equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
Did you even read the link?
Guilty of thought crime: New York cop could get life sentence for cannibal fantasies
- Thread starter Frumious B.
- Start date
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
I looked at it. It's a Wikipedia entry that someone has put up.
My personal belief is that people should be liable for imprisonment for acts they commit, not for thoughts that they think.
equationgirl
Respect my existence or expect my resistance
And that's the problem, because he was using more and more real life information and committing more and more overt acts, such as looking up a teenager's address on his computer or accessing the police computer to find someone.
He was moving away from fantasy into reality. He should have stayed in jail.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Using his status as a police officer to commit the act of accessing databases for non-police related reasons, is a breach of trust. He should have been done for breach of trust, and turfed from the police force, along with whatever penalty the court handed out to him.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I agree but I'm not sure that this falls into that category.
Detailed plans were created for which he accessed police information and these plans were communicated to others. Not a whole lot different to unsuccessfully plotting to bring down an airliner.
Of course, the credibility of the prospective crime is the issue.
I don't see this as just a "thought crime".
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Unlike the movie Minority Report, we don't have a computer that allows us to see the future, and know what people will do.
If we start locking up people for things they might do.... we'll be locking up a whole lot of people.
If we start locking up people for things they might do.... we'll be locking up a whole lot of people.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
But fewer if we lock them up for things that they're credibly planning to do.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
The law relating to the crime of conspiracy has been much expanded of late; I 'm not super comfortable with it, because in the final analysis, it is 'thought crime'.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
We all have different lines we would draw as to where the criminal law should begin to apply; my line's in a different place from your line.
Thought crime is a dangerous one to get into though.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
If the authorities have credible info that someone is planning some crime, then they can set up a sting or whatever - let the person walk into it, if and when they make the decision to turn thought into deed.
The danger to personal liberty attendant upon the expansion of thought crime comes from those in authority applying it against those who would question authority.
The danger to personal liberty attendant upon the expansion of thought crime comes from those in authority applying it against those who would question authority.
DotCommunist
So many particulars. So many questions.
the other option is counter intelligence, which is so wide open to state abuse it makes the 'cure' look worse than the disease
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
We all have different lines we would draw as to where the criminal law should begin to apply; my line's in a different place from your line.
I'd be disappointed if that weren't the case.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
I'm going to read up on conspiracy as I haven't argued it for a while (pogofish )
My immediate thought is that conspiracy goes to mens rea and actus reus, organised by multiple people prior to the deed being done. In the case of the guy referred to in the OP the first seems clear, and the second satisfied when he started looking up names on the old bill's databases and staking out their gaffs.
If this dude has communicated any personal information about his 'intended victims' to his co-slugs on the internet he loses right there.
He had restricted means of knowing the mindsets and capabilities of his correspondents and therefore how his info would be used. That's at least reckless, and arguably inciteful. But that's something else.
Anyway, I think the guy should get 3 years bollock-whipping for being a weird, rapey, cunt, but I don't expect anyone here to agree with me on that.
Last edited:
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Only if talking has now suddenly become sufficient for actus reus.
eta: actually, I've made a bit of a simplistic statement there. Anyone interested in this area should google 'inchoate offence'.
Last edited:
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
"Conspiracy to commit" is considered as serious as the actual crime in many cases. Supply of drugs is the one that springs to mind. When someone is planning on doing a thing, making active preparations for it to happen, then this is well beyond a "thought crime".
Anyway, we seem to be skipping the important stuff here, butchers vs dwyer: welshness.
Anyway, we seem to be skipping the important stuff here, butchers vs dwyer: welshness.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
The problem is that the laws gets changed or expanded based on a few cases that most people can agree upon; but the changes have consequences that go far beyond the obvious case.
This fellow is probably a disgusting, twisted individual. It's easy to sell a case of 'Convict The Cannibal Cop!'
Similarly, a lot of people agree with a sentiment like 'Let's Change The Law To Stop The Terrorists!' Nobody likes terrorists, and most people want them stopped. But here we are a few years later: the laws have been changed, and suddenly we're finding out that the govt has a record of everything we've said on the phone, or done on the internet. The 'emergency' powers of search and seizure etc, are routinely being used in common garden variety criminal cases.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Looking up their addresses is an actus reus of the offence of breach of trust by a police officer. He should be charged and convicted of that, punished for it, and thrown off the force.
I'm not sure what penalty obtains for going to someone's street.
Spymaster
Plastic Paddy
Sorry. I'm afraid it's between Phil and Butchersapron, although Butchers seems to have gone a bit quiet!
I don't see why we shouldn't allow side-bets. The bookie can take 10%.
Now all we need is Butchers. Where can he have got to, this isn't like him, maybe he's got a cold etc....
butchersapron
Bring back hanging
Why do policemen keep planning on and then eating people?
The one this thread is about was released after one year btw.
The one this thread is about was released after one year btw.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Planning to abduct, rape and murder women and looking up their personal details on a police database is slightly more than "a thought crime"
It is indeed. It is conspiracy to commit a serious and loathsome crime.
The OP is strange, one would think that the poster hadn't read the article he posted.
To 'chew the fat' with like minded people in an abstract way is one thing, to plan this:
'Prosecutors told how he visited a street that was home to a woman he had agreed to kidnap for $5,000 (£3,360) for a New Jersey man, who is now awaiting trial.'
is something else entirely.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Unfortunate phrasing there.
Similar threads
