PDA

View Full Version : Cringing jurors watch Duncan torture boy on tape



Perilloux
08-22-2008, 08:06 AM
updated 9:19 p.m. EDT, Thu August 21, 2008
Cringing jurors watch Duncan torture boy on tape (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/08/21/duncan.slayings.ap/index.html)

BOISE, Idaho (AP) -- Jurors cringed, cried and some desperately looked away as they were shown a series of deeply disturbing and graphic videos taken by a convicted child killer as he tortured, sexually abused and nearly killed a 9-year-old boy. Joseph Edward Duncan III, acting as his own attorney, had argued against playing the videos, saying it would turn jurors "into my victims" as they decide whether he should be executed.

Duncan kidnapped the boy, Dylan Groene, and his sister, Shasta, in May 2005 after murdering their older brother, their mother and her fiance in the Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, area. The two young children were taken deep into the Lolo National Forest, where they endured weeks of horrendous abuse at Duncan's hands.

Duncan ultimately shot the boy point-blank in the head while his sister, then 8, watched. He was arrested after returning to Coeur d'Alene, where a waitress recognized Shasta as the two ate at a Denny's restaurant. The videos and photos taken at the cabin show Duncan forcing the boy to perform a sex act, whipping him with a belt and hanging him with a wire noose until the boy passed out.

"The devil is here, boy, the devil himself. The demon couldn't do what the devil sent him to do so the devil came himself," Duncan yells in one video. "The devil likes to watch children suffer and cry." Duncan covered his face as parts of the video were shown, and jurors frequently shot him looks. Two of Duncan's standby attorneys also avoided looking at the screen.

Has there ever been a better candidate for the death penalty?

noonwitch
08-22-2008, 08:39 AM
I'm still against the death penalty, but I don't mourn for these guys when they do get it. I just don't ever want to be on a jury where that is on the line.

Gingersnap
08-22-2008, 09:39 AM
I not only wouldn't hesitate to send this guy to Hell, I'd flip the switch myself. :mad:

Bongo55
08-22-2008, 09:39 AM
Sorry, but as a father, I could push that needle and sleep like a baby. The video should make this an slam dunk.

asdf2231
08-22-2008, 09:54 AM
Push the needle my eye.

The guy should be fed to wild animals. 3 inches at a time.

No depth of hell is too deep for this filth.

LogansPapa
08-22-2008, 10:38 AM
:mad:

A thousand complete and proud-of-it assholes will come out of the woodwork to help this less than human creature with his court appeals after he’s convicted. Many pony-tailed lawyers will consume hundreds of hours of court clerk's time and annoy the governor’s office to save this "poor, unfortunate man" from his final fate. If I were, say the uncle of these children, I would quit my work - tell my family I’d be away from home for about a year and follow the same path as Steve McQueen’s character, as Nevada Smith in the ‘Carpetbaggers.’

Phillygirl
08-22-2008, 10:47 AM
My heart says the death penalty is wrong...my stomach says to fry the bastard.

Zafod
08-22-2008, 10:51 AM
These are the two angels that evil vile monster destroyed.

http://www.ktvb.com/news/topstories/stories/L_IMAGE.101688cd0b5.93.88.fa.7c.282d7a74b.jpg

how anyone against the death penalty can take in the facts of this terrible evil crime and still feel this bastard deserves to live is beyond me.....

Zafod
08-22-2008, 10:53 AM
Sorry, but as a father, I could push that needle and sleep like a baby. The video should make this an slam dunk.

I couldnt have posted a better post.

Since becoming a father I have been changed in how I react to stories like this.

I would have fun with a potato peal before pushing the needle.....

wilbur
08-22-2008, 01:41 PM
They should just send him to fed prison and let him experience some of what he did to those kids... then the inmates can take care of him like they took care of jeffery dahmer.

FlaGator
08-22-2008, 01:49 PM
My heart says the death penalty is wrong...my stomach says to fry the bastard.

Same here. These type of abominations always create a conflict in me.

Chuck58
08-22-2008, 01:51 PM
I think people like him ought to die a slow and painful death. It's why I've always advocated the return of Crucifixion and/or impalement for such animals.

In almost 25 yrs as a cop and detective, I've testified in my share of cases, some nearly as bad as this one. I worked homicide for a few years. I've seen these animals close up,interviewed them about their crime(s), and never got over desperately wishing that they'd do something, anything, that would permit us to use deadly force, thus saving the taxpayers a lot of money and providing us with great satisfaction to boot.

Troll
08-22-2008, 03:26 PM
I hadn't heard about this case.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/CRIME/08/21/duncan.slayings.ap/art.duncan.jpg

I read in the article that he's acting as his own attorney. I hope what that means is that there isn't a lawyer in the country that would represent this monster.

I understand people that object to the death penalty, but this is another textbook case of why we have it. This thing can not be rehabilitated, and humankind is ill-served by its very existence. A thousand years in prison will not make it sorry for what it did nor change it in any way. The highest and best use of this creature is fish bait or perhaps as a cadaver for medical students to study.

JB
08-22-2008, 06:09 PM
No, no, no. No death penalty.

You find some pipers and tell them that the guy has 200 crack rocks hidden in various places inside his body and they get to keep whatever they find. If they do a thorough enough search and find nothing, they get 500 rocks as a reward.

Speedy
08-22-2008, 06:22 PM
They should just send him to fed prison and let him experience some of what he did to those kids... then the inmates can take care of him like they took care of jeffery dahmer.

That is a complete misconception. Other than being ostracized, nothing would happen to him. I did time in three of the most violent Federal Prisons (Three Rivers, Texas was THE most violent in the system when I was there) and not once did anything like this even come close to happening.

Jeffery Dahmer was in State custody and his death was a contract hit not "inmate" inspired justice.

Jumpy
08-22-2008, 07:23 PM
I am glad I am not on the jury. I would be haunted by the videos for the rest of my life. I would not be able to watch them.

