NationStates Jolt Archive

The moral of this story is, "Don't become a housemaid in Saudi Arabia." A girl was hired as a housemaid and given the additional duty of taking care of the baby. However, she was not trained to take care of the child and the child died while she was giving him a bottle. The housemaid who was a teenager at the time of the baby's death has been sentenced to death.

WARNING:This is an AP story carried on FOX so all you Fox haters should gogle the story elsewhere.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289317,00.html

What a pack of scumbags....the death penalty in this day and age...

I was thinking earlier about places in the world I'd like to visit sometime in my life. Saudi Arabia would probably be top of the opposite list, of places I never want to visit, ever.

What a pack of scumbags....the death penalty in this day and age...

It boggles the mind that some countries still have it, does it not?

I was thinking earlier about places in the world I'd like to visit sometime in my life. Saudi Arabia would probably be top of the opposite list, of places I never want to visit, ever.

I've been there. It isn't the best place in the world to visit.

It boggles the mind that some countries still have it, does it not?

Indeed, and apply it liberally too. Why some place sentenced a woman with post-partum depression to death not too long ago for killing her children..she was lucky they commuted the sentence.....to life, if memory serves.....

What a pack of scumbags....the death penalty in this day and age...

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical. On the other hand even though it was apparently presented as murder, which carries such a sentence, it apparently was an accident and the Saudi authorities seem to have forgotten the numerous passages that say "Allah is forgiving, merciful" - plus the 'confession' was seemingly obtained under duress.

I was thinking earlier about places in the world I'd like to visit sometime in my life. Saudi Arabia would probably be top of the opposite list, of places I never want to visit, ever.

I wouldn't mind visiting if I had some kind of idiot proof way to escape the country at a moments notice.

When all the kinks are worked out of personal teleporters I might visit. Just to see if it's as backwards as some of the news from there leads me to believe.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical. On the other hand even though it was apparently presented as murder, which carries such a sentence, it apparently was an accident and the Saudi authorities seem to have forgotten the numerous passages that say "Allah is forgiving, merciful" - plus the 'confession' was seemingly obtained under duress.

Quite true.

I wouldn't mind visiting if I had some kind of idiot proof way to escape the country at a moments notice.

When all the kinks are worked out of personal teleporters I might visit. Just to see if it's as backwards as some of the news from there leads me to believe.

Same - for me visiting the U.S.A.

I want to see if it's really as backwards as a lot of stuff leads me to believe. But I'd have to have a properly-working teleporter for the same reason as you.

WARNING:This is an AP story carried on FOX so all you Fox haters should gogle the story elsewhere.

Sorry, this won't make us be okay with your use obseession with biased news sources.

Oh, and to annoy you even more, there's 2 o's in Google.

Oh, and to annoy you even more, there's 2 o's in Google.

Damn English teachers. :D

Sorry, this won't make us be okay with your use obseession with biased news sources.

Hell, at least I put in a disclaimer which is more than those that used other biased news source do. :p

Same - for me visiting the U.S.A.

I want to see if it's really as backwards as a lot of stuff leads me to believe. But I'd have to have a properly-working teleporter for the same reason as you.

Indeed. An effective method to get back to civilisation is important.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical.

I wouldn't be quite so judgemental as that. One could argue that there is value to the death sentence, but argue against this sentence, on the basis that it is inappropriate considering the...ahem..."crime".

I personally don't support the death penalty, but I do not see how a pro-death penalty supporter objecting to this would be "blatantly hypocritical".

Application, in my opinion, is more important than the actual sentence.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical.

Because Timothy McVeigh's acts are on the same scale as this one, right?

Are bottles in Saudi Arabia poisoned and covered in sharp spikes?
I think we need to look at the facts and get over the "omg they are killing a teenager" spiel.
1) The baby died while she was giving it a bottle. What? Huh? How? So it choked? I guess patting things on the back while choking isn't an instant reaction there..
2) Sounds like neglect or something - regardless, she would've been charged with a crime in the US. She wouldn't be given the death penalty (except maybe in Texas), but she would still be charged.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical.
Accidentally Killing a Baby < Killing an entire family.

