Five men facing death penalty after bus rape

[allthegoodnamesweretaken]

BBC news link here

I'm feeling conflicted about this. Obviously what these men did was horrific, vile and unforgivable. But I just cannot agree with the death penalty.

I feel like I am somehow excusing what they did by not wanting them to be killed, and I can't emphasise enough how despicable I find their actions.

Does the fact that they violated the poor woman's human rights so violently and abhorrently mean they should have their right to life taken away too? Am i being too soft?

I suppose I am asking how you all feel about this, how do you think they should be punished? Also have you ever had your feminist views conflict with other principles, and how have you dealt with this?

Well, yes, apparently she said she wanted them burned to death -
But I agree with you trills, we don't automatically do what the victim wants - although it might carry some weight in this case.

I must say that I feel uncomfortable with the poor victim's name being casually bandied about like a trump card in an online argument. It feels disrespectful.

i agree NG

"I believe Wants answered those earlier.

It seems the answer is that a few innocents dying is collateral damage. Innocents killed by "sub humans" are bad.
Innocents killed by government are ok.

Makes perfect sense."

Not the best demonstration of your reading comprehension is it? Kindly point out where I said I am agreeable to innocents being killed or where I referred to anyone as sub-human?

I believe that Jyoti's brutalisers should either be hanged or spend the rest of their life in jail under extremely difficult circumstances.

I am not advocating the death penalty for every rape or even murder.

And by the way what the fuck are you on about? How many times have I said that there is a difference between innocents like Jyoti being killed and depraved criminals being executed? Even if you are against the death penalty, at least acknowledge that they are not the same thing.

Why, may I ask, do you have an issue with these rapists being called sub-human or monstrous? What they did was absolutely disgusting. It was against every principle of civilisation and human rights. Why then are you so protective of their rights? Why the fuck are you on a feminist forum being all defensive about rapists?

Yes, they are disgusting. Yes, they are depraved. Yes, they are monstrous. No, they don't deserve mercy. And no, they aren't capable of reform.

Your views are hopelessly naive and quite "privileged". You're viewing the world through a naive lens whereby "education" can eliminate all crime and rehabilitation can "reform" all criminals. You have some first world bias whereby you view the death penalty as uncivilised. Well, keep your bias.
Fortunately and sensibly, India isn't looking for a first-world, "civilised" stamp of approval. They're going to do what they feel is right and the rest of us need to shut up and deal with it.

"I think with sufficient evidence and sensible trial, the death penalty could be enforced successfully without the murder of innocent people"

I'm sorry but this is naive in the extreme.

Do you not think "sufficient evidence and sensible trial" is what justice systems are aiming for already?

If you think that the death penalty can be enforced without innocent people being killed you're suffering from wishful thinking I'm afraid. The overwhelming evidence is that from time to time (and much more often than we might expect), criminal justice systems get it wrong and convict innocent people. In countries with the death penalty this means innocent people are executed.

You can't just wish that away or disregard it. The reality is that having a death penalty means that innocent people will be put to death. That's what experience - from all around the world - tells us.

You have spent a lot of time focusing on the awful crimes that people have committed. Can you please now spare some time to consider the crime of putting innocent people to death for crimes they did not commit? I think that is a very grave crime indeed, and nothing can justify it.

Imagine how you would you feel if you were about to be put to death for murdering your child? Only you know you didn't do it, but no one will believe you. (After your death, it's discovered your child actually had a rare condition, and that's where the multiple fractures came from). Is that a price worth paying? I don't think so. Not in a civilised world.

(I've taken this example from recent cases where parents were accused of abuse when in face their children had undiagnosed rickets. But there are of course many other ways in which miscarriages of justice can happen).

Jyoti wanted her attackers burnt alive. That is her view on the death penalty.

Since none of us have had iron rods shoved up our vagina and anus, and none of us have had our intestines pulled out, perhaps we can all hold our peace about whether her desire was justified.

It's so easy to sit down for a cup of privileged tea and discuss "education" for the poor, uninformed masses (as if educated people don't commit crimes), and talk about "rehabilitating" men who commit medieval crimes like mutilation and disembowelment. All the while not knowing a fuck all about how a victim actually feels.

The "feminism" on this forum is largely a farce.

Sorry, my mistake, that was Waynetta.

"Since none of us have had iron rods shoved up our vagina and anus, and none of us have had our intestines pulled out, perhaps we can all hold our peace about whether her desire was justified. "

Her desire was justified, don't think you'll find anyone arguing against that. The question is whether it is legally right. Desire shouldn't be a part of the decision process.

You mean her desire shouldn't be a part of the decision making process. But your desire to protect the rights of rapists at all costs should be a part of the decision making process.

Because rapists are deserving of humane treatment and should be rehabilitated instead of punished. Hurrah for fucked up feminism!

"But your desire to protect the rights of rapists at all costs should be a part of the decision making process."

I don't have that desire.

My honest desire is that they should be slowly and painfully tortured to death in their own personal purgatory.

I doubt many people would piss on them if they were on fire, but that doesn't mean we'd want to live in a society which sanctioned the fire, or with a government that started it.

As a general thing I disagree with with the death penalty, but in this case I cannot disagree that it is the only way that anything will change. I agree that they should be kept in prison for life, but they will still be revered by their peers in prison.

Some years ago, 1980's, a colleague's boyfriend who had been in a UK prison spoke of the kudos given to men in the UK prison system who had killed a woman. They are treated like gods. It doesn't matter if they never see freedom, they are respected by their peers for the deeds. That is not a deterrent.

AdoraBell that has certainly not been the experience of the (many) people I have spoken to who have been in prison. How depressing to hear that.

Very good post from MurderofGoths at 21:05.

Just want to say on balance I am happy India still has the death penalty for the rarest of rare cases, and given that the penalty is legally available in that country, I hope it is used in their case. Unfortunately the Juvenile Justice Act will prevent the most violent of them- the 17 year old- from hanging but hopefully the others will. And in those moments before they swing I hope they pee their pants in fear because let's face it, no living being wants to die. I hope every fabric of their bodies screams against it. And then they hang.

I'm entering the debate a little late but have read the whole thread. I do not trust for a second that the men who raped and murdered Jyoti will spend their whole life in jail should they be given a life sentence. At some point or another they will all be freed because some mysoginist judge or panel of judges will deem that the crime they committed wasn't so bad after all, or that their behaviour is so good that they must be freed. Given the attitudes of men who have stated Jyoti was guilty it shouldn't take long before some judge with the same attitude presides over an appeal. Indeed, as long as women and girls are held in such contempt in India there will always be a real danger that the jail sentences will be cut short or indeed jail terms overturned entierly on appeal - for all cases involving voilence against women and children.

This view was strengthened significantly when I read today of an Indian man who raped and murdered a 9 year old, plus raped two other children. This man was given the death penalty for the rape and murder of the first 9 year old but was pardoned by the Bombay High Court for said death penalty. He appears not to be given life instead but was fully pardoned. He was given 7 and 10 years respectively for the two other rapes, however, he was let out for "good behaviour" after serving approx 4 years. Six months after he was freed he was found to have raped and murdered another 9 year old girl. Police are now investigating if he committed other crimes also.

So in this case, i.e. the case of the men who raped, mutilated and murdered Jyoti, to ensure justice is served fully the death penalty must be given and enforced swiftly. Otherwise these men will be out as soon as the story dies down a bit and a new judge with similar views to their own hears their case.

The death penalty is the correct punishment for this crime at this point in the feminist battle in India. Once women have been given their rightful respect and crimes against women and children are provided with strict and enforced jail sentences the death penalty may no longer be needed. But what is needed here is a final solution so these men no longer present a threat to women and girls in India.

Wants you've wasted your time posting. You're reading what you want to see and so debating with you is pointless.

Brilliant post by snuppeline. Completely and utterly confirms it to me about the likelihood of the animals being let out at some point to re offend if they aren't killed. Oh and by the way ExpatAl, nobody on here has wasted their time posting ridiculous thing to say. It

is a heated debate but one that we are all entitled to have and hold opinions about.

Absolutely, but it's pointless if posters are only reading what they want to see and accusing people of saying things that they didn't.

Yes I have been on the receiving end of that myself unfortunately. Apparently I held saudi up as 'a bastion of justice'. I don't believe there is true feminism on this board though. True feminism is like the bond between a mum and child, if your sister is humanity is violated in such a horrific way, I cannot and never will be able to get my head around that a normal woman would not want those animals killed. Many hold the view that criminals are better off locked up and reformed rather than killed, but that's until something awful happens to them or their family and the views change.

I don't believe in the death penalty for several reasons and these are based on logic and facts. I won't cry or have my day ruined if these guys are put to death. To be against the death penalty is absolutely nothing to do with feminism. I don't understand your argument.

So in this case, you would still be against the death penalty Expat? Even though the men may be let out in the future?

I imagine these men will be put to death anyway so it's a moot point.
If these men are put in prison I would be amazed to hear that they left alive.

Yes, I am always against the death penalty regardless of what I think about the crime.

So if you don't believe in the death penalty then what punishment do you think would actually work?

I am against the death penalty.

That means that even in this extreme case and horrendous case, I do not believe these men should be put to death. I do not believe they should have a comfortable time in prison for life and frankly doubt that they will, and in fact prison for life in India for what they have done may well be worse than death for them.

But my principle remains unchanged. I do not agree with the death penalty.