# Our system failed again! Poway teen raped and murdered!



## Tames D (Mar 6, 2010)

Maybe it's time for the prosecutors and judges who make bad decisions do the jail time? Might make them less likely to be so lenient with known sex offenders?


http://www.aolnews.com/crime/articl...l-slain-california-teen-chelsea-king/19385884


----------



## MJS (Mar 6, 2010)

The system, IMO, fails people all the time.  People ***** and complain about prison overcrowding, but I'm sorry, this is just another reason why I say that trying to rehab someone is a fantasy, not a reality.  It states in the article that he showed NO remorse, for the last crime that he did, sooo....why give him a lesser sentence?  Why live in a fantasy and think that this piece of ****, would want rehab?  So now what....will this scumbag get another plea deal, or will be get what he should, that being many, many years in a small, confinded jail cell?  As far as I'm concerned, its impossible, unless the offender is watched 24/7/365, to know what they're doing, whether they're registered or not.  

I'll also say this:  This is another reason why I laugh, when I hear or in the case of the forum, see, people make the statement that its rare that martial artists, will ever have to use their skills to defend themselves.  Now, I dont know the crime stats of this particular area, but regardless, here we have a young girl, out for a jog, and she gets killed.  Now, nothing says that even if she was a martial artist, that she'd survive, but anythings possible.  It just goes to show, that no matter where you live, be it in the heart of the city or the country, that anything could happen, and you shouldn't assume that it wont.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Mar 6, 2010)

People can change and rehab if what they did was not a result of their messed up mind. If what they did WAS a result of being ****ed up, they should never walk the streets again. Sex offenders as in actual rapists  and child molesters (and not the 18 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend) should never walk free again barring permanent castration.


----------



## Tames D (Mar 6, 2010)

I agree with everyting you're saying Mike. And maybe I'm being a little more sensitive in this particular case because I have some family members, including some young nieces in San Diego. But I really believe in accountibility. The people that are making these plea bargains with sex offenders need to be accountible for the future actions of these scum. Whether it be losing their jobs or doing jail time. There are too many young girls lives at stake here.


----------



## MJS (Mar 6, 2010)

Bruno@MT said:


> People can change and rehab if what they did was not a result of their messed up mind. If what they did WAS a result of being ****ed up, they should never walk the streets again. Sex offenders as in actual rapists and child molesters (and not the 18 year old boy having sex with his 17 year old girlfriend) should never walk free again barring permanent castration.


 
I'll give you part of that, but I still feel that it has to be a 2 way street.  The doc. has to keep the faith and really want and try to rehab the guy and the criminal wants to be helped.  I've seen way too many people leave the cellblock, to go to another area of the prison, for their weekly AA meeting, NA meeting, Bible study, with no other purpose than to get some 'free time' out of the block.  IMO, 99% of the people that left had no desire to change, as there were a few times, when I'd see them back again, shortly after they were released.


----------



## MJS (Mar 6, 2010)

Tames D said:


> I agree with everyting you're saying Mike. And maybe I'm being a little more sensitive in this particular case because I have some family members, including some young nieces in San Diego. But I really believe in accountibility. The people that are making these plea bargains with sex offenders need to be accountible for the future actions of these scum. Whether it be losing their jobs or doing jail time. There are too many young girls lives at stake here.


 
Agreed 150% with you on this.  Then again, is the public defender really thinking about the future or just living in the moment?  10 to 1 says he's living in the moment, just thinking about doing his job, which is defending the piece of trash.  Whatever happens after that....not his issue in his mind.  Of course, on the flip side of this, the judge is the one that calls the shots, no?  So just because the public defender suggests a lesser sentence, doesnt mean the judge has to go with it.  Thats just a guess on my part.  I'm not a legal expert, so perhaps someone with more knowledge can confirm or deny what I just said.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 6, 2010)

Tames D said:


> Maybe it's time for the prosecutors and judges who make bad decisions do the jail time? Might make them less likely to be so lenient with known sex offenders?



