BS, what an unfair punishment. It's so messed up how the world works. He stole a damn black and white TV, and is sentenced to life in prison -_-.... "atleast he's got some years left"!?! whoever said that needs to be shot. Child rapests get out in 15 or less... i think anyone who is sick enough to rape a young child needs to be shot on sight.... this dude stole a TV for god sakes, i dont care if he had a past history of burglary, 35 years is unfair....atleast he is out now, can't dwell on the past...just have to live what time he has left -_-...
Wow... if I was that man... I can't even begin to imagine how unbelievably furious I would be.. and to feel so helpless that you can't do anything about it.
[ QUOTE ]
"atleast he's got some years left"!?! whoever said that needs to be shot.
[/ QUOTE ]
The person who said it was his lawyer from the past 3 years. He tried to fight the case for him but was completely bound by the law. The best thing he could say about fighting for him was that comment up there.
Yeah...pretty bad but in California he would have got the same punishment NOW with the 3 strikes laws ..I mean he did have a long criminal past history when they sentenced him it's not like he did'nt do anything else . He did stay in prison way to long even with his past in mind he should have done no more then 5 years ....wow ...
[ QUOTE ]
"atleast he's got some years left"!?! whoever said that needs to be shot.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
atleast he is out now, can't dwell on the past...just have to live what time he has left -_-...
[/ QUOTE ]
Um... you pretty much just rephrased the statement which you had just said was worthy of being shot for speaking. Like Adam just pointed out, the person who said that was the guy who has been fighting to get him out of prison. You took the statement out of context. Just before that quote, he said, "it is a shame that Allen wasn't released decades ago."
[ QUOTE ]
a criminal history that included burglaries and a violent assault when he sneaked into an unlocked house and stole a 19-inch black-and-white television worth $140
[/ QUOTE ]
hmmmm ... based on that I'm not really feeling too terribly sorry for him.
Yeah I think that roughing up old ladies to steal their TVs is pretty despicable. Isn't the point of prison to remove people that can't play nice from society? I think a 5 year stint would have been sufficient though...maybe he pissed of the judge.
It said that he allegedly assaulted an old woman, but was not convicted of assault. Even if it were true, it's a poor justification for keeping the man in prison for 35 years for stealing a television.
So because those bad men were released this bad man should have been released as well? Hell, if one murderer is released they should let them all go. Same with all rapists and child molesters as well.
I don't disagree that they should not have served a shorter sentence than him, mind you. They all definitely should have done longer than 35 years for their own individual crimes as well.
As far as "should not have served 35 years for stealing a television" goes - "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" I say.
@KeyserSoze- Just the way it sounded when I first read it. Just sounded cocky. I rephrased it more of a "ok hes out now forget the past and live on". The way that statment was presented just sounded so..heartless.
First off keyzer, he didn't steal a TV off the back of a removal truck or some shit. He broke into a defenseless old womans house, <allegedly> beat her up, then took her TV. Stop referring to the crime as 'stole a TV' in an attempt to belittle it. Breaking and entering into somebodys home is a fuck of a lot more serious than 'stealing a TV'. People have been shot dead in that endeavour.
Furthermore, I dont think anyone is really honestly saying that 35 years is a fair punshment, so much as ( as mojo says ) dont believe everything you read on the internet. There is quite probably a lot more to the story that we don't know.
There's always more to the story. What we do know is that he went to prison for 35 years on a conviction of second-degree burglary. Astro's comment just rubbed me the wrong way. "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time." The "time" for his crime should have been drastically less, that's the point.
True.
However, what we *also* know is that If he hadn't have broken into an old biddys home that night, he wouldn't have to do *any* time now would he? That was his decision. I think that's what AZ was driving at.
Tell you what, Keyser - give me your grandmother's address so I can go over to her house, <allegedly> beat hear ass, and then steal her television. We'll see how you feel about crime and punishment after that, k?
Seriously though, he did not serve 35 years for stealing a television set. He served 35 years for being a repeat offender with at lease one violent offense on his record (if you read the report again, he had "burglaries and a violent assault" <u>on his record</u> - this does <u>not</u> include the alleged assault on the old woman he stole the tv in question from). If he had "snatched and ran" with a television off the back of a delivery truck, first time offense and/or no prior violent offenses on his record, I might feel differently. He was a convicted violent criminal who did not learn his lesson the first few times he was arrested. Once again, I do not feel the least bit sorry for his sorry ass.
[edit - posted the same time]
Daz stated EXACTLY what I was driving at. He made a conscious decision to break into someone's home and steal from them. If he had made a different decision, then there would be no time to serve.
[ QUOTE ]
Tell you what, Keyser - give me your grandmother's address so I can go over to her house, <allegedly> beat hear ass, and then steal her television. We'll see how you feel about crime and punishment after that, k?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a horrible argument. Even if it were to change my opinion, it would only be because of my personal bias. That is not how the judicial system works, nor should it work in that way. I don't think the guy is a saint, but I feel that a life sentence for second degree burglary is more than excessive.