She wouldn't be given the death penalty (except maybe in Texas).

Which shows the old adage: "An alcoholic is someone you don't like that drinks as much as you do.".

1) The baby died while she was giving it a bottle. What? Huh? How? So it choked? I guess patting things on the back while choking isn't an instant reaction there..


Obviously not. (and you are not supposed to 'pat someone on the back' when choking anyways..)The girl was not trained in child CPR apparently.But,the article DID state that she said she had tried soothing and rubbing the baby's chest. And that IS one way to do heimlich on an infant. (though I don't know what kind of 'rubbing' she did)

If you have someone watching your child..it is your responsibility to make sure the person is qualified to do these kind of things. It is the parents being neglectful. I sure as hell would not let someone watch my kids that wasn't trained.

Putting someone to death for not being able to recussitate after they tried (and were not trained properly) is idiotic.

I wouldn't be quite so judgemental as that. One could argue that there is value to the death sentence, but argue against this sentence, on the basis that it is inappropriate considering the...ahem..."crime".

I personally don't support the death penalty, but I do not see how a pro-death penalty supporter objecting to this would be "blatantly hypocritical".

Application, in my opinion, is more important than the actual sentence.

Because Timothy McVeigh's acts are on the same scale as this one, right?

Are bottles in Saudi Arabia poisoned and covered in sharp spikes?
I think we need to look at the facts and get over the "omg they are killing a teenager" spiel.
1) The baby died while she was giving it a bottle. What? Huh? How? So it choked? I guess patting things on the back while choking isn't an instant reaction there..
2) Sounds like neglect or something - regardless, she would've been charged with a crime in the US. She wouldn't be given the death penalty (except maybe in Texas), but she would still be charged.

Accidentally Killing a Baby < Killing an entire family.

In answer to all of these: Though it would appear that the death was an accident, it would seem that the CHARGE AND CONVICTION was for murder. That is why it would be hypocritical for someone who supports the death penalty for murder in their own country to speak out against the penalty in this case.

And I've no idea who this Timothy person is.

In answer to all of these: Though it would appear that the death was an accident, it would seem that the CHARGE AND CONVICTION was for murder. That is why it would be hypocritical for someone who supports the death penalty for murder in their own country to speak out against the penalty in this case.

And I've no idea who this Timothy person is.

I hate to say this, but it appears to me that the Saudi idea of "murder" in this case is a bit different than the rest of the world*. Even if the judges and the government considers it as such, I do not recognise this conviction.

And, Timothy McVeigh was convicted and executed for masterminding the Oklahoma City bombing.

*Polite way for me to say that it's FUBAR.

And I've no idea who this Timothy person is.

Oklahoma bomber.

In answer to all of these: Though it would appear that the death was an accident, it would seem that the CHARGE AND CONVICTION was for murder. That is why it would be hypocritical for someone who supports the death penalty for murder in their own country to speak out against the penalty in this case.

And I've no idea who this Timothy person is.

That would mean we would need to assume the Saudi and (in my case) American judicial systems are equal in ability to produce the correct verdict and that they have the same propensity to order capital punishment, but neither of those two are necessarily true.

McVeigh killed 168 people in a bombing in Oaklahoma City.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical.

Completely false.

Completely false.

Or I could have just said that. Some people are so much better at simplicity than I am.

*sips Coke*

Oh, and another thing, what if a European who supported the death penalty said this execution was wrong? Or an Asian? Etc. ect.

Or I could have just said that. Some people are so much better at simplicity than I am.

*sips Coke*

Oh, and another thing, what if a European who supported the death penalty said this execution was wrong? Or an Asian? Etc. ect.

Europeans are perfect, and are thus excluded from allegations of hypocracy. ;)

Europeans are perfect, and are thus excluded from allegations of hypocracy. ;)

Yes...and the Pope, does, in fact, shit in the woods...

Yes...and the Pope, does, in fact, shit in the woods...

Pics or GTFO.

Pics or GTFO.

Thank you sir, you have made my day.





















Wait a minute, why the hell would you want to see that?!