Things are not always as simple as they appear.

We've tried giving judges the ability to sentence within guidelines, and we've had that cause problems when judges decide to hand out sentences that seem to stiff or too lax.

We've tried giving judges no choice in what sentences they hand out, and had problems with that when issues we never thought of end up with people getting mandatory massive prison sentences for minor offenses and vice-versa.

So it seems we've tried relying on the human factor and we've tried making everything cut-and-dried, and both have drawbacks.

We've also tried longer prison sentences for all kinds of crimes, particularly crimes of violence.  We've discovered that we run out of prisons and we run out of money.  I remember the calls to 'Build More Prisons' back in the 1980's.  We did.  We have more of our own population imprisoned in the USA than in any other nation on earth on a percentage basis, and apparently it is still not enough - and now we can't afford it, in the depths of a recession.

And despite anything else, a longer sentence for a sex crime may only mean delaying when they can offend again.  So the guy gets 30 years instead of 5, and when he gets out, he does the same thing again.  Not much comfort for the parents that he had to wait 30 years to repeat his crimes.  Keep him in forever?  We seem not to have the money.  Put him to death?  We seem not to have the will to do that (or the money, it costs more to put people to death in the USA than to put them in prison for life).

As to castration - rape is not a sex crime, it's a crime of violence.  Castrated rapists will use broomsticks to continue their crimes.  It's about the power they need to feel, not the sex part.

I don't have an answer, but I don't think there is any easy one.  It's not good, but I don't know what we can do.  In the case of this guy, yes, I think he should have received a longer sentence.  I suspect he would have done the same thing only later on, though.


----------



## 72ronin (Mar 6, 2010)

It would help if you guys first unified your laws across all states.  One country, one law.

    Its not much use having the death penalty in one state but not the other, Obviously its a deterent for severe crimes, but then the system lets them live on for years on end..  One appeal, within one year then bam, get rid of them.

     Im quite sure the reason your prisons are packed out is becouse of the ridiculous amount of guns floating around the country, no way am i saying anything against the right to bare arms, but maybe much stricter laws defining exactly who gets to bare em..

     Purchasing of weapons should be ridiculously strict, meaning only those that use them properly get to have them in the first place.  

      Dont get me wrong, theres plenty of guns in Australia too, but the legal requirements to own them keeps them out of morons hands. In America, if someone flips out, they go on a shooting rampage!!  How can you guys put up with that possibility from day to day?
      Law abiding citizens would still be able to apply for a gun liscence, with strict requirements, meaning you and i still get to own firearms.  For cripes sake, get the guns off the streets.   After all, they are the enablers for the crims man, thats all..

     On the topic of slack judges, we are cursed with them here in Oz also.. As far as im concerned, at the moment someone commits a severe crime they dont have rights. They forego their rights the moment they decide to break the law, plain and simple. 

     Time to harden the .... up  on repeat offenders big time..


----------



## jks9199 (Mar 6, 2010)

72ronin said:


> It would help if you guys first unified your laws across all states.  One country, one law.
> 
> Its not much use having the death penalty in one state but not the other, Obviously its a deterent for severe crimes, but then the system lets them live on for years on end..  One appeal, within one year then bam, get rid of them.
> 
> ...


Well, we could send them all to a distant continent...

Let me start with an explanation of the United States of America.  We're one NATION comprised of 50 individual States.  Each State is, in many ways, a "country" in its own right, despite post-Civil War increases in the federal power.  The US Constitution is "the Supreme Law of the Land" and no state law or state constitution can deny a person their constitutional rights but the underlying philosophy of government in the US is that the government that influences you the most should generally be that government where you have the most influence.  Congress and the President are far removed from most people's ordinary life -- but their local municipal council and mayor have a huge influence on daily life.  The laws that have the most influence on your daily life generally originate from your local government, and then from your state government.  So, while, we do have "one country, one law" -- we also have more local control.  It's only my opinion, but it seems to have worked pretty well over the last few hundred years or so.

