Incredibly audacious legal defense

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2006-03-25 05:48am

can't we just hang him by a meathook through his dick, and into his intestines until he dies?

Stofsk · Post by **Stofsk** » 2006-03-25 06:05pm

Patrick Degan wrote:Which considering what happens to kiddie-rapers in prision effectively would be a death sentence.

Don't Americans have 'special' (IE isolated from the mainstream) prisons for sex offenders, to pretty much prevent that kind of result?

I know they have so here. Sex offenders are automatically put into protection units at Port Phillip Prison, and I can only imagine that policy will continue when the new remand centre opens up, and when they get convicted they go to a place called Ararat Prison - a sex offenders jail.

(incidentally I've heard from Americans who were locked up here and some Screws that your jails really suck, the jails down here are picnics in comparison)

Uraniun235 · Post by **Uraniun235** » 2006-03-25 08:18pm

Justforfun000 wrote:
You know there are things such as Rape Shield laws that don't allow defense attorneys to bring up past sexual history of a rape victim. If your state doesn't enact such legislation is it the attorney's fault? No. Obviously the state legislature is saying that a woman's past sexual history is fair game or they would have addressed it as the states that have such laws do. We play by the rules we're given.

Really? I wasn't aware of those shield laws. That's a great idea.

They should be adopted as a federal law in my opinion.

Under what provision of the Constitution would such a federal law draw it's authority from? (I realize that in practice Congress just does whatever the hell it wants to, but come on.)

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2006-03-25 09:17pm

Gil Hamilton wrote:
Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:The best defense is a good offense - if you can discredit the victim by attacking, which is often also the Primary Witness for the Prosecutor, you are halfway towards winning.
Firstly, that's a cliche and not a very accurate one.

Read the post I made before this one, 6 posts above your last post. Perhaps I should have added a rolling eyes to indiate the sarcasm I was using when I typed this one.

Gil Hamilton · Post by **Gil Hamilton** » 2006-03-25 10:20pm

Kazuaki Shimazaki wrote:Read the post I made before this one, 6 posts above your last post. Perhaps I should have added a rolling eyes to indiate the sarcasm I was using when I typed this one.

I'm sorry, there are people who'd make the post you made with an entirely straight face. I'll apologize then for any hostility.

Patrick Degan · Post by **Patrick Degan** » 2006-03-25 11:12pm

Stofsk wrote:
Patrick Degan wrote:Which considering what happens to kiddie-rapers in prision effectively would be a death sentence.
Don't Americans have 'special' (IE isolated from the mainstream) prisons for sex offenders, to pretty much prevent that kind of result?

I know they have so here. Sex offenders are automatically put into protection units at Port Phillip Prison, and I can only imagine that policy will continue when the new remand centre opens up, and when they get convicted they go to a place called Ararat Prison - a sex offenders jail.

(incidentally I've heard from Americans who were locked up here and some Screws that your jails really suck, the jails down here are picnics in comparison)

The best they do for them is segregated lockup, in which some offenders are kept isolated from the general population. Effectively it means doing an entire sentence in solitary (with some privileges like visitation).