[OT] Enron Verdicts

If I could, I'd send them both to serve their sentences at Guantanamo
Bay.

Melissa

"Cheryl Perkins" wrote in message
...
Chakolate wrote:

If you want to argue that prisons need to be cleaned up so that no one
has to go through abuse and torture, I'd be completely in your camp.
But if you allow that *anyone* should be sent to what US prisons have
become, then you should allow that Lay should be sent there, too.

I don't quite follow. Pending appeals, won't he be sent to the same prison
as anyone else convicted of a federal crime? So he'd be treated the same
as anyone else convicted of the same crime.

Now, if you want to argue about the US federal government running its own
prisons or getting involved in law enforcement at all or something,
I'll step out of the discussion and leave it up to anyone who knows more
about federal/state responsibilities in the US.

--
Violent criminals are harder to supervise and are jailed in higher security
facilities from non violent criminals. It costs a lot more to house them
and its a lot more work to protect them from each other. It just doesn't
make sense to treat non violent criminals the same expensive way.

So while taxpayers might get some satisfaction of seeing Lay in maximum
security lockdown, it would take a space we need for a more violent person
and cost the taxpayers more than necessary.

Jo

On 2006-05-26, Chakolate penned:
Cheryl Perkins wrote in
:

Maybe not. I'm with Monique on this - people should be sentenced to
what the courts say, not to rape or to any other form of torture or
abuse.


If justice was meted out to the rich in exactly the same way as to
the poor, I'd agree. But while we're perfectly willing to sentence
an armed robber who robs *one* person of a few hundred bucks to
maximum-security, with all its attendant horrors, a rich man who
swindles millions out of thousands gets what? Club Fed for you,
pal.

If you want to argue that prisons need to be cleaned up so that no
one has to go through abuse and torture, I'd be completely in your
camp. But if you allow that *anyone* should be sent to what US
prisons have become, then you should allow that Lay should be sent
there, too.

No one should be subjected to rape. Period. I don't know where you
got the idea that I think only rich people should be exempted from
that. What disturbed me was that you appeared to be cheering the idea
that they should be raped in prison. Yes, it's a reality in our
prison systems. No, it shouldn't be, regardless of your crime or how
rich or poor you are. The whole situation is barbaric.

Today's Dear Abby just goes to show that this is still a real issue:

http://www.uexpress.com/dearabby/

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2006-05-26, Chakolate penned:
"Monique Y. Mudama" wrote in
:

I can't even fathom the mindset that suggests that rape is
acceptable, let alone desirable, in any context.


But you're willing to allow an armed robber to be sentenced to such
fate, even though he robs but one person? Unless you are out
protesting prisons in general, you are by your silence complicit in
rape.

I'm not "out" protesting prisons, regardless of the type.

I whole-heartedly condemn the idea that it's acceptable for prisoners in
*any* facility to abuse one another. I am, in short, in favor of prison
reform. I don't know how you managed to leap from "in any context" to
"when rich white people are concerned," but rest assured, I really did
mean "in any context."

In the meantime, you're the one who posted saying that you wanted
these guys to be "screwed," and at least in my view the interpretation
was that you truly wanted them to be raped. I don't see why my post
should require justification.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2006-05-26, Cheryl Perkins penned:
Chakolate wrote:

But you're willing to allow an armed robber to be sentenced to such
fate, even though he robs but one person? Unless you are out
protesting prisons in general, you are by your silence complicit in
rape.

The person complicit in rape is the person who commits it and the
persons (if any) who assisted that person.

I do not know of any situation in the US or Canada in which anyone
is sentenced to rape. I do know of prisons in both jurisdictions
which have failed and continue to fail to keep their prisoners in a
reasonable degree of security of the person, but that doesn't make
me complicit in anything the prisoners or staff do to each other. In
a broader context, you have no idea how much or how little effort I
or anyone else online puts into all the responsibilities of
citizenship, including dealing with convicted criminals.

What she said.


--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I whole-heartedly condemn the idea that it's acceptable for
prisoners in *any* facility to abuse one another.

And let's not forget the guards. It's not just the prisoners who abuse
each other. Corrupt guards are often in on it, or they look the other
way when certain people are being abused.

Joyce

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

On 2006-05-25, Chakolate penned:

Now if only they have to do their time in maximum-security
facilities. Let them be screwed the way they screwed all those
people. That's one use of my tax dollars I'd be happy to support.

Bah. Rape should not be part of the expected prison experience, nor
should it be a joke.

I agree with you in principle. On the other hand, when a convicted child
raper goes to prison, I can't say I feel too sad for him knowing what's
going to happen. I know, it's not rational and it's not very civilized,
either. But there is emotional satisfaction in that. Well, at least I feel
that way when such a person is convicted and sentenced on a TV cop show.

Joyce

In article .com,
Shiral wrote:
Me, I'd like to see them have to live on the top floor of a rat
infested slum tenement surrounded by all the people they ruined so that
for the rest of their lives, there's no getting away from the
devastation they caused. But I'll settle for prison! =o) Today is a
big victory for ordinary people who got monumentally screwed! Not that
it restores their pension funds, but at least they get to see the
people responsible are being punished!

Melissa

I'd just like to see them sentenced to working a minumum-wage job for
the rest of their lives, and living on the proceeds. Make them
WORK for a living for probably the first time in their lives.

Jane
- owned and operated by Princess Rita

On 2006-05-26, penned:
Monique Y. Mudama wrote:

I whole-heartedly condemn the idea that it's acceptable for
prisoners in *any* facility to abuse one another.

And let's not forget the guards. It's not just the prisoners who
abuse each other. Corrupt guards are often in on it, or they look
the other way when certain people are being abused.

True.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Cheryl Perkins wrote in
:

I don't quite follow. Pending appeals, won't he be sent to the same
prison as anyone else convicted of a federal crime? So he'd be treated
the same as anyone else convicted of the same crime.


No. There are maximum-, medium-, and minimum-security prisons. The
minimum-security ones have no inmates convicted of violent crimes.

Chak

--
You can no more win a war than you can win an earthquake.
--Jeannette Rankin