njlauren
Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Darkfeather
Funny you mention the King's law, as it is illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to own or purchase any type of knife in the U.K. This includes cutlery and kitchen knives. Yes, a 16 year old can actually go to jail for having a butter knife on him. Why all the knife hatred in England? Because the number of stabbings caused them to enact such drastic and silly legislation. Unless of course, there is actually a rush of 16 year old butter knife stabbings... It is also fear that drives the Valle case, as the evidence against him shows. First off, he is 28, which means he joined the force at 22. Still young enough to not know any better. They let in evidence of his text stories, compilation pictures, and surfing history. Where he fantasied about over 100 women, each with a picture to match. Some had a story to go along with, including his wife. He had a IM buddy who he talked with about how best to do the business, including if the oven was big enough, cooking times, etc. And yet another whom offered $5k for a woman. One woman he did have lunch with. All this was presented in graphic detail. But what actually happened? Did he make any strange or threatening moves towards the woman before, during, or after that lunch? No. Did he at any time receive any money, 1 dollar or $50k to kidnap a woman? No. Did he ever cook someone in his oven, or even make the first attempts (buying large knives, turkey basters, the obvious stuff)? No. Did he ever make any strange or threatening moves towards his wife, at any time during their marriage? No (or they would have charged him with that as well). So basically what happened is, his wife saw his fantasies, got freaked. Called the police who also got freaked. Anyone who has heard the evidence, gets freaked. But does that mean he is a "Cannibal Cop"? No. That just means he got caught with some freaky fantasies. But they couldn't just charge him of abuse of a database, because that only carries a 1-5 sentence. Nope, they go for conspiracy, because that nets up to 20-life. And that is how delusional fantasy become psycho monster
You cherry pick pieces of it to prove this is basically like those who assume a black guy near a fancy car is a carjacker (or a black guy driving an expensive car either stole it or is a drug dealer), that they did this because of his fantasies. There is a big difference here, and it is one you wish to ignore, and that is chain of evidence. They didn't just go after this guy because he spouted off on some web sites, if they arrested him for that you would be correct, it is like those assuming that a black man in a fancy car is automatically suspect.
On the other hand, there was a chain of evidence here that it was more then fantasy. His wife was only the beginning, it was a whole trail.
You dismiss the 5000 dollar bounty to get a woman, but that leaves out that the cop a)researched her b)met her I believe and c)checked out where she lived including visiting the neighborhood, it was that he went from the fantasy, to specifics, he created a list of women, and and that point he went over the line. This wasn't some spectators in a restaurant seeing you are black and assuming you are guilty, this is someone where there was a chain of evidence that had had gone from fantasy to actually working to make it happen.
If you think a 28 year old is not capable of understanding what they are doing, you don't know much about human development. It is true that 18 is an arbitrary age, and that especially when it comes to things like taking risks, or understanding consequences, much does't develop until the 20's, but this guy is 28 years old. More importantly, to become a cop, they don't just pull someone off the streets, they recruit, they are trained, they go through specific learning about the law, about the law and what is considered legal and what is considered illegal. An analogy would be a 28 year old stock broker (same age), who gets caught violating insider trading rules, if you tried arguing he was 28 and didn't know better, they would laugh you out of court, because like a cop, brokers are trained in the rules, it is a fundamental part of the job (they come down on brokers much harder then non brokers caught doing this; Martha Stewart was nailed because she is a licensed broker and a licensed branch manager, or was). He had been a cop for 6 years, and like in any business, claiming he didn't know would be a big stretch.
I'll give you another analogy. Some guy goes on a chat room and talks about pulling a heist on Tiffany and Co on 5th Avenue, he his found to have diagrams of the store on his computer, information on their security systems, he is found to have e-mailed fences talking about how fence merchandise. They also have security camera footage of him going into the store, 5 times over a two week period, and where it shows him taking pictures and the like. He talks to others about helping him, and even offers someone 1500 bucks if he will be their lookout guy.
This is discovered.....his lawyer argues that it was all an elaborate fantasy, that he was just play acting, that he didn't have the intent to really do it......he would be charged with criminal conspiracy with intent to rob the store, and would be convicted, because there is a chain of evidence there. You were harassed on an assumption, with him, there was evidence to indicate that he was seriously planning this, as with the store robbery, and claiming he might not have gone through it is bupkus. Your comparisons are apples and oranges, and it is ironic in many ways. What you are saying is that the people in that store acted on an assumption of guilt, and the cops in this case did the same thing, saw a sick fantasy and projected that it was going to be real without evidence; the irony is that you are doing the same thing, your are projecting on the cops and the DA's office and the investigators and everyone else, a diverse group of people, that they acted the way the people in that store and the cops acted towards you, you assume they are guilty of overreaching because someone overreached with you. Kind of like in the Goetz case I mentioned, where the 4 kids he shot had sharpened screwdrivers, had police records as long as my arm, and those supporting the kids claimed they were just 'having fun' with Goetz, that they weren't a threat (yeah, people carry sharpened screwdrivers to repair trains n case they break down). When there is a chain of evidence, and it has passed through the cops, investigators, to the DA's office (who don't want to bring cases that they know are losing bets), it is very hard to claim it is jumping to conclusions, too many people, the DA's office would have run this by their profilers and such, who are well aware of the difference between fantasy and reality. I don't have the court transcripts, but I would bet that they had their forensic psychologists testifying that this went way beyond fantasy, too.
|
RE: At what point does deviant sexual mental fantasy be... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread