Man spits on cop, gets life in jail
 

http://www.msnbc.com/news/934094.asp

That just seems ludicrous to me. :shocked

You're right, don't they have an electric chair in Oklahoma?

In Canada they would have charged the cop with causing mind pain to the poor man and forcing his mouth to involuntarily spit in a random direction, which just happened to be in the direction of the cop's face. :(

Besides, the guy is a wife-beater, and he'll probably be out of prison on good behaviour in a few years.

Interesting case. sounds like a clear violation of the 8th amendment to me. Usually they allow those kinds of sentences if the prisoner carries a disease and intends to pass it by spitting.

Even though this guy did NOT give the guy a serious disease, he needed to be punished to the full extent for doing this. I mean, really and truly, he should get life for wife-beating because it shows a clear lack of respect for other human beings, and he is just scum. I certainly won't lose any sleep over this guy's imprisonment.

You've also never been to jail. ;)

lol :( I don't see how it deserves life if he didn't get one. I mean, if you shoot someone and they don't die, it's only attempted murder. It should be like, Attempted Bio-attack. I guess it's a ATTEMPTED FLU ATTACK or something.

can you get a life sentence for spitting on anybody? i certainly hope so, who gives a shit if they're a government employee? it should be the same for everyone.

So what if a cop beats the hell out of someone a la Rodney King, who turns out to be completely innocent, but during the beating of an innocent man a TINY LITTLE SPLATTER of blood manages to land on that cop's shoe.

Would he still go to jail for life for that?

Bullshit.

Achimp must be from a small town in Canada :/

I can't see how anyone wouldn't find this absolutely ridiculous.

lol. Rodney King was not innocent at the time and resisted arrest.

And the 3 other times he has been arrested since then, whether it was for beating his wife, for indecent exposure while under the influence of PCP, or reckless driving while under the influence of PCP? Water under the bridge? Yeah, ok, right. :rolleyes

I didn't mean to infer King was innocent.

I just meant the caliber of beating.

It's hard to pick a specific incident as publicized concerning police brutaility, ya know.

But I was trying to make some sort of point *shrugs*

"You've also never been to jail."

I was locked up in Tiajuana for a few days, if you count that as prison time, I have. I only make this qualifying remark as I don't have any sympathies for this asshole either. He has no respect for anyone, from his own lover to the authorties which exist for his own well being. He deserves what he's getting.

And Rodney was not only guilty of speeding, but doing so while under the influence of alchohol and an illegal substance. To make matters worse, he didn't merely resist arrest, but he violently assaulted the first two officers to intercept him, and refused to cooperate at any point after. I have no sympathy for him either. If you really want to criticize thse cops in question, I suggest you wrestle with someone on PCP first, and see how easy it is to make them cease their struggles.

Why does wife-beating only carry a one year sentence? I think all wife-beaters should be locked in a room together, not given any food for a week and then have one steak thown in amongst them. Also they should all have knives.

As far as "splatter", that would be accidental. This is an intent crime, meaning they have to intend to have "splattered" which I think would not be the case if someone were having the crap beat out of them.

I think you guys are all entirely missing the point. This isn't about spit guy, who's conviction will almost certainly be overturned. It's about cruel nd unusual punishment, and punishment fitting the crime.

I don't care what you think of this particular spitter. You casually dismiss someone gettinga life sentence for spitting on a cop and you are not just setting foot on the slippery slope, you are tumbling ass over tit down it.

That this is generally being treated the same way as the funny animal stories the put in the bottom left corner of the front page of the metro makes me sick.

*breaks out into song*

"Don't do the crime, if you cant do the time!"

"It's about cruel nd unusual punishment, and punishment fitting the crime."

Criminal behaviour is itself predatory (cruel) and abnormal (unusual), there is no punishment which is uncalled for, providing the man in question is guilty.

I wouldn't describe criminal behavior as unusual as the legal definition defined by case law is "rarely done". And the 8th amendment is a proportionality test dealing w/the punishment fighting the crime and the culpability of the offender thus the importance of looking to the intent of the perpetrator. It's why we have degrees of murder.

