IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Reply
Old 27th November 2022, 05:33 AM   #41
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Vixen View Post
I don't believe these people really believed God would intervene. They knew she was going to die and they let it happen, whilst clapping and singing.
So what was the motive? They just thought the child was inconvenient? And what difference does it make anyway?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 05:38 AM   #42
Vixen
Penultimate Amazing
 
Vixen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Posts: 31,485
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
So what was the motive? They just thought the child was inconvenient? And what difference does it make anyway?
Cold-blooded child cruelty.

I blame the parents primarily.

And the participants for failing to demur or intervene.
__________________
The parting on the Left
Is now parting on the Right ~ Pete Townshend

Vixen is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 09:31 AM   #43
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
That won't be the test - because then the law would be testing the sincerity of their beliefs and people would literally be able to get away with murder. The test will be "would a reasonable person be expected to know that their inactions would cause death?" And the answer is clearly yes in this situation.
If I may:
Quote:
'....One is not allowed not to intend the obvious consequences of one’s actions. Supposing, for example, that you belonged to a society for the destruction of ugly buildings. You drew up a hit list, and you went around blowing the abominations up.’
* * ........
* * ‘And then supposing that you were to argue that you had not foreseen that anyone would be injured in the process. The jury would probably think that you jolly well should have foreseen it. Another example: if the man on the Clapham omnibus would expect death to result from a stab wound through the heart, then it is not open to the assailant to argue that he did not in fact intend such a result. Unless he pleads insanity, of course.’
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 02:42 PM   #44
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
If I may:
Who are you quoting and in what context?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 03:24 PM   #45
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
So what was the motive? They just thought the child was inconvenient? And what difference does it make anyway?
It is a truism that juries like to see motive; however most are smart enough to realise "god-bothering nutcasery" counts.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 03:25 PM   #46
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Who are you quoting and in what context?
Lord Peter Wimsey to his wife in the novel Thrones, Dominations, on the subject of murder in ECL.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th November 2022, 03:27 PM   #47
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by Susheel View Post
They weren't ignorant because they weren't aware. They chose to be willfully ignorant and decided they knew better. They chose to ignore sensible counsel for the sake of puerile beliefs. That level of ignorance in no way makes the crime any less...in fact makes it even worse.
And they can hardly claim otherwise given the previous incident.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 01:39 AM   #48
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 106,867
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
Who are you quoting and in what context?
John Gardner, and how "reasonable person" is used in common law systems.

ETA: Misread the sequence - sorry - I was lining to a short essay about the "reasonable" person and didn't realise catsmate wasn't quoting from that!
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you

Last edited by Darat; 28th November 2022 at 01:49 AM.
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 01:49 AM   #49
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
John Gardner, and how "reasonable person" is used in common law systems.
Not according to catsmate, who I asked.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th November 2022, 09:47 AM   #50
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section
Posts: 21,164
Originally Posted by Susheel View Post
They weren't ignorant because they weren't aware. They chose to be willfully ignorant and decided they knew better. They chose to ignore sensible counsel for the sake of puerile beliefs. That level of ignorance in no way makes the crime any less...in fact makes it even worse.
No, wait...that's the issue. If the State determines that secular findings override religious faith, well...that's a bit interesting, isn't it? The State is formally deciding that religious beliefs are cuckoo. Would they apply this reasoning to aboriginal peoples who say they have a sacred mountain or whatever? In the treatment of dead bodies or cemeteries?

I think a judge should be able to say "well, if you adhered to your religious faith, you can collect your reward in the afterlife, while God high-fives you. In the here and now, we don't care about your beliefs and your behavior led to this girl's death".

------------------------

Also, thanks to smartcooky for posting the Queensland law regarding the definition of 'murder'. It gets confusing at times when a jurisdiction ignores the common English-speaking meaning of murder (+/- intentional, unlawful killing), and wraps almost any homicide into it. On the Kyle Rittenhouse thread here, it was titled as "Accused Multi-Murderer", when the State of Wisconsin doesn't actually have a charge for 'murder', except for Capital Murder. They simply refer to different degrees of homicide.
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 02:26 AM   #51
Darat
Lackey
Administrator
 
Darat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: South East, UK
Posts: 106,867
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
No, wait...that's the issue. If the State determines that secular findings override religious faith, well...that's a bit interesting, isn't it? The State is formally deciding that religious beliefs are cuckoo. Would they apply this reasoning to aboriginal peoples who say they have a sacred mountain or whatever? In the treatment of dead bodies or cemeteries?

