[QatzelOk]

The fact that those families are trying to make lots of money off what happened to their deceased relative's body is more disgusting to me than how those dead bodies were violated.

The "families" in question are mostly composed of sexually-unfulfilled people with the consequent chips on their unmassaged shoulders.

Perhaps the reason they can't 'find someone to love' is because they are still alive.

The Living are being discriminated against in this story.

[Puffer Fish]

People know that actions have consequences. If some demented pervert has sex with a dead body, then he deserves whatever he gets.

You know as well as I do that that's not even logical.

Yes, there does exist a line past which a person deserves to be executed or have their life completely ruined.
But this individual did not cross that line.

This is the reason there are unfair or overharsh punishments in the U.S. Because there are plenty of people like you (even though I know you are not an American) who view people who do something wrong as "deserving of whatever they get".

Just because something is sick and sexually disgusting doesn't put them in the same class as the most horrible people.

[Godstud]

You know as well as I do that that's not even logical.

It is. It's illegal as well as immoral.

Yes, there does exist a line past which a person deserves to be executed or have their life completely ruined. But this individual did not cross that line.

You defend in indefensible, AGAIN.

This is the reason there are unfair or overharsh punishments in the U.S. Because there are plenty of people like you (even though I know you are not an American) who view people who do something wrong as "deserving of whatever they get".

Do the crime. Pay the time.

Just because something is sick and sexually disgusting doesn't put them in the same class as the most horrible people.

It usually does mean that they are horrible people. The exceptions don't make the rule.

[Puffer Fish]

Do the crime. Pay the time.

He did pay the time. But the issue is, you also want him to pay the money. A ridiculously absurd sized amount of money, which will keep him in poverty for life.

[Tainari88]

@Puffer Fish who are you dude? Your background? Your nationality and socioeconomic class, and age and where you grew up? I am really curious about where you get these ideas of yours? Damn hombre, eres rarísimo.

[Godstud]

@Puffer Fish, most of the time they don't end up paying close to what the defendants ask for, and you know it. You're being melodramatic.

The morale of the story is, "Don't commit crimes that can fuck up your life.".

[Puffer Fish]

The morale of the story is, "Don't commit crimes that can fuck up your life.".

In my opinion, if I were an omnipotent deity, the fair thing would be for all those family members who took the money to have their bodies raped and violated after their death.

Might strike you as absurd but think about it. These people are accepting an excessive amount of money in compensation for a violation of someone else. They simply don't deserve all that money. Thus, to make things right, they should have to pay for that money they accepted, to make the deal rightfully fair. They accepted money from someone who violated bodies. So those people should themselves have their bodies violated, up to the point that payment of money they accepted becomes actually justified.

Justice. A fair balance on the scales.

[Godstud]

Waaaaaahhhh ! Fuck off, @Puffer Fish.

You only feel sorry for sexual deviants and rapists who might have to pay for their crimes.

[Puffer Fish]

You only feel sorry for sexual deviants and rapists who might have to pay for their crimes.

Who cares if the body was going to be cremated anyway.

If the family members are complaining of "emotional damages", maybe it would just be better for the authorities to not inform the family members at all.

[Godstud]

Who cares if the body was going to be cremated anyway.

Who cares if a demented pervert can't get his rocks off! You sure seem to care! Why is that?

If the family members are complaining of "emotional damages", maybe it would just be better for the authorities to not inform the family members at all.

A crime has been committed and those affected by it have to be notified. If they choose to make a civil court case about it, that is within their rights, as well.

You sure like defending the worst of humanity. Why is that?

(edit: Fixed quote)

[ingliz]

You sure like defending the worst of humanity. Why is that?

Why indeed.

Is he a necrophiliac incel with murder-rape fantasies, or is it some childish attempt to shock?

A necrophiliac incel with murder-rape fantasies would be a dangerous individual, and - cruel as it seems - the sooner he was locked up in a secure mental facility and chemically castrated the better for all of us.

But I expect it's the latter - A bored teenager with nothing better to do than construct an online persona as a sexual deviant.