Next thing you know getting a drop of blood in a public area will be a terrorist act, and coughing will cause immediate quaranteen and execution.

"I wouldn't describe criminal behavior as unusual as the legal definition defined by case law is "rarely done". And the 8th amendment is a proportionality test dealing w/the punishment fighting the crime and the culpability of the offender thus the importance of looking to the intent of the perpetrator. It's why we have degrees of murder."

A pity, I rather liked you for awhile.

Regardless of standard definitions, it is a societal abheration to commit a crime against one's fellow man. We come from the same culture were citizens lobby to enforce equality and protect an abstract right over something as trivial as personal property. Why then is it we show sudden temerity in limiting the active influence of those whom have shown themselves incapable of respecting the basic right to personal security which even Hobbes admitted was inherent to civilized life?

Degrees of murder, to protect innocent men from suffering unduly for a crime they did not intentionally commit. . .That is the spirit behind those rulings, but you seem to have forgotten that in favour of the law's letter. This man is guilty of his current accusations, additionally, he is a convicted criminal for past transgressions whom the system failed to rehabilitize. He is now a liability to the basic rights of everyone around him, and as such, must be removed from society for the good of all. He assaulted his own wife. Think on that for a moment. The one person who was closest to his heart, the single soul whom shared his most intimiate confidences, and he abused her in the most base and foul manner. Then, in addition, he assaulted the very person to intercede on her behalf. He has shown what he is capable of, and if the system is just, he will recieve what is his due.

I only wish he could hang.

I hope you still feel that way when you get pulled over for speeding and suddenly find yourself in jail for twenty years.

Like getting underwater handjobs from prostitutes?

I'm with Max on this one. He doesn't deserve life for spitting on a cop, and he deserves more than a year for beating his wife. And while I'm sure this guy is a bastard, this is just too much.

AWWWWWW, pj thinks he's funny!

*gives pjalne a treat*

No, PJ thinks he's on the money.

You can be guilty of something and still not deserve life in prison. A person who consistently jaywalks after numerous tickets...does that person deserve to be removed from society? Someone who steals food b/c he can't afford it, and does it again each time he is released from prison b/c he can't get on his feet...does he deserve life after a certain amount of time.

And don't forget a "crime" is defined in society by a politicians view of what society wants, not necessarily "natural law". Homosexuality was a crime up until about 3 wks. ago...do those men deserve life for committing homosexual acts against the "law"?

I also brought out degrees of murder as an example of measuring intent. There are other degrees as well such as petty theft v. grand theft, the difference being price. Grand theft v. joyriding. Felony-murder v. 2nd degree murder (of which felony-murder can carry a death sentence for someone the accused didn't 'intend' to kill while 2nd degree is 15-20)? It's never simply "did he do it"? So if the man's insane is there less time...of course, b/c of diminished culpability, so we find him to have committed crimes less intentionally...he still committed it and is guilty of it.

The orgin of the crime is defined by a specific cause; a lack of morality. You may consider it black and white, "Bad is bad, good is good", but yet you could excuse the rich people with bilions of dollars who sit in rich homes getting rich while poor people cry and suffer everyday, but it's not a crime-- not even considered immoral.
Anyway, back on topic, the nature of a crime is never defined by the intent, or even if they did it. It's defined by the lack of morality in it and the lack of care or repentence for the suffering the person has caused. Most of that can't be judged(although they do have plea bargains), so instead it's easier to judge based on the nature and lack of morality of the crime, i.e.: person kills a person on spur of the moment emotional impulses; gets murder 2. Person ignores somebody who is in danger of dying; depraved indifference(i think depraved indifferance is worse then murder 2, though).

"You can be guilty of something and still not deserve life in prison."

And you can be guilty of something and still deserve life in prison.

"Someone who steals food b/c he can't afford it. . ."

Someone who steals food has other options. In the worst case scenerio, he can see a temp agency and get a fill in job. Lacking all other skills, he can at least do construction. There are options, everything from enlisting to selling plasma. Noone is forced to steal, and no condition is so difficult than an alternative to crime is impossble. If they are a repeat offender, they illustrated either an inability to control themselves, or a total disdain for civic law, in which case they should be removed from society for the good of all. Removal does not necessitate imprisonment.

"...does he deserve life after a certain amount of time (of repeat offenses for stealing food). "

Yes, it is the most humanitarian option, for at least he will eat everyday without risking scurvey and malnutrition in jail.

"And don't forget a "crime" is defined in society by a politicians view of what society wants, not necessarily "natural law"."

You are the eptiome of a stupid cunt. There is no such thing a natural law. I suppose next you'll say that the civilian populace is living under an oppressive system which they neither need nor appreciate, and that the laws we have currently are in place to keep them in line by the powers that be. DOWN WITH THE TYRANNICAL US, BASTION OF DICTATORS AND OPPRESSION.

"Homosexuality was a crime up until about 3 wks. ago...do those men deserve life for committing homosexual acts against the "law"? "

Its still against the UCMJ, which in addition to the law, is something I am still responsible for abiding by, even after the end of my service. Laws change because they are a reflection of what society finds acceptable, not instruments of tyranny implimented by politicians to control civilians. I'm sure that sentiment is wasted on you however.

"I also brought out degrees of murder as an example of measuring intent."

This man's intent was made clear a year ago with his initial conviction, and is evident now in his repeat offenses.

"There are other degrees as well such as petty theft v. grand theft, the difference being price."

Gee. Really. I had no idea.

"It's never simply "did he do it"?"

You don't say.

"So if the man's insane is there less time...of course, b/c of diminished culpability, so we find him to have committed crimes less intentionally...he still committed it and is guilty of it."

A moot point. This man is wholely in possession of his senses, which makes his crimes even more grievous, and that is my final word on this topic, I don't care to respond to you any longer. It is a waste of both of our time.

I find it incredible that you would so carelessly pass out justice.

I find it incredible that Rorschach can so callously disregard people's opinions and experience as moot and insult someone's intelligence at the same time. Obviously a sign of either insecurity or "God complex" of which there is no "debating" with. So yes I agree, it is a waste of our time.

Fornicating is a sin, Vinth. But, of course, you already knew that from your years in the seminary. :rolleyes

Actually, along the lines of what you've said, I don't think I missed it.

To paraphrase what I said, I'd said "so if an innocent man gets beaten, bleeds on the cop and the cop notices, he gets a life sentence?"

Intent notwithstanding, it's fucking ridiculous to get a life sentence for spitting. I only worry for if this gets so out-of-hand, that if you spit on the sidewalk once, you get locked away and gassed for unauthorized dumping of biohazardous materials.

The policeman himself shouldn't be allowed to continue on the force, because these are the type of cops that will sooner or later shoot someone and plant a gun later.

Vinth, what would it be like it you shut your fucking stupid e-chowhole when you had nothing to contribute?


"Criminal behaviour is itself predatory (cruel) and abnormal (unusual), there is no punishment which is uncalled for, providing the man in question is guilty."

Listen. You know I like you, but that is absolutely the stupidest thing you've ever said here, and one of the stupidest things anyone has said here who wasn't Vinth.

That sentence would mean if you jaywalked , it would not be cruel and unusual for the state to chain you to a lampost and let you starve to death.

"Now, Max, what would it be like if you were a Jew? Oh, wait, we can't wonder about it becuase you are a Judaism."

There are various shades of crimes Max, but in general, I believe they fall into two categories: The majority of laws are engineered to protect individuals from direct interference with their lives, the rest are to protect people from themselves. There are many laws which fall into neither category, and others that fall somewhere in between, but for the sake of argument allow me to work with this assumption for I am only concerned with the former cases at the moment, the latter is in deed of revising.

I maintain the government has no right to protect a person from themself -wearing a motorcycle helmet, drug use et cetera ad infinitum. Now, when it comes to acts which interfere with others, murder, theft, rape, battery assault and the like, the government must protect the innocent from such predation. What purpose does government, on a state, local or federal level, exist but to maintain the secuirty and peace of its own society?

Does this man deserve life for spitting? No, but he has earned it for a burtal way of life which has adversely affected the public around him. Why is it his right to freedom is more valuable than the publics right to security Burbank? I really don't see it.

Crime of this sort is cruel, its very nature is predatory or abusive, depending upon how one views the beating of a spouse. It is also unusual, and God help us when it ceases to be so, therefore the ramifications must likewise be equally severe. Mankind does not possess an inherent morality, there is no better nature in people one can appeal to. The hand of justice must be swift, unwavering and firm.

You seem to be missing that he got life for spitting on a policeman, not for beating his wife. Irony aside, doesn't your argument (and really it's far and away the silliest thing I've ever heard from you) argue for a swift and speedy execution for all crimes that endanger others in any way? Shouldn't someone get life in prison for speeding? Shouldn't bar brawlers be put to death?

What will it cost the tax payer to keep our spitter jailed for life? Frankly I'd rather keep our police force supplied with moist towlettes.

What kind of civil liberties message does life for spitting send do you think? And what standard of spit proof will be required? I think DNA evidence at very least, but what if the policeman simply forced a perpetrators jaws open and applied the spit? I mean, I dooubt that could happen, but with a life for spitting case on the books can we trust the Poletzai not to abuse their new found powers of being spit on?

I want to go on record as saying that I think spitting on people is not at all nice, and that this guy is obviously a very bad person. I might even argue that he should get a multi-year sentence for wife beating. But life for spitting seems like the sort of shit you read in a bad filler story in Asimov's.

Yeah... I know I'm not supposed to be here but...
 

*raises hand*

Umm... I believe I've seen many MUCH stupider things said here than that. I don't believe that Rorshach's follow up was even really that necessary... I got his point, and I'm not always the brightest bulb on the gutter...

An entire life in prison may be a tad harsh... but we all know that's not what he got, so acting all fake-shocked at the sentence is just silliness. I'm not the biggest cop-fan out there ( I totally agree with whomever said that that special protection should extend past our revered government employees...) but showing that kind of contempt is not a personal gesture... especially when you're dealing with such an obviously contemptible man.

The guy had no respect for society in any form. Lock him the fuck up. Justice is served. This is not about getting the chair for jay-walking or any other hypothetical situation. His punishment absolutely fits his abberent life choices.

The law is not there to judge you on how nice a person you are. It's there to judge you on the crimes you committed as noted down in the law.

Christ. We don't even KNOW anymore about this case other than what we've been told by the news.

If spitting on a cop has to be punished more severely, then that should go through the proper channels. New laws, approval, I don't know how it all works exactly. Not "Meh. Asshole. Lock him up."

Besides. This "asshole" is certainly not one of a kind and I doubt they're all getting a life sentence.

NEXT ON FACIST BULLSHIT AMERICA: LIFE FOR DISOBEYING PARENTS.

Cut scenes of the Rosarch:
I think he deserved it! He has no regard for society!

Cut scene of the 12 year old kid:
*crying* I just wanted to watch Pokemon, but mommy said I had to do my chores! BUT IT WAS NEW, POKEMON... NEW... POKEMON.


THE HORROR

You know me Burbank, I don't believe in caging people and don't particularly view our correctional system as effective. I would sooner ascribe to a system based on fines, death or apologies with the added stigma of revoking citizenship for the conviction any Federal crime. Maybe when the Supreme Court revisits what was passed by Justice Felix Frankfurter we can start to institute some manner of true reciprocity, but until then none of us can do anything but watch as the civilized aspect of our society slowly slips away.

I know your heart is good Burbank, and I see where you're coming from, I really do. . .I wish I had the compassion within me to be a kindred spirit in this but I don't. All I see is the victim, and the potential for another one. I don't like to see the weak, the innocent and those without defense taken advantage of, and standing helplessly aside while the cycle repeats itself fills me with an anger born of frustration. I've seen too much to have any sympanthy for those who would willingly perpetrate such acts. The fact he spit on a cop doesn't bother me, its simply the outward manifestation of his contempt for his fellow man, but the fact he beat his wife. . .

Thats such a low and cowardly act, and I see people defending him by trivializing his case through equivocation; What if it was jay walking. Ridiculous. It wasn't jay walking, it wasn't something benign or inconsequential, he has had a violently adverse affect on someone who may continue to suffer for it years for now in subtle and sundry ways. Most would agree that a year is too little, but I ask you, based on this man's character, is life really too much?