I think a judge should be able to say "well, if you adhered to your religious faith, you can collect your reward in the afterlife, while God high-fives you. In the here and now, we don't care about your beliefs and your behavior led to this girl's death".

------------------------
...snip...
Belvie it or not but this may have popped up in our legal systems once or twice over the last 300 years or so....

The test is not about the sincerity of anyone's beliefs or the validity of those beliefs - its about the reasonable person.

(Now there is of course a wrinkle with this as what the "reasonable person" in a society and a culture will change as a culture and a society changes but that is very slow and doesn't impact this type of outlier case.)
__________________
I wish I knew how to quit you
Darat is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 08:22 AM   #52
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
No, wait...that's the issue. If the State determines that secular findings override religious faith, well...that's a bit interesting, isn't it? The State is formally deciding that religious beliefs are cuckoo. Would they apply this reasoning to aboriginal peoples who say they have a sacred mountain or whatever? In the treatment of dead bodies or cemeteries?

I think a judge should be able to say "well, if you adhered to your religious faith, you can collect your reward in the afterlife, while God high-fives you. In the here and now, we don't care about your beliefs and your behavior led to this girl's death"..
None of this has relevance to the case in question.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 08:25 AM   #53
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by Darat View Post
Belvie it or not but this may have popped up in our legal systems once or twice over the last 300 years or so....

The test is not about the sincerity of anyone's beliefs or the validity of those beliefs - its about the reasonable person.

(Now there is of course a wrinkle with this as what the "reasonable person" in a society and a culture will change as a culture and a society changes but that is very slow and doesn't impact this type of outlier case.)
Yep. Over here were have a case on average once every year of a Jehovah's Witness or similar person refusing blood transfusion. The hospital applies to the court and court issues an order allowing blood to be transfused.
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 08:27 AM   #54
catsmate
No longer the 1
 
catsmate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 27,895
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The dominos will not cooperate on this.
What in the name of all that is holy, unholy or atheistic is this supposed to mean?
__________________
As human right is always something given, it always in reality reduces to the right which men give, "concede," to each other. If the right to existence is conceded to new-born children, then they have the right; if it is not conceded to them, as was the case among the Spartans and ancient Romans, then they do not have it. For only society can give or concede it to them; they themselves cannot take it, or give it to themselves.
catsmate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th November 2022, 08:35 AM   #55
Thermal
Penultimate Amazing
 
Thermal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: In the Troll Ignoring Section
Posts: 21,164
Originally Posted by catsmate View Post
None of this has relevance to the case in question.
It does.
__________________
"Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it is time to pause and reflect" -Mark Twain
"Half of what he said meant something else, and the other half didn't mean anything at all" -Rosencrantz, on Hamlet
Thermal is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 08:41 AM   #56
MarkCorrigan
¡No pasarán!
 
MarkCorrigan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Слава Україні
Posts: 11,379
I hope these loons get the book thrown at them. **** these people.
__________________
Naturalism adjusts it's principles to fit with the observed data.
It's a god of the facts world view. -joobz

When I give food to the poor, they call me a Saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a Communist. - Hélder Câmara
MarkCorrigan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 09:22 AM   #57
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 19,783
Originally Posted by Thermal View Post
That's how I read it. How do you try someone for being so stupid that they literally rely on supernatural medical care? As ridiculous as it sounds, they may need to stand a competency evaluation. But it would only be murder if the State can show that they are psychopaths that intended for the girl to die.

I'm extrapolating from the available facts based on my own familiarity with various religious philosophies. That said, it's very likely that they didn't "intend" for her to die (as in, that was the outcome they wanted), but that they were willing to accept that she would die (and go be with God of course), if that turned out to be God's will. They were no doubt praying for the miracle cure, but I'd bet that in the back of their minds they were also considering the possibility that they were making a sacrifice that would prove their faith, and that also being an okay outcome.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...

Last edited by Myriad; 30th November 2022 at 09:24 AM.
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 09:26 AM   #58
Lplus
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2018
Posts: 1,416
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
I'm extrapolating from the available facts based on my own familiarity with various religious philosophies. That said, it's very likely that they didn't "intend" for her to die (as in, that was the outcome they wanted), but that they were willing to accept that she would die (and go be with God of course), if that turned out to be God's will. They were no doubt praying for the miracle cure, but I'd bet that in the back of their minds they were also considering the possibility of a sacrifice that would prove their faith, and that also being an okay outcome.
Surely it would only prove their faith if the miracle occurred? If the child died, it would prove nothing at all except not to waste time on prayers, or that they or the child were not worthy.
__________________

Life isn't fair, Princess; anyone who says it could be is selling a political ideology.
Whinging on internet forums is the last resort of the powerless
Lplus is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 09:41 AM   #59
Myriad
The Clarity Is Devastating
 
Myriad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Betwixt
Posts: 19,783
Originally Posted by Lplus View Post
Surely it would only prove their faith if the miracle occurred? If the child died, it would prove nothing at all except not to waste time on prayers, or that they or the child were not worthy.