Now onto the specific topic...  Recidivism.  

Most of the population obeys the law for the simple reason that they are "good people."  Whether they're afraid of consequences, innately honest, or what... they simply don't break the law.  A portion of that population does need "encouragement"  to comply but all that takes is seeing the occasional squad car, having locks on doors, and the like.  They don't need direct & personal intervention.

However, there's a sizable chunk (for discussion, I'm going to say 20 percent) that does need to get caught once.  They need a personal explanation & exposure that being bad causes problems... and once they get that, they won't re-offend.

But about half of that 20% -- or 10% -- need a little more convincing.  They're going to get out, and figure that maybe they know how to get away with it this time...  They'll get caught a second time -- and a lot of them will be convinced.  

Again, though, about half of that 10%, or 5% of the total group, will need still further convincing.  If they're caught a third time -- the odds are pretty good that they're going to continue to offend, no matter what you do; they're hardcore criminals.  This is the basis of three strikes laws, incidentally.    

The exact percentages may be off -- but the research has held for a breakdown along those lines.  And that third time offenders are the most likely to keep offending, unless somehow incapacitated, like through lifetime incarceration without parole.

Some offenses, like pedophilia and domestic abuse, are a bit different due to the specific psycho/emotional dynamics involved.

This case is a tragedy.  It highlights one of the problems of plea bargaining: Gardner got a significantly lighter sentence than he might have had he been convicted of the more serious charges he was facing.  But that assumes conviction, and especially in a sex crime trial, that's not always a given.  The victim is often placed on trial as much as the defendant -- and sometimes there are factors that really can make it hard to get a conviction.  Was 5+ years for sure better than maybe 30?  Hindsight says no... but what was the case the prosecutor was looking at?  What problems might there have been.

Even then... sex offenses are complicated.  You may be familiar with the move *A Clockwork Orange*; (I'm told the book is somewhat different) in it, aversion therapy didn't stop violence -- it merely added a new component necessary for arousal.  We're talking about some pretty primal/basic wiring of the human being...

And Sex Offender Registries are another thing... Like protective orders, they do nothing in and of themselves to stop offenses!  The Dixie Chicks had a great line about it; "Earl walked right through that restraining order."  A list doesn't keep anyone from any action anymore than a piece of paper will.  Registries do provide a tool to educate yourself about dangers -- but you have to understand the registry.  The offenses covered vary greatly, and some folks required to register are unlikely to be repeat offenders.  (An 18 year old high school senior who dates and becomes involved with a 15 year old sophomore whose parents take serious offense to him can find himself having to register for the rest of his life... even though he wasn't really dating outside his peer group.  And isn't likely to go looking for young girls when he's 21... or at least no more than the rest of us guys...  So could a kid after a dumb stunt that's really more grab-assing than assault to obtain sexual gratification.)

The simple fact is that life is complicated and doesn't lend itself to easy solutions.


----------



## Bruno@MT (Mar 7, 2010)

72ronin said:


> Its not much use having the death penalty in one state but not the other, Obviously its a deterent for severe crimes, but then the system lets them live on for years on end..  One appeal, within one year then bam, get rid of them.



Obviously you have never checked this 'fact', because otherwise you would obviously know that the death sentence is not an effective deterrent at all.

But since you mention the '1 appeal and blam' argument...
Let me ask you this: if an innocent man got executed because of a wrong testimony, or because the DA misrepresented his case or had exonerating evidence dismissed on a technicality would you support the immediate execution of said witness, DA, judge, or other party which gave rise to the wrongful execution, if the dead man was proven innocent after all?

If you read up on the innocence project or other similar projects, it becomes clear that a significant number of people with life sentences or death penalty convictions got convicted wrongfully despite the safeguards that do exist.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 7, 2010)

72ronin said:


> It would help if you guys first unified your laws across all states.  One country, one law.