Awww, the widdle pussified wiberal is mad at me! Good.


If he didn't want to be punished, HE SHOULD NOT HAVE SPIT ON THE COP! Wow, what a far-fetched concept! Don't do something you know you can get jailed for and you probably won't go to jail for it! Oh man, what a grand concept!

The scumball spit on a cop. He shouldn't have. He is getting punished according to the laws that have been set before he spit on the cop. Wah wah wah. Here is my violin for him ----> :boohoo

Maybe his wife was a "stupid cunt"
Those damn bitches are always back talkin.

Not that I'm condoning the behavior but isn't the act of spitting on a cop (along with some of the other indignities that they have to put up with in their job) rather commonplace? Sounds like a case of a cop just pushing the issue. Sure. It's a thankless job and I'm glad that SOMEBODY'S doing it but I don't have a lot of sympathy. In other words, it's part of the job (it's an imperfect society :shrug )and if you can't take it, then get the hell out.

Shach: Again, he didn't get the sentence for beating his wife, he got it for spitting on a cop! Granted, you know a good deal about what the guy is like from the wife beating, but the SENTENCE WAS FOR BEATING HIS SPITING ON A COP! THAT'S SCARY! Of course it will get overturned, but the very idea that you could get a law like that on the books at all is a very bad sign. I think it's quaint you liberatarians don't see this as a first step at SEVERELY increasing police powers and protection.

Preecher: I'll get back to you. I have meeting.

Vinth... Honestly I didn't bother to read your post yet. I just imagined your usual blathery pap, inserted few racial slurs, mixed plural and singular concepts and put in the word 'now' twice.

Now you remind people I'm a Jew, rinse and repeat.

This stupid spitting bugger is being made and example of. Wow you guys sure do have a lot to say about a simple subject.

This has fairly little to do with the wifebeater spitting on a cop. It's about a man getting an abnormally high punishment for a crime no matter who and what he is. They are two separate issues. This is a good illustration of why justice must be nearly blind to emotions.

[ Uh no.

Uh really no.

CAN'T ARGUE WITH THAT

"Maybe his wife was a "stupid cunt". . ."

Quite likely, there are many of them out there, but there are responsible ways of handling situations involving such people. For instance Doopa, until now, I've chosen to disassociate myself with you. There are responsible ways for dealing with 'stupid cunts,' and irresponsible ways; He is responsible for his own decisions.

"Shach: Again, he didn't get the sentence for beating his wife, he got it for spitting on a cop!"

YOu act as though his past transgressions have no impact on his charges. I'm actually over at a friends house tonight, Adam Bagely, and he was a cop in Chino Cali for afew years before coming out here (It's how I get to check the Mock at nights now ;) ). According to him, while uncommon, it is not exactly unknown for cops to recieve such treatment, but mostly it goes ignored. I believe this man was charged maliciously, I'll grant you that, but not unjustly. He is inherently worthless and utterly dispicable. What purpose would his life serve if he was set free?

I believe that she was joking to make something close to the same point that you're making. I think that you may need some sarcasm lessons.

I think it's very brave your friend the cop has come out.

I'm aware cops get spit on. If COPS has taught us nothing else, it's taught us that.

I think it's very bad to sppit on cops. think it's very, very, very bad to beat your wife. I don't think the law was written in such a way as to take that into account, though. As in, spit on a cop, five years, spit on a cop after beating your wife, life.

Your judgement, accurate though it may be, on the value of this man's life, has little to do with laws or the concept of punishment and crime having something to do with each other. This degree of punishment to crime ratio is nothing the government should have under any circumstances, and you shouldn't want it, lest you get five to ten for a parking violation or twenty years for passive resistance. So far the US is still not a police state, but if this sentence passes as a humerous sidebar in the press, we'll be well on our way.

"He spitted. Those acts is aggainst a pre-written legal law. He should have his head torn off in front of his family for the spitting and then they should give his body into prison for the raping of it."
-Vinth

burbank, just go out there and protest your little heart out against the evil deeds that have fallen upon this man!

"I believe that she was joking to make something close to the same point that you're making. I think that you may need some sarcasm lessons."

