HIV+ soldier accused of raping 75 boys

[The Cobra]

Nothing in the report suggests he "infected" anyone, had "unprotected sex" with anyone.

So the HIV status at the moment is irrelevant to the actual facts at this time.

 

Just saying

[canuckamuck]

2 minutes ago, The Cobra said:

Nothing in the report suggests he "infected" anyone, had "unprotected sex" with anyone.

So the HIV status at the moment is irrelevant to the actual facts at this time.

 

Just saying

Not really. He may have infected them, that is a chance he took and they did not have informed consent to take that risk. That makes his crimes more despicable.

[Krataiboy]

19 hours ago, Fairynuff said:

Mentioning his HIV status is purely designed to sensationalise. It cannot be passed on if he is on medication. That however doesn’t change the fact that he is a rapist and should have the book thrown at him. He’s a lowlife piece of **** deserving nothing but contempt

Publishing this man's HIV status is relevant, as it could alert other rape victims out there that they are at risk - not just from HIV but also other STDs with which this promiscuous alleged rapist might be infected.

 

It is worth mentioning that while HIV medication dramatically reduces the risk of infection, it is by no means 100 percent effective. Research has revealed, for example, that some new strains of HIV resistant to PrEPS.

 

This appalling case cries out for a more enlightened and humane approach to rape cases by the Thai forces of law and order. Most women victims of sex crimes fail to report the attack for fear they won't be taken seriously. How much more difficult must it be for a man to walk into the mostly-male preserve of a police station and cry "Rape!"?

Edited November 10, 2018 by Krataiboy

[Bluespunk]

27 minutes ago, AGareth2 said:

I prefer the word retribution

Doesn’t change the fact it’s revenge. 

[The Cobra]

Just now, canuckamuck said:

Not really. He may have infected them, that is a chance he took and they did not have informed consent to take that risk. That makes his crimes more despicable.

Sorry but "may have" doesnt work, either he did or he didnt, you cannot punish anyone for what they "may have" done. 

[canuckamuck]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

It is never the best thing to “eliminate” someone. 

 

Society is never best served by having the state execute its citizens. 

This is only your opinion and you are welcome to it. I would like to see you argue this point formally, but I don't think that's going to happen.

[Bluespunk]

25 minutes ago, TPI said:

Every prison sentence is revenge, to think that judges and juries have punishment on their collective minds denies the cruelty that lives in every modern man/woman...people are not nice, in my opinion the only reason Christians believe as they do is to protect themselves from "blame" at the end of days!!

Prison sentences are set by guidelines so it doesn’t matter what’s on an individuals mind. 

 

Religion should have no role in a justice system so I don’t really care what Christianity says. 

 

The death penalty is wrong and I cannot support it. 

[Bluespunk]

24 minutes ago, hotchilli said:

For a very small minority harsh penalties do not act as a deterrent, they will commit their evil crimes for as long as freedom to commit them exists... 

For these minority cases where life long incarceration is not possible then the death penalty is a great deterrent to protect innocent victims !

There is no proof the death penalty acts as a deterrent to crime. 

[happy chappie]

19 hours ago, Essaybloke said:

Hi happy chappie- You have changed the parameters of the discussion; your claim was based on the abolition of the death penalty and a supposed concomitant 'through the roof' rise in 'murder and other serious crimes'. I wondered how you determined that the abolition of one caused the other? (According to the WHO, the world wide murder rate has declined from 7.8 to 6.4 per 100k from 2000-2015 http://apps.who.int/violence-info/homicide/).  And I did not proffer any 'theory' as such and therefore will not respond to the spurious claims you make in response to it. I'm sorry but I don't understand what you mean by the apparent non-sequitur (sic) "i won't even go into detail but I will mention,South America,North America,Europe,Asia,the Middle East and Mediterranean." Re 'London' and your 'crime epidemic' claim- just in the period  October 2017 and September 2018, overall crime incidents fell from 797 incidents to 683. (https://www.police.uk/city-of-london/cp/crime/stats/) Yes, you may be ill-informed.  

One part you seem to forget is terrorism but we can leave that out of your statistics if you like as it's only a minor offence.how people can sit there and say these evil bastards don't deserve to die is beyond me.

[AGareth2]

5 minutes ago, Bluespunk said:

Doesn’t change the fact it’s revenge. 

revenge is carried out by a "victim" on the perp

 

[geriatrickid]

People knew what he was doing long ago. This  didn't suddenly occur. 

Dig deeper and we will find enablers and the people who covered this up,  probably going back 15+ years. Hunt them all down.

[AGareth2]

3 minutes ago, The Cobra said:

So now the "state" is the victim ?? Oh please, your terminology is now going down the road of deminishing any decent argument you had.

that might be unfair

not everyone is a native speaker

[metisdead]

Bickering posts in which repeated opinions are repeatedly repeated have been removed.  You've made your opinion known, stop trying to continue to repeat. 

[Jingthing]

8 minutes ago, weri said:

castrate that excuse of a human being and jail for life, better just shoot him, saves money 

There is also something called chemical castration. But I think in this case, that's overkill as I assume he'll be sent to prison. 