As has been said, we're a union of 50 states, and the states are sovereign within their own borders.  It is not unlike the EU in that way.  Not identical, but similar.

In a more realistic sense, the chances of all 50 states deciding to give up their sovereignty is nil.  Flatly speaking, it won't happen, although the federal government does try an end-run around state law from time to time.



> Its not much use having the death penalty in one state but not the other, Obviously its a deterent for severe crimes, but then the system lets them live on for years on end..  One appeal, within one year then bam, get rid of them.



Numerous studies have shown the death penalty not to be a deterrent.  And as others have mentioned, once you've put someone to death, it's hard to fix if it turns out later that they might actually be innocent.

As difficult as it sometimes is to deal with from a victim's point of view, our legal system was built based on two basic principles - innocent until proven guilty, and that it is better a hundred guilty men go free than one innocent man go to prison.



> Im quite sure the reason your prisons are packed out is becouse of the ridiculous amount of guns floating around the country, no way am i saying anything against the right to bare arms, but maybe much stricter laws defining exactly who gets to bare em..



What do you propose as a restriction?  We already prohibit former felons from possessing guns, and drug addicts, the mentally disturbed, fugitives from justice, and anyone convicted of domestic assault, among other restrictions.  Which additional restrictions would you propose that would fix the existing problems?

Second, how do you stop people from buying guns illegally?  Many drugs are illegal, and surprisingly, people can buy them quite easily anyway.  Guns are no different.  Making them illegal, or adding more restrictions on getting them, doesn't stop bad people from getting their hands on them.  Even banning them entirely would not stop bad guys from getting them - just like heroin or cocaine.  Just like booze during prohibition.



> Purchasing of weapons should be ridiculously strict, meaning only those that use them properly get to have them in the first place.



What it would mean is that only those who don't break the law get them legally.   Everyone else who wants one gets theirs illegally.  Eventually, what you end up with is a system where only criminals can get guns, because here's an interesting fact - criminals do not obey laws.



> Dont get me wrong, theres plenty of guns in Australia too, but the legal requirements to own them keeps them out of morons hands. In America, if someone flips out, they go on a shooting rampage!!  How can you guys put up with that possibility from day to day?



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_gun_ownership

The USA has a gun culture, like it or not.  Guns tend to last generations if not hundreds of years if they're not exposed to the elements.  We have more guns than people, or close to it.  How do you propose collecting them all up?

I understand the sheer horror that people from other countries display when they find out just how many guns we Americans have, and how much value we place on them.  *What's actually amazing is how peaceful we are, given how many guns we have.*  We prove every day that it's not the availability of guns that cause the problems.



> Law abiding citizens would still be able to apply for a gun liscence, with strict requirements, meaning you and i still get to own firearms.  For cripes sake, get the guns off the streets.   After all, they are the enablers for the crims man, thats all..



How do you take away guns from citizens who are more highly armed than the government, and who outnumber all police and military combined by a huge factor, and who believe they were given the right to own those guns by God?  Give me some idea how you would go about that, I'd really like to hear it.

The moment the government began forcibly collecting up guns, house to house, the 2nd American Revolution would begin.



> On the topic of slack judges, we are cursed with them here in Oz also.. As far as im concerned, at the moment someone commits a severe crime they dont have rights. They forego their rights the moment they decide to break the law, plain and simple.
> 
> Time to harden the .... up  on repeat offenders big time..



Again, we in the USA have a larger percentage of our citizens in prison now than any other country.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States



> The United States has the highest documented incarceration rate in the world.[1][2] The U.S. incarceration rate on December 31, 2008 was 754 inmates per 100,000 U.S. residents.[3] The USA also has the highest total documented prison and jail population in the world.[1][4][5]
> 
> According to the U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS): "In 2008, over 7.3 million people were on probation, in jail or prison, or on parole at year-end  3.2% of all U.S. adult residents or 1 in every 31 adults."[6]



Now, given that, how many more can we lock up?  We can't afford to house and feed the prisoners we have locked up now.  In California, the state is being forced to turn loose violent prisoners by court order, because they can't provide them with health care.

