• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Convicted Child Molester Suing After Being Raped in Garfield County Jail[W:186]

Status
Not open for further replies.
Colleges get sued all the time, the deepest pockets get the lawsuits for better or for worse. Here the prison is on the line more than any other thing you mentioned because we put the people in prison by force and through force keep them there (which is all legitimate, not saying otherwise). Ultimately we put them there and we are responsible for their welfare. We cannot make prison a way around the death penalty, for instance. We are responsible for the health and well being of our prisoners.

Yes, we are.

He says he was raped by his cellmate. How could this have been prevented, short of giving every prisoner a private cell?
 
Colleges get sued all the time, the deepest pockets get the lawsuits for better or for worse. Here the prison is on the line more than any other thing you mentioned because we put the people in prison by force and through force keep them there (which is all legitimate, not saying otherwise). Ultimately we put them there and we are responsible for their welfare. We cannot make prison a way around the death penalty, for instance. We are responsible for the health and well being of our prisoners.
I think that there is something to be said about reasonable expectation...but can we presume every prisoner is a violent offender and NOT house them with others without violating SOMEONES rights? If they had put the sex offender in isolation 'for his own protection' would he also be able to sue because he was being isolated and discriminated against?

At some point they will have to prove intentional negligence, not "prison is a dangerous place cuz there are all those pesky prisoners in it..."
 
Yes, we are.

He says he was raped by his cellmate. How could this have been prevented, short of giving every prisoner a private cell?

It will have to be something that we figure out, we can't send folk into some place to get raped or dead or tortured. If we cannot control our prison population, we'll have to investigate why and then move to fix it. It's barbaric to to just shrug our shoulders at the torture of and crimes against our prisoners.
 
It will have to be something that we figure out, we can't send folk into some place to get raped or dead or tortured. If we cannot control our prison population, we'll have to investigate why and then move to fix it. It's barbaric to to just shrug our shoulders at the torture of and crimes against our prisoners.

It'll never be fixed though because it doesn't gain politicians anything.

Anyone who proposes it will be painted as being "soft on criminals".

ANd more likely than not by the alleged "constitutionalists"
 
Oh, it will all get super out of hand until we figure out how to control the system well enough and perhaps to man up a little bit.
Hey...Ive long said we need to build another thousand "Super Max" facilities. But would anyone listen? Nooooooooooooooooooo....
 
It will have to be something that we figure out, we can't send folk into some place to get raped or dead or tortured. If we cannot control our prison population, we'll have to investigate why and then move to fix it. It's barbaric to to just shrug our shoulders at the torture of and crimes against our prisoners.

Okay so what are your suggestions? He was raped by his cell mate. How could that have been avoided?
 
I think that there is something to be said about reasonable expectation...but can we presume every prisoner is a violent offender and NOT house them with others without violating SOMEONES rights? If they had put the sex offender in isolation 'for his own protection' would he also be able to sue because he was being isolated and discriminated against?

At some point they will have to prove intentional negligence, not "prison is a dangerous place cuz there are all those pesky prisoners in it..."

The overcrowded conditions in our prison certainly do lead to a lot of these problems. Indifference cannot be allowed either. I think what you can say is that there is a reasonable level of effort and control that we must exercise in our prison system to ensure some amount of control and safety. Just like on the outside, nothing can be guaranteed and there is likely to be crime; but so long as we have acted in a provable and demonstrable manner through which we had taken every reasonable course to ensure the safety of our prisoners, that then the prison cannot be faulted.
 
Negligence does not need to be intentional.
Assault by one to another is not necessarily a by-product of facility negligence, intentional or otherwise.
 
Hey...Ive long said we need to build another thousand "Super Max" facilities. But would anyone listen? Nooooooooooooooooooo....

That would be one way to help control prison population. Though not throwing so many into prison in the first place is also an avenue to explore.
 
Assault by one to another is not necessarily a by-product of facility negligence, intentional or otherwise.

Not necessarily. Nevertheless, "intentional negligence" would be malice and (hopefully) not relevant to this case.
 
