<i>This</i> is twisted...
-
>> she acted in a completely meaningless way not for cruelty, but for crazyness does this make you not responsible for what you did? trying to burn the seat, not driving the car anymore doesn't sound like an act of shock. She just didn't realize what she did, otherwise she'd be more silent about. OK, it makes a good story at certain parties... But that's no excuse. I don't believe punishing her (in any way) will help, but she shouldn't get away with this. I would have said 5 years emergency room might help, but she's a nurse aide, heck!
peterchen wrote: >> she acted in a completely meaningless way not for cruelty, but for crazyness does this make you not responsible for what you did? Everybody knows that driving when you're drunk is dangerous and unsafe, she made a big mistake and she has responsibilities for that. But after the accident she "losed her mind", or something like that... You are responsible of what you did if you can understood what you were doing. In this case you deserve a punishment (and the main goal of jail should be to made people ready to come back into the "normal" society). If you were acting without full control of your actions you have to be helped to recover yourself and maybe isolated from other poeple to avoid other actions of this kind until you're recovered. peterchen wrote: trying to burn the seat, not driving the car anymore doesn't sound like an act of shock. She just didn't realize what she did, otherwise she'd be more silent about. OK, it makes a good story at certain parties... But that's no excuse. You've to agree that she didn't acted in a rational way. She can hide all the evidence (and she's not related in any way to the victim, so it would have been very difficult to suspect her), but she confusely tried to hide only part of it. And she spoke about the accident with other people. I think that this is the kind of situations nobody wants to be involved in (nor as the victim, nor as the murderer). She saw her life changing in a matter of seconds, and this could have shocking effect on people. Some people react in the right ("good"?) way (do their better to minimize the damage they inflict to others and accept the consequences of their actions), other in the bad way (try only to protected themselves and to avoid "punishment"). She reacted in a "mad" way (does the worst for the victim and also for herself). If she had dumped the man immediatly after the accident and destroyed or fixed her car to hide the evidence, she would have been even more "cruel" in my opinion...
-
Vuemme wrote: I think that the woman had big psycological problems after the accident, and she acted in a completely meaningless way not for cruelty, but for crazyness. What! :omg: It's that so ! Wow, I see, the lawyer will invoke mental insanity, bahh , this doesn't excuse her totally unacceptable behaviour. OH yeah and their friends just help her to hide the body, she left the guy 2 nights alive on the garage, great crazyness, ah ? ;P Vuemme wrote: Killing her will be just another crime I personlly don't favor the dead penalty ,except in very extreme cases, and in this case so the conservative catholic church. Here in Portugal the max time you can spent on jail is 25 years ... Vuemme wrote: And she should be helped to recover herself, if this is possibile Vuemme , this shows 2 posibilities : one , you're are a very naive person , or second, a truly good person. I believe more that you're on 2º part of the sentence. :) Vuemme wrote: I think that the worst aspect of human nature is the one shown by her lawyer On this I agree with you, the lawyer is a ... :rolleyes: Peace :rose: Joao Vaz
Joao Vaz wrote: What! It's that so ! Wow, I see, the lawyer will invoke mental insanity, bahh , this doesn't excuse her totally unacceptable behaviour. OH yeah and their friends just help her to hide the body, she left the guy 2 nights alive on the garage, great crazyness, ah ? I said that this was unrational behaviour, not acceptable behaviour. Joao Vaz wrote: Vuemme , this shows 2 posibilities : one , you're are a very naive person , or second, a truly good person. I believe more that you're on 2º part of the sentence. I'm someone who never got involved in this kind of situation and hopes to never get into this kind of situation during his life. And if I can choose, I prefer to be runned down than to live the rest of my life with the idea of being responsible of someone else's death (and for something so stupid like a couple of drink more at a party). I'm not sure about how I would react in this kind of situation, and nobody can. I think that the aspects of human nature that this history shows are madness and fear, not cruelty. Dumping the body immediately after the accident and destroy all the evidence (and not simply keep the car hidden inside your garage) would have been an even more cruel behaviour, but also a more rational one.
-
peterchen wrote: >> she acted in a completely meaningless way not for cruelty, but for crazyness does this make you not responsible for what you did? Everybody knows that driving when you're drunk is dangerous and unsafe, she made a big mistake and she has responsibilities for that. But after the accident she "losed her mind", or something like that... You are responsible of what you did if you can understood what you were doing. In this case you deserve a punishment (and the main goal of jail should be to made people ready to come back into the "normal" society). If you were acting without full control of your actions you have to be helped to recover yourself and maybe isolated from other poeple to avoid other actions of this kind until you're recovered. peterchen wrote: trying to burn the seat, not driving the car anymore doesn't sound like an act of shock. She just didn't realize what she did, otherwise she'd be more silent about. OK, it makes a good story at certain parties... But that's no excuse. You've to agree that she didn't acted in a rational way. She can hide all the evidence (and she's not related in any way to the victim, so it would have been very difficult to suspect her), but she confusely tried to hide only part of it. And she spoke about the accident with other people. I think that this is the kind of situations nobody wants to be involved in (nor as the victim, nor as the murderer). She saw her life changing in a matter of seconds, and this could have shocking effect on people. Some people react in the right ("good"?) way (do their better to minimize the damage they inflict to others and accept the consequences of their actions), other in the bad way (try only to protected themselves and to avoid "punishment"). She reacted in a "mad" way (does the worst for the victim and also for herself). If she had dumped the man immediatly after the accident and destroyed or fixed her car to hide the evidence, she would have been even more "cruel" in my opinion...
Shw drove drunk & drugged, and didn't aceept the consequences of that. for two or three days. I know how such an accident can make you cross the border, esp. if you grow up in an "engineer your life, shit can't happen to me" environment. but shock is a reason for stupidity, as much as hunger is a reason for stealing. I do assume she was not intentionally cruel, just "disabled". The best I could say about her is that she took social incompetence to a new level. "Hide it, and it will go away" is no solution, esp. not of a nurse aide towards an injured. Noone should get away with that. OK, likely she's scarred for life. Maybe she'll go downhill without any help. And of course it would be nice if "the society" finds a way to help her, instead of just punishing. But this expects more from the society towards her, than she was willing or "mentally able" to do for the society. And "mentally inable" is so much overrated nowadays - while "writers block" made it's way into common terms, we would laugh at the idea of a "plumbers block". That's what I had to say. I can understand what she did, what happened, and how she feels. But this can by no means justify it.