Kidnapped girl found 18 years later
 

well not found so much as walked into a police station with two children allegedly fathered by her kidnapper who was assisted by his wife :eek:

wow

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/8225621.stm

the stepfather saw the kidnap happening too.

Maybe all those missing children like Ben Needham do have a chance of being found eventually

poor, poor girl :(

I'm hoping for more details. News said she was 29? I'm wondering what she was doing/thinking in the years since she turned 18.

ETA: okay the sex offender who abducted her got 2 kids on her, and kept them all in a backyard shed.

:(

Sick sick bastards. For those of you who don't believe there is a place for torture in our "civilized" society, I present you with *drumroll* kidnappers.

The reunion with her real parents has got to be very strange. After all the hugs you're just standing there, staring at someone who is essentially a stranger.

I am fascinated with this story. Thinking of the step-dad trying to chase down the car, seeing the mother's news plea for the return of her daughter...

Man, what freaks, from what little I've caught it seems kidnapper man (who had already been convicted of rape at the time of this girl's abduction) is just talkin' talkin' talkin'. Ain't no thing, ya know?

:(

yeah, he said he completely turned his life around, and "get ready for a heartwarming story."

What B.S. And the wife? Just sat around and let her pedophile husband imprison and rape this girl?

People are so strange.

Eliminate them both from the planet - What are they gonna go to prison and "reform" - Puhlease!

I cannot BELIEVE he said the thing about the heartwarming story. I read that and thought "you fricking freak!"

I'm sure I'll feel all fuzzy inside when that little Hallmark Hall of Fame story hits Lifetime.

:mad:

Kill it with fire ! ! !

I'm wondering what kind of "literature" he was trying to pass out at Cal. The news said he didn't know what it was. WTF?

I read in a couple of different articles taht it was religious literature - he thought God spoke to him through a box, and that he could read people's minds. And of course that what he had done was God's will. What a winner.

Wonder if his wife is schizo, too.

Shouldn't there be some kind of rule: "I'm sorry, you're a psycho fuck, and you're a psycho fuck. There can only be one psycho fuck in any marriage at any given time. Plus, you're both ugly. New legislation requires that one of you jump off a cliff and the other one stand in front of a speeding train. NEXT?"

Like Elizabeth Smart's captors, who are both too deranged to stand trial.

Another reason to dislike religion.

You probably dislike Jodie Foster too, using that logic.

If it wasn't religion, it'd be some other damn thing. Crazy comes in many forms.

How in the world is this girl going to restart her life? I can't imagine what she's going to tell the kids when they're older--I have friends who were born of rape that turned out ok, so it's certainly possible...but still.

The guy should be on death row. No pardon. Too many criminals are getting off on "whoops, sorry, I was insane."

Followup--I just said as much to my wife, and she laid some wisdom on me.

"So let's say the 29-year-old woman turns around and kidnaps a child. Does the same thing to him that was done to her. Do we kill her?"

"That's a different situation," I replied. "This guy inflicted a lot of suffering on this girl for a long time."

She smiled. "How do you know what happened to him when he was a kid?"

I had no reply.

Who cares what happened to him as a child? What difference does that make.

If he was treated horribly perhaps he should know how that felt and NOT inflict that on another?

Remove them both from the planet - next.

That's because you gave the wrong answer to her question.


Kill her, no. Lock her up permanently? Sorry, but yes. The only thing that makes her situation different is maybe she gets put in minimum security, with as many perks as they can reasonably give her along the lines of library privileges, etc. The fact that you have a valid mental excuse for something wrong doesn't mean you should be allowed to keep doing it.

This guy was a registered sex offender. Recidivism rates for this type of criminal are staggering. They need to start accepting that there is no psychological recovery for most of them, and stop letting them out just so they can do it again and again.

Permanent lock-up was my wife's suggestion, as well. She certainly doesn't feel sorry for them, but her P.O.V. is that killing them is going too far.

Sadistic behavior likes this makes me sick, so my gut reaction is to kill the offender and be done with it--but she suggested that it may truly be sickness resulting from something that was done to him, so locking him up permanently is the only solution.

classicman: like i said, that's my gut reaction--but consider this: kids who are abused by their parents are 10 times as likely to abuse their own children. These horrible acts don't teach their victims not to do it; rather, it corrupts them, makes them think that such harmful abuse is normal behavior.

Ah...the idea of the philosophy of justice in a world where it seems that justice does not truly exist.

I strongly do not believe in purely genetically good or bad people but that we are all products of a mix of genetic and more prominent environmental influences. That means for the most part, who we are as people is largely out of our control but this argument is meaningless when attempting to form a stable and civil society.

Jodie Foster is a religion?

A guy tried to assassinate Ronald Reagan because he was obsessed with Jodie Foster and thought in his delusions that it was what she wanted. The point is, it's not religion's fault that some retards are drawn to it.

there is no real solution - thats the problem.

