- Joined
- Aug 27, 2005
- Messages
- 43,602
- Reaction score
- 26,256
- Location
- Houston, TX
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
NEW YORK (Reuters) - The New York City cop on trial for plotting to kidnap, cook and eat women shed tears on Tuesday as his attorneys rested their case after one day.
"Just knowing that we've finally come to the conclusion (of the trial) and that his fate is in the jury's hands" made Officer Gilberto Valle emotional, attorney Robert Baum said after court ended.
Can you go to prison for thought crime? It appears so. Valle never carried out what he said he wanted to do. Add to that the fact that darkfetishnet is a web site dedicated to role play (pretty sick role play at that), and you have to ask yourself the question "Is just talking about doing something without acting on it, as in role play, a crime". But on the other hand, his wife and other women were very much afraid of his posts at that web site. So, IMHO, their rights were violated. With First Amendment rights come First Amendment responsibilities. The old adage about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind here. Should Valle be convicted of actually plotting murder and cannibalism? I don't think so, but in light of those he terrorized by his actions, he certainly should be convicted of making the threats which terrorized his victims.
In addition, it wouldn't be a bad idea for a psychatric evaluation either. This man is certainly sick.
What does everyone else think?
Article is here.
NOTE: The idea of eating someone's face does give a new meaning to "Facebook". LOL.
You shouldn't be able to be jailed for thinking about something f'd up. Was there a lot of evidence to demonstrate this was beyond thinking and there was a plan in place? I mean if you can prove that, and that would take a lot of actual evidence, maybe. But without evidence, not at all. Being afraid does not necessarily translate into rights violation, not saying that's the case here; but in general.
I don't necessarily have enough info to draw a proper conclusion, but the idea of being able to be arrested for thinking about something doesn't really strike me as ok.
That counts for something. Not plotting murder, but the act of posting something that did terrorize them. Again, with First Amendment rights come First Amendment responsibilities.
Yes. The only difference between manslaughter and murder is thought. Intent is relevant to a whole range of crimes, either rendering them more serious or making them crimes at all. Where the intended crime is as serious as kidnap and murder I think it would be expected that the authorities would step in before the act is actually committed if they have the opportunity.Can you go to prison for thought crime?
Can you go to prison for thought crime? It appears so. Valle never carried out what he said he wanted to do. Add to that the fact that darkfetishnet is a web site dedicated to role play (pretty sick role play at that), and you have to ask yourself the question "Is just talking about doing something without acting on it, as in role play, a crime". But on the other hand, his wife and other women were very much afraid of his posts at that web site. So, IMHO, their rights were violated. With First Amendment rights come First Amendment responsibilities. The old adage about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind here. Should Valle be convicted of actually plotting murder and cannibalism? I don't think so, but in light of those he terrorized by his actions, he certainly should be convicted of making the threats which terrorized his victims.
In addition, it wouldn't be a bad idea for a psychatric evaluation either. This man is certainly sick.
What does everyone else think?
Article is here.
NOTE: The idea of eating someone's face does give a new meaning to "Facebook". LOL.
Can you go to prison for thought crime? It appears so. Valle never carried out what he said he wanted to do. Add to that the fact that darkfetishnet is a web site dedicated to role play (pretty sick role play at that), and you have to ask yourself the question "Is just talking about doing something without acting on it, as in role play, a crime". But on the other hand, his wife and other women were very much afraid of his posts at that web site. So, IMHO, their rights were violated. With First Amendment rights come First Amendment responsibilities. The old adage about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind here. Should Valle be convicted of actually plotting murder and cannibalism? I don't think so, but in light of those he terrorized by his actions, he certainly should be convicted of making the threats which terrorized his victims.
In addition, it wouldn't be a bad idea for a psychatric evaluation either. This man is certainly sick.
What does everyone else think?
Article is here.
NOTE: The idea of eating someone's face does give a new meaning to "Facebook". LOL.
After months of online role play last year, Valle began to act on his fantasies when he met one of his online "targets" for brunch and improperly accessed a law enforcement database to get personal information on another, Assistant U.S. Attorney Randall Jackson has alleged.
Can you go to prison for thought crime? It appears so. Valle never carried out what he said he wanted to do. Add to that the fact that darkfetishnet is a web site dedicated to role play (pretty sick role play at that), and you have to ask yourself the question "Is just talking about doing something without acting on it, as in role play, a crime". But on the other hand, his wife and other women were very much afraid of his posts at that web site. So, IMHO, their rights were violated. With First Amendment rights come First Amendment responsibilities. The old adage about shouting "fire" in a crowded theater comes to mind here. Should Valle be convicted of actually plotting murder and cannibalism? I don't think so, but in light of those he terrorized by his actions, he certainly should be convicted of making the threats which terrorized his victims.
In addition, it wouldn't be a bad idea for a psychatric evaluation either. This man is certainly sick.
What does everyone else think?
Article is here.
NOTE: The idea of eating someone's face does give a new meaning to "Facebook". LOL.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?