ForumGarden

pantsonfire321@aol.com;792472 wrote: http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/saudi_crime


Whilst I am against the death penalty, the Saudi method of execution does seem appropriate in this case.

I see no sympathy for the man from any quarter.

omg that is sickening. He deserves everything he is going to get.

Bryn Mawr;792475 wrote: Whilst I am against the death penalty, the Saudi method of execution does seem appropriate in this case.

I see no sympathy for the man from any quarter.


Allow me to note, then, that (while I have no knowledge at all other than this thread) what he did might well have been completely lacking premeditation - do we at least agree that much, in principle?

spot;792502 wrote: Allow me to note, then, that (while I have no knowledge at all other than this thread) what he did might well have been completely lacking premeditation - do we at least agree that much, in principle?


And what has premeditation got to do with for gods sake. The man killed an innocent child by cutting its head off.

Gives a whole new meaning to "I'm just popping to the Supermarket for some chops".

Uncle Kram;792547 wrote: Gives a whole new meaning to "I'm just popping to the Supermarket for some chops".


Bad Krammie!







Let's hope that the blade used to execute him is blunt. He deserves to suffer.

He must have been mentally ill :-5

Uncle Kram;792547 wrote: Gives a whole new meaning to "I'm just popping to the Supermarket for some chops".


This is a child we are talking about and your making a joke about it:(

kayleneaussie;792562 wrote: This is a child we are talking about and your making a joke about it:(


Believe me, I'm as appalled as you.

A man cuts a child's head off in a supermarket to get back at the childs mother who was annoying him? The mind boggles sometimes, it really does. What an appaulingly brutal act, it does seem like the actions of someone who was completely deranged to me.

Someone asked so here's a couple of paragraphs:Premeditated murder is the crime of wrongfully causing the death of another human being (also known as murder) after rationally considering the timing or method of doing so, in order to either increase the likelihood of success, or to evade detection or apprehension.

State laws in the United States vary as to definitions of "premeditation." In some states, premeditation may be construed as taking place mere seconds before the murder. Premeditated murder is usually defined as one of the most serious forms of homicide, and is punished more severely than manslaughter or other types of murder.Neither description applies if the man was deranged or mad at the time. One can only hope he was.

I hope that SOB gets what he deserves. The innocent child did nothing and was caught in that pyscho's demented rage. Bless the baby's mother.:-1

Just so.

I case anyone's interested in premeditation, an example can be seen here.The court heard after Hawkins wrote a series of notes, which mentioned his anger over finding out his wife of 17 years was having an affair and that he would kill his son.Of course, he might have been mad too. I don't think we have very good guidelines on how to recognize madness in someone who's committed murder for revenge.

If it wasn't premeditated, does that make it any less horrible?

No Peg, it's extremely horrible. It would be extremely horrible if an aisle of stacked saucepans had fallen and had the same result too.

I believe this is the most disgusting horrible thing I've heard of in a long time!

It made me so sick just reading the title of the post, that I haven't been able to bring myself to read the rest of the story. Maybe it's because I'm a new mother myself, that this has hit me SO hard. I know this is going to haunt me for weeks. Just writing this reply has brought me to tears. I have a little boy just about the same age. When I look at him I can't understand how anybody could do anything to hurt such a precious innocent life, oh my God, he was just a baby!

Even though I'm very pro-life and I'm generally aganist the death penalty, I'd make an exception in the case of this guy.

Even if he was mentally incapable, at the time, of distinguishing between lawful and unlawful actions? You'd remove insanity from legal consideration by a court?

I guess it goes without saying that if he was insane he's not responsible for his actions. I hope that was the case, because a sane person who could do something like this would have to be an evil, evil man.

So "I'm generally against the death penalty, I'd make an exception in the case of this guy" doesn't apply if he was insane? I'm just asking, that's all. There's a lot of people would prefer to punish him regardless.

Un-believable. That poor baby and poor mother. This is too hard to imagine. Insane or not, this horrible person should not be spared his life.

spot;792796 wrote: No Peg, it's extremely horrible. It would be extremely horrible if an aisle of stacked saucepans had fallen and had the same result too.


