Worst child abuse in history - dont read if easily upset

reply to post by Rasobasi420


Perhaps you missed these significant quotes...

Morley, who had previous convictions for rape, attempted rape and indecent assault against children, and was a registered sex offender, used a false name and address and an internet cafe to avoid detection.

Morley, 64, of Greenford, Middlesex, pleaded guilty to 50 counts of distributing, making and possessing hundreds of indecent images of children between January 11 and March 6 this year.

Why should my (rather those of the UK..) tax dollars go to keeping this man alive? He clearly doesn't deserve to be. And if reading something like this doesn't instill bloodlust, I would question the humanity of said calm person.

reply to post by Rasobasi420


well I hear where you're coming from but- consider this - the pictures that he had in his possession were produced by real people and the crimes perpetrated on real babies - children this tiny rarely survive rape by adults - it literally tears up their insides...these are basically snuff films and he bought them thereby participated in the death and torture of these babies...so his crime is as great as those who took the pictures and those who raped the children....

I hate to break up this feeding frenzy, but there seems to be a little confusion in this thread. Did the man actually film any of the material found in his possession? In other words, did the man actually commit the act?

I'm not saying this guy didn't commit a crime, but let me tell you what I see: I see people intentionally ignoring the distinction between committing the act and looking at pictures of the act. This topic has become the new "sanctioned" hate trough. We all know it. Some of us go ahead and indulge our hate because we intuit that the rest of the herd will overlook the facts with us.

Utter filth like him should be thrown in a large meat slicer, while still alive, and liquefied then sprayed into a huge oven and vaporized.

I don't get why the courts protect horrible pedophiles like him, makes me wonder if some judges or lawmakers are pedophiles themselves. People should be up in arms and demand no protection for him at all in prison at least

reply to post by A curious cat

Originally posted by A curious cat
How many babies do you think survive being raped by a grown man?????

I don't understand the question. Is it meant to be rhetorical?

reply to post by Rasobasi420


The thing is, even if you think about it for a while, the conclusion is still the same. Let's say that we are either born or socialized to behave. Thus, if these individuals are born desiring to cause harm to children or rape individuals, they are a lost caused. If our behavior is socialized, then we have to attack the social mechanisms which influence this behavior, however rehabilitation is possible. If life is a mixture of the two, then both innate behavior and socialization must be looked into. So on this basis, behavior could be rehabilitated depending on which theory you subscribe to.

The problem is unlike all other crimes (murder, theft, drugs, etc.), with rape and child molestation there is a definitive victim, the actions cannot be justified, and there is no way to reimburse the victim. Individuals who commit these crimes are taking away the very life essence/soul/innocence/whatever you want to call it of their victim. This cannot be given back to the victim, and unlike murder which can be justified (as with self-defense), there is never an excuse or necessity to rape someone or molest a child. Now, if this man hadn't "made" some of these videos, I'd say prison time is good, because he hasn't acted on it. However, he has acted on his impulses and therefore is accountable for his actions.

So, if an individual performs rape or child molestation, they should be punished. If we put them in prison, there is a chance they will escape. If we "torture" them or use them in experiments or for some better purpose, some would say that that would be worse than just killing them quickly as it's prolonged. If they don't escape and do die in prison, it falls upon good citizens to have to pay for their stay in prison through sacrificing our much needed tax dollars to make sure that this scum is still breathing.

Based on the first paragraph about behavior, we have some other factors. If behavior is innate, rehabilitation won't work. He won't change, and is "programmed" to commit atrocious acts. If it's socialized, sure, they might not commit the crime again, but that rehabilitation cannot take away the scars of their victims. Even if they are rehabilitated and become "good" citizens, they still have destroyed the lives of others. Thus, if he did have a change of heart, he wouldn't want to live as he has destroyed another individual's life and would realize the absolute evil of his deeds. If he doesn't change, he will not regret anything and will bide his time until his next victim comes along. Thus, with or without rehabilitation, he should still die, he would just probably want to die after successful rehabilitation and his actions are realized from a humanistic stand point.

I have a few family members and friends who were raped and/or abused as children, and none of them have ever been the "same" since the incident. Three of my family member's have been abused, and their abuser is now dead. They said they hadn't felt relieved about the situation till the abusers were dead, one was in prison for 10 years and she still didn't feel safe.

Personally I don't see any behavior as "deviant", however, once an individual inflicts this type of damage on another, they are no longer deserving of basic human rights. It costs too much to keep them alive, and the risks of repeat offenses cause me to lean toward having him killed. Killing him takes the least amount of resources, provides closure to the victim, and saves us from having to find horrendous ways to make him pay thus sacrificing more of our humanity as a society. Just my opinion of course, and how I see the situation.

Originally posted by jsobecky
reply to post by A curious cat

 

Originally posted by A curious cat
How many babies do you think survive being raped by a grown man?????

I don't understand the question. Is it meant to be rhetorical?

No i'm asking you.

You say that if they knew they would be put to death for raping babies they wouldn't have any reason to keep them alive, so how many do you think are going to live anyway?

Originally posted by applebiter

I see people intentionally ignoring the distinction between committing the act and looking at pictures of the act. This topic has become the new "sanctioned" hate trough. We all know it. Some of us go ahead and indulge our hate because we intuit that the rest of the herd will overlook the facts with us.

Then you should open your eyes and read the thread properly so you can get your facts straight.

I pray they find the source of these child crime films!

Are they from another country? And where are the mothers?

In America, statutory rape and molestation are two different crimes.
Statutory rape;

he term statutory rape generally refers to sex between an adult and a sexually mature minor past the age of puberty. Sexual relations with a prepubescent child, generically called "child molestation," is uniformly treated as a more serious crime.

A baby, toddler or child is a BIG difference from teenager relations!