That's how you would interpret those outcomes. Different people have different mental models of what events mean or prove. I don't agree with theirs, and I don't expect you to either, but the world is more understandable when you keep in mind that those alternative mental models exist.
__________________
A zømbie once bit my sister...
Myriad is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 11:10 AM   #60
Sherman Bay
Master Poster
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Wisconsin, USA
Posts: 2,424
I know this case isn't being tried in the USA, where religious freedom rules supreme, but let's pretend.

"Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, our national motto is 'In God We Trust.' That statement is on all our coins and money. It is repeated every time the Pledge of Allegiance is recited at public meetings. It is enshrined in our highest laws, ingrained in our national conscience, and confirmed daily.

"My clients applied that conscience to their daughter. They trusted in God, as they were taught, as they could expect from public discourse. Now they are being persecuted for following that noble aspiration. They are persecuted for following the dictates of not only the National Government, but their personal choice of church. Their very freedom to worship in the manner they see fit is being challenged.

"If my clients are denied the ability to practice their religion, what's next? Do we bulldoze churches and synagogues, lock up priests and ministers, and attack their parishioners? Is any religion or religious tenet now safe from government intrusion? Where will this end, in a theocracy, where someone else's religion gets to make the laws and handle the prosecution? Or can we return to what this country was founded on, religious freedom?

"My clients trusted in God. But as we know, the Supreme Being doesn't always agree with His creations. As the only party to this transaction with superior knowledge and the ability to see into the future, sometimes He has other plans -- plans that may be inscrutable to us. So who are we to oppose the Almighty, the Maker of All Things? We are but puny servants to his greater direction and wisdom, and can do nothing He doesn't permit..."
Sherman Bay is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th November 2022, 12:40 PM   #61
jimbob
Uncritical "thinker"
Moderator
 
jimbob's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 28,553
Mod Info

Derail about the NZ case and unvaccinated blood split to

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=363145

Posted By:jimbob
__________________
OECD healthcare spending
Public/Compulsory Expenditure on healthcare
https://data.oecd.org/chart/60Tt

Every year since 1990 the US Public healthcare spending has been greater than the UK as a proportion of GDP. More US Tax goes to healthcare than the UK
jimbob is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2022, 12:33 AM   #62
smartcooky
Penultimate Amazing
 
smartcooky's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Nelson, New Zealand
Posts: 22,867
Originally Posted by Sherman Bay View Post
I know this case isn't being tried in the USA, where religious freedom rules supreme, but let's pretend.

"Ladies and gentlemen of the Jury, our national motto is 'In God We Trust.' That statement is on all our coins and money. It is repeated every time the Pledge of Allegiance is recited at public meetings. It is enshrined in our highest laws, ingrained in our national conscience, and confirmed daily.

"My clients applied that conscience to their daughter. They trusted in God, as they were taught, as they could expect from public discourse. Now they are being persecuted for following that noble aspiration. They are persecuted for following the dictates of not only the National Government, but their personal choice of church. Their very freedom to worship in the manner they see fit is being challenged.

"If my clients are denied the ability to practice their religion, what's next? Do we bulldoze churches and synagogues, lock up priests and ministers, and attack their parishioners? Is any religion or religious tenet now safe from government intrusion? Where will this end, in a theocracy, where someone else's religion gets to make the laws and handle the prosecution? Or can we return to what this country was founded on, religious freedom?

"My clients trusted in God. But as we know, the Supreme Being doesn't always agree with His creations. As the only party to this transaction with superior knowledge and the ability to see into the future, sometimes He has other plans -- plans that may be inscrutable to us. So who are we to oppose the Almighty, the Maker of All Things? We are but puny servants to his greater direction and wisdom, and can do nothing He doesn't permit..."
But doesn't the US specifically separate Church and State?
__________________
Science supplies evidence, invites you to analyse and evaluate that evidence, and then to draw conclusions from that
Religion supplies no evidence, demands you have faith, and expects you to uncritically and automatically believe that something is true simply because "the Bible tells you so"
If you don't like my posts, opinions, or directness then put me on your ignore list!
smartcooky is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 1st December 2022, 01:39 AM   #63
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,309
Originally Posted by smartcooky View Post
But doesn't the US specifically separate Church and State?
Theoretically, yes. In practice...
__________________
Might I posit that individuals who regularly endorse murderers or child rapists might not actually be interested in good faith discussions? Far be it for me to judge another's non-harmful past time; but I personally find more enjoyment and productivity in activities that do not involve feeding bridge-dwellers, flogging dead equines, or trying to debate stones.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2022, 08:18 PM   #64
Roger Ramjets
Philosopher
 
