Woman allowed revenge on attacker -I am interested in your thoughts

[HelloOutThere]

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1386809/Eye-eye-Woman-blinded-scorned-lover-given-permission-throw-acid-eyes-Iran-court.html

Well would have to agree that they don't have it right with most punishments - not a big fan of stoning for adultery, hanging for homosexuality etc etc but....this guy still has it coming.

Sensible head for a moment: I think there is a really interesting debate about whether vengeance having a place in the legal system. I heard a senior UK barrister talking about it on the radio last week. His view was it actually did which is why people want prisoners in the UK to not have TVs, not get the vote, not have an easy life etc. They want to make them suffer as much as possible so they can feel what it is to be a victim.

I can understand the concept of an eye for an eye . My son was left with brain damage by his attacker at 15 and our family have lived with the long term trauma and psychological damage to my two youngest. So I can understand where she is coming from

FMN I'm v sorry to hear your story. I hope whoever did this to your son/family got properly punished.

No. He got away with it after threats and intimidation. Police were useless and my son now lives away from us . He is a young man now , but has difficulties . He was lucky to survive after major brain surgery . He is just waiting for his day.......

That's shocking.

See.

In this country, people don't GET the sentences they deserve. Someone who has totally ruined someone else's life in that way deserves life imprisonment. When the fuck does that ever happen here? Practically never. Someone can serve three years in prison for murder if they were 'of good character' (read: never got caught before), suspended sentence for rape, assault etc.

Obviously, letting people decide their own punishments for their abusers is never going to work. But giving crappy nothing sentences and expecting people to embrace the moral high ground or whatever is just bollocks. I guess if you have enough counselling it can make sense in your own head, but it doesn't alter the fact that a truly dangerous and disgusting person will be at large in the world some point fairly soon, and by reading of the fact he only got a couple of years in prison (or God forbid got off) other similarly disgusting people will take that as carte blanche to do whatever they like.

In the Telegraph article, she spoke mostly about wanting it to be a disincentive to other men who might be thinking about doing the same thing. I can understand that. I disagree with capital punishment and don't agree with this sentence but I can still understand that. Sometimes violence is the only language people like that understand.

But that's mainly just dismissing other forms of action against criminals as they are sometimes inadequate, for example short prison sentences for dangerous crimes.

If that was sorted out then it would negate any possible argument in favour of violent retribution.

It's like saying, well so and so raped several women and got banged up for three years, therefore he ought really to have been castrated, instead...when really he ought to have just been kept in prison for a good while longer until he was no longer a threat. It's daft. There's no need for that sort of thing if the justice system is functioning properly.

Which it may not be in places but that doesn't automatically mean we ought to scrap it completely in favour of beating people up so they 'know how it feels'. How civilised...

That's as may be...until he was no longer a threat does not preclude keeping him in for the rest of his life, if he remains such

For fuck's sake, NO! What he did was terrible, if fate meant he ever got acid thrown in his own face I doubt anyone would weep, but to live in a country where doctors hold someone down and coldly calmly drip acid in their eyes until they be blind.... vile.

ohmyfucksy makes an excellent point re the absolute bleeding hopelessness of sentencing in this country. Especially for crims against the person like this acid attack. You get longer for nicking a car

But as I explained, that isn't an argument for violent retribution. It's an argument for reviewing the justice system as it stands.

Someone said on page 1 (I haven't turned back to check who it was) that the man's mother had suggested that he (attacker) could work for this woman for the rest of his life. Something of that kind could be viable I think.
The avenge 'attack' by an approved doctor idea comes, I should think, from 'An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth' which is in the Old Testament. And as I understand it, the Old Testament is in The Koran - or is The Koran, maybe? Any muslim reading this who wants to clarify, please do.
Then Jesus came along and preached forgiveness, saying that instead of pursuing 'an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth', we should forgive - turn the other cheek - if a man wants our coat, let him have our shirt as well...
Like most of the people who have posted here, I do understand why that poor woman CAN'T forgive, and wants to to to that man what he did to her. It's a very appealing concept -
BUT she would be causing suffering to dozens of people, family and friends of that man - who have done NOTHING wrong. So it would be a bad choice of punishment. That vicious man can still pay throughout his life for what he did, and in the course of his paying be made to do something worthwhile. Maim him for life, and what do you get? A maimed and blinded man who no longer has the capacity to do something good to partly repair the damage he has done.

I don't agree with it at all, it's horrible and will do the victim no good in the long run.

However if I really wanted revenge I would want to physically hurt him as much as he hurt me, so I can't really see the point of it tbh considering he would be under GA iyswim? I don't mean I would actually want to throw acid in his face but in theory the proposed punishment doesn't even match the crime.

Time magazine

"Speaking on the interactive television program Saturday, Bahrami said she favored a more modern course, suing for damages. "I want him to be punished foremost. But if there are human rights considerations, then I'll accept two million Euros and his life imprisonment," she said. The program featured an emotional exchange between Bahrami and Movahedi's weeping mother, who begged for her forgiveness.

Read more: www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2071529,00.html#ixzz1MRDk6zFN

we judge by western standards. ofcourse to me this is a barbaric course of action. But many actions in that country are barbaric. justice th ere is barbaric.

to taking on this barbarism, is not abnormal there when thinking about justice. I can't help but thnk that she is getting the publicity becuase she is a woman. Because women are not usually put in this kind of powerful situation over a man.

And if in doing this, any man there thinks twice about these horrific kinds of acted perpetrated on women. Then perhaps justice will have been served?

And the Archbishop of Canterbury and others want us to adopt Sharia law in this country.

So much about those places is utterly barbaric

to be fair - he said aspects. such as the Jewish Beth Din which already exists. i doubt very much he means acidin the eyes - and more of a monitored cultural resolution which wouldn't ofcourse supersede the current system but rather compliment it in a cultural way

I do judge by western standards. But I also believe to be humane standards.

Yep, this man should be punished. My god, what he did was evil, cruel and degrading. And he should not be allowed to get away with it. Life imprisonment with food, shelter and little by way of entertainment. Cruel? I don't think so but his basic needs are met without any indulgence.

But to participate in cruelty by blinding him with acid? That is vile too. Revolting.