Thank you sir, you have made my day.


Wait a minute, why the hell would you want to see that?!

It could be the next goatse if /b/ got hold of it.

It could be the next goatse if /b/ got hold of it.

Anonymous and /b/tards everywhere would turn the internet into a literal shitstorm.

Do you want this?

Anonymous and /b/tards everywhere would turn the internet into a literal shitstorm.

Do you want this?

It'll happen anyway. I could gain infamy by being behind it all.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical. On the other hand even though it was apparently presented as murder, which carries such a sentence, it apparently was an accident and the Saudi authorities seem to have forgotten the numerous passages that say "Allah is forgiving, merciful" - plus the 'confession' was seemingly obtained under duress.

I'm pro death penalty! :)

This was a juvenile offender, however, and also appears to be an accident.

But if you do something like this:

When Katy Davis observed three strangers outside her Austin, Texas, apartment, she walked away. Returning later, she was attacked and forced to open the door by Charles Rector, on parole for a previous murder. The men ransacked her apartment, abducted her and took her to a lake where she was beaten, gang-raped, shot in the head and repeatedly forced underwater until she drowned.

Fuck it! Death by gang rape! :)

Because Timothy McVeigh's acts are on the same scale as this one, right?

No, maybe the Texas babysitter sentenced to death for dropping the baby
http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read/84528

Or the mentally ill woman here.....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C02EEDB1239F930A25750C0A9649C8B63

Just more examples of the brilliantly democratic and impartial justice system of Saudi Arabia, America's partner and ally in "The War on Terror".

Then again, Saudi Arabia's role as "partner" and "ally" probably explains why this thread surprisingly went three pages without Kimchi, New Mitanni or Lacadaemon masturbating to this thread as an indictment of Islam and Muslims as a whole par for their course.

A wonderfully enlightened, considered sentence passed....

As much as I endorse capital punishment, this does appear to be nothing short of institutional stupidity.

In answer to all of these: Though it would appear that the death was an accident, it would seem that the CHARGE AND CONVICTION was for murder. That is why it would be hypocritical for someone who supports the death penalty for murder in their own country to speak out against the penalty in this case.

And I've no idea who this Timothy person is.

Given that MURDER usually carries the idea of it being purposeful, then yes, a teen being put to death for "murdering" a baby that choked on a bottle is a travesty.

I'm pro death penalty! :)

This was a juvenile offender, however, and also appears to be an accident.

But if you do something like this:



Fuck it! Death by gang rape! :)

I might agree with you, but the smilies make your post a tad creepy.

Just more examples of the brilliantly democratic and impartial justice system of Saudi Arabia, America's partner and ally in "The War on Terror".

Then again, Saudi Arabia's role as "partner" and "ally" probably explains why this thread surprisingly went three pages without Kimchi, New Mitanni or Lacadaemon masturbating to this thread as an indictment of Islam and Muslims as a whole par for their course.

:rolleyes:

The punishment would be nothing if she were a man, I'm sure of it.

I hate to say this, but it appears to me that the Saudi idea of "murder" in this case is a bit different than the rest of the world*. Even if the judges and the government considers it as such, I do not recognise this conviction.

And, Timothy McVeigh was convicted and executed for masterminding the Oklahoma City bombing.

*Polite way for me to say that it's FUBAR.

It's easily possible that false "evidence" was given especially as it's claimed that the girl's confession was under duress - it's happened many many times in other countries, both those that do and those that don't have the death penalty

That would mean we would need to assume the Saudi and (in my case) American judicial systems are equal in ability to produce the correct verdict and that they have the same propensity to order capital punishment, but neither of those two are necessarily true.

McVeigh killed 168 people in a bombing in Oaklahoma City.

The American legal system, as evidenced not only by the amount of innocent people having being killed (percentages are irrelevant here, one death of an innocent person is one too many) but also by the amount of posts on here about stupid stuff that the cops/court have done is just as faulty as any other legal system and more so in many cases. And the states that have the death penalty in the U.S.A. seem happy to keep doling it out.

Completely false.

Or I could have just said that. Some people are so much better at simplicity than I am.