Scarlet
08-22-2008, 08:18 PM
He has tourtured and murdered others. He killed a boy in Ca. He picked Shasta because he saw her playing in her yard in her bathing suit on a hot day in the sprinklers. I hope he burns in hell.
________
Zoloft settlement (http://www.classactionsettlements.org/lawsuit/zoloft/)

LibraryLady
08-22-2008, 08:25 PM
I am glad I am not on the jury. I would be haunted by the videos for the rest of my life. I would not be able to watch them.

My Mom served on a murder trial about two years ago. The death penalty was not an option but the photos of the victim's body (he had hidden it in a hole in the woods) will haunt her forever.The father of the murderer is the one that told them about his son's favorite place in the woods or they would have never found her.

Phillygirl
08-22-2008, 09:18 PM
I hadn't heard about this case.

http://i2.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/CRIME/08/21/duncan.slayings.ap/art.duncan.jpg

I read in the article that he's acting as his own attorney. I hope what that means is that there isn't a lawyer in the country that would represent this monster.

I understand people that object to the death penalty, but this is another textbook case of why we have it. This thing can not be rehabilitated, and humankind is ill-served by its very existence. A thousand years in prison will not make it sorry for what it did nor change it in any way. The highest and best use of this creature is fish bait or perhaps as a cadaver for medical students to study.

When they captured him, it was all over the news. The waitress at the diner was really a quick thinker. She recognized the little girl and stalled him from leaving with her until the police got there by bringing the girl a sundae.

I sit the fence all the time on the death penalty. Outside of the moral implications of our society, and my general belief that, absent self-defense (which I consider encompasses just wars), only God has the right to take a life; I have a hard time justifying why this kind of piece of shit shouldn't die.

MstrBlue
08-22-2008, 09:20 PM
The only problem I would have with executing this... person... is that modern execution methods are too quick.
He does not deserve humane treatment.
IMHO, he gave up his humanity when he stole it from a child.

Teetop
08-23-2008, 10:58 AM
The only problem I would have with executing this... person... is that modern execution methods are too quick.
He does not deserve humane treatment.
IMHO, he gave up his humanity when he stole it from a child.

Slow torture would fit this case, quite nice.

FlaGator
08-23-2008, 01:43 PM
The only problem I would have with executing this... person... is that modern execution methods are too quick.
He does not deserve humane treatment.
IMHO, he gave up his humanity when he stole it from a child.


I don't feel that I am in a position to decide what he does or doesn't deserve. Life in prison yes, death maybe, death by torture... I don't think so. Because he gave up his humanity does that mean that we should give up ours in response? Seems ironic that he can cast aside his humanity and take ours with it in the process. Not only does he have the power to torture and kill children we have now given him the authority to nullify society's ethics, principles and morality.

Odysseus
08-23-2008, 02:37 PM
I don't feel that I am in a position to decide what he does or doesn't deserve. Life in prison yes, death maybe, death by torture... I don't think so. Because he gave up his humanity does that mean that we should give up ours in response? Seems ironic that he can cast aside his humanity and take ours with it in the process. Not only does he have the power to torture and kill children we have now given him the authority to nullify society's ethics, principles and morality.

Executing him doesn't nullify our ethics, principles and morality, it validates them. A society that cannot bring itself to condemn monsters has chosen to be overrun by monsters. It's not like there wasn't ample warning:


Duncan has a long history as a violent sexual predator, and was clinically diagnosed with antisocial personality disorder in 1980, while in prison for raping a younger boy at gunpoint.
In 2004, Duncan was charged with groping the genitals of a six-year-old boy. He was arrested in April 2005 in Minnesota. The judge granted bail at $15,000. A businessman in Fargo, Joe Crary, gave Duncan money for bail.[1] When freed, Duncan jumped bail.

The state of Idaho had almost three decades of criminal sexual conduct recorded for Duncan, yet he was granted a low bail and freed to continue his murderous conduct. The judge who granted him bail and the businessman who paid it need to serve part of his sentence. In fact, I propose that this become the law. When a violent felon is freed from jail and commits another crime, the person who freed him, whether a judge, a parole board or simply a third party who paid his bail, should be charged with aiding and abetting. They can still grant bail or parole, but they will be responsible for the consequences.

Phillygirl
08-23-2008, 02:40 PM
I don't feel that I am in a position to decide what he does or doesn't deserve. Life in prison yes, death maybe, death by torture... I don't think so. Because he gave up his humanity does that mean that we should give up ours in response? Seems ironic that he can cast aside his humanity and take ours with it in the process. Not only does he have the power to torture and kill children we have now given him the authority to nullify society's ethics, principles and morality.

Always a difficult argument for me. But my baser instincts frequently take over.

Lanie
08-23-2008, 02:52 PM
Death is the easy way out for this piece of shit.

Phillygirl
08-23-2008, 03:02 PM
Death is the easy way out for this piece of shit.

No it isn't.

FlaGator
08-23-2008, 03:03 PM
Executing him doesn't nullify our ethics, principles and morality, it validates them. A society that cannot bring itself to condemn monsters has chosen to be overrun by monsters. It's not like there wasn't ample warning:



The state of Idaho had almost three decades of criminal sexual conduct recorded for Duncan, yet he was granted a low bail and freed to continue his murderous conduct. The judge who granted him bail and the businessman who paid it need to serve part of his sentence. In fact, I propose that this become the law. When a violent felon is freed from jail and commits another crime, the person who freed him, whether a judge, a parole board or simply a third party who paid his bail, should be charged with aiding and abetting. They can still grant bail or parole, but they will be responsible for the consequences.

You misunderstood the point I was making. I was replying to those who suggest that his death should be slow and painful. I wasn't speaking to an execution in general. There is a difference between justice and vengence.

As for the second half of you post, you seem to be arguing that mercy should be made illegal. If someone has mercy upon another and the person receiving mercy commits another crime you would punish the merciful as well as the criminal. That is a very cold society you are proposing.

FlaGator
08-23-2008, 03:06 PM
Always a difficult argument for me. But my baser instincts frequently take over.

