ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
I have been in the courtroom when a convicted criminal was being sentenced, not to make any statement about what this person would or would not have done- that was already established- but simply to support that person and show that I cared (not just for him, but the victims). Note that the statement quoted a little more fully was "He would never, ever intentionally hurt someone." Not that this would necessarily be any easier to stomach for the ones he hurt, but it still isn't quite the same as saying he would never hurt someone.
So, would we rather that those who commit crimes were abandoned by all, to stand in court without a friend or supporter present? That is actually the norm in our society. Most criminals, it's just them and their lawyer and maybe a reporter or one or two others. I think it can speak well for Christians when they support one of their own who has committed a sin or crime. (It goes without saying that we should be there for victims as well.)
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
mike wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:18 pm
So, would we rather that those who commit crimes were abandoned by all, to stand in court without a friend or supporter present? That is actually the norm in our society. Most criminals, it's just them and their lawyer and maybe a reporter or one or two others. I think it can speak well for Christians when they support one of their own who has committed a sin or crime. (It goes without saying that we should be there for victims as well.)
I agree, it's quite appropriate to have a few family members and close friends present. But I've seen reports of trials where it seems the attitude is "everyone come and bring the whole family" to attempt to convince the court that an admitted serial perpetrator should escape the consequences of his crimes. This case isn't that, and perhaps I'm overreacting a bit, but I think it's important to be aware of how our actions may be perceived.
0 x
I grew up around Indiana, You grew up around Galilee; And if I ever really do grow up, I wanna grow up to be just like You -- Rich Mullins
I am a Christian and my name is Pilgram; I'm on a journey, but I'm not alone -- NewSong, slightly edited
mike wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:18 pm
So, would we rather that those who commit crimes were abandoned by all, to stand in court without a friend or supporter present? That is actually the norm in our society. Most criminals, it's just them and their lawyer and maybe a reporter or one or two others. I think it can speak well for Christians when they support one of their own who has committed a sin or crime. (It goes without saying that we should be there for victims as well.)
I agree, it's quite appropriate to have a few family members and close friends present. But I've seen reports of trials where it seems the attitude is "everyone come and bring the whole family" to attempt to convince the court that an admitted serial perpetrator should escape the consequences of his crimes. This case isn't that, and perhaps I'm overreacting a bit, but I think it's important to be aware of how our actions may be perceived.
Very valid point.
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
I have been in the courtroom when a convicted criminal was being sentenced, not to make any statement about what this person would or would not have done- that was already established- but simply to support that person and show that I cared (not just for him, but the victims). Note that the statement quoted a little more fully was "He would never, ever intentionally hurt someone." Not that this would necessarily be any easier to stomach for the ones he hurt, but it still isn't quite the same as saying he would never hurt someone.
So, would we rather that those who commit crimes were abandoned by all, to stand in court without a friend or supporter present? That is actually the norm in our society. Most criminals, it's just them and their lawyer and maybe a reporter or one or two others. I think it can speak well for Christians when they support one of their own who has committed a sin or crime. (It goes without saying that we should be there for victims as well.)
When a large group of family and friends of a perpetrator (Menno or otherwise) crowds into a courtroom they might *think* they are there to support the victim as well. But it most certainly doesn't come across that way. That much is certain.
And if people want to support victims, there are certainly better ways to do it than only engaging with the criminal justice system and showing up when one of one's own is on trial.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
I have been in the courtroom when a convicted criminal was being sentenced, not to make any statement about what this person would or would not have done- that was already established- but simply to support that person and show that I cared (not just for him, but the victims). Note that the statement quoted a little more fully was "He would never, ever intentionally hurt someone." Not that this would necessarily be any easier to stomach for the ones he hurt, but it still isn't quite the same as saying he would never hurt someone.