Though of course inanimate objects cannot commit crimes, deranged or not, as they are incapable of thought. Therefore if the saucepans had caused this then it would be simply a horrific accident, but because a human being took a knife and using his hands cut the head from a child, that makes it a particularly horrendous criminal act. Though as you said it may be by someone who is criminally insane (to use the old term). I have to say I completely understand the horror felt by people at this one, its a particularly gruesome, and insanely violent, and arbritary act by someone who was this child's uncle. I cannot imagine what that woman must be suffering right now, no one could feel anything but great pity for anyone who had experienced such an excruiciating crime against their own child.

In terms of the due process involved, I don't imagine that this man will escape the death penalty no matter what his mental condition, given the nature of the Saudi Arabian criminal justice system, and also the horrific nature of the crime itself, I am sure that people in that country must feel many times more shocked and disgusted than we do here, and they will be demanding this man's blood for this act. I presume he himself will therefore be beheaded at some point, perhaps in the most brutal way that is natural justice. To be honest the crime is so off the scale (for any society) that its hard to have a rational response to it, so I don't what else to say about it, its just horrible.

I agree with you entirely Galbally. The words Peg and I were discussing were horrible, and the degree of horrible (extremely). Not words like accidental or reprehensible or guilt-laden or any of the other ones we might have had a go at.

I'm not sure how the Saudis are, vis a vis insanity and guilt.

This happened in Saudi Arabia so why are US laws being quoted.

pantsonfire321@aol.com;793337 wrote: This happened in Saudi Arabia so why are US laws being quoted.My local example in post14 happened last September in Huddersfield and nobody's so much as mentioned it once despite it being a premeditated event involving two children, not just one, and the killer having to serve at least 21 years for it. I'm surprised we're focused so intently on the Saudi case. Perhaps we have something against Muslims? Perhaps you're more interested in the Saudi aspect than the knifing to death of a pre-school child by a relative for revenge against its mother?

I'm the only person to have mention US law, and I did so in response to a question about the relevance of premeditation on guilt in revenge killings.

spot;793253 wrote: So "I'm generally against the death penalty, I'd make an exception in the case of this guy" doesn't apply if he was insane? I'm just asking, that's all. There's a lot of people would prefer to punish him regardless.


to tell you the truth, I find this whole thing so disgusting that I'm having a hard time thinking about this man not being executed even if he is insane.

Hope6;793399 wrote: to tell you the truth, I find this whole thing so disgusting that I'm having a hard time thinking about this man not being executed even if he is insane.


There was a time when people actually felt sorry for the insane having to carry the burden of their criminal actions. This entire business of retribution against criminals has got to be stopped somehow, it's psychotic and evil and unproductive and damaging. The insane person was at fault? No. Penalizing the insane person will deter other insane people from such acts? No. All you get out of it is a glow of self-satisfaction at seeing him suffer. It's dreadful.

spot;793428 wrote: There was a time when people actually felt sorry for the insane having to carry the burden of their criminal actions. This entire business of retribution against criminals has got to be stopped somehow, it's psychotic and evil and unproductive and damaging. The insane person was at fault? No. Penalizing the insane person will deter other insane people from such acts? No. All you get out of it is a glow of self-satisfaction at seeing him suffer. It's dreadful.


you're right, I agree with you. an insane person is not at fault, and it won't deter other insane people. but the human race on average is not very forgiving. and when its a crime that is exceptionally horrible they're even less so.

I agree Spot, but how is insanity proved?

spot;793379 wrote: My local example in post14 happened last September in Huddersfield and nobody's so much as mentioned it once despite it being a premeditated event involving two children, not just one, and the killer having to serve at least 21 years for it. I'm surprised we're focused so intently on the Saudi case. Perhaps we have something against Muslims? Perhaps you're more interested in the Saudi aspect than the knifing to death of a pre-school child by a relative for revenge against its mother?

I'm the only person to have mention US law, and I did so in response to a question about the relevance of premeditation on guilt in revenge killings.