I fight hard against my baser instincts myself, but that is the challenge God put before us. In a nutshell Christ said 'here is your nature, now rise above it.'

Phillygirl
08-23-2008, 03:13 PM
I fight hard against my baser instincts myself, but that is the challenge God put before us. In a nutshell Christ said 'here is your nature, now rise above it.'

I know. I suspect you're better at the challenge than I.

hampshirebrit
08-23-2008, 05:13 PM
I fight hard against my baser instincts myself, but that is the challenge God put before us. In a nutshell Christ said 'here is your nature, now rise above it.'

Guess I have an advantage over you then, being that I'm an atheist an' all.

I'd put a bullet in this guy's head in a heartbeat, and wouldn't miss any sleep.

I used to be against the death penalty, but I've seen far too much nasty shit happening this year, the French students being tortured to death in London, that sicko Austrian guy raping and imprisoning his daughter and having kids by her, and on and on.

There was an op ed in the UK Times the other day debating the mad or bad thing. The author was basically saying the perpetrators of such crimes can be mad, or bad, but not both.

Bullshit. They are both mad and bad, in my view. People who commit these crimes are clearly both mad and bad. This Duncan individual is one such person.

Some crimes are so vile that the DP is the only acceptable sentencing option.

Phillygirl
08-23-2008, 05:16 PM
Guess I have an advantage over you then, being that I'm an atheist an' all.

I'd put a bullet in this guy's head in a heartbeat, and wouldn't miss any sleep.

I used to be against the death penalty, but I've seen far too much nasty shit happening this year, the French students being tortured to death in London, that sicko Austrian guy raping and imprisoning his daughter and having kids by her, and on and on.

There was an op ed in the UK Times the other day debating the mad or bad thing. The author was basically saying the perpetrators of such crimes can be mad, or bad, but not both.

Bullshit. They are both mad and bad, in my view. People who commit these crimes are clearly both mad and bad. This Duncan individual is one such person.

Some crimes are so vile that the DP is the only acceptable sentencing option.

I don't think a belief in God is required to believe that we are challenged to rise above some of our more base instincts.

The death penalty troubles me for many of the reasons that FlaGator laid out. To fail to employ the death penalty troubles me for many of the reasons others have laid out.

hampshirebrit
08-23-2008, 05:26 PM
I don't think a belief in God is required to believe that we are challenged to rise above some of our more base instincts.

The death penalty troubles me for many of the reasons that FlaGator laid out. To fail to employ the death penalty troubles me for many of the reasons others have laid out.

Good points.

I am with you and FlaGator in that I would not support anything other than a proper judicial execution, carried out quickly and as humanely as one can carry out such a thing.

Where there is any doubt at all that the individual carried out the crime, then I would oppose the death penalty. That has always been my position, and the main cause of my opposition to the DP. You can release an innocent man from jail, but you cannot bring one back to life.

But in cases such as this one, where there is clear, irrefutable evidence of guilt, provided, as it has been here, by the perpetrator no less, then I can see no reason at all not to apply the death penalty.

Shannon
08-23-2008, 05:37 PM
Just reading that article enraged me. There is no way I could be on that jury. I would've jumped up and attacked the animal.:mad:

Phillygirl
08-23-2008, 05:42 PM
Good points.

I am with you and FlaGator in that I would not support anything other than a proper judicial execution, carried out quickly and as humanely as one can carry out such a thing.

Where there is any doubt at all that the individual carried out the crime, then I would oppose the death penalty. That has always been my position, and the main cause of my opposition to the DP. You can release an innocent man from jail, but you cannot bring one back to life.

But in cases such as this one, where there is clear, irrefutable evidence of guilt, provided, as it has been here, by the perpetrator no less, then I can see no reason at all not to apply the death penalty.

That's where I always have a problem. I don't think any conviction should be without the requisite conclusion of beyond a reasonable doubt. If anyone votes against the dp in a particular case because of the potential of innocence, they shouldn't have voted to convict in the first place.

Don't get me wrong...when I'm for the dp, I'm for torture. I'm sort of extreme in my views on the issue. As I said, I often give in to my baser instincts on the matter.

Odysseus
08-23-2008, 09:38 PM
You misunderstood the point I was making. I was replying to those who suggest that his death should be slow and painful. I wasn't speaking to an execution in general. There is a difference between justice and vengence.
Understood.

As for the second half of you post, you seem to be arguing that mercy should be made illegal. If someone has mercy upon another and the person receiving mercy commits another crime you would punish the merciful as well as the criminal. That is a very cold society you are proposing.
I'm not banning mercy, I'm banning the arrogance of liberals that masquerades as mercy. Judges and parole boards routinely free violent offenders with impunity. In this case, Duncan was repeatedly let out of custody by people who are paid to know better, people whose job it is to keep sick, deviant vermin like this away from the children that he will victimize. That makes them criminally negligent, and they should be held accountable. Does that mean that there will be fewer paroles and grants of bail? Certainly. Should there be fewer paroles and grants of bail? Absolutely. Just ask Duncan's suviving victim whether she thinks that he should have been free on bail, or allowed to skip. But, that doesn't mean that there won't be any mercy, just less of it going to those who we know don't warrant it. If a parole board member is absolutely convinced that a felon will not repeat his crimes, to the point where he or she is willing to put their own liberty on the line, then they can free that felon. But, if they're wrong, then they are going to pay for the consequences of their arrogance and incompetence. If a judge grants bail to a known flight risk, and that person absconds and cheats justice, why should the judge not be penalized for freeing a criminal? Parole boards and judges will have to actually consider the consequences of their actions before making grand gestures that demonstrate how much they value the rights of scum over the safety of the people who pay their salaries.

That's where I always have a problem. I don't think any conviction should be without the requisite conclusion of beyond a reasonable doubt. If anyone votes against the dp in a particular case because of the potential of innocence, they shouldn't have voted to convict in the first place.

