Jump to content

Sky Slate Blueberry Blackcurrant Watermelon Strawberry Orange Banana Apple Emerald Chocolate

I'm moving to Canada


  • Please log in to reply
65 replies to this topic
Eedis NLI
  • Guests
  • Last active:
  • Joined: --
A man, Marc Gilbert, is being sent to prison for rape and child pornography. The prosecutors are letting him have unlimited access to 28 hours of child pornography while he's in jail. Why?

He's acting as his own attorney. By law, an attorney has the right to view ALL evidence being used to accuse their client. That being said, they are forced by law to let him watch his personal collection, that he himself is accused of filming, in jail. Link

I'm moving to Canada

sinkfaze
  • Moderators
  • 6367 posts
  • Last active: Nov 30 2018 08:50 PM
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2008
So what? He's already in prison. If he did hurt someone, he won't be able to do it anymore from behind bars. And frankly, he'd better enjoy himself because in most gen pops child molestors will get the harshest treatment there is from the other inmates.

Eedis NLI
  • Guests
  • Last active:
  • Joined: --
To be honest, our justice system is not harsh enough (in the USA at least). If they had it my way, inmates would be growing their own food, crushing rocks, making license plates, they'd get no tv, no radio, no form on entertainment what-so-ever. If a homeless person would rather jail over the winter's cold, our system isn't strict enough. How the hell is someone supposed to learn their lesson if they don't care if they're in jail?

It's basically like they kill the virus, but don't give any vaccines or try do any preventative measures to keep it from happening again. That is why so many criminals come out of jail, just to do it again.

Mickers
  • Members
  • 1239 posts
  • Last active: Sep 25 2015 03:03 PM
  • Joined: 11 Oct 2010
That's messed up... :?

VxE
  • Moderators
  • 3622 posts
  • Last active: Dec 24 2015 02:21 AM
  • Joined: 07 Oct 2006
The entire US justice system is broken. Prisoners ARE indeed used as cheap labor across the country, while at the same time, the for-profit prison industry is soaking up taxpayer dollars.

The US justice system is based on retribution instead of rehabilitation. That, along with good 'ol corruption, is the underlying problem.

As for Marc Gilbert... would you rather that our justice system not allow the defense access to evidence used by the prosecution? IMHO, that would be more of a cause to leave the country.

Tuncay
  • Members
  • 1945 posts
  • Last active: Feb 08 2015 03:49 PM
  • Joined: 07 Nov 2006
They have too many rights in the prison. I wonder if the court would allow this in Germany. The video material are created with kids and he have the right to watch them? What is about the personal rights from these kids?

No signature.


sumon
  • Moderators
  • 1317 posts
  • Last active: Dec 05 2016 10:14 PM
  • Joined: 18 May 2010

The entire US justice system is broken. Prisoners ARE indeed used as cheap labor across the country, while at the same time, the for-profit prison industry is soaking up taxpayer dollars.

The US justice system is based on retribution instead of rehabilitation. That, along with good 'ol corruption, is the underlying problem.

As for Marc Gilbert... would you rather that our justice system not allow the defense access to evidence used by the prosecution? IMHO, that would be more of a cause to leave the country.


You got a many points...

Regarding evidence, maybe they could make an exception stating that child porn evidence can only be viewed X times, or only under supervision. The point being no wanking in the cell, but without infringing the rights of those in actual need to use their rights to see the evidence.

Eedis
  • Members
  • 1775 posts
  • Last active: Aug 14 2015 06:33 PM
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2009
It's illegal to watch child pornography, period. Therefore, it should be illegal to be watched even in a case such as this. Or at least, if it's a case such as this, the material can only be viewed by the jury and the judge ONCE, but only ONCE, EVER.
AutoHotkey state, the forum, Poly, and Drainx1. The short story.
I love my wife, my life, my atomic-match; for giving me the greatest gift a man could ask for, such a perfect and beautiful little girl.
9rjbjc.png

sinkfaze
  • Moderators
  • 6367 posts
  • Last active: Nov 30 2018 08:50 PM
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2008

Therefore, it should be illegal to be watched even in a case such as this.


That's easy to say when it isn't your life on the line.

Or at least, if it's a case such as this, the material can only be viewed by the jury and the judge ONCE, but only ONCE, EVER.


The problem is it never stops there. There wasn't a smoker alive in the 70s who thought that an innocent, single law banning smoking on airplanes would've taken banning smoking as far as it has gone today. And yet here we are. If subverting due process can be justified in this instance, it will justified in other instances and pretty soon the practice is widespread and abuse is rampant. Granted, abuse of court proceedings is bad as it is, but again, you'll support the subversion of your own rights until one day you need them and *poof* they're gone.

He's not hurting and can't hurt anybody else at this point, and even if he does manage to live a long life in prison, his fellow inmates will ensure it is not a pleasant one. It's not worth sacrificing anybody's right to a fair trial.