I think thats completely unfair spot, I don't think that people's reactions here have had anything to do with the probable fact that everyone involved were Muslims, or that Saudi Arabia uses the beheading of adults as a punishment for serious crime, so I think thats extremely provocative of you, no one has even mentioned Islam, other than to mention that he may well end up being beheaded because this has happened in Saudi. Its the nature of the crime itself, and the fact that it seems to have occurred out of an everyday event, in an everyday place like a supermarket, and then the visceral and horrible action that people are upset about today here. I don't think the reaction would have been any different if it had happened in Brighton, or LA, or Bangkok, its just a horrible grusesome crime. To turn this into some political thing is just belittling the crime and that child's life.

In fact if it had happened in America some people would probably think things like, "there you go those yanks are all insane violent people" which is not true at all. Something of this nature would in my guess have nothing to do with nationality or religion, Saudi Arabian people are no more violent than anyone else or likely to do such a thing to anyone, in fact, of course no normal human being would commit such a crime in any society, no matter what their race or religion. Its not got anything to do with Islam, its just a very deranged and violent person committing a sickening act of murder.

Galbally;793476 wrote: I think thats completely unfair spot, I don't think that people's reactions here have had anything to do with the probable fact that everyone involved were Muslims, or that Saudi Arabia uses the beheading of adults as a punishment for serious crime, so I think thats extremely provocative of you, no one has even mentioned Islam, other than to mention that he may well end up being beheaded because this has happened in Saudi. Its the nature of the crime itself, and the fact that it seems to have occurred out of an everyday event, in an everyday place like a supermarket, and then the visceral and horrible action that people are upset about today here. I don't think the reaction would have been any different if it had happened in Brighton, or LA, or Bangkok, its just a horrible grusesome crime. To turn this into some political thing is just belittling the crime and that child's life.

In fact if it had happened in America some people would probably think things like, "there you go those yanks are all insane violent people" which is not true at all. Something of this nature would in my guess have nothing to do with nationality or religion, Saudi Arabian people are no more violent than anyone else or likely to do such a thing to anyone, in fact, of course no normal human being would commit such a crime in any society, no matter what their race or religion. Its not got anything to do with Islam, its just a very deranged and violent person committing a sickening act of murder.


VERY WELL SAID> THANK YOU

spot;793428 wrote: There was a time when people actually felt sorry for the insane having to carry the burden of their criminal actions. This entire business of retribution against criminals has got to be stopped somehow, it's psychotic and evil and unproductive and damaging. The insane person was at fault? No. Penalizing the insane person will deter other insane people from such acts? No. All you get out of it is a glow of self-satisfaction at seeing him suffer. It's dreadful.


Sure, your point is a valid one, but we don't know actually whether this man was insane or is insane, or is perhaps just a particularly violent and malevolent person, in any case he won't be tried under a system of law that we are used to, but the Saudi one, which is quite different from any of the European systems, I'm not making a value judgement on it, I am just stating the fact that its different. There is no point in going off on a rant about your personally percieved injustices of the criminal justice system you live under, or the values of western society, as thats something general and to be honest its completely irrelevant to this situation. Anyway, I really don't want to go any more into this one, as it seems distasteful to be arguing over legal and social issues with this incident. We always seem to be banging up against each other in lots of threads lately spot, I don't know why, but don't worry I don't have it in for you or anything.

Hope6;793459 wrote: you're right, I agree with you. an insane person is not at fault, and it won't deter other insane people. but the human race on average is not very forgiving. and when its a crime that is exceptionally horrible they're even less so.


They used to be, they're just losing their humanity. I blame the media.

ThePheasant;793467 wrote: I agree Spot, but how is insanity proved?


As I said earlier, "I don't think we have very good guidelines on how to recognize madness in someone who's committed murder for revenge". They do seem to be a special and very extreme case. Extremes make for bad law.

Galbally;793476 wrote: I think thats completely unfair spot, I don't think that people's reactions here have had anything to do with the probable fact that everyone involved were Muslims, or that Saudi Arabia uses the beheading of adults as a punishment for serious crime, so I think thats extremely provocative of you, no one has even mentioned Islam, other than to mention that he may well end up being beheaded because this has happened in Saudi. On the contrary, I think the thread only exists because the original post had an anti-Muslim agenda which was the point of my comment which you're criticizing.

spot;793505 wrote: They used to be, they're just losing their humanity. I blame the media.