[canuckamuck]

47 minutes ago, The Cobra said:

Sorry but "may have" doesnt work, either he did or he didnt, you cannot punish anyone for what they "may have" done. 

Negligence is a factor in determining the severity of a crime. It is a worse crime because he put people at risk.

[Alexandra3]

Why is his crime not considered:

1. Assault and Battery 

2. Sexual Assault

3. Rape

4. Attempted Murder - HIV+, this is the charge in other countries

5. Assault with a deadly weapon - HIV+, this is the charge in other countries

5. Murder - if anyone dies from HIV and it is proved the strain came from him

6. Extortion - you extort the person for sexual favors

7. Blackmail 

 

When the death penalty is in force there is an unintended consequence of the death penalty. The criminals don't leave behind any crime victims or witnesses who can ID them and cause them to be arrested or put to death. The witnesses are murdered. The crime victims are murdered. The murder rate goes up with the death penalty instead of down. 

 

No one is left behind who can ID the perpetrator to the police. This is the unintended consequences of the death penalty. They are all killed. This means the death penalty has an undesirable outcome of driving up the murder rates. 

 

When there is no death penalty there is no need to murder the witnesses or crime victims. The murder rate drops when there is no death penalty in play. 

 

Also, no witness is willing to speak to the police if they know they will be targeted for murder in a death penalty case. The person can put a hit out on you from jail while they await their trial. The witness won't live long enough to testify. Once the witness is dead the death penalty case falls apart. This means the wheels of justice grind to a halt. Self-preservation prevents a witness from cooperating. Who is going to risk being killed simply because they saw what happened to a stranger? This is especially true when gang related. 

 

Death penalty isn't as cut and dried as you would like to believe. It is very complicated, nuanced and has many factors that are undesirable. 

 

Also, due to the cost of the appeals process in the death penalty cases... the costs outweighs any benefits of putting someone to death. It actually costs the taxpayers far less money to put someone in prison for life than to put them on death row. The death row cases eat up tremendous amounts of court time and taxpayers money. The courts get clogged with death penalty case appeals. They go to court repeatedly, repeatedly with appeals and that clogs the courts and eats up taxpayer funds. The taxpayers pay more for death penalty cases than for life in prison. The cost v. benefit analysis means it is not worth it financially to put someone to death. It costs too much money and clogs the already overburdened courts. 

 

[Thingamabob]

Fully understand the anger generated by this case, however innocent people are sometimes sentenced to death. In the last century at least 38 wrongly executed in the USA. Not a great feeling if you are one of those incorrectly convicted.

[Jingthing]

Does anyone know what crimes are covered by the Thai death penalty, if any. I had thought it was only for murder and major drug dealing. If the crimes the accused aren't in the class of such death penalty crimes, what's the point of discussing that punishment here?

Edited November 10, 2018 by Jingthing

[CharlieH]

Off topic removed

[Torrens54]

HANG THE MONGREL...SLOWLY and only after some Prison Inmates give him some “TLC.”

 

This bag of Puke has given hundreds Of KIDS a DEATH SENTENCE and by Exterminating him, it will ENSURE he never again repeats his crimes.

 

With regards to those who are against the Death Penalty, might I be so bold as to suggest they Offer Their “Nether Regions” to some HIV-Spreading Swine, get a Big Dose of HIV and see how they feel then?

 

Edited November 10, 2018 by Torrens54
Alignment of typing.

[Kiwiken]

2 hours ago, Bluespunk said:

Yes, that argument has been put to me several times on this thread. 

 

My response then, as now, is the same. The state should not execute it’s citizens. 

 

Crime should be punished, harshly, but the death penalty is not punishment, it is revenge. 

 

I support law and order, but not revenge. 

I do not support revenge but I spent 13 years in crime prevention. i saw Sex offenders offend , get treatment, re offend , get prison , escape and re offend. Often their victims living in terror these people would come back for them.

If a Dog bites We put it down if its nature is shown to be aggressive or deviant. So why not humans . The case is no different

[twig]

Restitution doesn't seem possible here, because he already has a death sentence without modern pharma, and doesn't seem like he would have much in assets.

 

"Punishment" by caging would be pointless and unfair to everyone else, because they would be looted by the brown shirts to house and feed him for the rest of his life. Only the brown-shirt gang would gain anything of value by "punishment" caging.

 

Revenge by death, which the brown-shirts have no moral right to administer, would be inequitable. The victims do have moral right to revenge, however, I doubt any of them would want the equitable revenge in this case.

 

Seems the only way left to get any kind of moral justice is to just withdraw the publicly supported HIV treatment he probably gets through the brown shirts, and let the HIV death sentence take its course without any more armed gang meddling.

 

 

 

[twig]

1 minute ago, Kiwiken said:

I do not support revenge but I spent 13 years in crime prevention. i saw Sex offenders offend , get treatment, re offend , get prison , escape and re offend. Often their victims living in terror these people would come back for them.