I also think it's a weak argument to say that he never would have been sent to prison for 35 years if he hadn't broken into the old lady's house in the first place. Does that mean he is deserving of any punishment he receives? So if he had been executed for his crime, it would be permissible because he made a conscious decision to break into someone's house and steal their television?
I'm not defending the guy so much as I'm criticizing the people who put him away for so long and kept him in prison.
i personaly think the 3 strikes system is great, i mean its not like he made one stupid mistake and paid for it h repeatedly made stupid mistakes and proved to the jurors and judge he was not safe to be on the streets.
I would be willing to bet that the tv will not be the last crime he comits,
x 80808754307032
Replies
"I won't be truly happy until I see a sign that says I'm outside of North Carolina." Words to live by.
I would go insane.
"atleast he's got some years left"!?! whoever said that needs to be shot.
[/ QUOTE ]
The person who said it was his lawyer from the past 3 years. He tried to fight the case for him but was completely bound by the law. The best thing he could say about fighting for him was that comment up there.
Not something "shot" worthy.
"atleast he's got some years left"!?! whoever said that needs to be shot.
[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
atleast he is out now, can't dwell on the past...just have to live what time he has left -_-...
[/ QUOTE ]
Um... you pretty much just rephrased the statement which you had just said was worthy of being shot for speaking. Like Adam just pointed out, the person who said that was the guy who has been fighting to get him out of prison. You took the statement out of context. Just before that quote, he said, "it is a shame that Allen wasn't released decades ago."
a criminal history that included burglaries and a violent assault when he sneaked into an unlocked house and stole a 19-inch black-and-white television worth $140
[/ QUOTE ]
hmmmm ... based on that I'm not really feeling too terribly sorry for him.
I don't disagree that they should not have served a shorter sentence than him, mind you. They all definitely should have done longer than 35 years for their own individual crimes as well.
As far as "should not have served 35 years for stealing a television" goes - "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" I say.
As far as "should not have served 35 years for stealing a television" goes - "don't do the crime if you can't do the time" I say.
[/ QUOTE ]
So you believe that serving 35 years for stealing a $140 television (a misdemeanor) is appropriate? I almost find that offensive.
Enix, I figured that you had mistook the meaning behind the comment, but I just thought it was funny that you then said something very similar
Furthermore, I dont think anyone is really honestly saying that 35 years is a fair punshment, so much as ( as mojo says ) dont believe everything you read on the internet. There is quite probably a lot more to the story that we don't know.
However, what we *also* know is that If he hadn't have broken into an old biddys home that night, he wouldn't have to do *any* time now would he? That was his decision. I think that's what AZ was driving at.
Seriously though, he did not serve 35 years for stealing a television set. He served 35 years for being a repeat offender with at lease one violent offense on his record (if you read the report again, he had "burglaries and a violent assault" <u>on his record</u> - this does <u>not</u> include the alleged assault on the old woman he stole the tv in question from). If he had "snatched and ran" with a television off the back of a delivery truck, first time offense and/or no prior violent offenses on his record, I might feel differently. He was a convicted violent criminal who did not learn his lesson the first few times he was arrested. Once again, I do not feel the least bit sorry for his sorry ass.
[edit - posted the same time]
Daz stated EXACTLY what I was driving at. He made a conscious decision to break into someone's home and steal from them. If he had made a different decision, then there would be no time to serve.
Tell you what, Keyser - give me your grandmother's address so I can go over to her house, <allegedly> beat hear ass, and then steal her television. We'll see how you feel about crime and punishment after that, k?
[/ QUOTE ]
That is a horrible argument. Even if it were to change my opinion, it would only be because of my personal bias. That is not how the judicial system works, nor should it work in that way. I don't think the guy is a saint, but I feel that a life sentence for second degree burglary is more than excessive.
I also think it's a weak argument to say that he never would have been sent to prison for 35 years if he hadn't broken into the old lady's house in the first place. Does that mean he is deserving of any punishment he receives? So if he had been executed for his crime, it would be permissible because he made a conscious decision to break into someone's house and steal their television?
I'm not defending the guy so much as I'm criticizing the people who put him away for so long and kept him in prison.
I would be willing to bet that the tv will not be the last crime he comits,
Scott
I would shoot anyone Dead who breaks into my house.
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
i think if a dead person did anything other than be dead i'd shoot them.
I would shoot anyone Dead who breaks into my house.
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
The sad thing about that is that you'd end up draining your bank account spending years in litigation with the deceased's family members.
I would shoot anyone Dead who breaks into my house.
Scott
[/ QUOTE ]
that's justified and all. but since we have a gun and all, i'd like to force them to call the cops on themselves.