Held captive as a sex slave...

[Cutter John]

Quite honestly I don't think what this guy did deserves death. Now if he'd tortured and killed the girl, then maybe. As it is, I'm more than happy to see him spending the rest of his miserable life alone in a cell. The death penalty really needs to be reserved for the worst of the worst.
Actually what I'd love to see is this guys property confiscated and given to the family of the girl he kidnapped. He certainly won't be needing it anymore.

What worries me is what the girl and her two daughters who were held are thinking and going through. Are they glad to be free, or will we be seeing a classic case of Stockholm syndrome? "Why are these bad people persecuting daddy?"

 

[Trekker4747]

Quite honestly I don't think what this guy did deserves death. Now if he'd tortured and killed the girl, then maybe. As it is, I'm more than happy to see him spending the rest of his miserable life alone in a cell. The death penalty really needs to be reserved for the worst of the worst.

Kidnaping a child, keeping her captive in a tent/shed compound in your back yard for two decades, raping her to have children and not giving her anything but the most basic of "care"... that you would give a yard-dog?

Pretty much the definition of "worst of the worst."

 

[Captain Ice]

Quite honestly I don't think what this guy did deserves death. Now if he'd tortured and killed the girl, then maybe. As it is, I'm more than happy to see him spending the rest of his miserable life alone in a cell. The death penalty really needs to be reserved for the worst of the worst.

I quite honestly agree. He should not be killed. He should be given 18 years of like treatment or worse. Killing him is letting him off to lightly.

Actually what I'd love to see is this guys property confiscated and given to the family of the girl he kidnapped. He certainly won't be needing it anymore.

What worries me is what the girl and her two daughters who were held are thinking and going through. Are they glad to be free, or will we be seeing a classic case of Stockholm syndrome? "Why are these bad people persecuting daddy?"

Agreed on both counts. Although I don't think I'd give the property to them. Instead I would remove the buildings and inner fence and then auction the house and property. Then I would give the proceeds to this young lady to help her and her children get established elsewhere. I'd encourage her to do so near her birth family so that she could reestablish a relationship with them and so that they could help her overcome this.

 

[PKTrekGirl]

This is just shocking. Truly shocking. In about a million different ways.

That they had so many missed opportunities to find her/rescue her and never took them, even after the neighbors complained....that this guy is as wacky as he is and that he (and his God Box) isn't in the loony bin....that no one put together the fact that there were children back there who never went to school....it's all so bizarre.

I really feel sorry for Jaycee. Because once she is de-programmed and realizes the full extent of what she has been through, it might have been kinder in a why if he had killed her. Because for all intents and purposes, her life is over. I just don't think she will ever be able to come back psychologically from this. Not given that she spent pretty much all of her formative years in terms of developing independence and ability to function on one's own living like a captive animal, subject to the twisted sexual whims of this perverted scumball.

To the OP: as for the death penalty...I wouldn't worry about that in the slightest. Having worked with alot of death row inmates in my past, I can tell you with absolute certainty that all the stories you hear about 'even inmates having standards' are absolutely true. Even the most hardened criminal you find on death row thinks it's horrendous to prey on an innocent child, the mentality being that at least adults can defend themselves.

This guy won't make it a year on the inside. The inmates will kill him...and when they do, it won't be pretty. Not even isolation will save him, because in many prisons, it is quite easy to find a guard who can 'accidentally' leave another inmate alone with this scumbag for 30 seconds in the shower room....and that's all it takes. This is now Jeffrey Dahmer met his not-so-unfortunate demise.

Wherever he goes, there won't be ANYONE all that concerned with keeping him alive....and plenty of people who 'have skills', if you know what I mean. And as an added bonus, if someone makes a 'mistake' and allows the inmates to handle this, the citizens of California won't have to pay to keep him on Death Row until he drops over of natural causes anyway.

This guy is toast.

 

[sidious618]

Some people are evil scum and deserve to die.

This guy? One of those people.

I've never understood this. Why does he deserve to die? He clearly can't be kept in society so let's put him in prison. But why do we need to kill him? I just don't see the point.

 

[Jayson]

Some people are evil scum and deserve to die.

This guy? One of those people.

I've never understood this. Why does he deserve to die? He clearly can't be kept in society so let's put him in prison. But why do we need to kill him? I just don't see the point.

Because nothing we will do to him will ever equal the amount of suffering that he caused. So you settle for the second best thing. I have a question. Why does he deserve to live? What is so precious about his life that we must preserve it? Life is not precious and special. Individuals are what makes a human being special not that we are all part of the same species. If a human being doesn't have any values or morals then he is just another animal from the jungle.

Jason

 

[Itisnotlogical]

This has nothing to do with political correctness, which is just a largely pointless buzzword(s) people throw out to discredit an argument they don't like. Nor have I mentioned any political parties or political leanings for that matter.

