Quote:
Originally posted by Sidd Finch
I'll ignore the rest of the bullshit
|
Of course you will.
[quote]and just respond to your question of "Why?" -- i.e., why I believe the murderers' original story instead of their new story.
Very rarely to robberies end in murder. Much more rarely to robberies end in torture-murders (as opposed to, say, just shooting your victim or whacking him on the head with a pipe). It is even more rare for a planned robbery to end in a murder. Here, you have two guys who planned to rob a random person, and planned to do so by pretending to give him a ride... and then ended up committing a torture-murder.[quote]
He was savagely pistol-whipped and left to die. If this is your definition of torture-murder, so be it
Quote:
|
Could it have been the meth? Sure. But lots of crimes are committed under the influence of meth, or crack, or pcp, or other drugs that don't have the calming influence that people tell me other drugs have. ("Dude, give me your wallet. Or some food -- you have any foood???") Very few of those crimes end in murder, particularly the torture-murder we saw here. This leads me to look for a reason.
|
Are you forgetting that these guys attacked another group of people right after the Shepard incident - in exactly the same manner [pistol-whipping]? It was because of this second attack that they got caught.
Quote:
|
The original reason was pretty credible -- the violent response to the gay advance.
|
Which sounds to me like nothing more than a bullshit lawyer trying to get them off on an insanity defense.
Quote:
The new reason is no reason at all, at least based on the report I read (I didn't watch 20-20, because, ugh). The torture-murder was just a continuation of the robbery. Sure, it's possible. But to me, it seems a lot less plausible. Particularly when the motivation for changing the story now -- i.e., getting a reduced sentence by showing it wasn't a hate-crime -- is so apparent.
Now, why do you accept the murderers' new story as gospel?
|
I don't accept it as gospel.
However, I never liked how certain people - both gay and straight - took this case and made it the poster case for the advance of ludicrous "hate" crimes legislation.
I also always found it odd that the judge in this case imposed a gag order on the defendants after the trial. I've never heard of such a thing.