*sips Coke*



Well yes, you could, but it wouldn't exactly have been a logical argument or truthful response.

Just more examples of the brilliantly democratic and impartial justice system of Saudi Arabia, America's partner and ally in "The War on Terror".

Then again, Saudi Arabia's role as "partner" and "ally" probably explains why this thread surprisingly went three pages without Kimchi, New Mitanni or Lacadaemon masturbating to this thread as an indictment of Islam and Muslims as a whole par for their course.

The U.S. legal system isn't exactly perfect either, to put it extremely lightly. In fact, it's fucking ridiculous a lot of the time (like proscuting CHILDREN for child porn - man that "logic"'s fucked)

A wonderfully enlightened, considered sentence passed....

As much as I endorse capital punishment, this does appear to be nothing short of institutional stupidity.

You endorse capital punishment. Therefore, as the girl was found guilty of murder apparently, it's hypocritical for you to say this sentence is 'nothing short of institutional stupidity

Given that MURDER usually carries the idea of it being purposeful, then yes, a teen being put to death for "murdering" a baby that choked on a bottle is a travesty.

It would seem that the evidence provided may have been basically a load of bollocks, and that's why she was found guilty of murder. Not because people think that being in charge of a baby at the time that the baby dies is murder, or that ACCIDENTALLY killing a baby is murder.

In short, the conviction seemed to be one of murder, thus it's hypocritical for any person who supports the death penalty in their own country to complain about the setence. But if, as it would seem, the legal system was screwed with and the girl actually didn't kill the baby, then it would not be. In my opinion (and I don't support such a backwards thing as a death penalty), sentencing the girl to death for either murder or accidental death or being in charge of the baby at the time the baby died is nuts.

Oh, and another thing, what if a European who supported the death penalty said this execution was wrong? Or an Asian? Etc. ect.

I think you've gotten this thing entirely wrong. I don't have a problem with the death penalty, but I do have caveats of proof and evidence of guilt. Mitigating circumstances can only be used in cases of non-intention in accidents as this one apparently was.

does twisting logic around in a pretzle like that hurt your brain?

I think you've gotten this thing entirely wrong. I don't have a problem with the death penalty, but I do have caveats of proof and evidence of guilt. Mitigating circumstances can only be used in cases of non-intention in accidents as this one apparently was.

...That wasn't what I was aiming for, but thanks anyway!

*thumbs up*

And I don't think "mitigating circumstances" could ever be argued successfully in a Saudi court.

It could be the next goatse if /b/ got hold of it.

popese?

And I don't think "mitigating circumstances" could ever be argued successfully in a Saudi court.

Not by a woman anyway.

But I'm not talking about the mockery of law that is the Saudi legal system. I'm talking about my personal standards in application of law.

Reads....

Faux news....

Stops reading...

Most likely a fabricated or completely out-of-context exaggerated story to appeal to the crazies on the right. Fail.

Reads....

Faux news....

Stops reading...

Most likely a fabricated or completely out-of-context exaggerated story to appeal to the crazies on the right. Fail.

? (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003789850_behead15.html)

Reads....

Faux news....

Stops reading...

Most likely a fabricated or completely out-of-context exaggerated story to appeal to the crazies on the right. Fail.

Un no, that farce really is the Saudi Justice System at work. Don't pull a Sovietstan here please.

? (http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2003789850_behead15.html)

Well while I deplore the death sentence in any country, especially the US, a baby did die as a result of her negligence, willful or not.

The moral of this story is, "Don't become a housemaid in Saudi Arabia." A girl was hired as a housemaid and given the additional duty of taking care of the baby. However, she was not trained to take care of the child and the child died while she was giving him a bottle. The housemaid who was a teenager at the time of the baby's death has been sentenced to death.