I said "as objectively as is reasonably possible" for precisely the reason that no one can be completely objective on a matter such as this. When you hear the horrific nature of the crime obviously you're going to form (hopefully negative) opinions on the perpetrator even if you were not directly affected by the crime itself. The hope is that you can overcome those negative feelings and judge the case/sentencing using the letter of the law rather than emotion to guide your decision. The courts don't always work that way, of course, but what other option is there?

Being objectiive though has two levels. One is in determing guilt. The other is punishment. I think the courtis are very important in determin guilt, though I think we all know there are situations like this one or OJ were the guilt is ovious even before you have a trial. The ability to figure out if someone is guilty of something is the main reason I am agaisnt vigilante justice.

To me the issue becomes murky when it comes to punishment and I find it uncomfortable with strangers figuring out what a fair punishment is. I have a problem with this on many levels. Don't like the government having that power, I don't like strangers melting out justice, when they don't have any emotional stake in the crime yet at the same time I also don't like victims having complete control because they might abuse the power. That is why I said there can be no justice in the justice system but it's almost impossible to get justice as well in a vigilante system.

The system we have now might be the best we can do but at the same time I can't hold moral judgments on people who do get revenge, asuming the person they get revenge on was guilty, because the system is flawed. There is no soultion to this problem. You just got to take every crime,ever revenge and every situation differently and judge them on there own, instead of taking grand statements about how revenge is always wrong. Sometimes it is and sometimes it isn't.

Jason

It is always good to determine guilt within a reasonable margin of error, but when they're sitting on death row waiting 20 years for their appeal to go through, THEN it's time for "vigilante justice".

 

[Trekker4747]

Some people are evil scum and deserve to die.

This guy? One of those people.

I've never understood this. Why does he deserve to die? He clearly can't be kept in society so let's put him in prison. But why do we need to kill him? I just don't see the point.

What's the point in keeping him alive so he can live off the tax-payers' tit for the rest of his life?

He's unredeemable and his comitted a heinous, disgusting, inhuman crime. He's evil scum. Kill him.

 

[Deranged Nasat]

I don't think some rape victim cares if I don't have the balls to kill someone. They want justice for what happened to them. They don't and shouldn't care what we all think or whats best for society. They have the right to get revenge for what happened to them.

I must disagree. No they don't have "the right to get revenge". Being victimized is not an excuse to victimize others. It is certainly not an excuse for society to encourage their vengeance. What sort of rape victim, who has just suffered terrible abuse themselves, would wish to inflict harm on others? And what sort of person, who empathizes with that victim, would wish to spread the abuse and violence further? It is simply not logical.

 

[RJDiogenes]

Some people are evil scum and deserve to die.

This guy? One of those people.

I've never understood this. Why does he deserve to die? He clearly can't be kept in society so let's put him in prison. But why do we need to kill him? I just don't see the point.

Because mentally ill criminals give people a chance to show off their baser instincts and feel good about it.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

What's the point in keeping him alive so he can live off the tax-payers' tit for the rest of his life?

Oh, well if you're hung up over a tax issue then I'm sure you'll care that it costs less to incarcerate a prisoner for life than it does to execute one. Unless we eliminate that pesky appeals process.

 

[Jayson]

I don't think some rape victim cares if I don't have the balls to kill someone. They want justice for what happened to them. They don't and shouldn't care what we all think or whats best for society. They have the right to get revenge for what happened to them.

I must disagree. No they don't have "the right to get revenge". Being victimized is not an excuse to victimize others. It is certainly not an excuse for society to encourage their vengeance. What sort of rape victim, who has just suffered terrible abuse themselves, would wish to inflict harm on others? And what sort of person, who empathizes with that victim, would wish to spread the abuse and violence further? It is simply not logical.

Because the person they want revenge on is the person/people who caused there suffering. Your looking at this from a big picture perspective where I am looking it from a individual's perspective. Jaycee Dugan wasn't victimized by "others" or "people" or any terms we can use to describe citizens in general. She was victimized by two people,maybe more if it's true about him having parties.

It's one thing to say we shouldn't endorse torture and abuse as everyday things. We shouldn't even make it legal. If it happens though to people who deserve it and the scumbags in this situation deserve it then I am not seeing how some huge moral injustice has happened because the law was broken. You could even say it's one of those issue's were it's both right and wrong at the same time. Some issue's are like that. There is no correct soultion or no moral abosoulte position you can take. You can't allow vigilante justice run rampant but it's not really evil either when some of these scumbags die.

I don't see how you can look at the issue and say "This is the answer." To me there isn't a answer to this question that is %100 correct. I don't want the wild west attitute return to America but at the same time I wouldn't care if a bunch of pedophiles got killed by people doing, just that very thing. That's why this issue is complex IMO. My own views on justice conflict with my pratical concerns of wanting a orderly society.