Roger Ramjets's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,037
Originally Posted by Myriad View Post
They were no doubt praying for the miracle cure, but I'd bet that in the back of their minds they were also considering the possibility that they were making a sacrifice that would prove their faith, and that also being an okay outcome.
Not a sacrifice, which is something of value that you give to the gods to please them. What they did was gamble her life on a validation of their faith. Clearly they thought her life was worth less than their emotional comfort. They are no different to a drunk who insists he is sober enough to drive - then kills someone on the road, proving he wasn't.

Well actually there is a difference. A drunk's cognition is physically impaired by alcohol. These people do not even have that excuse. They 'drugged' themselves with the idea that they could invent a fantasy permitting them to buck authority, and reality would have to bend to it. She died due to their arrogance.
__________________
We don't want good, sound arguments. We want arguments that sound good.
Roger Ramjets is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2022, 11:35 PM   #65
rjh01
Gentleman of leisure
Tagger
 
rjh01's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Flying around in the sky
Posts: 27,573
One question. Has there been another case when more than 14 people were charged with a single murder? Details? In my mind, a mob may have decided to kill someone, then done it. No idea of the result or if it ever really happened.
__________________
This signature is for rent.
rjh01 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd December 2022, 11:52 PM   #66
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
One question. Has there been another case when more than 14 people were charged with a single murder? Details? In my mind, a mob may have decided to kill someone, then done it. No idea of the result or if it ever really happened.
In Australia, not to my knowledge. There have cases where many people have been charged over gang rapes.

The closest I could find was the “Peru six” where six Aussie tourists were accused of throwing someone off a balcony, but they were not prosecuted.

https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...cb154a66f90ba2
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 01:11 AM   #67
Bob001
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US of A
Posts: 16,301
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
.....
The closest I could find was the “Peru six” where six Aussie tourists were accused of throwing someone off a balcony, but they were not prosecuted.

https://www.news.com.au/travel/trave...cb154a66f90ba2

Note the basis for the accusation:
Quote:
Renewed interest in the case came about when Rodriguez’s family claimed his ghost had appeared to them in dreams, telling them he had, in fact, been murdered.
Bob001 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 01:23 AM   #68
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Bob001 View Post
Note the basis for the accusation:
I did see that. I don’t the accused needed Perry Mason to get off….
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:14 AM   #69
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 10,270
Originally Posted by rjh01 View Post
One question. Has there been another case when more than 14 people were charged with a single murder? Details? In my mind, a mob may have decided to kill someone, then done it. No idea of the result or if it ever really happened.
The case is ridiculous.
Of 14 people, most will be pawns, a few castles bishops Knights queens and Kings.
This is a failure way before this child died, of state funded education etc.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:15 AM   #70
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
The case is ridiculous.
Of 14 people, most will be pawns, a few castles bishops Knights queens and Kings.
This is a failure way before this child died, of state funded education etc.
What? What on earth does state funded education have to do with a religious sect killing a child?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:29 AM   #71
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 10,270
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
What? What on earth does state funded education have to do with a religious sect killing a child?
I consider sects to always abuse.
They never avail themselves of current science and knowledge.
I consider Islam to he a sect for example.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:32 AM   #72
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
I consider sects to always abuse.
They never avail themselves of current science and knowledge.
I consider Islam to he a sect for example.
What the **** does this have to do with state funded education or Islam?
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:53 AM   #73
Samson
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Oct 2013
Posts: 10,270
Originally Posted by lionking View Post
What the **** does this have to do with state funded education or Islam?
If state funded education was worth a hill of beans sects would never happen, and Islam would be exposed for the hoax it is.
Samson is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 4th December 2022, 03:58 AM   #74
lionking
In the Peanut Gallery
 
lionking's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 52,487
Originally Posted by Samson View Post
If state funded education was worth a hill of beans sects would never happen, and Islam would be exposed for the hoax it is.
Utter nonsense.
__________________
A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.

Sir Winston Churchill
lionking is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Trials and Errors

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 09:32 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2023, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.