quote:
Originally posted by Laslow:
Ewww thanks alot, read the part about the little girls hands and I wasn't able to eat dinner last night [img]http://princess.cybrmall.net/ubb/frown.gif[/img]. That sicko deserves what he has coming.
No, he deserves far worse, but human rights applies to criminals like that too, in most civilized countries.
There are things far worse than death.
quote:
Originally posted by Benoit:
There are things far worse than death.
Torture, pain, isolation, starvation, suffocation, etc. one of those did you mean? Such things can make death almost welcome, or were you thinking something else?
Nope, you got it right, SCDawg.
One of the principles of justice in Western legal systems is “innocent by reason of insanity”. From the behavior described in the case of Tsutomu Miyazaki there is probably grounds for such defense. While we all abhor such gross acts of depravity, there is reason to apply different standards to people who are truly not responsible for their actions.
From what I’ve read about the Japanese penal system - forcing people to kneel facing the wall for days at a time, beatings for the slightest infraction, etc. - I suspect this person faces a dismal future and will never live again in the outside world (should he be spared execution).
“Have been” spared execution. I believe this happened in the eighties?
As for pleading insanity, I doubt he would convince anyone he did not know his actions were wrong (which is, I think, what has to happen nowadays…)
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
One of the principles of justice in Western legal systems is "innocent by reason of insanity". From the behavior described in the case of Tsutomu Miyazaki there is probably grounds for such defense. While we all abhor such gross acts of depravity, there is reason to apply different standards to people who are truly not responsible for their actions.
I don't think he was criminally insane. I think he knew that what he was doing was very wrong, as his behaviour shows. That he was doing sick and twisted things that most people would never do, doesn't automatically mean that he is not responsible for his actions. The way he hid the bodies, strangled the girl who started crying in his car... he knew that what he was doing was wrong.
As an example, take war. People can get themselves to do the most horrible things in a war, things that people under normal circumstances would consider gross and inhuman. Are they all suddenly insane? Are they unaware that they are doing something terrible to other human beings? No. But they can justify it to themselves, either as duty, or that it's because they are enemies, or any number of different reasons.
Doing sick and twisted acts doesn't automatically remove your responsibility for your own actions.
You could say he was "insane" in that he did what most people can't even imagine doing. But he was not insane in the sense of believing that what he was doing was good and right.
quote:
Originally posted by perigee:
From what I've read about the Japanese penal system - forcing people to kneel facing the wall for days at a time, beatings for the slightest infraction, etc. - I suspect this person faces a dismal future and will never live again in the outside world (should he be spared execution).
The real problem is proving he was insane because the acts were so horrific, so much pointing to being insane that it is very hard to prove he actually is insane. It seems so easy to point to it, but as was said he seemed sain enough when hiding the bodies, sane enough to show some regret for what he did, so I agree with AG3, I think he knew it was wrong. So despite the fact it seems easy to prove insanity I think it would be a very hard defense since they, at least within the U.S., would have to prove it beyond a shadow of a doubt since he could just be an almost sane, but not insane, person that killed in the manner he killed.