So tell me how you're going to accomplish harsher sentencing laws and longer prison sentences?


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 7, 2010)

All intelligently posited and reasonable points, Bill.  I can't really argue against any of them.

I would add a question of my own to the mill tho, if I may?  What else is it in your cultural matrix that is so broken that crime is such a huge and growing problem?  I have my own opinions but I'll keep them to myself as an unfashionably Liberal Johnny Foreigner.  I would like to hear those of the indiginous majority population of MT tho'.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 7, 2010)

they just announced they found the skeletal remains of Amber Dubois, a 14 year old that dissapeared on the way to Escondido High school a little over a year ago...... Why do I mention this?
they found her in Pala in a desolate area based on a tip..... John Gardner lived 2 miles from Escondido High School at the time of the dissapearance. I find it awfully convenient that this so called tip came in so soon after he was captured, unless he is trying to make a plea deal by giving them Amber...

this story gets worse and worse.


----------



## Bill Mattocks (Mar 7, 2010)

Sukerkin said:


> I would add a question of my own to the mill tho, if I may?  What else is it in your cultural matrix that is so broken that crime is such a huge and growing problem?



I'm not sure that the problem is crime.  I think the problem may be perception.  The US does not have the highest crime rate (except for 'overall' crime rate), nor even the highest murder rate.  In fact, it's not even close to the top.

http://www.nationmaster.com/article/Crime-Rates-Around-the-World



> Burglary  Widely believed as the gravest of property crimes, burglary is lower in US today than in the 80s. As of 2000, US has lower rates than Australia, Canada, Denmark, England, Finland, and Wales. It has higher rates than Korea, Saudi Arabia, and Spain.
> 
> Homicide  US had been consistently high in homicide rates than most of the Western countries from 1980  2000. Though the rate was cut almost in half in the 90s, it is still higher than all nations without political and social turmoil with the 2000 rate of 5.5 homicides per 100,000 people. Countries entrenched in turmoil like Colombia and South Africa, had 63 homicides per 100,000 and 51, respectively.
> 
> ...



For intentional homicide, the US has double the rate of the UK, 5.4 per 100,000 versus 2.03 per 100,000 for the UK.  But nothing like the 49 per 100,000 of Jamaica, for example.

I do think that there are cultural smashups taking place, though.

Consider that the USA has always been more 'religious' than most of Europe.  We're mostly Christians, and mostly devout, based on Pew studies.  We're from a culture of self-reliance, gun-ownership, and despite a brief 'enlightenment' in the late 1960's that quickly died, until the last ten years or so, we've fought cultural change including legalization of certain drugs, gay marriage, and other radical challenges to traditional American concepts of what it means to be an American nuclear family.  Religion is being discarded (again, according to Pew), homosexuality is gaining widespread acceptance, and we're slowly beginning to change our attitude from one of rugged independence to an attitude that the government can and therefore should provide more in the way of services, medical care, and protection for individual citizens.  We're becoming more socialist in our demands on government, while those disenfranchised by this movement are moving towards the center and reaching for a new populism that could well take a dangerous turn if a dynamic populist leader emerges.

We're facing challenges on every front of what it has always meant to be an American.  Economic, religious, cultural, political, even moral (by some standards). This does not sink in to Europeans, most of you have absorbed these changes decades ago, while we remained apart.  And we have a base culture that you don't understand; we're coming from a place much further from yours towards a place more like yours, and the strains have the machinery groaning under the pressure.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 7, 2010)

Molon Labe

Or to quote one of my favorite movies..

"So we shall flow a river forth to Thee, and teeming with souls shall it ever be"

I just hope those that come to disarm  Americans, who actually believe in their rights, bring their floaties.... they will need them.