[edit on 27-6-2008 by Clearskies]

we should not judge. we are here to learn. the universe takes care of everything in the end. worry more about your self. is your reaction the ultimate reaction? the reaction that is most wise? emotions cloud perception always. with emotions involved, how can you see the truth? live and let live.

"You can be a king or a street sweeper, but everybody dances with the Grim Reaper."

・Robert Alton Harris, executed in California on
April 21, 1992

Originally posted by Clearskies
And where are the mothers?

Some of them would be holding the babies..... yes believe me, it happens far too often.

This is pass horrible, its something completly different. Plus, this guy is actually looking at this stuff....for fun? That's sick, the only things worst than actually watching this stuff is being the guy who's picture is being taken.

In the US, we can't give out the death penalty for stuff like this. Its weird what kind of sentences get given out here. Like Jeffery Daumer who got 900-something years in prison (a lot of life sentences, trust me)

He got killed less than two years in prison though.

I also find it interesting that the moralists on this thread think it's so much more horrible and shocking that these particular bits of pornography featured infants rather than older children.

If anything, that makes the assault less harmful, in my opinion. Nobody remembers anything from their infancies! Many babies are subjected to horrible assaults legally every year - like circumcision - but it's humane and acceptable in our society because we know the person will never remember the pain. And if the baby happens to die, it's not as bad as an older child being killed because not only have babies not been emotionally invested in by anyone long enough to really be missed, but they lack understanding of their own existence. I'd argue that they're not mentally developed enough to be considered sentient. It's just a step away from killing an animal.

Personally, I find babies to be much more of a sexual deterrent than a stimulant, but philosophically, I'd say it's better for them to suffer abuse than an older child who could potentially be scarred for life because of it.

If they caught one there has to be many many others like him in this world of ours. I, personally, would like that this person not live on this Earth. Let him loose in the prison system and the guys will really take good care of him. These kinds are really the sicko's of the world.

I dont believe the lame argument , not giving them the death sentence will be an incentive to keep the victim alive. I mean, you think a pedophile would rather be dead or be tortured in prison for life.

These vermin should be given to prisoners
to do whatever they want with. Then he should be castrated. Then
he should be prisoned with hard labor. And once a week he should be
put in a cage out in public so people could walk by and throw eggs
and insults and feces at him.

I think this would be incentive enough to keep a lot of pedophiles from acting.

And the argument that just looking at child rape is not harmful , its
a release, how do u know, I mean theres so many victims we never
find out about.
Anything to do with child sex should be dealt with at the very extreme
level.

Originally posted by EverythingYouDespise
And if the baby happens to die, it's not as bad as an older child being killed... I'd argue that they're not mentally developed enough to be considered sentient. It's just a step away from killing an animal.

Oh, dude...extreme for that post. That is one of the most cold-hearted posts I've ever seen on the internet.

Babies also have no means of defense nor can they communicate what happens to them. No child, no matter what age, should have to experience this heinous crime, but babies...it's worse.

Originally posted by Dan Tanna
These people degrade and destroy children for sexual fun. For fun they will rape, sodomize and kill children. They may not die right away, but a life times guilt of abuse kills just as sure as a knife in the heart.

Any pedophile is a danger, for as long as they live to children. There is no cure, apart from a bullet to the base of the skull..

You do realize that most pedophiles were themselves abused as children, right? So where does your sympathy for abused children begin, and your ruthlessness towards the same people as adults end? At puberty? My point is not that we should allow such predators to roam free, but that we should see the problem as it really is, and address it at a much earlier stage. There’s only so much that can be done though, particularly in a society that makes sexuality a cornerstone of commerce and success. The sexual revolution has been a resounding failure IMO.

Originally posted by Rasobasi420
reply to post by optimus fett

 

Because killing isn't fair retribution for this crime. Simple as that. Although absolutely sickening, killing a man for possessing pictures is extreme and shows your own blood lust more than the defendant's.

# that. Put a bullet in his brain. simple as that.

Wow, what a sick thread.

I would probably offer him a deal:

1) Help us catch the people who made the films and you can spend the rest of your life in solitary confinement. A cold slab of a cell, only a few cubic metres, with no luxuries and one small window for some sunlight. Fifteen minutes of exercise every two days in a cage that's barely a few times times bigger than your cell, for the rest of your life. No books, radio, TV, access visits, nothing but your own silence - forever.

2) Don't help us catch the people who made the films and you can spend the rest of your jail time in general population...

Afterall, he didn't rape the babies himself, so it's hard to justify executing him for viewing it. Now, I'm going to count the implied contradictions in my own post!

reply to post by TheComte


Oh, dude...extreme for that post. That is one of the most cold-hearted posts I've ever seen on the internet.

lol, newb.


As for killing the guy, I can't really see the justification in it. I mean, I would love to see him dead... but when it really comes down to the fact of the matter... there's just not a justification for it. Certainly he should be jailed for life, in the general population - which is pretty much a death sentence in it's own right anyhow.

Careful the tightrope you walk upon when deciding so easily whether undesirables in our society should be mortally removed. Perhaps it's because I cannot fathom anyone actually deciding to be a monster in such fashion, but the impression I get is that he truly was sorry for his actions - and no amount of verbal slings you throw at him can match the torment he's already put himself through. He has a sickness that he wasn't able to control. For that, and for the nature of the crime, I think he deserves life in prison. Hard labor, specifically. But not death.

Indeed, it may just be my conjecture, but death would probably be a blessing to him.

As for the materials and being an accessory to a crime by purchasing them - I don't believe that's justification. There will always be customers for this kind of product, and you can no more blame him for pains his purchases bought than the Muslims can blame UK and US citizens for the taxes they pay to support the governments which they blame for all the woe and misery in their lives.