Sephiroth2906
  • Members
  • 86 posts
  • Last active: Dec 31 2012 04:28 PM
  • Joined: 28 Apr 2007
I am actually more concerned about the fact he gets to question the victims. This is one type of case where representing yourself makes sense. Those kids are gonna crack on the stand.

Huh, go figure, there is something worse than allowing an inmate to watch his homemade child porn videos in prison!

Sinkfaze is right, though. This is an isolated case where a monster is going to get his way, but if you start subverting his rights, yours are not too far behind.

Once you limit or give up a liberty or right, it is easier to take the next one away, but nearly impossible to get the one your gave up back.

chrisj91
  • Members
  • 398 posts
  • Last active: Jun 03 2015 09:03 AM
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2011

To be honest, our justice system is not harsh enough (in the USA at least). If they had it my way, inmates would be growing their own food, crushing rocks, making license plates, they'd get no tv, no radio, no form on entertainment what-so-ever. If a homeless person would rather jail over the winter's cold, our system isn't strict enough. How the hell is someone supposed to learn their lesson if they don't care if they're in jail?

It's basically like they kill the virus, but don't give any vaccines or try do any preventative measures to keep it from happening again. That is why so many criminals come out of jail, just to do it again.


Touche . . . !! Excellent points there, exactly how I feel . . . !!

The world's too obsessed with this 'goody goody' approach, they've done a crime, which is punishable, so PUNISH them, not give them luxuries and what not . . .

In my opinion, when someone's in prison, they lose their human rights . . .

The British justice system's probably even worse than the US' . . . !!
Posted Image

Hope this helps / Thanks <-------- (Delete Appropriate)

Chris

maul.esel
  • Members
  • 790 posts
  • Last active: Jan 05 2013 09:26 PM
  • Joined: 28 Feb 2011

In my opinion, when someone's in prison, they lose their human rights . . .

That's how democratic systems break down. By definition, human rights can not be lost in any way. And that has a reason. Otherwise, just forget about them at all, they wouldn't make sense anymore.

I live neither in the USA nor in UK, so I can't tell if their system is good. I agree that it's not ok if they get luxuries etc., but your approach is to radical.

It's illegal to watch child pornography, period. Therefore, it should be illegal to be watched even in a case such as this. Or at least, if it's a case such as this, the material can only be viewed by the jury and the judge ONCE, but only ONCE, EVER.

I totally agree.
Join the discussion on The future of AutoHotkey
Posted Image Visit me on github Posted Image
Win7 HP SP1 64bit | AHK_L U 64bit

chrisj91
  • Members
  • 398 posts
  • Last active: Jun 03 2015 09:03 AM
  • Joined: 11 Apr 2011
I know it's radical and it is impractical, but I guess it's just how it makes you feel . . .

Especially if, God forbid, but someone were to do something like that to your own family, I'm sure you would have a very different approach when it is your own family that has suffered at the hands of others . . .

Then again, you would probably feel different again if it was your own family who were the suspect . . .

Interesting things are feelings and emotions . . .
Posted Image

Hope this helps / Thanks <-------- (Delete Appropriate)

Chris

Eedis
  • Members
  • 1775 posts
  • Last active: Aug 14 2015 06:33 PM
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2009

That's easy to say when it isn't your life on the line.

You can think the other way around. If that was my son that was victimized and then he gets to victimize him all over again, I'd be pretty rampant.

He's not hurting and can't hurt anybody else at this point, and even if he does manage to live a long life in prison, his fellow inmates will ensure it is not a pleasant one.

You're saying this like him interviewing these kids and continually watching these videos aren't hurting these kids or their families at all.

It's not worth sacrificing anybody's right to a fair trial.

You're sacrificing the rights of the kids and their family.
AutoHotkey state, the forum, Poly, and Drainx1. The short story.
I love my wife, my life, my atomic-match; for giving me the greatest gift a man could ask for, such a perfect and beautiful little girl.
9rjbjc.png

sinkfaze
  • Moderators
  • 6367 posts
  • Last active: Nov 30 2018 08:50 PM
  • Joined: 18 Mar 2008

If that was my son that was victimized and then he gets to victimize him all over again, I'd be pretty rampant.


That's exactly the point. You're not thinking with regard to anyone else's rights or safety, just satisfying your own hurt feelings.

You're saying this like him interviewing these kids and continually watching these videos aren't hurting these kids or their families at all.


What would you rather them do? Ask the prosecutors to withdraw the charges just so they don't have to be "victimized" in a court proceeding? :roll: Is it fair that every plaintiff can't go to trial without somehow being hurt again by their grievance? No, of course not. But that's also not a good excuse to subvert the legal process either.

You're sacrificing the rights of the kids and their family.


Nonsense. A crime was committed against them, they reported the crime, the alleged offender has been arrested and will stand trial. Despite the crime committed against them their rights are fully intact and nothing of theirs has been sacrificed in that regard. Again, you are approaching this issue based on your emotions, and while there's nothing wrong with having emotions, they should never be trusted to make good judgments.