Jason

 

[Deckerd]

I'm fairly sure his victim or the children would not want him tortured and killed. If they don't want it, why do you? On another related note: why is keeping her alive and a prisoner worse than merely killing her?

 

[Itisnotlogical]

^^
Look at it this way: what would you pick- prisoner and sex slave for years and years with no end in sight, or death? Plus, they have to live with that experience for the rest of their life. They'll be looking over their shoulder afraid that someone is going to grab them again. I'm not a psychologist or former sex slave and I'm thankful to God that I'm not, but I think that's what they'll have to live with.

 

[Jayson]

I'm fairly sure his victim or the children would not want him tortured and killed. If they don't want it, why do you? On another related note: why is keeping her alive and a prisoner worse than merely killing her?

The victim and children are brainwashed. Your going let people with Stockholm's symdrome, dictate how we should judge this guy? Perhaps when there cured, if they are cured they could make that judgment but what would you say if they wanted the guy dead? Speaking of which I can't help but think killing him would be good in the long-run for their mental health. As long as he is alive, he can continue to have power over them. If Jacee and the kids are visting this guy in prison and wanting to stay connected to him then sometimes horrible has gone wrong in trying to help them recover from their abuse. By killing them you basically sever the connection, forever. I think their mental helath is more important than his life.

As for the murder question I do think murder is still worst than even this. Nothing beats murdering innocent people in terms of evil. Once your dead your dead for good. Thing is, even though murder is still more evil than this, this is more sadistic because it's about taking pleasure in people's pain. You might think that would make this worst but if your alive there is always hope you can someday escape.

Jason

 

[Jayson]

^^
Look at it this way: what would you pick- prisoner and sex slave for years and years with no end in sight, or death? Plus, they have to live with that experience for the rest of their life. They'll be looking over their shoulder afraid that someone is going to grab them again. I'm not a psychologist or former sex slave and I'm thankful to God that I'm not, but I think that's what they'll have to live with.

I would pick prisoner or sex-slave because I would fight back. Remember I believe in revenge. I would find away to get it somehow. First blow job he made me give, would be the last time he had a penis. I might still be killed which puts me back to option 1 but now I am dead and he is missing a dick. Better than being dead and him going about, business as usual.

Jason

 

[Deckerd]

^^
Look at it this way: what would you pick- prisoner and sex slave for years and years with no end in sight, or death?

So you hold with the 'a fate worse than death' theory for this kind of crime? I bet you're a man.

 

[Jayson]

^^
Look at it this way: what would you pick- prisoner and sex slave for years and years with no end in sight, or death?

So you hold with the 'a fate worse than death' theory for this kind of crime? I bet you're a man.

I am uncertain what that means. are you saying men can't judge how horrible rape is? I sort of agree but guys know enough to know it's bad and evil.

Jason

 

[SiorX]

I'm fairly sure his victim or the children would not want him tortured and killed. If they don't want it, why do you? On another related note: why is keeping her alive and a prisoner worse than merely killing her?

The victim and children are brainwashed. Your going let people with Stockholm's symdrome, dictate how we should judge this guy? Perhaps when there cured, if they are cured they could make that judgment but what would you say if they wanted the guy dead? Speaking of which I can't help but think killing him would be good in the long-run for their mental health. As long as he is alive, he can continue to have power over them. If Jacee and the kids are visting this guy in prison and wanting to stay connected to him then sometimes horrible has gone wrong in trying to help them recover from their abuse. By killing them you basically sever the connection, forever. I think their mental helath is more important than his life.

Further upthread you were arguing that you were taking the victim's side in this, and that if (as you assumed they would) the hypothetical victim in a brutal rape wanted revenge, it was not society's place to call halt. Now you've changed tune and revoked the victims' autonomy on the grounds that they're too damaged to know what's best for them. Thus it's your job to speak for them since you do know best. You're going to have to pick one. You can't invoke the victim on both sides of the argument.

I would never presume to speak for all survivors, or to assume I know what Jaycee Dugard is going through. However, generally speaking, a common aftermath of rape trauma is for a survivor to lose confidence in the humanity of those around him or her. It's not just 'why did he rape me?' it's also 'why did nobody help?' and 'why doesn't anyone else get that the entire world has fallen apart at the seams?'. For survivors, dealing with their rapist is only one part of the healing process. One also has to renegotiate dealing with the rest of the world - loved ones, and strangers, and people in authority.

I would argue that letting anger and vigilantism fuel our responses to rapists (that is, to the really heinous ones) isn't about helping their victims. There are probably survivors for whom the death of their attacker would help bring a little peace, I'm sure. But (again, speaking generally) what survivors need is support. They need stability, and they need to be believed, and to believe that the system is on their side. What help is it to re-enforce the message that violence is the true answer and that this time they're lucky enough to have it on their side instead of used against them?

 

[Deckerd]

Yes but it's usually men who say that a woman's life should naturally be not worth living after such an ordeal.