So, would we rather that those who commit crimes were abandoned by all, to stand in court without a friend or supporter present? That is actually the norm in our society. Most criminals, it's just them and their lawyer and maybe a reporter or one or two others. I think it can speak well for Christians when they support one of their own who has committed a sin or crime. (It goes without saying that we should be there for victims as well.)
When a large group of family and friends of a perpetrator (Menno or otherwise) crowds into a courtroom they might *think* they are there to support the victim as well. But it most certainly doesn't come across that way. That much is certain.
And if people want to support victims, there are certainly better ways to do it than only engaging with the criminal justice system and showing up when one of one's own is on trial.
When I went, the courtroom wasn't absolutely crowded but there were far more people there than for most court proceedings. The judge said he received far more letters about this particular sentencing than most other cases. He said it was one of the more difficult cases he had to assess (he came down on the side of throwing the absolute book at the criminal). I didn't exactly know who was there in support of whom, or whether there were more there for the victim or the perpetrator, but there were numerous there for each side. I was the only Mennonite person there. I assume the victim's family would have preferred that no one was there to provide any support to the perpetrator. I would have preferred not to be there, but felt like I should be a support to the the person because I developed a friendship with him while doing prison ministry, not because he was "one of our own" or anything.
0 x
Remember the prisoners, as though you were in prison with them, and the mistreated, as though you yourselves were suffering bodily. -Heb. 13:3
ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
Now OJ - you of all people? Are you really claiming this man "intentionally" hurt/killed these people? The testimony was that he would never intentionally hurt anyone, not that he would never accidently do so.
I mean, I get it that there is a level of recklessness that gets awfully close to intentionally causing harm, but words do mean something after all...
It's somewhat disconcerting to think that perhaps it is impossible to attend a court proceeding simply in order to witness firsthand what happens, without one's presence being construed as "support" for one side or the other, whatever it is that everyone means by "support."
ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
Now OJ - you of all people? Are you really claiming this man "intentionally" hurt/killed these people? The testimony was that he would never intentionally hurt anyone, not that he would never accidently do so.
I mean, I get it that there is a level of recklessness that gets awfully close to intentionally causing harm, but words do mean something after all...
The law draws a distinction between intentional killing (murder) and accidental killing (manslaughter). Both intentional killing and accidental killing can be crimes or not crimes depending on the circumstances. Vehicular manslaughter is a crime if there is negligence involved. The only questions here are: (1) did he commit that crime, and (2) is the sentence appropriate for that crime. Intent (motive) is not a factor when it comes to crimes of manslaughter. It is only a factor when it comes to murder.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
ohio jones wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 1:08 pm
I don't get why people pack out the courtroom in cases like this. Not to mention testifying "he would never" when he actually did. It gives the impression that "we" think "we" are, or should be, above the law. There are better ways of supporting the accused.
Watching sports highlights?
Now OJ - you of all people? Are you really claiming this man "intentionally" hurt/killed these people? The testimony was that he would never intentionally hurt anyone, not that he would never accidently do so.
I mean, I get it that there is a level of recklessness that gets awfully close to intentionally causing harm, but words do mean something after all...
The law draws a distinction between intentional killing (murder) and accidental killing (manslaughter). Both intentional killing and accidental killing can be crimes or not crimes depending on the circumstances. Vehicular manslaughter is a crime if there is negligence involved. The only questions here are: (1) did he commit that crime, and (2) is the sentence appropriate for that crime. Intent (motive) is not a factor when it comes to crimes of manslaughter. It is only a factor when it comes to murder.
I'm kind of curious why you quoted me in this post, considering that what you posted had exactly nothing at all to do with my post that you quoted.
I understand you think reading comprehension is hard, but still....
Soloist wrote: ↑Fri Apr 26, 2024 10:46 am
This case should be a wake up call to any Christian that we have serious problems with phones when one gets thrown in prison for crime of using them.
Any of us who use a phone in a non car safe mode while driving should repent.
If that isn’t enough, get rid of your smartphone while you still can chose it yourself.