I completely agree. I am absolutely not in favour of the death penalty. But nor am I in favour of allowing people who are driven to do harm, just continue to do it. Burglars can be reformed. Even violent killers can (and sometimes are) reformed. But paedophilia is a compulsion. If someone has proved unable to resist that compulsion then they will always be a risk.

I don't believe in 'punishment' for damaged people. I don't think it helps society and I don;t think it helps the perps either. I think there's a strong argument for compassionate but permanent incarceration.

No compassion deserved.

So, if this woman was to repeat the crimes against her, because she's basically been warped by the things done to her, she deserves no compassion?

There is a place in life for mercy.

poor woman. She just got freed and you all have her guilty and incarcerated again! if you are jailed awaiting trial it counts as time served, so surely she'd be freed anyway ;)

Good point Monnie :P

but...@ Classic: to my mind, mercy and compassion aren't about what the recipients of them deserve; they're about what the giver is prepared to give. And for justice truly to be justice it needs both, else it's just vengeance. And I'd like to think most of us are better than that. Better than the murderers or the paedophiles or the rapists. Better than those who are devoid of compassion and who have no mercy.


[eta] that's not to say , by the way, that I see no place in life for vengeance. I just don't think its place is in our justice system. As individuals, if hurt we may well want vengeance. But I want my society to be a just one, not a vengeful one. I want a justice system that tempers its judgements with mercy and compassion, even if I as an individual might prefer vengeance.

Kidnappers, abusers, drunk drivers, ect: all have no place in civilized society, and neither does torture.

I was referring to the wife of the shitbag kidnapper - not the girl. Sheesh!

Wow. that guy is really creepy and evil looking. I changed the channel rather than hear his voice. (shudder)

Fumigate the neighborhood.

Speaking of the neighbourhood, how the hell can a registered sex offender get away with maintaining a private prison in his backyard?
I heard on the news that in about 2005, a neighbour did phone concerns like this in to the cops. EvilPrick was already a registered sex offender by that time.
Cops came by, quick chat, did NOT look about ... result: nothing. WTF?

You wimpy Brit! In America, we have no compassion. The guy did what he did because he could, and had no compassion for an eleven year old girl. He was bigger and stronger, so he did what he wanted to do. Now that we, as a society, have captured him, the collective we, as the bigger and stronger entity, get to do whatever we want to do to him. Torture, death, the sky is the limit! It's a shame that the first person on the scene didn't just shoot him, or better yet, the girl didn't shoot him at the time of her abduction. And his wife.

The girl now has to pull herself up by her own bootstraps. No welfare or healthcare for her or her's. She'll have to get a job and pay for her own housing and healthcare, and maybe she should immediately get her own gun so that this kind of thing can't happen to her again.

What would be better than prison or execution would be to round up all the bad people in the world and quarantine them somewhere - I know, put them all on Manhatten Island![/ugly conservative American]

*laughs* I call bullshit. I genuinely believe that Americans are some of the most compassionate people on the planet: as individuals. One glance at the third world will show that American teenagers flock in their thousands to help villages build wells, to help save orangutans in the rainforest, and in their own country manning soup kitchens and running thrift sales for charity.

I think most people, even if they believe in capital punishment, even if they believe very strongly that the perpetrator of terrible crimes deserves to be tortured and killed: if sat in a room with an individual who has done these things, listening to them tell their tale of what took them down that path: whatever their belief in what constitutes justice, would hear that tale with empathy and compassion. It is the human condition. We are wired for empathy. That's why we find psychopaths and sociopaths so damned disturbing and frightening. They are alien to us. They have no empathy and compassion and that is unlike the rest of us.

But. . . society has to protect itself. At some level, that's its basic function. Removing known threats (either through incarceration or state-sanctioned murder) is part of that self-preservation ethic.

On what occasions do we allow empathy for a dangerous individual to come before societal good? That's the critical question.


Who says liberals can't be nuanced?

Softy. Personally I wouldn't shed a tear while watching that piece of shit get beat to death. or slowly bled to death. or any other method you can think of.

Stoning. :thumb:

I don't think getting him stoned is much of a punishment.

Sure it is, if you don't give him anything to drink when he gets the drys, or any food when he gets the munchies.;)

I agree. Which I why I am in favour of incarcerating those who are a continued danger.

We don't at any point allow empathy to come before societal good. But nor should we allow our need to protect ourselves to rob us of our empathy. There is no good reason, in my mind, to act without mercy even to those who have none themselves. Mercy can come in many forms. It doesn't mean allowing dangerous predators the freedom to prey.

Good God man, where is your humanity?!

Bruce you sadistic bastard!

Although, that could be some REAL enhanced interrogation.

(1) Spliff up.
(2) So, Mr Achmed Abdul, you see the mars bar and banana smoothie behind the glass window? While you're staring at those, let's just chat about where Osama likes to hang out, shall we.

I think it would work! You guys are all geniuses! :)

Well here is some more detail:

http://www.mercurynews.com/topstories/ci_13233303

"Meanwhile those, like Christenson who came into contact with Garridos during the past year, are reporting his increasingly bizarre behavior. Once, both the Garridos came into Christenson's office at the recycling center, shut the door and asked for money to fund a new bathroom and backyard church.

"He started preaching and doing all this stuff. He was telling me about his voices. And then he said, 'You know I've been to prison, and I don't masturbate anymore.' Out of the blue," she said. "Then he started crying, and she was crying. I was looking at them — what is this about? I got freaked out."

Karunaratne also recalled increasingly strange behavior. When he picked up his orders at the Garridos' house, Garrido would often hop in Karunaratne's car, Bible in hand, trying to preach to him. Once Garrido played him a CD of religious country-rock songs — recorded, he said, in a soundproofed backyard studio.

To some, Garrido announced plans to give up the printing business and preach full time. Last year, he launched a company, God's Desire. His blog, called Voices Revealed, describes a fascination with mind control and the ability to hear the voices in people's heads.

"The Creator has given me the ability to speak in the tongue of angels in order to provide a wake-up call that will in time include the salvation of the entire world," he wrote."

And

"Reports show that Garrido managed to somehow slip through the cracks of the legal system. In 1977, he was sentenced to 50 years for a kidnapping conviction and given a life sentence for a rape conviction, but served only 10 years in federal prison in Leavenworth, Kan., and was granted parole in 1988. Less than three years later, he allegedly kidnapped Dugard.

Garrido had tried to convince a jury that his pot and LSD use were to blame for a 1976 rape in Reno, and he told the victim she was at fault because of her good looks, according to news accounts. A retired Reno police detective Dan DeMaranville, 74, told The Associated Press that a cooperative Garrido came across as intelligent and educated during his interviews with him, despite heavy drug use that started in 1968."

I am so tired of reading about crimes committed by somebody who should never have been let out of jail in the first place. A person in my neighborhood was killed by a guy who had been convicted of armed robbery, and had served only a token sentence.

Decriminalize marijuana and free up prison cells for people we need to incarcerate. I would happily pay $20-30K a year to keep this guy locked up. I really don't care about any idiot caught with a few ounces of pot.

Why pay $20-30K a year indefinitely when for a fraction of that we can put him to death and let that be the end of it?

You wanna give him a trial before we kill him? Or should we just shoot him now?

Honestly? I'm cool with killing him now and saving the expense, but I'm pretty sure you know I was responding to the idea of paying $20-30K each year to keep him locked up, which would really be post conviction.

Who needs trials anyways? The guilty should not get trials.

Typical person uninformed about the real costs of the death penalty. :headshake

Feels good to say though, huh? "Hellll yeah, kill that dadburn varmint. Yee-fucking-ha."

Because putting people to death has other costs. I do not want my government to have power of life and death over any of its citizens, guilty or innocent. Not all cases are as cut and dried as this. Though these are usually the ones wheeled out by those who are pro-death penalty.

Death is irreversible. To date no justice system has proved itself flawless. Too many people get convicted and go to prison only to have their cases overturned years later, for the death penalty ever to be considered safe. And whilst one can point to this case and say it is pretty damn clear he's guilty, legislation can only be made on the assumption that all convictions are generally safe.

I also believe the death penalty is morally wrong. Aside from that there is enough evidence to show that where it is used the death penalty is often painful and extended. Electrocutions can take many minutes of agony. Lethal injection also often causes agony. If the point of the death penalty is simply to deny that person life and remove them from our world, then there is no reason to do so in a painful fashion. The fact that they will no longer live is enough. If the point of execution is to punish with pain, then I think that is brutal and unwarranted. That they have been brutal does not mean that we should be brutal.

Right on sister :eyebrow::cool:

(the above quote was modified for humor)

I envision some chaw-spittin' going on, too.

before or after we kill him?

What percentage would you attribute to this "Too many"? Just asking. Please just don't say "even one is too many" I'm trying to quantify this.
Good - I hope they die a horribly painful death. For someone to actually make it through to where the death penalty is actually meted out, they must be a virtual monster. No mercy deserved. Toss 'em out like yesterdays garbage.

From the New York Times:
http://partners.nytimes.com/library/...h-penalty.html

Obviously the death penalty is handed out in many cases where the case is less than clear cut.

Now dar, quit letting facts get in the way of all the god-playing. ;)

Honestly Classic, I do believe one is too many.

And as I may have posted before: mercy resides in the person giving it. Not the person receiving it. Whether or not someone deserves that mercy is irrelevant to me.

You're a better person than I am Dana. I personally feel that in a case like this after the person has received a fair trial the death penalty should be applied. If that means the poor guy feels pain along the way then so be it. He has forfeited his right to breathe, imo. If that makes me a barbarian, then I'm cool with that. I've been called worse.

Unfortunately, laws do not apply exclusively to cases "like" the ones which you may cite as an example of their suitability.