Don't get me wrong...when I'm for the dp, I'm for torture. I'm sort of extreme in my views on the issue. As I said, I often give in to my baser instincts on the matter.
It's not a baser instinct to want to see a monster punished. The baser instinct is to file his appeals, decry his sentence and hold candlelight vigils when the time comes for him to pay for his crimes. Most of those people who will try to move heaven and earth on behalf of Duncan will do so in the full knowledge of his guilt, but they are animated by a vision of their own moral superiority, rather than any real concern for legal principles or justice. Those who claim that we should not give in to the "primitive" desire for revenge are really saying that they are superior to us primitives who continue to demand that criminals be punished and victims be avenged. Frankly, I have no problem with revenge. If someone hurt my wife or daughters the way that this monster did to those children, I'd want him dead. No, it won't bring back his victims, but they may rest easier.

Theo
08-23-2008, 10:18 PM
"The devil is here, boy, the devil himself. The demon couldn't do what the devil sent him to do so the devil came himself," Duncan yells in one video. "The devil likes to watch children suffer and cry." Duncan covered his face as parts of the video were shown, and jurors frequently shot him looks. Two of Duncan's standby attorneys also avoided looking at the screen.

This case really, really troubles me... you guys know I am usually one of the first to jump on the "Hang em twice, then drag him through town, bandwagon" however, if this Duncan psycho was actually possessed by the Devil himself, or other substantiating evidence of Demonic possession, could it be that the Perp is a victim as well? I am really conflicted about this one...

If I believe in God & Good, then logically I have to believe the Devil & Evil exist correct?

don't get me wrong, if in doubt, rip his guts out, but what if it truly is a possession?:confused:

Shannon
08-23-2008, 11:36 PM
This case really, really troubles me... you guys know I am usually one of the first to jump on the "Hang em twice, then drag him through town, bandwagon" however, if this Duncan psycho was actually possessed by the Devil himself, or other substantiating evidence of Demonic possession, could it be that the Perp is a victim as well? I am really conflicted about this one...

If I believe in God & Good, then logically I have to believe the Devil & Evil exist correct?

don't get me wrong, if in doubt, rip his guts out, but what if it truly is a possession?:confused:

Are you fucking kidding me? Demonic possession?

wilbur
08-23-2008, 11:49 PM
This case really, really troubles me... you guys know I am usually one of the first to jump on the "Hang em twice, then drag him through town, bandwagon" however, if this Duncan psycho was actually possessed by the Devil himself, or other substantiating evidence of Demonic possession, could it be that the Perp is a victim as well? I am really conflicted about this one...

If I believe in God & Good, then logically I have to believe the Devil & Evil exist correct?

don't get me wrong, if in doubt, rip his guts out, but what if it truly is a possession?:confused:

The church's best trick is to convince you the devil exists;)

Shannon
08-23-2008, 11:58 PM
The church's best trick is to convince you the devil exists;)

The devil's best trick is to convince you that he doesn't exist.

hampshirebrit
08-24-2008, 05:29 AM
Are you fucking kidding me? Demonic possession?

Holy shit (literally).

A second believer (not you, Shannon) being "conflicted" about doing the right thing.

Just shoot the fucker and be done with it.

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 07:06 AM
The church's best trick is to convince you the devil exists;)

Satan's best trick is to convince you that he doesn't

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 07:10 AM
Holy shit (literally).

A second believer (not you, Shannon) being "conflicted" about doing the right thing.

Just shoot the fucker and be done with it.

And there in lays the real question. What is the right thing? To kill him or to show mercy and give him life without parole? And this spawns another question of right or wrong. Is it more merciful to kill him outright or let him spend the rest of his life in prision? Different people with have different answers.

Phillygirl
08-24-2008, 10:15 AM
It's not a baser instinct to want to see a monster punished. The baser instinct is to file his appeals, decry his sentence and hold candlelight vigils when the time comes for him to pay for his crimes. Most of those people who will try to move heaven and earth on behalf of Duncan will do so in the full knowledge of his guilt, but they are animated by a vision of their own moral superiority, rather than any real concern for legal principles or justice. Those who claim that we should not give in to the "primitive" desire for revenge are really saying that they are superior to us primitives who continue to demand that criminals be punished and victims be avenged. Frankly, I have no problem with revenge. If someone hurt my wife or daughters the way that this monster did to those children, I'd want him dead. No, it won't bring back his victims, but they may rest easier.

And this is where the dp opponents and I part company. Conflicted as I am from a theoretical standpoint, I can say that I've never been so on board with the opposition to even consider taking a proactive role in the abolishment of the practice in general, or an execution in particular. Perhaps my most base instinct on the matter is my apathy towards its implementation.

Odysseus
08-24-2008, 10:58 AM
And there in lays the real question. What is the right thing? To kill him or to show mercy and give him life without parole? And this spawns another question of right or wrong. Is it more merciful to kill him outright or let him spend the rest of his life in prision? Different people with have different answers.
Life without parole isn't merciful to the survivors, who will live in constant terror of his eventual release, and make no mistake about it, he will eventually be released, because life without parole is really life-until-some-idiot-comes-up-with-an-excuse-to-free-him. All that they need to do is find one sympathetic judge who is willing to consider an appeal and throw the whole thing back into court, where the victims get to relive the entire monstrous ordeal (assuming that they're still around to testify) while the defense comes up with creative ways to reinterpret guilt or redefine innocence. Maybe the court failed to provide an exorcist for his demonic possession, or maybe they didn't take his unhappy childhood into account, or maybe the little girl was really a federal agent and therefore her testimony is tainted. Doesn't matter, since by that time, evidence will have been lost, doubts manufactured in the place of certainty and the system gamed in favor of the guilty. Keeping him alive serves no purpose except to allow those self-appointed moralists to act as though they've done something noble by pretending that they're serving a higher end (mercy) in spite of the primitive attitudes of the rest of us.


And this is where the dp opponents and I part company. Conflicted as I am from a theoretical standpoint, I can say that I've never been so on board with the opposition to even consider taking a proactive role in the abolishment of the practice in general, or an execution in particular. Perhaps my most base instinct on the matter is my apathy towards its implementation.

