Should a crime still be prosecuted even if the victim (or the victim's survivors) wish it not to be?

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Well?

If I am robbed, or stabbed, and they catch the guy, and I FORGIVE him, and ask the court to drop the charges against him,
should the court still prosecute him, on the basis that he committed a crime against society's laws, not just against me, and they have a responsibility to protect the public from him, not just me?


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[rsmn17 0]

It's not really a fair question because you'd have to specify the crime. If robbery or stabbing was the case, then yes he shoud be prosecuted no matter what the victim says...but if the crime is only considered a crime by the victims' interpretation of it and doesn't cause any harm to anyone, then no, he shouldn't be prosecuted.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Hey, thread hijack!


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[rsmn17 0]

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

So, I never found out; when the stripper licked yer ass, did he hit starfish?


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[rsmn17 0]

Haha...it wasn't THAT bad

[miked10270 0]

While the victim's views SHOULD be taken into account in sentencing,The increased potential for recidivism in the face of forgiveness largely precludes abandoning prosecution & punishment purely at the request of the immediate victim.

Mike.

Taking the piss out of the FrenchAmericans since before it was fashionable.

Prenait la pisse hors du FrançaisCanadiens méridionaux puisqu'avant lui à la mode.

[Nightingale 0]

Yes, the criminal should still be prosecuted.

You can decide not to pursue a civil action against him (not to sue), but a criminal case is prosecuted by the state because of a broken law. One of the reasons it works this way is that otherwise, criminals would have a much bigger incentive to try to frighten victims into dropping charges.

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Exactly.

You are always reasonable and even-voiced, Nightingale. That's why I respect you so much.

-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[lawrocket 3]

Of course it should. Look at domestic violence. There's one where the victim almost always wants to drop charges. It's a classic example of why crimes should be punished regardless of the "stated" desires of the victims.

My wife is hotter than your wife.

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

Of course it should. Look at domestic violence. There's one where the victim almost always wants to drop charges. It's a classic example of why crimes should be punished regardless of the "stated" desires of the victims.

This poll is something of a twisted representation of an issue that arose in the "stripper" thread.

If you say I've been sexually assaulted, and I don't feel sexually assaulted, have I been sexually assaulted?

An underlying presumption is that we are dealing with adults, not children or incompetents.

Moreover, if I am forced to have sex by a known rapist, and I like it, and he's then caught for his other crimes, can he be prosecuted for "raping" me even though I don't feel raped.

Somehow, the leap from that to this poll is "should the victim of a crime be permitted to drop the charges at a whim?" IMO, the only reasonable answer to that question is no.

I just have a bad feeling that the answer to the question in this poll is going to be applied to the situation in the other thread, and they are not analogous situations.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[billvon 3,120]

>Of course it should. Look at domestic violence. There's one where
>the victim almost always wants to drop charges. It's a classic
> example of why crimes should be punished regardless of
> the "stated" desires of the victims.

Wow, I'm going to jail for life! The things you learn here on DZ.com . . .

[Airman1270 0]

Nice question. I believe that I, as a "victim," should have some say in this, especially if we're talking about "crimes" that were recently enacted by well-meaning "tough on (fill in the issue-du-jour here)" politicians.

A neighborhood teenager might damage my parked car while D.U.I., but maybe I'd rather accept his apology and his offer to pay restitution, instead of demanding he be criminally charged. He will likely have learned a lesson for life, and will forever appreciate me for not putting the screws to him.

Another example: It seems that I should have the right to throw a chair across the room in my home. It's mine. But if I do this while arguing with my wife, it's recently been redefined as a crime. Something like "criminal mishchief," etc. And if I do it in front of my kids, it's interpreted as "cruelty to children."

Meanwhile, if I do this while we're all in a good mood, and we're just having some clean, albeit unusual "fun," nobody will care. The police will not respond even if they find out about it.

So, is it, or is it not illegal to throw a chair across my living room? If "yes," what difference does it make what's being said and to whom? And if "no," why do I face arrest and prosecution for it?

God help any cop who interferes in a private family matter in my home.

Cheers,
Jon S.

[AlexCrowley 0]

umm she merely justified your own belief.

The justice system draws distinctions between different crimes and the rights of the victim with regard to pursuing criminal actions for good reason.

TV's got them images, TV's got them all, nothing's shocking.

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

umm she merely justified your own belief.

The justice system draws distinctions between different crimes and the rights of the victim with regard to pursuing criminal actions for good reason.

You bring out the point that has been clouded since this discussion began in the stripper thread.

If a "crime" has been committed, but no report has been made to the police, the victim can do whatever he or she wants to do. Once the "crime" has been reported, however, there isn't much the victim can do except to recant, which is to say, take the blame for another kind of crime on him/herself.

Edited to add: The exception to this is when the victim actually brings the complaint rather than the complaint being brought by the police. This happens in certain kinds of everyday disputes that do not involve violence or evidence of violence, and are more of a "he said/she said, he did/she did" sort of thing.

As for the discussion of domestic violence up above, you can throw all the chairs you want, but if your neighbors hear the noise and call 911, or if your wife or children make a complaint, you're going to have to deal with the legal system.

You may believe you are sovereign in your own home, but your family has rights too, and their right not to be terrorized by a raving and/or violent parent or spouse trumps your right to rave or be violent.

