Ariel Castro: Not my fault...

[CORed]

At his sentencing hearing, Ariel Castro claims -- in front of Michelle Knight! --that he maintained a "home full of harmony" with his victims, that he never hurt them, and sex with them was consensual. He says he's a victim of childhood abuse and asks for forgiveness. The judge is now explaining the legal definition of "sexually violent predator."

I am against the death penalty, but for this guy I'd make an exception.

http://www.cnn.com/

Well, if nothing else, the threat of the death penalty got the scumbag to plead guilty. According to the news account I read he also claimed to be "addicted to pornography and masturbation", as if that and the sexual abuse he claims to have suffered somehow excused his conduct. I will shed no tears if one of his fellow inmates manages to shove a shiv between hid ribs.

Claiming that sex from women he held prisoner for years was "consensual" is mind boggling.

 

[CORed]

This sick **** deserves a bullet to the head.

I agree, though I think something slower and much more painful would be even better.

 

[Magic 9-Ball]

I agree, though I think something slower and much more painful would be even better.

I would agree, and have my ideas of a punishment. And I don't know in this case, but I would think the victims AND their families would have to agree to his pleading guilty and his punishment?

 

[The Central Scrutinizer]

How would you propose that someone kidnapped, threatened with death and held prisoner would give informed consent?

Stockholm Syndrome???

 

[TheWeirdSkeptic]

Stockholm Syndrome???

Keyword: informed.

 

[Craig4]

Stockholm Syndrome???

Disproven by the fact one of the girls, against the direction of the kidnapper escaped, contacting a neighbor.

 

[squealpiggy]

The song Sebastian the crab was singing in the movie comes to mind.

This one?

 

[Cain]

Disproven by the fact one of the girls, against the direction of the kidnapper escaped, contacting a neighbor.

Only because she was no longer the favorite.

 

[rjh01]

Another might be that however difficult it is to get out of a relationship, most marriages (at least in this culture) begin voluntarily, and in most cases the relatives of the bride have some notion of where she has gone.

What exactly do you mean by "for one reason or another"? Please, be explicit about what sort of reasons you're including here.

Most people who "cannot" get out of a marriage actually can, they just aren't willing to endure the process. In fact, the only reason I can think of where a spouse truly cannot get out of a marriage (as in, it is not possible) is if their partner actually held them captive physically. If that's what you mean, then yes, it's the same. But since you said "for one reason or another", suggesting that the reasons you refer to are both varied and unimportant, I suspect that's not what you had in mind, in which case I cannot see how it is not different.

Thank you for your replies. I think you both raised the same point, the ability of the woman to get out of the marriage. In Castro's case it is the extreme case. As I pointed out the chains are visible. But in cases where the woman is abused the chains are still there, just invisible. This makes it even worse as these women cannot show their chains to people. That is what I meant by "for one reason or another".

As for beginning voluntarily, yes they do enter something voluntarily, but the woman may have no idea what their husbands are going to be like. If the man is abusive can we say the woman entered the relationship voluntarily? Or was it another relationship she agreed to enter?

 

[ABC10]

Only because she was no longer the favorite.

I'll bite. What does that mean??? What do you know about this?

 

[ABC10]

Is there a reason for such a long sentence? I mean it's not like he'll survive even 10% of it.

Can never count on when someone is going to die. He could be here when we are all gone.

 

[NotJesus]

I'll bite. What does that mean??? What do you know about this?

It's just Cain's schtick. Don't worry about it.

 

[triforcharity]

I would agree, and have my ideas of a punishment. And I don't know in this case, but I would think the victims AND their families would have to agree to his pleading guilty and his punishment?

I believe they did, as they didn't want to have to endure facing him for weeks in court, and also having to testify to guarantee a conviction.

 

[Xulld]

Wow some of the posts in this thread are disturbing.

 

[bruto]

Thank you for your replies. I think you both raised the same point, the ability of the woman to get out of the marriage. In Castro's case it is the extreme case. As I pointed out the chains are visible. But in cases where the woman is abused the chains are still there, just invisible. This makes it even worse as these women cannot show their chains to people. That is what I meant by "for one reason or another".

As for beginning voluntarily, yes they do enter something voluntarily, but the woman may have no idea what their husbands are going to be like. If the man is abusive can we say the woman entered the relationship voluntarily? Or was it another relationship she agreed to enter?

I'm not sure, here, what you're driving at. Sure, entering a relationship with a fake and a liar calls into question the consent to that relationship, but is there not still a difference between consenting to the wrong relationship and consenting to none at all? Abusive relationships are certainly bad, and can come close in effect to a kidnapping, but are we to enter into a sorites fallacy here and say that if we can't stop them we might as well approve of outright kidnapping?

 

[desertgal]

At his sentencing hearing, Ariel Castro claims -- in front of Michelle Knight! --that he maintained a "home full of harmony" with his victims, that he never hurt them, and sex with them was consensual. He says he's a victim of childhood abuse and asks for forgiveness. The judge is now explaining the legal definition of "sexually violent predator."

I am against the death penalty, but for this guy I'd make an exception.

http://www.cnn.com/

I wouldn't make an exception. Death is too good for this guy. Why should he get the easy way out when the girls have to struggle to rebuild the lives he destroyed?

Let him slowly and torturously rot in solitary confinement. I have a hunch this will end like Jeffrey Dahmer.

As for what he said, is anyone really surprised? The man is psychotic. Did anyone actually expect words of remorse?

 

[ABC10]

It's just Cain's schtick. Don't worry about it.

I'm not worried but curious.

 

[Craig4]

Only because she was no longer the favorite.

This would be relevant to disproving the Stockholm Syndrome how exactly?

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Death is too good for this guy... Let him slowly and torturously rot in solitary confinement.

As for what he said, is anyone really surprised? The man is psychotic.

I agree that he is psychotic, but my reaction is somewhat different. Incurably insane people should be pitied, especially if they end up committing heinous crimes. If a rabid dog attacked someone, would you recommend that it be tortured slowly while rotting in solitary confinement? If not, what justification do you have for treating people worse than animals?

Castro told the court, "I am not a monster, I am just sick". He was only half right. He is a monster, but he is also sick. It is a pity that nobody was able to intervene and treat his sickness before it caused him to become a monster.

Why should he get the easy way out when the girls have to struggle to rebuild the lives he destroyed?

The girls will get over their ordeal and go on to live normal lives. He will die in prison, constantly reminded of the crimes that got him there. I don't think he got an 'easy way out'.

 

[rjh01]

I'm not sure, here, what you're driving at. Sure, entering a relationship with a fake and a liar calls into question the consent to that relationship, but is there not still a difference between consenting to the wrong relationship and consenting to none at all? Abusive relationships are certainly bad, and can come close in effect to a kidnapping, but are we to enter into a sorites fallacy here and say that if we can't stop them we might as well approve of outright kidnapping?

The difference between consenting to the wrong relationship and consenting to none at all is only a matter as far as I can see a matter of degree. The last part of your last sentence is not correct. I want someone to explain a fundamental difference between what he did and what happens frequently in society. I just cannot see it.

Just in case anyone was wondering, I think they should put him in jail and never let him out.