[QatzelOk]

A necrophiliac incel with murder-rape fantasies would be a dangerous individual, and - cruel as it seems - the sooner he was locked up in a secure mental facility and chemically castrated the better for all of us.

1. But what if an entire civilization becomes sick. Is it possible to lock the entire society up? And will this help the sick society to change in any positive way, this confinement?

2. And what if it the society itself that creates sick individuals. Does locking a few of the most extreme victims of this sick society once in a while even help anyone?

3. Or is punishing people like this... just a way for a sick society to "look like we're doing something?"

Because once a society is so far gone and so superficial that its leaders only want to "appear to be doing something," that society is finished. And no amount of pissing on one single solitary individual... will get it back on track.

[Puffer Fish]

A crime has been committed and those affected by it have to be notified.

But they're not actually affected by it.

If they choose to make a civil court case about it, that is within their rights, as well.

Is it "within their rights"? Should it be within their rights?

They were not the individual actually affected. And no financial damages were actually caused. Money can't undo or mitigate the damages.

This should not be an issue involving money.

[Puffer Fish]

If the body is going to be cremated anyway, is it really that big of a deal if a rogue morgue assistant performs their own cream-ation on it, right before?

[Godstud]

But they're not actually affected by it.

If someone desecrates the body of a loved one then it IS within their rights. It was also illegal.

If the body is going to be cremated anyway, is it really that big of a deal if a rogue morgue assistant performs their own cream-ation on it, right before?

This tells me exactly what you are.

[Puffer Fish]

If someone desecrates the body of a loved one then it IS within their rights. It was also illegal.

You keep saying it's within their rights to get money.

I don't know if you personally are on the Left, but this is how a lot of Left leaners are, want any excuse to get their hands on some money.

I personally don't even think a LIVE woman should be able to get money for a sexual assault.
But you seem to want to go TWO steps beyond that. Not only was there no live person who was the victim of the assault, but also you think other people who weren't even the ones assaulted should be the ones to get the money.

Hey, no, never mind, make that three steps beyond. Because it would be one thing if the family got maybe a little payout, like maybe $4,000, $8,000, or even $15,000, but you want to pay them $816,000.
For an assault on a dead person.

[Godstud]

I am not on the left, as you would see it, but then you aren't on the right. You are out in left field!

Once you die, the responsibility to take care of the body lies with loved ones. I know your sexually deviant mind can't fathom that or the trauma that can come from someone desecrating the body of a loved one. Your ignorant, and perverted, comment clearly shows this.

What you think is irrelevant. What the law thinks and what moral human beings think, is.

[Puffer Fish]

Once you die, the responsibility to take care of the body lies with loved ones.

Is that money actually going to be used to help take care of the body, or will it be used by the family members to satisfy their own selfish desires?

Responsibility is not the same thing as rights.


You know, if the sexual assault somehow caused damage to the body, and it needed to be repaired or put back in place before being suitable for burial, then I might understand the perpetrator having to pay some money to compensate for the damage, since that would actually have a financial price.
But that does not appear to be the case in this story.

What you think is irrelevant. What the law thinks and what moral human beings think, is.

You know as well as I do the law does not say anything specifically about this. The courts are just making up "the law" as they go along, using their interpretation.

It's the dysfunctional interpretation (and bad precedent accumulating over years) in American courts that is allowing anyone to sue anyone else over anything, in cases where there are no financial damages (what the lawsuit system was originally intended for).

[Godstud]

Is that money actually going to be used to help take care of the body, or will it be used by the family members to satisfy their own selfish desires?

Irrelevant. Damages are damages. Dipshit sexual deviants should trhink about the consequences of their actions before exercising their perverse bullshit.

Responsibility is not the same thing as rights.

They can go hand in hand. You have a right to have children and then the responsibility will lie with you. I hope you never have kids and that children aren't near you at any time.

The responsibility of the perpetrator was to NOT commit the crime.

Your thoughts on this, as a representative of outlying sexual deviancy, are irrelevant. 99% of the population would agree with the justice meted out.

[Puffer Fish]

Irrelevant. Damages are damages.

There are no real damages. That's the issue.

How do you put a price on this?