That's not a bad thing.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[rehmwa 2]

one thing - A person committed a crime, that must be addressed. Justice is about protecting all of society. It has nothing to do with closure or revenge or restitution for the victim - those are side effects, not the real purpose of justice.

separate thing - someone had a crime committed against them. They are a victim. That's all. Justice must occur regardless of their view or opinions. Justice is not a personal thing, that's where people get the mixup between feelings and morality in this type of question.

This is real crime, not civil stuff, not PC made up laws.

Easy poll. Yes is the only answer that makes sense.

It's equivalent to asking the poll - should the victim be allowed to pull the switch/lock the cell/beat up the criminal. No, as soon as justice becomes personal, then it becomes subjective, then it becomes a great big joke, then justice is a popularity contest and uneven. Unfortunately, it seems we are moving in that direction in areas....

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[Scoop 0]

I think that if you dont want anything done about it, dont report it.

Although I obviously urge everyone to report every criminal act

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

A neighborhood teenager might damage my parked car while D.U.I., but maybe I'd rather accept his apology and his offer to pay restitution, instead of demanding he be criminally charged. He will likely have learned a lesson for life, and will forever appreciate me for not putting the screws to him.

Your neighbors deserve to have that D.U.I. kid punished in a meaningful way, to get the message across that there are serious consequences of doing something like that, which risks innocent lives.

You think that kids (or adults) who do something very serious and then receive a slap on the wrist "learn a lesson for life"? What lesson? That they won't be severely punished for severe criminal behavior? That's not a good lesson to teach youth.

I don't think that the victimhood is restricted to YOU alone in that case. We have a kid who committed a crime against society by driving drunk -- it just happens that your car is the one he hit. Could have been my girlfriend. Your daughter. Her grandmother.

Quote

God help any cop who interferes in a private family matter in my home.

????????

Um, whuh?

Does that mean that a cop who comes to your door because the neighbors heard smashing sounds, your wife scream, you scream, her beg you to stop hitting her, and called the police, should fear a violent response from you?

I don't get it. Granted if a cop tries to intervene when you're not doing something clearly wrong, he is out of line, but it sounds for all the world like you would harm a cop for doing his job.


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

Quote

A neighborhood teenager might damage my parked car while D.U.I., but maybe I'd rather accept his apology and his offer to pay restitution, instead of demanding he be criminally charged. He will likely have learned a lesson for life, and will forever appreciate me for not putting the screws to him.

Your neighbors deserve to have that D.U.I. kid punished in a meaningful way,

You don't mean a "meaningful" way. You mean in an official way.

It's a funny thing about teenagers. They do a whole lot better with some kindness and limits than they do with terror tactics. Our society has grown too large for it to work in most places, but this is still done in small towns.

It certainly turned out better citizens in the small community in which I grew up than I see growing up in the larger towns I've lived in since.

All the legal system does is make kids grow up hating and fearing authority. A kindly neighbor who lets a kid off the hook for a youthful mistake while still requiring a logical consequence has done a public service.

I hope for you that if you ever make a mistake, someone shows you mercy, but I'm inclined to think that if they do, you'll just laugh about how you got over.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

• Quote

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

A youthful mistake would be toiletpapering a house, or egging it, on Halloween.

A D.U.I. involving property damage and the very real potential to KILL someone is not a "youthful mistake" in that sense of the term, and needs to be dealt with "officially" and "meaningfully."

As a member of society, I DEMAND that the courts handle someone who breaks such a serious law. I want if for MY protection, and my loved ones'.

Rehmwa made the best post on this subject yet. It's not a personal decision, it's a justice decision.


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

I hope for you that if you ever make a mistake, someone shows you mercy, but I'm inclined to think that if they do, you'll just laugh about how you got over.rl

It's amazing how well you know me, after three days or so of reading paragraphs here and there. You're incredibly intuitive about people, aren't you? In fact, you're so good you neither have to meet them nor speak directly with them in conversation before you know just what kind of person they are and how they would act in a wide array of situations.

You need to learn to distinguish between a "mistake" and a "criminal act."


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[lisamariewillbe 1]

Quote

I DEMAND

Well why didn't you just say so, I mean jeesh since you DEMAND it and all

Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this
Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this

[RhondaLea 4]

Quote

You're incredibly intuitive about people, aren't you?

Yes.

Quote

In fact, you're so good you neither have to meet them nor speak directly with them in conversation before you know just what kind of person they are and how they would act in a wide array of situations.

I don't need to know how someone will act in a wide array of situations if the only situation in which I know him is one in which he behaves badly.

Quote

You need to learn to distinguish between a "mistake" and a "criminal act."

You'll be a happier person if you learn to see the world in something more than black and white.

rl

If you don't know where you're going, you should know where you came from. Gullah Proverb

[peacefuljeffrey 0]

Quote

Quote

I DEMAND

Well why didn't you just say so, I mean jeesh since you DEMAND it and all

Which I take to mean that you don't demand that the criminal justice system actually mete out...justice?

Then you're among those people whose permissive attitude toward crime and criminals is responsible for its prevalence? Thanks a lot.


-Jeffrey

-Jeffrey
"With tha thoughts of a militant mind... Hard line, hard line after hard line!"

[lisamariewillbe 1]

Your welcome

Sudsy Fist: i don't think i'd ever say this
Sudsy Fist: but you're looking damn sudsydoable in this