Burned Alive During 18th Birthday

[VoidWanderer]

If this is a 'rarnk gone wrong' then Darwin strikes again. Anyone thinking pranks and fire are a good mix are just begging to be let out of the gene pool.

But when I first read this, I would've said that his 'friend' should be given much longer.

 

[LetalisK]

I think I'd like to see this from a less sketchy source. While either way this is a terrible thing, it's clear the media is wanting to tell a story and at this point they have no evidence to prove their narrative has any truth to is.

Whaaaaat? When would the media ever be emotionally manipulative? *checks calendar* Oh, right, it's a day that ends in "y".

I also think people are underestimating just how stupid dudeguybros can be. I would not be surprised in the least if it was a stupid prank gone horribly wrong rather than a hate crime.

I must remember that little trick. I can do anything as long as I say that it was a prank.

Sometimes I am quite glad that I do not understand humans.

Though the cynical part of me knows why this crime was only lightly punished.

*sigh* I never said it should be excused. The media being a sensationalist machine with the prime motivator of profit and this guy having done something horrible which should be punished accordingly are not mutually exclusive propositions. Try again.

 

[wulf3n]

I never got the concept of "manslaughter". Either way the person's dead, is it any consolation to the victim or their family that it was just an "accident".

 

[LetalisK]

I never got the concept of "manslaughter". Either way the person's dead, is it any consolation to the victim or their family that it was just an "accident".

Because motivations matter. Someone who purposely and maliciously runs someone down with their car is a greater threat to society than someone who was texting and driving. Both are responsible for what they did, but in different ways and we acknowledge this.

 

[V da Mighty Taco]

So let me get this straight - here in the US somebody can get 5 years or more for copyright infringement / piracy (not advocating them, mods), yet burning somebody alive for being gay and then fleeing the scene while leaving the victim to die gets the killer only 3.5 years?



This... this.... I'm confuzzled.

EDIT: Just noticed that this was the British Legal System here who did this. I'm still confuzzled though, as I'm going to guess that people still get put into prison over there for more than 5 years for crimes that don't involve somebody potentially dying. I don't know this for certain though, so I guess I'm confuzzled for different reasons now.

 

[wulf3n]

Because motivations matter.

To who? If I was set on fire, between the thoughts of 'why' and 'this REALLY hurts!' I wouldn't be thinking 'well they didn't intend to set me on fire, so I can't be that mad'

Someone who purposely and maliciously runs someone down with their car is a greater threat to society than someone who was texting and driving.

Really, what evidence do you have to back this claim?

Both are responsible for what they did, but in different ways and we acknowledge this.

Acknowledgement is one thing, differing punishments is another.

 

[repeating integers]

As far as tha law goes, thatz fine.

If it was me dat da perved-out muthafucka set on fire, I'd make it mah goal up in thuglife ta make shizzle da thug was charged wit attempted murder. Shiiit, dis aint no joke. It only takes one mistake n' his ass could have took a dirt nap or been seriously damaged fo' life.

...alright, some I'm reading through this thread. You know, you got your typical "that is some fucked up shit", "he should be tortured for torturing someone", and the few people trying to play devil's advocate and act "rational." (I use that word very loosely.)

And then there's you.

Seriously, da fuq is this?

Yeah...you might want to look at that person's other posts. Or not, as the case may be.

His posts are doggone perfect. Don't you go dissin' the Dawg.

OT: I see lots of people arguing that he should get more than 3 years, but the point of prison here in the UK is not punishment but reformation. Or, at least, it's supposed to be - in actual fact we're not fully committed to it due to all the twats who think we should be "tough on crime", putting our system somewhere in the ineffective middle ground between deterrent and reform.

We need to be more like Denmark [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3036450.stm], IMO.

 

[Kopikatsu]

OT: I see lots of people arguing that he should get more than 3 years, but the point of prison here in the UK is not punishment but reformation. Or, at least, it's supposed to be - in actual fact we're not fully committed to it due to all the twats who think we should be "tough on crime", putting our system somewhere in the ineffective middle ground between deterrent and reform.

If that's true, then all prison sentences should be for life. That's what parole hearings are for, to see if the person has been rehabilitated.

That way, when they're rehabilitated, they're released. If they're not rehabilitated, then they rot in a cell for the rest of their natural life- where they belong. Best of both worlds. Focus is on reform, and if they can't reform, they're kept out of society.

 

[LetalisK]

Because motivations matter.