If a Dog bites We put it down if its nature is shown to be aggressive or deviant. So why not humans . The case is no different

Agreed, but this is the Land of Something Something.

2 "stray" dogs chase and try to bite you as you scoot down the soi;

you call the brown shirts and they show up to "protect" the public;

you tell them that you plan to kill the dogs if they do it again, because the brown shirts refuse to do anything to protect you.

 

They'll tell you that they "WILL ARREST YOU IF YOU HARM THESE DOGS EVEN IN SELF DEFENSE!" 

I know the victim personally, and there's public record of this incident <1 km from the local mayors office.

 

Land of Something is a  territory where the brown-shirt gangs are at least as brazen, irresponsible, unaccountable and imbecilic as on your planet; no "justice" can be expected or entrusted to them, especially that involving ending human lives.

 

[Jingthing]

15 minutes ago, twig said:

Restitution doesn't seem possible here, because he already has a death sentence without modern pharma, and doesn't seem like he would have much in assets.

 

"Punishment" by caging would be pointless and unfair to everyone else, because they would be looted by the brown shirts to house and feed him for the rest of his life. Only the brown-shirt gang would gain anything of value by "punishment" caging.

 

Revenge by death, which the brown-shirts have no moral right to administer, would be inequitable. The victims do have moral right to revenge, however, I doubt any of them would want the equitable revenge in this case.

 

Seems the only way left to get any kind of moral justice is to just withdraw the publicly supported HIV treatment he probably gets through the brown shirts, and let the HIV death sentence take its course without any more armed gang meddling.

 

 

 

That's a barbaric idea. An actual death penalty would be more civilized than that. 

To add, HIV meds in Thailand are actually quite cheap.

Edited November 10, 2018 by Jingthing

[Patriot1066]

5 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That's a barbaric idea. An actual death penalty would be more civilized than that. 

To add, HIV meds in Thailand are actually quite cheap.

No he should be left in a cell to rot.

 

Are the Medes cheap by our standards or Thai?

[Patriot1066]

22 minutes ago, twig said:

Restitution doesn't seem possible here, because he already has a death sentence without modern pharma, and doesn't seem like he would have much in assets.

 

"Punishment" by caging would be pointless and unfair to everyone else, because they would be looted by the brown shirts to house and feed him for the rest of his life. Only the brown-shirt gang would gain anything of value by "punishment" caging.

 

Revenge by death, which the brown-shirts have no moral right to administer, would be inequitable. The victims do have moral right to revenge, however, I doubt any of them would want the equitable revenge in this case.

 

Seems the only way left to get any kind of moral justice is to just withdraw the publicly supported HIV treatment he probably gets through the brown shirts, and let the HIV death sentence take its course without any more armed gang meddling.

 

 

 

Or throw him jail in the darkest corner and let him rot as a deterrent to others?

 

If guilty he deserves nothing

[Patriot1066]

24 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

I do not support revenge but I spent 13 years in crime prevention. i saw Sex offenders offend , get treatment, re offend , get prison , escape and re offend. Often their victims living in terror these people would come back for them.

If a Dog bites We put it down if its nature is shown to be aggressive or deviant. So why not humans . The case is no different

Yes many criminals simply re offend sex attackers are one of the worse to deal with as the urge is difficult for the authorities. Best have a more permanent solution, that makes the chance of re offending zero.

 

At least in Thailand they still have the death penalty unlike this lot in the U.K. Who have been raping children in gangs and got sentences as low as 7 years.

 

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/09/grooming-gangs-muslim-men-failed-integrate-british-society/

 

 

[Bluespunk]

29 minutes ago, Kiwiken said:

I do not support revenge but I spent 13 years in crime prevention. i saw Sex offenders offend , get treatment, re offend , get prison , escape and re offend. Often their victims living in terror these people would come back for them.

If a Dog bites We put it down if its nature is shown to be aggressive or deviant. So why not humans . The case is no different

For me there is a difference. 

[Patriot1066]

1 hour ago, Jingthing said:

Does anyone know what crimes are covered by the Thai death penalty, if any. I had thought it was only for murder and major drug dealing. If the crimes the accused aren't in the class of such death penalty crimes, what's the point of discussing that punishment here?

Treason, drug dealing, I think rape, some other violent crimes 35 in total.

 

last big purge was in 2002 when they switched from shooting to drugs.

 

Not many got it for years due to EU pressure, but they started again this year in defiance of pressure.

 

He could be guilty of attempted murder or a similar charge and due to the severity of the impact and numbers I think the penalty should be severe, if he could get it for 1 murder why not 75 potentially shortened lives

[twig]

11 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

That's a barbaric idea. An actual death penalty would be more civilized than that. 

To add, HIV meds in Thailand are actually quite cheap.

Ok, then he could go to a charity for HIV patients, and get the meds he needs.

 

I'm sure if the charity explained to you his plight, YOU personally would even voluntarily donate the money, since it's "quite cheap".

 

Or do you think it's more "civilized" to have the brown-shirt gangs coerce the money from everyone for his HIV meds after all his accomplishments, the way they extort the money from the population for all their "services"?