----------



## Nomad (Mar 8, 2010)

LuckyKBoxer said:


> they just announced they found the skeletal remains of Amber Dubois, a 14 year old that dissapeared on the way to Escondido High school a little over a year ago...... Why do I mention this?
> they found her in Pala in a desolate area based on a tip..... John Gardner lived 2 miles from Escondido High School at the time of the dissapearance. I find it awfully convenient that this so called tip came in so soon after he was captured, unless he is trying to make a plea deal by giving them Amber...
> 
> this story gets worse and worse.



According to the papers, the source was *not* Gardner; it was instead someone else who came forward with new information on this 13 month-old case because of the headlines on the disappearance, rape, and murder of Chelsea King.  I'm not saying that Gardner didn't do the crime, just that he wasn't the source that led police to Amber's body.

Oops... nevermind.  Apparently the source that told the papers that has recanted, so we don't know if the tip came from Gardner or someone else after all.

This has been a tough couple of weeks, and we don't even know the families involved in these cases.  We do live in the general area of both of them (kids are zoned for the same high school as Chelsea King) and have 2 daughters of our own, so it's all too easy to imagine our family in similar circumstances and realize just how devastating it must be.

I'd say that I hope the animal(s) who committed these crimes face swift justice, but honestly don't think there's anything society could do to him/them that would equal the pain and anguish he's/they've caused.


----------



## LuckyKBoxer (Mar 8, 2010)

Nomad said:


> According to the papers, the source was *not* Gardner; it was instead someone else who came forward with new information on this 13 month-old case because of the headlines on the disappearance, rape, and murder of Chelsea King. I'm not saying that Gardner didn't do the crime, just that he wasn't the source that led police to Amber's body.
> 
> Oops... nevermind. Apparently the source that told the papers that has recanted, so we don't know if the tip came from Gardner or someone else after all.
> 
> ...


If you are in the same area as Chelsea King, then this might be something you would be interested in.
Our martial arts studio is providing free self defense classes every week for the next 4 weeks and then one weekend a month after that. My instructor Mr. Barry Barker has had his studio in Poway for 25 years now, and is extremely upset about this tragedy. If you are interested in some free no nonsense self defense classes for you or your family call him at 858-486-1003. He has mentioned that these classes will not be about how to avoid the predators, since so many other organizations in our area are doing those, but will be about what to do when you are already face to face. I know that we already have two full classes scheduled for this sunday, and I think next sunday also is close to two full classes as well. He mentioned he would add more classes as is necessary. The school is Poway Kenpo, AKA, Poway Martial Arts, and is located on Poway Road near Community road.


----------



## LoneRider (Sep 24, 2010)

I'd say shoot the incompetent judge with a firing squad for allowing this travesty to occur.


----------



## Twin Fist (Jan 30, 2011)

Bruno@MT said:


> Obviously you have never checked this 'fact', because otherwise you would obviously know that the death sentence is not an effective deterrent at all.



it deters the hell out of THAT guy.


----------



## Tez3 (Jan 31, 2011)

Those that come to disarm Americans, if it happens will be Americans, they rest of us don't care what you do in your country as long as you pay us the same compliment.

I know many are against the 'overall government' having more perceived power but perhaps all the states could agree that certain crimes such as murder, rape, child sexual abuse etc are crimes that should carry the same weight nationally with the same sentencing? You could see some crimes as being a crime against the nation almost. 

Sukerkoin, did you watch Charlie Booker's programme ' How TV ruined your life'? It was very interesting, he talked about how television makes you more afraid of crime even though the crime figures were actually going down. 
http://realsociology.edublogs.org/2...n-tv-charlie-bookers-how-tv-ruined-your-life/


----------



## Sukerkin (Jan 31, 2011)

I didn't see that one, Tez - I did mean to watch it but it slipped me by.  I shall have a dig for it when I am not at work.


----------

