http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-24078339

The 4 of them have been sentenced to death. They bit that I don’t like is that when they committed their offences their crime was not punishable by death. Surely their punishment should only be the maximum allowed at the time they committed the offence. Seems a bit kangaroo courtish to me. Not saying that they don’t deserve to be killed, but the do deserve a fair trial an fair punishment.

They did what they did, were tried, convicted and sentenced by the law of the land.

Split hairs all you like, it won’t make any difference, they’ll be nothing but jam on a wall within hours.

But the 17 year old gets 3 years? Surely he should be in that line.

Article 11.2 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights:

No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.

That (retrospective changes) is clearly in contravention of the Rule of Law.

And I don’t believe in the death penalty.

… the do deserve a fair trial an fair punishment.

Nah.

They won’t be doing that again then.

Have you read the details of this case? They are truly horrific! They’re animals!

I suppose the punishment they’re getting I suppose reflects the revulsion felt by Indian society to people who are capable of doing things like this

As I said, I dont doubt that they deserve to be killed for their crimes. A mark of civilised society is to give everyone a fair trial and fair punishment. This is neither, and is not civilised.

They did what they did, were tried, convicted and sentenced by the law of the land.

Can’t say I’ll lose any sleep over it…..

In what way did they not receive a fair trial?

Of the punishment, the judge said: “This case definitely falls in the rarest of rare categories and warrants the exemplary punishment of death”

Seems fair enough to me. As deterrents go, potential rapists now know what the benchmark for punishment is

But the 17 year old gets 3 years?

I’m no expert on law whether Indian or otherwise, but does that reflects his involvement in the crime or maybe the max sentence available for that age…

This is neither, and is not civilised.

Why?

I’m no expert on law whether Indian or otherwise, but does that reflects his involvement in the crime or maybe the max sentence available for that age…

According to the International Business Times, a police spokesman said that the minor was the most brutal attacker and had “sexually abused his victim twice…

The next part of the description of his actions is worse, I’ll let you pop over to wikipedia if you wish to read it.

India has a terrible reputation on Human Rights, this doesn’t counter that argument in the slightest.

It does however send a clear message to Indian men who do commit these heanus crimes that you will get what you deserve.

Poor Girl I say, and all the others who get acid thrown in their faces, utterly barbaric.

Grrrrr.

Patriot, the 17 y/o was the worst of the lot of them

For what it’s worth, I agree with Glupton* here, abhorrent as their crimes were they should be tried according to the law as it was when they were committed.

*and seemingly the UN.

‘they inserted iron rods in her, resulting in a complete destruction of the vital parts of her body’

String em up now!

The 17 year old only got three years as that was the maximum possible due to him being a juvenile.
His involvement was as bad as the others.
Good luck to him when he comes out of jail.

@Rockape63; Come on mate, some of us don’t need to read that shit.

clearly in contravention of the Rule of Law

as a citizen of the world and therefore someone who the Rule of Law is designed to protect I’m prepared to let this clear contravention of law slide. just this once.

how will they be put to death?

Seems fair enough to me. As deterrents go, potential rapists now know what the benchmark for punishment

Cos we all know rape is a rational calculated process with risk assessment 🙄

Welcome to the Indian concept of justice. This is maybe why countries are reluctant to extradite their citizens to face trial in India.

@Rockape63; Come on mate, some of us don’t need to read that shit.

Just quoting from any report on the Telegraph web site…..which gives you a full understanding of why they they were sentenced to death

Cos we all know rape is a rational calculated process with risk assessment

I think in many cases it is. The rational calculation is certainly true of the power exertion of the rapist over the victim and risk assessments are unconscious things that we do all the time. If you believ you can do something this abhorrent and get away with it, and it gives you a kick to do it then you’ll do it.

I don’t think it’s a spur of the moment thing in many cases.

Cos we all know rape is a rational calculated process with risk assessment

You’ve not read the specific details of this case then Molls? This crime was indeed planned and calculated from the off. They set out to find someone to do this too, among other fun and games they got up to.

They’re getting what society seems to demand as a punishment for that. Boo hoo for them eh? The injustice of it all!!! 🙄

how will they be put to death?