WARNING:This is an AP story carried on FOX so all you Fox haters should gogle the story elsewhere.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,289317,00.html
While I don't condone the execution in Saudi Arabia, I can't say that your Georgy boy was any better in dealing with executions while he served as Texas Governor, especially those underage and mentally handicapped:

The Death Penalty in Texas: Lethal Injustice (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510101998)

All international human rights treaties prohibit the imposition of the death penalty on anyone under 18 years of age at the time of the crime. The United Nations Economic and Social Council Safeguards Guaranteeing Protection of the Rights of Those Facing the Death Penalty resolution 1984/50, adopted in December 1984, state in article 3 that "persons below 18 years of age at the time of the commission of the crime shall not be sentenced to death...".

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child also prohibits the execution of juvenile offenders under the age of 18 at the time of the offence. However, the USA is one of only two countries (the other being Somalia) that have not ratified the Convention.

Since 1990, only five countries are known to have executed juvenile offenders: Iran, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, Yemen and the USA. The majority of these executions were carried out in the USA (9), five of them in Texas [6]. At the end of 1997, there were 25 men on death row in Texas who were sentenced at the age of 17, the minimum age stipulated by Texas death penalty law.

Well while I deplore the death sentence in any country, especially the US, a baby did die as a result of her negligence, willful or not.

The U.S. didn't execute Louise Woodward though, unlike Saudi Arabia and this poor girl. There's one time it actually scores higher on morality.

The Death Penalty in Texas: Lethal Injustice (http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/ENGAMR510101998)

WTF? Civilised country MY ARSE

why the heck are they gunna kill the girl. that makes no sense, shes only a teenager and she was helpin. wow thats stupid

WTF? Civilised country MY ARSE
What can I say. Olatex/Celtund start threads like these and forget about the rubbish in their own backyards!!!!!

why the heck are they gunna kill the girl. that makes no sense, shes only a teenager and she was helpin. wow thats stupid

Welcome to Saudi Arabia, a corrupt monarchy that has only two things going for it: Oil, and a willingness to give the United States head in regards to the "War on Terror."

Otherwise it's a hellhole that's the home of a twisted fundamentalist version of Islam that's the official sect of Al'Qaeda.

I think the main issue is not necessarily the death penalty, but the definition of "murder." Few could argue that serial killers hadn't "murdered" anyone, but who the hell can say with a straight face that this woman "murdered" the baby?

And, for those of you who aren't from the USA, most Americans don't care too much for (most parts of) Texas to begin with. It is like saying that all of Turkey is just like the backwater islamic-extremists hicks that populate its countryside.

If any American who supports the death penalty in America complains about this penalty, they're being blatantly hypocritical. On the other hand even though it was apparently presented as murder, which carries such a sentence, it apparently was an accident and the Saudi authorities seem to have forgotten the numerous passages that say "Allah is forgiving, merciful" - plus the 'confession' was seemingly obtained under duress.

It's the offense that the death penalty is being applied to that I'd criticize, not the death penalty itself. It should be reserved for the worst crimes, not negligent babysitting. You might serve a couple years for it here, not be executed. ;)

I've been there. It isn't the best place in the world to visit.

I've met a few people who have enjoyed working there, but I don't think I'd take to well to it myself. :p The Saudis employ a good number of Indonesian and Filipino migrant workers, who make some good dough there, at least.

The American legal system, as evidenced not only by the amount of innocent people having being killed (percentages are irrelevant here, one death of an innocent person is one too many) but also by the amount of posts on here about stupid stuff that the cops/court have done is just as faulty as any other legal system and more so in many cases. And the states that have the death penalty in the U.S.A. seem happy to keep doling it out.

To work backwards a little - about 65% of executions occur in 5 states, so most are not "happy to keep doling it out". The vast majority of states with the death penalty use it sparingly, if at all, which is how it should be. Even accepting the debatable premise that percentages don't matter and that one innocent death is equal to many innocent deaths, this still doesn't spell the need to get rid of the death penalty but rather it shows the need to further restrict it until the possibility of innocent death is eliminated.

Let me state the obvious, Saudi Arabia is a sovereign state, therefore their justice is their business, no one else's.

Let me state the obvious, Saudi Arabia is a sovereign state, therefore their justice is their business, no one else's.

:rolleyes:

So you're essentially saying that governments should be allowed to do whatever they want. Good to know.

:rolleyes:

So you're essentially saying that governments should be allowed to do whatever they want. Good to know.