It's understandable to be conflicted. It's not a pleasant thing to take a life, and the issues surrounding the powers of government vs. the the rights of individuals can offer legitimate discussion, but the maudlin sentiments that anti-DP activists bring to their candlelight vigils and specious appeals demonstrate that their motives have nothing to do with the nature of government, crime and punishment, and everything to do with their view of themselves as paragons of virtue.

Phillygirl
08-24-2008, 11:20 AM
It's understandable to be conflicted. It's not a pleasant thing to take a life, and the issues surrounding the powers of government vs. the the rights of individuals can offer legitimate discussion, but the maudlin sentiments that anti-DP activists bring to their candlelight vigils and specious appeals demonstrate that their motives have nothing to do with the nature of government, crime and punishment, and everything to do with their view of themselves as paragons of virtue.

I agree. That has never sat well with me. Quite frankly, I can handle a quiet candle light vigil at the time of execution. To me, that kind of protest is appropriate and befitting the point they are (from my point of view) trying to make...that taking another life in a cold fashion dehumanizes us as well.

I've told this on here before, but my change in position regarding the death penalty really came from the Mumia trial. I spent a weekend reading the transcripts, after watching some of the circus on t.v. with Mike Farrell and other Hollywood elites decry his sentence. After reading the transcripts, and knowing the certainty of his guilt, to compare that to the circus that he was ring leading sickened me. The fact that those Hollywood types would go on t.v. defending him, knowing absolutely nothing about the facts of the case, the crime, the trial, sickened me. Say you're against the death penalty; even say that you are against it even under these most egregious of circumstances...but don't pretend that he's innocent, and don't use him as the poster child for all that is wrong with the system and its implementation.

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 12:11 PM
Life without parole isn't merciful to the survivors, who will live in constant terror of his eventual release, and make no mistake about it, he will eventually be released, because life without parole is really life-until-some-idiot-comes-up-with-an-excuse-to-free-him. All that they need to do is find one sympathetic judge who is willing to consider an appeal and throw the whole thing back into court, where the victims get to relive the entire monstrous ordeal (assuming that they're still around to testify) while the defense comes up with creative ways to reinterpret guilt or redefine innocence. Maybe the court failed to provide an exorcist for his demonic possession, or maybe they didn't take his unhappy childhood into account, or maybe the little girl was really a federal agent and therefore her testimony is tainted. Doesn't matter, since by that time, evidence will have been lost, doubts manufactured in the place of certainty and the system gamed in favor of the guilty. Keeping him alive serves no purpose except to allow those self-appointed moralists to act as though they've done something noble by pretending that they're serving a higher end (mercy) in spite of the primitive attitudes of the rest of us.

You know that I am pretty devout in my beliefs and I take everything that Christ asks of me to heart and this creates the conflict I have. It is probably not what you think it is so let me try to explain. Christ asks believers to do some pretty hard things sometimes. He speaks of forgiving our enemies and wishing them well and praying for them and I know I should do this, but people like Duncan make this really tough. Part of me wants to string him up and the other part of me wants to lock him up and let God look after him. If the state decides that he should die then I can live with that. Gods expects different things from the state as opposed to the individual. God gives the mandate for earthly justice to the state but the individual is held to a different standard. This is the conflict that I have. It is not so much with the death penalty but how in my heart I feel about it. As I interpret things the state can take a life but I shouldn't rejoice over the life being taken. And I should seek for God to be merciful to the person being executed. However, deep in my core I want people like Duncan to end up shoveling coal for Satan and the sooner the better.

Theo
08-24-2008, 02:14 PM
Are you fucking kidding me? Demonic possession?

Millions of Catholics believe in it, and to be fair, if I am doing God's will on a daily basis, am I not 'God Possessed?

Yes, I believe in Free will, God allows us to have & use free will, Satan, not so much...:cool:

Theo
08-24-2008, 02:19 PM
The church's best trick is to convince you the devil exists;)


Ahhhhh, so your upset with the 'Church' whatever church you mean, has nothing to do with God... God is Goodness, Love Peace, & Tolerance, the Churches I have visited & congregated in exhibited little or fake 'Goodness, Love, Peace & Tolerance, please do not confuse the Church with God, to me Churches are a great way to meet women.:D

Do you believe Evil exists wilbur? if you do, 'The Devil' is as good a name to call Evil as any, no?

Goldwater
08-24-2008, 02:21 PM
Millions of Catholics believe in it, and to be fair, if I am doing God's will on a daily basis, am I not 'God Possessed?

No because God is not controlling you, you are doing it by your own will.

Theo
08-24-2008, 02:24 PM
Originall
y Posted by wilbur View Post
The church's best trick is to convince you the devil exists


Satan's best trick is to convince you that he doesn't

FG gets it! ;)

And by convincing us that he does not exist, we put the Perp, who is also a victim, to death?

Satan calls that a win-win..:(

PS: Satan, I'm glad God banished you to hell, it's where you belong, you miserable sack of Goat fornicating crap....

Theo
08-24-2008, 02:32 PM
Holy shit (literally).

A second believer (not you, Shannon) being "conflicted" about doing the right thing.

Just shoot the fucker and be done with it.

Look at it this way hamp,

and I know you don't buy into the God stuff, therefore, your solution is correct, eliminate evil in any form, and I don't disagree, I have just figured out I can stir more shit with conflict than my usual:

Typical Theo Response to post:

*bring back the Roman Arenas!
*Draw & Quarter him on Pay per View! Give the profits to the victims families!
*Put the Execution on Public access TV as a lesson to other would be child torturer/killers!

see? ya'll would ALL agree with that, and a lack of controversy KILLS Message Boards..:D

Theo
08-24-2008, 02:38 PM
No because God is not controlling you, you are doing it by your own will.