To who? If I was set on fire, between the thoughts of 'why' and 'this REALLY hurts!' I wouldn't be thinking 'well they didn't intend to set me on fire, so I can't be that mad'

Pretty much every set of legal codes established by society ever, with minor exceptions within them[footnote]Edit: Actually, let me qualify this with "Almost" since I'm not omniscient. Cavemen may have thought differently and there may have been religious groups who thought differently. But it is one of the foundational principles of criminal justice that has stood the test of time and its use through history will occur magnitudes more often than its absence.[/footnote]. Specifically, the judge, jury, prosecutor, and defense attorney. And if you want to get political about it, society in general as the aforementioned parties are essentially just instruments of the latter. The absolutist standard you're thinking of does exist in limited quantities within the legal system, but it's definitely the exception, not the rule.

Oh, and no one is expecting you to think anything other than "why", "this REALLY hurts" and possibly even "I'm going to kill this ************ SO HARD once I get to some water". No one would expect you to care about their motivations or any details that culminated into the act. You're personally involved. Which is why you're not allowed to carry out justice yourself.

Really, what evidence do you have to back this claim?

You want me to explain how someone who has shown themselves able and willing to kill another person is worse for society than someone who made a mistake? I suppose if someone were Jar Jar Binks and habitually made the mistake of killing people that would be an exception. What about the person that didn't make a mistake, their actions were reasonable and anyone would have done them, but someone still died because of those actions? What about self-defense? After all, someone died. Do we care about motivations and intent then?

Edit: Don't know why I said esoteric, that wasn't what I meant at all.

 

[TallanKhan]

For me the "prank gone wrong, he didnt mean it" argument holds no water. Setting someone on fire, whether you mean to kill them or not, is in no way a prank. But even if you believe it was a valid prank, what would have been the outcome of the prank gone right exactly?

Even if you accept that he didnt mean to kill him, he did, and while commiting a hate crime. What if i took an axe, picked someone i didnt like, waited for them and burried it in their back, subsiquently killing them? Ive murdered him right? What if i claim it was only a prank and i didn't mean to kill them? Would that in any way lessen what i had done?

Jordan Sheard took deliberate, senselessly violent actions that directly resulted in the death of another person and as far as I'm concerned, thats murder.

I see lots of people arguing that he should get more than 3 years, but the point of prison here in the UK is not punishment but reformation. Or, at least, it's supposed to be - in actual fact we're not fully committed to it due to all the twats who think we should be "tough on crime", putting our system somewhere in the ineffective middle ground between deterrent and reform.

We need to be more like Denmark [http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3036450.stm], IMO.

Also I have to disagree, reform is important, but reform is achieved through social programmes and personal development schemes that are operated while people are in prison. Prison itself isn't there to reform people, the point of having a place where you send people like this is so that the public at large can be kept safe from these people.

 

[LetalisK]

For me the "prank gone wrong, he didnt mean it" argument holds no water. Setting someone on fire, whether you mean to kill them or not, is in no way a prank. But even if you believe it was a valid prank, what would have been the outcome of the prank gone right exactly?

Really? Again, not saying it couldn't have been an outright hate crime, but I think you're underestimating just what young testosterone-filled immature men(women too, actually) are capable of, particularly when drunk(or high), as I would assume they would be considering the availability of alcohol at this party. Maybe it's because I see stupid shit like this all the mother-loving time. Between friends. Ask me how I feel about humanity. Hell, I've seen people in positions of distinction with college educations do incredibly stupid shit like this because of alcohol. They were just lucky enough to not have it get this bad.

I guess what I'm saying is don't underestimate our stupidity.

 

[Vareoth]

*sigh* I never said it should be excused.

Neither did I.

The media being a sensationalist machine with the prime motivator of profit and this guy having done something horrible which should be punished accordingly are not mutually exclusive propositions.

I was meaning to convey that I did not understand why anyone would think that this was a prank.

Try again.

I will not.

Edit: Also, please don't think I am trying to insult you here. I genuinely do not understand.

 

[TallanKhan]

For me the "prank gone wrong, he didnt mean it" argument holds no water. Setting someone on fire, whether you mean to kill them or not, is in no way a prank. But even if you believe it was a valid prank, what would have been the outcome of the prank gone right exactly?

Really? Again, not saying it couldn't have been an outright hate crime, but I think you're underestimating just what young testosterone-filled immature men(women too, actually) are capable of, particularly when drunk(or high), as I would assume they would be considering the availability of alcohol at this party. Maybe it's because I see stupid shit like this all the mother-loving time. Hell, I've seen people in positions of distinction with college educations do incredibly stupid shit like this because of alcohol. They were just lucky enough to not have it get this bad.

I guess what I'm saying is don't underestimate our stupidity.

I have to disagree, maybe it was stupid, maybe it was alcohol induced, but none of that excuses what he actually did. You could blame a combination of hormones, alcohol and stupidity for any number of shootings, stabbings, fights outside nightclubs that end with somones face being stamped on while they beg to be left alone, but they are all still vicious, violent crimes.