Unless you want to invade a country and subdue it every time their government does something you don't like, yes, it's called sovereignty.

Unless you want to invade a country and subdue it every time their government does something you don't like, yes, it's called sovereignty.

No one is suggesting invading Saudi Arabia. We are suggesting that beheading a girl for negligence under insufficient evidence is bad. You come in and say that it's obviously none of our business. Realistically, not much is going to be done to stop this kind of thing occuring anyway.

If Saudi Arabia or any other country started a campaign of genocide within its borders, would you suggest that it's not our business and they're entitled to do so?

By the way, why do you criticise Bush so much? He's the leader of a sovereign state, he can do what he likes!

Same - for me visiting the U.S.A.

I want to see if it's really as backwards as a lot of stuff leads me to believe. But I'd have to have a properly-working teleporter for the same reason as you.

Better stay where you are then. We're all cousin marrying, gun toting, McDonalds eating, scale breaking, church going, warmongering, racist rednecks. :rolleyes:

No one is suggesting invading Saudi Arabia. We are suggesting that beheading a girl for negligence under insufficient evidence is bad. You come in and say that it's obviously none of our business. Realistically, not much is going to be done to stop this kind of thing occuring anyway.

If Saudi Arabia or any other country started a campaign of genocide within its borders, would you suggest that it's not our business and they're entitled to do so?

By the way, why do you criticise Bush so much? He's the leader of a sovereign state, he can do what he likes!

Well yes and no, the Congress also represents the people.

It's the offense that the death penalty is being applied to that I'd criticize, not the death penalty itself. It should be reserved for the worst crimes, not negligent babysitting. You might serve a couple years for it here, not be executed. ;)

But if you were a parent would you feel the same way?

To a parent negligence that leads tot he death of their child is worse then someone with a political motive murdering hundreds. They can see sense in a political motive, but not in negligence.

How do you decide what are the 'worst crimes' isn't a child killing another child one of the worst crimes?

Personally I am anti death penalty for a number of reasons I won't bore you with but I cannot understand those who advocate it for some crimes and not others.

BTW why has no white man ever been executed for the death of a black man in the USA? Is that because killing a white man is a worse crime than killing a black man?

But if you were a parent would you feel the same way?

To a parent negligence that leads tot he death of their child is worse then someone with a political motive murdering hundreds. They can see sense in a political motive, but not in negligence.

How do you decide what are the 'worst crimes' isn't a child killing another child one of the worst crimes?

Personally I am anti death penalty for a number of reasons I won't bore you with but I cannot understand those who advocate it for some crimes and not others.

BTW why has no white man ever been executed for the death of a black man in the USA? Is that because killing a white man is a worse crime than killing a black man?
Exactly, it's not like we on this forum are objective or impartial to this crime, I am sure the parents were crying for her head too.

But if you were a parent would you feel the same way?

I'd be angry as hell. But there's that element that's usually called 'malice aforethought' that needs to be present. I'd still want some kind of punishment to be carried out, but not death.

Let me state the obvious, Saudi Arabia is a sovereign state, therefore their justice is their business, no one else's.Please replace 'Saudi Arabia' with 'United States of America', and repeat your sentence.

I just want to know if you're capable of it, really.

EDIT: Actually, 'Israel' would do, too. Your choice.

But if you were a parent would you feel the same way?

To a parent negligence that leads tot he death of their child is worse then someone with a political motive murdering hundreds. They can see sense in a political motive, but not in negligence.

How do you decide what are the 'worst crimes' isn't a child killing another child one of the worst crimes?

Personally I am anti death penalty for a number of reasons I won't bore you with but I cannot understand those who advocate it for some crimes and not others.

BTW why has no white man ever been executed for the death of a black man in the USA? Is that because killing a white man is a worse crime than killing a black man?


This was obviously some sorta acciendent, but I guess in this culture of sue, blame,and counter sue, people have forgeotten that accidents happen?

Ohh and the parent thing, I'm one of them and I say that genacide for political reasons is a far, far worse thing than the death of a child through negligence.

:rolleyes:

So you're essentially saying that governments should be allowed to do whatever they want. Good to know.
So if say China disagrees with Texas', or more likely a more lenient state's, handling of an internal criminal affair, the should be able to whine and bitch and intervene?

I say, don't intervene.

In fact, we should make front page news of how much we like this peaceful Islam, which kills people the old fashioned way.

So if say China disagrees with Texas', or more likely a more lenient state's, handling of an internal criminal affair, the should be able to whine and bitch and intervene?

There's pretty much no less lenient state than Saudi Arabia. That aside, all states should have some kind of responsibility towards fighting human rights abuses, both internationally and within their own borders. No one is suggesting 'intervening' over this, apart from maybe the USA rethinking their alliance with the place.

All I and others are saying is that shit like this should not be tolerated in any country, Saudi Arabia, the USA or the Netherlands, and that to excuse it on the grounds of national sovereignity is ludicrous. I'm not saying that any particular nation should necessarily do something about it, although perhaps they should, only arguing from my own personal viewpoint. To my knowledge, I don't support executions for negligence, so I don't see any hypocrisy here as you have strangely given in the above.

There's pretty much no less lenient state than Saudi Arabia. .


Since resuming executions in 1982, Texas has killed more than 170 prisoners, and for many years, Amnesty International has raised serious concerns over the consistent failure of its clemency procedures to remedy possible wrongful convictions in capital cases or excessive death sentences. Despite compelling grounds for mercy in many cases, in 17 years the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles has recommended the commutation of a death sentence only once.
http://web.amnesty.org/library/Index/engAMR510851999

That was 1999......Unless they've turned all cuddly in the mean time....

The moral of this story is, "Don't become a housemaid in Saudi Arabia."
I think the moral is, "Don't be female in Saudi Arabia."

No, maybe the Texas babysitter sentenced to death for dropping the baby
http://www.politicalgateway.com/news/read/84528

Or the mentally ill woman here.....
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?sec=health&res=9C02EEDB1239F930A25750C0A9649C8B63

I am quoting this as I think it is under appreciated in the relevance to the topic

I am quoting this as I think it is under appreciated in the relevance to the topic
Good point. Also probably best to not be female in the USA.

Good point. Also probably best to not be female in the USA.

Well that or be mentally handicapped ...

I am quoting this as I think it is under appreciated in the relevance to the topic

The first one doesn't say anything about the method of death, the woman could have stabbed it a dozen times for all we know. Nodinia, where did you get the sentence for dropping the baby from?

Or be in the position where you're reliant on an underfunded "Public defender"'s office.....
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/07/15/AR2007071501250.html?hpid=topnews

The first one doesn't say anything about the method of death, the woman could have stabbed it a dozen times for all we know. Nodinia, where did you get the sentence for dropping the baby from?

Thought it was in that.....This has more detail...
http://austin.about.com/od/crime/p/hendersoncathy.htm

Thought it was in that.....This has more detail...
http://austin.about.com/od/crime/p/hendersoncathy.htm

Your description is a bit dodgy. She wasn't sentenced to death for dropping the baby, she was sentenced to death for murdering it. Dropping the baby was just her excuse. Since new evidence has apparently come to light that she may or may not have been telling the truth, she has been granted an appeal. I don't see any miscarriage of justice here.

Anyway, I'll concede the point. Perhaps Texas is more lenient than Saudi Arabia, perhaps they aren't, I doubt there is much accurate data on Saudi executions. At least Texas doesn't execute people for witchcraft, but they're both backwards dumps.

We say invade using Fremen on camels, sowing panic and fear as we rescue the girl. :mp5::mp5::mp5::sniper::mp5::mp5: Or, force the American ambassador at needle-point (him being a diplomat and open to friendly persuasion) to protest the act and ask for a retrial with a sponsored lawyer.

At least Texas doesn't execute people for witchcraft, but they're both backwards dumps.

Oklahoma has the highest execution rate compared to its population. Texas executes more people, but Oklahoma has a significantly higher execution to population ratio.

Anyways, executions are generally a bad idea. And I don't think it matters if it's a beheading, lethal injection, or firing squad, they all end up killing people. Once they're dead it's kinda hard to set them free if evidence comes to light that exonerates them.