Correct, I agree, however Satan is not such a sweetheart, Demonic Possession Links throughout history would fill this Thread, so my question Goldwater would be this:

If the Perp is under Demonic Possesion, is HE responsible for his actions?

hint: Satan can MORE easily possess, the mentally Ill, the Addicted, and those that choose to do Evil..

imho

wilbur
08-24-2008, 03:09 PM
Correct, I agree, however Satan is not such a sweetheart, Demonic Possession Links throughout history would fill this Thread, so my question Goldwater would be this:

If the Perp is under Demonic Possesion, is HE responsible for his actions?


If we can assume "demonic possession" is akin to mental disease, where the person might not be in full control of their faculties, then of course not. How can you hold someone fully responsible if they are under the control of basically what is supposed to be the second most powerful being in the universe besides God? However, there is no such thing as demonic possession. The whole concept was dreamed up because of people like this killer... not the other way around.

We can fill up these pages with alien abduction stories and all kinds of new age mystical crap, that doesn't mean they have a grain of truth to them.



hint: Satan can MORE easily possess, the mentally Ill, the Addicted, and those that choose to do Evil..


Or the mentally ill, depending on the disease and the situation, are more likely to capable of such horrible crimes. And if someone is already doing 'evil deeds', why do we need to attach demonic possession to the situation to explain more evil deeds that they do?

As far as the death penalty goes, I generally don't agree with it. Prisons escapes are a fairly rare thing, and most escapees seem to get caught pretty quickly, so I don't think the argument regarding the danger to society by letting a murderer live the rest of his life in prison is moot. Not that I think it's likely, but perhaps we did find out this guy has a mental disease that explained his actions? Death is too final for us to make judgements when we don't have perfect knowledge. We can lock them away and keep society safe, there is no need to kill them.

wilbur
08-24-2008, 03:20 PM
Satan's best trick is to convince you that he doesn't

Oh I know the old saying... I just rearranged it so it made sense;)

Theo
08-24-2008, 03:28 PM
[QUOTE=wilbur;36216]If we can assume "demonic possession" is akin to mental disease, where the person might not be in full control of their faculties, then of course not. How can you hold someone fully responsible if they are under the control of basically what is supposed to be the second most powerful being in the universe besides God? However, there is no such thing as demonic possession. The whole concept was dreamed up because of people like this killer... not the other way around.

We can fill up these pages with alien abduction stories and all kinds of new age mystical crap, that doesn't mean they have a grain of truth to them.

Ok, so your not buying the 'Devil made him do it' defense..:D

However, if you truly believe that the Devil is the second most powerful being in the Universe, and he does not believe in free will for humans, who is to say the Devil would not, could not, does not possess people?
maybe 'possession' is too strong a term, think C.S. Lewis's book The Screwtape Letters..

You don't believe in Alien Abductions? nor buy the New Age Stuff? what the hell is wrong with you!!!:D:p



Or the mentally ill, depending on the disease and the situation, are more likely to capable of such horrible crimes. And if someone is already doing 'evil deeds', why do we need to attach demonic possession to the situation to explain more evil deeds that they do?

As far as the death penalty goes, I generally don't agree with it. Prisons escapes are a fairly rare thing, and most escapees seem to get caught pretty quickly, so I don't think the argument regarding the danger to society by letting a murderer live the rest of his life in prison is moot.

I say we conserve food & resources he would use for no purpose in prison, and go ahead and go the Public execution route..

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 03:42 PM
Oh I know the old saying... I just rearranged it so it made sense;)

If I may interject myself into the conversation for a moment… in the case of demonic possession the victim isn't free of guilt. He or she has done something to attract the attention of demonic forces, is in some way useful for Satan's operation and is not under the protection of Christ. The demons don't just possess anybody. There is a method to their madness.

As for the Devil himself, the problem with the modern concept of Satan is that his existence is not believed and if he is believed he is either over estimated or underestimated. People tend either to give Satan credit for attributes that only God has or consider him some cartoonish dolt ala Looney Tunes. Satan is not omniscient or omnipresent. He can only be in one place at a time and odds are those places don't include possessing some little girl in Georgetown (Exorcist reference). He doesn't know everything and he is not all powerful. But being God's highest Angelic creation he is no slouch either. He is stronger and smarter than man.

hampshirebrit
08-24-2008, 03:46 PM
If I may interject myself into the conversation for a moment… in the case of demonic possession the victim isn't free of guilt. He or she has done something to attract the attention of demonic forces, is in some way useful for Satan's operation and is not under the protection of Christ. The demons don't just possess anybody. There is a method to their madness.

As for the Devil himself, the problem with the modern concept of Satan is that his existence is not believed and if he is believed he is either over estimated or underestimated. People tend either to give Satan credit for attributes that only God has or consider him some cartoonish dolt ala Looney Tunes. Satan is not omniscient or omnipresent. He can only be in one place at a time and odds are those places don't include possessing some little girl in Georgetown (Exorcist reference). He doesn't know everything and he is not all powerful. But being God's highest Angelic creation he is no slouch either. He is stronger and smarter than man.

Look, I hate to be the one to point it out, but wasn't the Duncan bloke also drivelling on about "the devil" when he was abusing the little boy? On video?

Belief in devils is a very dangerous thing. Look what it lead to here.

Let's cast out this silly talk of some imaginary devil, and concentrate on the real evil here...Duncan.

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 03:51 PM
Look, I hate to be the one to point it out, but wasn't the Duncan bloke also drivelling on about "the devil" when he was abusing the little boy? On video?

Belief in devils is a very dangerous thing. Look what it lead to here.

Let's cast out this silly talk of some imaginary devil, and concentrate on the real evil here...Duncan.

I don't believe that he is possessed for a single second. However, I do believe that Satan is real. If one accepts the Son of God part of Christianity he as to acknowledge the validity of the otherside of the coin as well.

Theo
08-24-2008, 03:52 PM
If I may interject myself into the conversation for a moment… in the case of demonic possession the victim isn't free of guilt. He or she has done something to attract the attention of demonic forces, is in some way useful for Satan's operation and is not under the protection of Christ. The demons don't just possess anybody. There is a method to their madness.