Iron rod would be fitting

Alright fair play it is calculated sometimes.. but not always.

So potential premeditated rapists might think twice, but one would assume that people planning a crime are also planning not to get caught?

Not a fan of murder regardless of the circumstances, tbh.

You’ve not read the specific details of this case then Molls? This crime was indeed planned and calculated from the off. They set out to find someone to do this too, among other fun and games they got up to.

I’ve read it, its horrific. But they appear to have been relatively easy to catch (having used a victims mobile to trace them) and must surely have know the punishment, yet it didn’t stop them carrying out the crime?

Seems fair enough to me. As deterrents go, potential rapists now know what the benchmark for punishment is

A study of the homicide rate in the US will tell you that the deterrent effect is something of a myth.

It’s a bitter irony that the Indian state was founded by Ghandi “An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind”

Have you read the details of this case? They are truly horrific! They’re animals!

You’d be very hard pushed to find an animal that behaves in that way, so don’t insult them (i.e. animals) like that.

It’s a bitter irony that the Indian state was founded by Ghandi

Not that ironic if this article has any truth:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/mohandas-gandhi-women-india

Red hot poker up the arse?

So potential premeditated rapists might think twice, but one would assume that people planning a crime are also planning not to get caught?

Not a fan of murder regardless of the circumstances, tbh.

I agree with you and Ransos, not a fan of the death penalty (although this case makes my moral convictions waiver), plus the deterrent effect is largely unproven.

Have you read the details of this case? They are truly horrific! They’re animals!

Yes and they are. Are they any worse than the gang of men who weeks after this attacked and raped a girl on a building site setting fire to her afterwards so see wouldn’t identify them. The girl in that case was 11, it received little media coverage, no arrests were made and the father reports he now cannot get police to continue the investigation. There has been no reduction in these crimes since then, and i doubt these sentences will change anything.

It looks more like pandering to the international community rather than addressing the deeper societal issues driving these cases. Overall it paints a more depressing picture of the society to me.

Pretty murky as far as the rule of law is concerned and am not a natural advocate of the death penalty (cant be revoked on appeal and all that) but in this case my reasoning for the death penalty would be as follows:

Deterrent – no, clearly people commit these crimes all the time all over the world

Revenge/public molification – no, an abhorrent concept

means of disposing of individuals that pose an unacceptable risk to the rest of society – well it’s cheaper than prison and you don’t have to put up them whining about the injustice of their whole life tariffs

no ceremony, no publicity, just a double tap to the back head and a quiet burial in an unmarked grave.

You’d be very hard pushed to find an animal that behaves in that way, so don’t insult them (i.e. animals) like that.

Romanticising nature much?

dolphins gang rape females to death
ducks gang rape females to death
bears rape female
snakes gang rape females
baboons maul females to prevent them mating with other males
sea otters rape baby seals to death
dog’s penises are designed to tear the female if she attempts to leave copulation

And don’t get started on the invertebrates…

Not that ironic if this article has any truth:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2010/jan/27/mohandas-gandhi-women-india

So we should blame contemporary violence against women on a man who died over 60 years ago?

in depth and graphic look at the case
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/sep/10/delhi-gang-rape-india-women

after reading that I really dont know what to think

State sanctioned murder will never sit comfortably with me I’m afraid. They are loathsome things (human is not a word I would use to describe them) who are of no use to society whatsoever and this planet would undoubtably be better off with them not absorbing the oxygen on it, but regardless the notion of the state sanctioning something so violent as murder is not something I could ever support in any circumstance.

I find the defendants lawyers comments quite dreadfull.

On 10 January, their lawyer, Manohar Lal Sharma, said in a media interview that the victims are responsible for the assault because they should not have been using public transportation and, as an unmarried couple, they should not have been on the streets at night. He went on to say: “Until today I have not seen a single incident or example of rape with a respected lady. Even an underworld don would not like to touch a girl with respect.” He also called the male victim “wholly responsible” for the incident because he “failed in his duty to protect the woman”.

seems to show quite clearly the attitude to women in general.

Out at night = Slut asking for it. 🙁