If the killer was drunk or high he was responsible for getting into that state. And also, so was everybody else there, so were tens of thousands of other people at parties accross the country, but Jordan Sheard is the only one who set someone on fire, and thats what makes him different, he took it too far. Theres a line where somethings stops being excusable due to intoxiations or mental deficiencies and becomes malicious. I believe he crossed that line.

 

[Master Cerberus]

You know I don't post very often on the forums for the very simple reason that I don't like paying attention to what society is doing because most of the time it hurts my brain to try to wrap my mind around the things they do, but sometimes a headline will catch my attention and I feel I need to make my opinion known on the subject.

I am quite honestly sick, disgusted and horrified by the state our society has degraded to when it come to crime and punishment. People are allowed to commit unspeakable crimes against others and literally get a slap on the wrist as the punishment for their actions. They learn that they CAN in fact kill others, ruin lives, cause pain and that its ok to do so. Not only that, but people who are not directly involved with them also see these results and are more likely to act on their violent impulses to resolve whatever issue they have. Take a guy to court over a bad deal? That's for sissies, just bludgeon him to death and the prison sentence is going to be shorter and cheaper. Seriously, what the fuck is wrong with our society, we have grown to cling so strongly to upholding "humane" means of treating those who commit crimes when in a lot of cases the word human doesn't apply to them. You lose that definition when you act even lower than an animal, you do cruel things not out of necessity or self protection, but merely because you can or worse yet because it pleases you. The states are also so reluctant to adopt the death penalty and to use it appropriately. The legal system is garbage when it can't appoint appropriate punishment for the level of the crime.

When I see a crime like what these idiots committed I would take the one who initiated it and publicly feed him feet first into a wood chipper and feed whats left to his mates who thought it was a good idea to do this. When he set another innocent person on fire and watched them burn to death, this individual lost the right to be called human, he lost the right to be supported by the money of hard working people while he rots in a prison and what he is designated at the end of it all is biowaste that needs to be disposed of. I think society needs to be educated on the consequences of causing pain to others, they need to have a clear burning image in their mind that if I do stupid shit like that guy, this is what is going to happen to me. Considering as of now few people are aware of the punishment that awaits them if they do something horrible to another person so it makes it that much easier for them to take that extra step.

In closing, individuals who act human should be treated humanely, everything else is waste and should be disposed of as such.

 

[LetalisK]

I have to disagree, maybe it was stupid, maybe it was alcohol induced, but none of that excuses what he actually did.

Why do people keep thinking that I'm excusing what he did? I'm not. Saying a husband killed his wife because he found out she was cheating on him and not because he has fetish for corpses isn't excusing the husband. Hell, I think his sentence was too light. :/

but Jordan Sheard is the only one who set someone on fire

Possibly. I know you were being rhetorical, but I wouldn't bet my paycheck on it. And if we broaden it to "killed someone while intoxicated"...yeah. Again, not excusing. Just pointing out that shit like this is sadly more common than we think.

 

[TallanKhan]

I have to disagree, maybe it was stupid, maybe it was alcohol induced, but none of that excuses what he actually did.

Why do people keep thinking that I'm excusing what he did? I'm not. Saying a husband killed his wife because he found out she was cheating on him and not because he has fetish for corpses isn't excusing the husband. Hell, I think his sentence was too light. :/

And in the same way that, regardless of his stupidity or intoxication I view Jordan Sheard to be a murderer, I would view that husband to be a murderer and deserving of the same punishment regardless of which of those reasons was his motive for killing her.

 

[LetalisK]

I have to disagree, maybe it was stupid, maybe it was alcohol induced, but none of that excuses what he actually did.

Why do people keep thinking that I'm excusing what he did? I'm not. Saying a husband killed his wife because he found out she was cheating on him and not because he has fetish for corpses isn't excusing the husband. Hell, I think his sentence was too light. :/

And in the same way that, regardless of his stupidity or intoxication I view Jordan Sheard to be a murderer, I would view that husband to be a murderer and deserving of the same punishment regardless of which of those reasons was his motive for killing her.

I would judge him more harshly if it was alcohol-related, personally(which is actually the opposite of how some legal systems do it). And more harshly than that if it was intentional. I would need more information for the husband one, though the difference would be much less than with this Jordan guy. Just my opinion.

 

[launchpadmcqwak]

the kid who did it will suffer for the rest of his life. thats One way to look at it.

 

[hazabaza1]

If this is a 'rarnk gone wrong' then Darwin strikes again.

If "Darwin had struck again" then the crazy fuck would be dead. Not the innocent autistic kid.

Seriously, this is fucking messed up.