Actually, if I am correct in my understanding, she was trying for irony; The fact I would criticize someone for mistreating a woman when I am equally abuse, if verbally rather than physically. Irony is not the same as sarcasm Kelly, regardless of similarities. I simply chose to use her remarks to illustrate my point better and give them some value rather than treat them as the childish remarks they were concieved to be.

As for you Burbank, I only have one last parting sentiment on a distantly related topic: The Rand corporation does statistical analysis of trends in America, amongst other things, and is always looking for cyclical patterns which may have future implications. They discovered new frontiers of industry in America seem to be pioneered every forty to fifty years, with a ten to fifteen year incubation period where they are first explored prior to exploitation. Interesting, though only conjecture. If the same is true for political trends, we may be developing into a Police State within the next few decades, I feel certainly within a century. I personally believe a form of Facism will be eclipsing our liberal democratic tendancies, as little as I like it. With headlines arising regarding the revisiting of the Constitution, and our new unilateral Pre-Emptive strike policy, it may arrive even sooner.

If we ever needed a Gaius Caesar, it was now.

Gayus Caesar was such a fag.

Gaius is pronounced GUY-us, and furthermore, he was probably the single most dedicated champion of the people I can name, save for Publius Valerius Publicola, Lucius Junius Brutus, Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus and a handful of Forefathers froms the Revolutionary War.

Cicero's name was not Cicero. 'Cicero' means garbanzo bean, it was a nicname and apparently refered to his unnaturally small testicles.

Actually, irony is a better term for what she was trying to convey. Either way, your understanding of it wasn't evident in your non-reply - i.e. insulting response without any more clarification of your point or furthering of a constructive argument. Big words don't necessarily mean big ideas and your condescending tone doesn't exactly invite people to listen to your ideas and participate in a valid discussion so much as entice further animosity towards your view.

I must case in point say this ruling was terrible. The fact that he spit on a cop is wrong. He should definitely be punished for it. But, the sentence imposed on him for it is WAY too over-the-line for my liking. It only opens up grounds for future prosecutions, and unfair sentences.

I always thought cops got spat on.

When I spat on a cop, all I got was a kick to the chest.

After that guy got life, I will not spit on any more cops. However, I will beat my wife, cause I thought I done told her to shut the hell up.

"Big words don't necessarily mean big ideas and your condescending tone doesn't exactly invite people to listen to your ideas and participate in a valid discussion so much as entice further animosity towards your view."

If I truly am void of 'big ideas,' as you seem to be alluding to, then perhaps my condescension will allow people to see past my 'big words.'

One can only hope.

This is fucking ridiculous. The amount of respect for law officers is way too high. I hate the majority of policemen, because most of them are arrogant pricks that think they're above normal, decent human beings. I hope the man's spit actually did carry a disease and that it remains undetected and the policeman suddenly dies and it looks like a heart attack and the man gets off scot-free. Well, scratch that. He gets the penalty for the wife-beating, but that's it. As N.W.A. once said, "Fuck the police!"

Fucking eh!
People get mad at cops when they are being arrested. If someone does not understand this concept, or is unable to handle the thought of it, they should not become police officers. Was the guy who was being arrested an asshole? Yes, and he deserved to be arrested if he was beating his wife. The relatively harmless expression of anger and contempt the man made by spitting at the cop doesn't even hold a candle to beating his wife.

As to the ridiculous amount of respect people have for the police, that is mainly because there are so many people today who are willing to trade freedom for security. They'd rather have cops telling them that they can't commit harmless illegal acts than risk the possibility of danger to them or their precious property, for which they love having the police their to protect.

Exactly. People are always willing to give up freedom to feel safe. Takes all the fun out of life if you ask me.

I doubt it. Being well-read doesn't necessarily mean you comprehend and are able to apply what you've read. Did you ever notice that people generally don't like to trade topics with you because of your tone and, in general, lack of willingness to see anything other than your own view a la Vinth? It's rather your own literary narcisissm (i.e. jerking off to you're own self-preceived brilliance) than any form of constructive conversation that keeps you posting on a given topic. Get over yourself!

Yeah!