As for the Devil himself, the problem with the modern concept of Satan is that his existence is not believed and if he is believed he is either over estimated or underestimated. People tend either to give Satan credit for attributes that only God has or consider him some cartoonish dolt ala Looney Tunes. Satan is not omniscient or omnipresent. He can only be in one place at a time and odds are those places don't include possessing some little girl in Georgetown (Exorcist reference). He doesn't know everything and he is not all powerful. But being God's highest Angelic creation he is no slouch either. He is stronger and smarter than man.

sheesh, we may have to go to the REL forum, we keep this up..


[QUOTE=FlaGator;36226]If I may interject myself into the conversation for a moment… in the case of demonic possession the victim isn't free of guilt.

FG, I agree with the majority of your post, we ARE responsible for 'putting on the Armor, shield & Sword' of God, however how can we as humans be guilty of being weak, or, not placing our faith & trust in God? to say this would mean we are guilty of Sin... ok, never mind I think I just answered my own question..:o

FlaGator
08-24-2008, 03:55 PM
sheesh, we may have to go to the REL forum, we keep this up..

FG, I agree with the majority of your post, we ARE responsible for 'putting on the Armor, shield & Sword' of God, however how can we as humans be guilty of being weak, or, not placing our faith & trust in God? to say this would mean we are guilty of Sin... ok, never mind I think I just answered my own question..:o

Unfortunately management doesn't think a religion forum is a good idea. To much chaos and flaming for a single forum. Instead management as elected to spread the chaos and flaming amongst all the forums:D

Theo
08-24-2008, 04:08 PM
Unfortunately management doesn't think a religion forum is a good idea. To much chaos and flaming for a single forum. Instead management as elected to spread the chaos and flaming amongst all the forums:D


:eek:

the carnage, destroyed friendships, bannings based on religious beliefs/lack of any beliefs...:eek:

It's cool, you know my history, I:

Let go and Let God...
Live & let Live...
Easy does it...
The Problem is ME

wilbur
08-24-2008, 05:26 PM
[QUOTE]

Ok, so your not buying the 'Devil made him do it' defense..:D

However, if you truly believe that the Devil is the second most powerful being in the Universe,

I don't... but that's generally what Christian theology says (I am not Christian)... Lucifer was the greatest and most powerful of the angels before his "fall", IIRC. I was just being hypothetical. Possession implies some sort of surrender or loss of control. If that is the case one could not be fully accountable for the actions while under such a possession, in the same way a schizophrenic might not be fully accountable for something done under an attack. But no, I do not believe in demonic possession. Myth and fairy tales made up to explain aberrations like the killer in this case, most likely (and in many cases, schizophrenic people).

Actually, today, myths of demonic possession cause quite a bit of damage if someone with a disease like schizophrenia falls into the clutches of some particularly wacky fundamentalist churches. They convince the schizo that the voices and the sinister hallucinations are real (and demonic), and get them to forgo psychiatric treatment in lieu of "healing" by way of some imbecile slapping them on the forehead during a service.



You don't believe in Alien Abductions? nor buy the New Age Stuff? what the hell is wrong with you!!!:D:p


Oh noes, I didn't realize what I was getting into here... :)

gravright
08-24-2008, 05:38 PM
My heart says the death penalty is wrong...my stomach says to fry the bastard.


My heart, mind, and stomach say.....a bullet to the face.

I would hate to be one of those jurors. Reading about it is bad enough.

wilbur
08-24-2008, 05:41 PM
I would hate to be one of those jurors. Reading about it is bad enough.

That is the truth

MrsSmith
08-24-2008, 08:48 PM
Look, I hate to be the one to point it out, but wasn't the Duncan bloke also drivelling on about "the devil" when he was abusing the little boy? On video?

Belief in devils is a very dangerous thing. Look what it lead to here.

Let's cast out this silly talk of some imaginary devil, and concentrate on the real evil here...Duncan.

"Belief in devils" led to nothing. Other than the belief in Christ, which provides salvation and protection from the master of this world, human "beliefs" have no power. Humans may act on them, but a simple belief stuck in a human mind is powerless.

LogansPapa
08-24-2008, 11:50 PM
Silly folk - We are the only Devil.:rolleyes:

FuroraCeltica
08-25-2008, 05:29 AM
You are lucky to live in a country where scum like child sex attackers can get the death penalty.

Contrast this with the European Union. The so called European Court of Human Rights ruled that convicted sex killers have a human right to pornography in prison.

FlaGator
08-25-2008, 02:03 PM
Silly folk - We are the only Devil.:rolleyes:


Satan encourages that kind of thinking. Makes his job easier.

Odysseus
08-25-2008, 02:10 PM
You know that I am pretty devout in my beliefs and I take everything that Christ asks of me to heart and this creates the conflict I have. It is probably not what you think it is so let me try to explain. Christ asks believers to do some pretty hard things sometimes. He speaks of forgiving our enemies and wishing them well and praying for them and I know I should do this, but people like Duncan make this really tough. Part of me wants to string him up and the other part of me wants to lock him up and let God look after him. If the state decides that he should die then I can live with that. Gods expects different things from the state as opposed to the individual. God gives the mandate for earthly justice to the state but the individual is held to a different standard. This is the conflict that I have. It is not so much with the death penalty but how in my heart I feel about it. As I interpret things the state can take a life but I shouldn't rejoice over the life being taken. And I should seek for God to be merciful to the person being executed. However, deep in my core I want people like Duncan to end up shoveling coal for Satan and the sooner the better.
I understand your dilemma, but I don't see it as a conflict. You can forgive and pray for a sinner while still inflicting punishment that is deserved. What happens to Duncan's soul is between him and God, but what happens to him on earth is up to him and to those who are tasked with keeping the world safe from the likes of him. If that means that he gets culled from the gene pool with extreme prejudice, then that's what he set himself up for. Besides, I'm not bound by Christian morality, and Judaism is far less forgiving. Moses would've cracked a stone tablet over Duncan's head and left him in the desert to die, which is probably why you don't see a whole lot of liberals driving around with "What Would Moses Do?" bumper stickers on their volvos.
Human evil isn't the result of divine intervention. Duncan didn't torture, rape and murder children because he was possessed, he did it because he enjoyed doing it, and if he is ever released, he'll do it again.