We say invade using Fremen on camels, sowing panic and fear as we rescue the girl. :mp5::mp5::mp5::sniper::mp5::mp5: Or, force the American ambassador at needle-point (him being a diplomat and open to friendly persuasion) to protest the act and ask for a retrial with a sponsored lawyer.

*sigh*

Without fail.

We believe the subtlety of our invasion is this: we can wring our hands, cry, scream, rip out hair, self-flagellate, curse the gods, and another bunch of stupid things, but will it save any of the two women? What needs to be done to stay their executions?

Let us examine the case of Cathy Lynn Henderson:

- woman intentionally kills baby
- or baby dies due to accident
- or baby dies due to accident during abduction.

resulting in:
- woman panics and fleas with corpse of baby, burying it along the way
- or abducts baby in an attempt to sell it, then changes her mind and kills it.
- or kills baby out of revenge on parents
- or because mentally unstable

who is the woman:
- poor (the rich don't make good babysitters).
- cannot afford Johnnie Cockran (now deceased)
- gets provided some piss-an state attorney who probably believed she was guilty of murder
- clinching evidence for murder: the opinion of a coroner (who then second-guesses himself later; no counter-evidence from an out of state coroner to draw this coroner's findings into question)

Death of child: not consistent with a fall from the babysitter's arms (then consistent with what? Blunt instrument trauma? Repeated bashing of the head against an object? Consistent with what?)

What was the intent?
- why suddenly kill a child?
- revenge on the parents?
or
- an abduction gone wrong?
- or: no intent - it was an accident.

See, society does not buy the argument that it was an accident. It cannot - what about the parents? There had to be something malicious there. if not malicious, then mentally disturbed. A verdict of not guilty leaves the problem of redress - how does one redress the loss of a child if there is no one to blame, or again in its hypocrisy - society blames the parents for leaving their children with a babysitter. So, the cop-out is a guilty verdict.

Now, the woman drops the child and it dies. The rational mind say call 911. Report what has happened. But then you start thinking: they'll never believe me. Now, as someone with no malicious intent to the child you probably already are in shock about what happened. You are alone in another city, no family, no friends to turn to, no money - you panic. What is telling for me is that she took the child with. The story does not play out like an abduction gone wrong. Or a malicious message to the parents - she would have done way worse to the body and left it. She runs with the body of the child, only later stopping to pause and think what she should do. She buries the body and runs since the cops are looking for her anyhow.

Anyone have a different take on this?

Lets just say that Texas is the Christian Saudi Arabia and leave it at that.

Pater Noster, Qui Es In Caelis
Sanctificetur Nomen Tuum.

Aveniat Regnum Tuum.

Fiat Voluntas Tua,
Sicut In Caelo Et In Terra.

Et Dimitte Nobis Debita Nostra,
Sicut Et Nos
Dimittimus Debitoribus Nostris.

Good point. Also probably best to not be female in the USA.

Unless you're willing to sell yourself like Jessica Simpson (with the implication that you have no self-worth).

We say invade using Fremen on camels, sowing panic and fear as we rescue the girl. :mp5::mp5::mp5::sniper::mp5::mp5: Or, force the American ambassador at needle-point (him being a diplomat and open to friendly persuasion) to protest the act and ask for a retrial with a sponsored lawyer.
Terrible idea.
We believe the subtlety of our invasion is this: we can wring our hands, cry, scream, rip out hair, self-flagellate, curse the gods, and another bunch of stupid things, but will it save any of the two women? What needs to be done to stay their executions?
If by we you mean the people on this forum then there's nothing we can do except bitch among ourselves.
Pater Noster, Qui Es In Caelis
Sanctificetur Nomen Tuum.

Aveniat Regnum Tuum.

Fiat Voluntas Tua,
Sicut In Caelo Et In Terra.

Et Dimitte Nobis Debita Nostra,
Sicut Et Nos
Dimittimus Debitoribus Nostris.

http://i134.photobucket.com/albums/q100/TheSteveslols/no_spam_bruce.jpg