|
Post by sadie1263 on Feb 15, 2011 3:30:59 GMT
A man has been accused of several child rapes. There just always seems to be some type of problem with the cases and he walks away from the charges. One of the victims was even a friend of yours child. You know the facts of the case and that he was the one.
The man is picked up and being tried for killing his wife. The wife that always seemed to give him an alibi. It looks like they are going to get him this time. They have a lot of circumstantial evidence and he has no alibi.
The only problem is.........you know he could not have done it. You saw him at the time of the murder and he was no where near there.
Would you let him go to jail for this crime that you know he did not commit.....knowing that it leaves a murderer out there loose........even though it puts a dangerous criminal behind bars?
|
|
♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Feb 15, 2011 13:43:11 GMT
If it's a fact that the "accused" did indeed commit a number of child rapes I certainly wouldn't waste my time getting the predator off the hook so that more children would be raped. Violent predators have to be removed from society-by hook or by crook!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 17:00:31 GMT
I don't know what I'd do, I honestly don't!
I'm not sure why he didn't get convicted of child rape by DNA alone or why I know for a FACT that he was guilty; surely I have no more than second hand reports to guide me?
But assuming that I am certain of his guilt on the rape cases, I'd probably spend hours trying to convince myself that the guy I saw wasn't really him, that I was mistaken about the date or time....whatever. If I am still left with an unshakable belief that I am his alibi, I'd probably go to the police. Apart from anything else, there is a risk that he will be convicted and then released after a few years with compensation if it is discovered he was framed. The police might discover he paid a contract killer.
More importantly, by keeping quiet I am protecting the real killer, who might go on to kill someone else.
And with his wife gone, the guy might stop abusing kids.
That's what I'd tell myself, anyway
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Feb 15, 2011 18:54:24 GMT
I know I had to take a little liberal license with the idea that everyone knows that he has committed the child rapes.........and got away with them..........(hey....these are hard to come up with.....I have to get ideas from shows....and try and twist)
But true.....if you don't say anything....the real killer could kill again......and then how would you feel.....but then again.....if this guy doesn't get put away.....he could harm another child..........maybe you could hope that while in prison someone gets him in there.....they don't really take kindly to child molesters in there........
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 15, 2011 21:00:47 GMT
I know I had to take a little liberal license with the idea that everyone knows that he has committed the child rapes.........and got away with them..........(hey....these are hard to come up with.....I have to get ideas from shows....and try and twist) .... It is always possible that a clever team can discredit forensic evidence if there is a remote possibility of contamination. I could of course be the pathologist/forensic expert who has performed the tests (on more than one occasion), and therefore has the knowledge. Even so, and even knowing that a child I know was a victim, I would still report what I saw. After all, the trial would not necessarily stand or fall on my evidence alone.
|
|
|
Post by iamjumbo on Feb 16, 2011 15:41:05 GMT
I don't know what I'd do, I honestly don't! I'm not sure why he didn't get convicted of child rape by DNA alone or why I know for a FACT that he was guilty; surely I have no more than second hand reports to guide me? But assuming that I am certain of his guilt on the rape cases, I'd probably spend hours trying to convince myself that the guy I saw wasn't really him, that I was mistaken about the date or time....whatever. If I am still left with an unshakable belief that I am his alibi, I'd probably go to the police. Apart from anything else, there is a risk that he will be convicted and then released after a few years with compensation if it is discovered he was framed. The police might discover he paid a contract killer. More importantly, by keeping quiet I am protecting the real killer, who might go on to kill someone else. And with his wife gone, the guy might stop abusing kids. That's what I'd tell myself, anyway the ONLY issue here is that, if you don't tell the police, you are protecting a murderer. that is the only thing to be considered. how abhorrent the fool's actions have ever been, there obviously has never been any proof that any kids were molested. there IS proof that someone was murdered.
|
|
|
Post by sadie1263 on Feb 16, 2011 18:10:58 GMT
I think you have to step forward.......the case has to stand or fall on it's own merits. They either have the goods on him or not. But, there is a killer out there.....could be one hired by the husband, and if so, they will get him that way, if not, someone else could die and I couldn't deal with the guilt of that.
Also.....however the guy is getting out of the convictions......it's got to be cleared up and they will get him with the correct evidence.
|
|
|
Post by Synonym on Feb 22, 2011 18:03:30 GMT
If I unimpeachably, 100% knew that he was guilty of the child molestations but not guilty of the murder, and knew that he would go to jail for a long time for it, then I'd be very tempted to keep quiet and let him serve the time he deserves even if it is, officially, for the wrong reason.
In practise I don't think I could know these things 100%, and so would feel that it is not for me to play judge and jury based on what I think I know. I'd present my evidence and let things take their course.
|
|