I blame the media, for that and a lot of other things too!

spot;793516 wrote: On the contrary, I think the thread only exists because the original post had an anti-Muslim agenda which was the point of my comment which you're criticizing.


But the original post was just a link to a current news story, it happens to have happened in Saudi, but it would be newsworthy no matter what country it happened in. Do you think that every link to an American crime story or a British crime story is because the poster is trying to make some sort of political point? The report is neutral, I don't see any editorializing by the poster, so I don't see how you can claim there was any intent, other than to infer it because you have some knowedge about the poster that we don't?

I just can't stop thinking about the horror that mother must have experienced.

I know I would die for my baby without hesitation ,but to have something happening to your child and you can't do anything about it, I think would be the worse fate possible.

Galbally;793535 wrote: The report is neutral, I don't see any editorializing by the poster, so I don't see how you can claim there was any intent, other than to infer it because you have some knowedge about the poster that we don't?I infer it because my post 14 was totally ignored. The corresponding case in Huddersfield. The one where the judge rejected the defence of insanity, saying he did not accept that Hawkins killed Ryan in a spontaneous attack. "I'm satisfied that you used him [Ryan] cold-heartedly as a vehicle for avenging yourself on your wife". It's got everything the original case had except it's in England so it doesn't impugn Muslims.

Spot go to bed:yh_bye

You have gone right off track with this thread.

It was about a violent crime committed on an innocent child. It dosent matter what country, what religion,whether there was insanity involved it was a hidious awful crime.

kayleneaussie;793559 wrote: Spot go to bed:yh_bye

You have gone right off track with this thread.

It was about a violent crime committed on an innocent child. It dosent matter what country, what religion,whether there was insanity involved it was a hidious awful crime.


I agree with everything there except the suggestion that I've taken the thread anywhere at all. I responded to the question about US law having been mentioned at one point. If anything's going to take it off-track it's suggestions from you that I've deflected the thread. I haven't.

We have two comparable cases, one in Saudi Arabia where the attacker may or may not have been insane and one in Huddersfield where he definitely wasn't because the judge tells us so. Both are extremely horrible events. One is a hideous awful crime and the other might be too.

spot;793568 wrote: I agree with everything there except the suggestion that I've taken the thread anywhere at all. I responded to the question about US law having been mentioned at one point. If anything's going to take it off-track it's suggestions from you that I've deflected the thread. I haven't.

We have two comparable cases, one in Saudi Arabia where the attacker may or may not have been insane and one in Huddersfield where he definitely wasn't because the judge tells us so. Both are extremely horrible events. One is a hideous awful crime and the other might be too.


Well Spot we are going to have to agree to disagree as you are one stubborn person. I am not going to argue the point with you I just feel very disappointed in you that your not understanding this thread.

Understanding in what sense?

If my husband did that to my child I would want him dead on the spot.

No ifs, buts,sane or insane just dead.

That is one of the saddest things I have read in a long time.:-1

spot;793599 wrote: Understanding in what sense?


Well the thread was about a child being brutally murdered. To me it dosent matter who did the crime, it was a shocking crime. Race really dosent come into it, importance dosent come into it. Sure there are other horrible crimes going on in this world and I am not blind to that but not everything can be front line news.

In Australia we have all different races and if this murder happened here and was front line news and it was an Aboriginal I wouldnt be jumping up and down saying well if it was a white Australian we wouldnt be making such a big deal about it.

This spot is what you seem to be doing. Do you understand what I am saying .

Keep to the issue.

I agree with you entirely, though I'm puzzled as to why you're telling me about it.

spot;793637 wrote: I agree with you entirely, though I'm puzzled as to why you're telling me about it.


omg i was just answering your question like the polite little Aussie I am:(



But glad you finally agree

OMG what a sick thing to do glad hes getting the proper punishment for it

He is? Christ that was a quick trial then, he only did it on Sunday.

spot;792616 wrote: Just so.



I case anyone's interested in premeditation, an example can be seen here.The court heard after Hawkins wrote a series of notes, which mentioned his anger over finding out his wife of 17 years was having an affair and that he would kill his son.Of course, he might have been mad too. I don't think we have very good guidelines on how to recognize madness in someone who's committed murder for revenge.




Are you for real ?

This isnt the kind of thing you put up for debate spock.