You are lucky to live in a country where scum like child sex attackers can get the death penalty.
Contrast this with the European Union. The so called European Court of Human Rights ruled that convicted sex killers have a human right to pornography in prison.
That's the kind of idiocy that's beyond parody. I submit that the members of the European Court of Human Rights should be made to pose for it.

Silly folk - We are the only Devil.:rolleyes:
That explains your horns and pitchfork.

LogansPapa
08-25-2008, 02:16 PM
Satan encourages that kind of thinking. Makes his job easier.

Satan has nothing to do with it. Betrayal is the basis of all sin. You betray yourself, someone else, or Him. That’s it - so save the "influence" propaganda for someone who hasn’t been to the Big Rodeo yet.

FlaGator
08-25-2008, 02:35 PM
Satan has nothing to do with it. Betrayal is the basis of all sin. You betray yourself, someone else, or Him. That’s it - so save the "influence" propaganda for someone who hasn’t been to the Big Rodeo yet.

I don't blame Satan for most things because mankind's behavior is sinister enough without any external help. I do suspect he has a hand in the big things. As I stated earlier, people either overestimate or underestimate Satan. To do either is a mistake. As you stated, the Devil didn't invent sin. Sin is a natural occurence when the will of man is at odds with the will of God. Satan, however, can use the sin that is already present in a human heart to achieve his ends.

hampshirebrit
08-25-2008, 03:51 PM
Satan encourages that kind of thinking. Makes his job easier.

Oh please:

I hate to say this, and I respect you and all but for fuck's sake,

wake up!!!

There is no devil.

You are just playing into Duncan's hands when you say that there is.

I will not say anything here about your other beliefs, but belief in the devil really is utterly, utterly immoral.

It is in any event, but especially, in this one. Why? Because it gives him a pass.

Surely, you can see this. For your god's sake, not mine, you should see that there is only one just, only one right outcome in this case...a bullet in the head.

Duncan is a sick fuck, but a human, sick fuck. Not a devil-originated sick fuck.

Anything else is liberal prevarication.

I have a hunch that the jury in this case is going to return the DP.

LogansPapa
08-25-2008, 03:54 PM
We’ve allowed the development of the human-rodent prototype to go too far. Time to exterminate this kind of varmint.

wilbur
08-25-2008, 04:08 PM
Oh please:

I hate to say this, and I respect you and all but for fuck's sake,

wake up!!!

There is no devil.

You are just playing into Duncan's hands when you say that there is.

I will not say anything here about your other beliefs, but belief in the devil really is utterly, utterly immoral.

It is in any event, but especially, in this one. Why? Because it gives him a pass.

Surely, you can see this. For your god's sake, not mine, you should see that there is only one just, only one right outcome in this case...a bullet in the head.

Duncan is a sick fuck, but a human, sick fuck. Not a devil-originated sick fuck.

Anything else is liberal prevarication.

I have a hunch that the jury in this case is going to return the DP.

To be fair, I don't think FlaGator is alleviating the guy of any responsibility for his actions.

The way I was always taught, and I think its pretty standard, is that the devil can usually just tempt you (how he actually engineers situations without controlling or coecring people I don't know;), and supposedly God will never let you be put in front of a temptation that you don't have the power to resist.

Rebel Yell
08-25-2008, 04:14 PM
That's right, Wilbur. The devil made him do it is not really recognized by CHristians. The devil is actually powerless when it comes to the choice a human makes. He can offer the choice, but can't make the choice for you.

Theo
08-25-2008, 10:16 PM
[QUOTE=hampshirebrit;36950]Oh please:

I hate to say this, and I respect you and all but for fuck's sake,

wake up!!!

There is no devil.

I find this to be reasonable coming from you hamp, considering that you do not believe God exists, I can't very well expect you to believe a devil exists, but why the need to ram your lack of belief at us in such large font? irritated much?


You are just playing into Duncan's hands when you say that there is.

according to the article, Duncan did not want the video shown (for obvious reasons) however, he was not using the devil as a defense, he was speaking on the videotape & talking about Devils & demons, I am the one who asked "did the Devil possess him, to do these acts? Personally, I would like to utilize a blowtorch on Duncan's hands, before moving on to more sensitive areas of his scumbag self..


I will not say anything here about your other beliefs, but belief in the devil really is utterly, utterly immoral.

It is in any event, but especially, in this one. Why? Because it gives him a pass.

hamp, how in the hell is a belief in the devil immoral?
No one on this thread is giving Duncan a pass, or trying to, I guess to my way of thinking, it is hard to believe that a human being is capable of inflicting such torture & evil on a person, much less a child, without a 'greater force' of evil incarnate to cause such diabolical acts.

FlaGator
08-26-2008, 09:17 AM
Oh please:

I hate to say this, and I respect you and all but for fuck's sake,

wake up!!!

There is no devil.

You are just playing into Duncan's hands when you say that there is.

I will not say anything here about your other beliefs, but belief in the devil really is utterly, utterly immoral.

It is in any event, but especially, in this one. Why? Because it gives him a pass.

Surely, you can see this. For your god's sake, not mine, you should see that there is only one just, only one right outcome in this case...a bullet in the head.

Duncan is a sick fuck, but a human, sick fuck. Not a devil-originated sick fuck.

Anything else is liberal prevarication.

I have a hunch that the jury in this case is going to return the DP.

You should read my posts before commenting on them. I don't think that Satan is in any way responsible for Duncan's behavior. I was merely commenting on the fact that I believe Satan to be a real being. How is it immoral to believe that Satan exists? I would enjoy hearing you expound upon this.

You wouldn't be trying to force your beliefs on me would you? :)