Quote:
Originally Posted by GGG
Probably not, which is why we make laws rationally and not emotionally. Although I would hope overtime I could get to the point where I was rational.
The only reason to disagree with supervised escorts is punishment and revenge. Society found him not criminally responsible so you want to punish someone for something they did not control.
|
Just because that is what the courts and experts found, it does not necessarily make it true. Experts make mistakes all the time, and our justice system seems more interested in catering to the sensibilities of the perpetrator, not the victims.
The victims wishes 100% should come first in a scenario like this. This woman had 3 children butchered by this maniac. My parents lost a child and a grandchild (the child of my sister that passed away, who they raised from 5 years old.) and I can tell you, the most painful thing any parent has to go through is losing a child. Both deaths in my family were entirely different circumstances, dealing with someone slaughtering them... I can't imagine what that woman is dealing with.
The first person who should be taken into consideration in this scenario is the mother. If she finds it within herself to forgive him, then fine, let him taste some freedom. But now, if you read the article, she has to live in terror of this person again. She is being re-victimized by this monster, and she shouldn't be.