The overcrowded conditions in our prison certainly do lead to a lot of these problems. Indifference cannot be allowed either. I think what you can say is that there is a reasonable level of effort and control that we must exercise in our prison system to ensure some amount of control and safety. Just like on the outside, nothing can be guaranteed and there is likely to be crime; but so long as we have acted in a provable and demonstrable manner through which we had taken every reasonable course to ensure the safety of our prisoners, that then the prison cannot be faulted.
This act occurred at the hands of a cellmate. We cant start assigning all of the industry woes to this individual case. There are no indicators that overcrowding was an issue or that the 'victims' cellmate had a history that warranted extraordinary care. Until that is proven or at LEAST there is evidence to the contrary, this is no more negligent than a University or Community shelter housing individuals with the occasional violent criminal act.
 
Sorry but I have absolutely NO sympathy for this less the scum thing. And nothing that anyone can say will change that. As far as I'm concerned child rapists should be put to death.
 
Not necessarily. Nevertheless, "intentional negligence" would be malice and (hopefully) not relevant to this case.
I think it would be the ONLY relevant factor in a finding of guilt. But then...Im not on a jury.
 
That would be one way to help control prison population. Though not throwing so many into prison in the first place is also an avenue to explore.
Sure...if we are talking about the choom gang. But we arent...we are talking about a child rapist.
 
Which makes you a moral subjectivist. Rape, sodomy, and all other manner of perverted acts can never be justified. You are no better than the rabid liberals who condone gay marriage.

But morals are subjective...

Ethics may not be, but morals are.

Also, lol you a bigot.
 
This act occurred at the hands of a cellmate. We cant start assigning all of the industry woes to this individual case. There are no indicators that overcrowding was an issue or that the 'victims' cellmate had a history that warranted extraordinary care. Until that is proven or at LEAST there is evidence to the contrary, this is no more negligent than a University or Community shelter housing individuals with the occasional violent criminal act.

Murder, rape, and drugs occur often in our prison systems. We even know the aggregate effect, we stated it in this thread. Rapists get raped, child molesters get theirs in prison, blah blah blah. All that doesn't speak to some isolated, individual case, but rather a larger dynamic of crime and murder in our prison system.

This doesn't exist in vacuum, and one of the reasons this lawsuit has so much potential to win is because we have turned a blind eye to the dangers and crimes occurring in our prison system. We are responsible for the well being of our prisoners, hands down. We have not lived up to that responsibility.
 
If rape is intended to be part of the sentence for a crime, it should be specified by law. Allowing thugs in prison to rape anyone they don't like violates the government's obligation to protect people in their custody. It creates a climate in the prison that encourages rape as a reward for the strongest, most powerful or violent prisoners. If it happens in jail, the victim may be innocent and awaitingtrial. A person with a relatively benign conviction, such as 18 year old caught having consensual sex with his 16 year old girlfriend, is considered a child molester under the law and rumors could result in a person being wrongly identified as a child molester.
 
Sure...if we are talking about the choom gang. But we arent...we are talking about a child rapist.

*sigh*

Yes, I know. But all the people in prison are not child rapists (I don't know why this has to be explained). So overall prison crowding isn't just because we're only throwing child rapists into prison, but also other folk who have not committed violent crime. The prison overcrowding on aggregate is one of the major contributors to the dangers in prison because it becomes hard to keep and control such large numbers. Thus, reducing the prison population is a way through which we can help to secure the well being of our prisoners who are legitimately in prison.

This is not a vacuum problem, this is not an isolated case; this is an aggregate problem with our prison system in general. You cannot treat this as singular.
 
It is unlikely that this suit will go anywhere UNLESS it can be proven that the state in some way facilitated the assault.

Think about the can of worms it opens if someone were to successfully sue because something bad happened to them in prison.

The flip side to this is of course...the chutzpah that it takes to sue because someone committed a violent sexual act against you when you are in prison for committing a violent sexual act...

Prisons are responsible for the safety of the prisoners, they should be able to control the behavior of the inmates enough to prevent rapes.
 
I think it would be the ONLY relevant factor in a finding of guilt. But then...Im not on a jury.

That's simply not correct legally. The standard of (civil) culpability which a natural or legal person has for failing to protect a person in their custody is negligence, which is more restrictive than strict liability, but less than intentional.

But morals are subjective...

Ethics may not be, but morals are.

Also, lol you a bigot.

Opposing rape is not bigoted.
 
Only death row inmates are kept in cages, 23 hours a day. I already know you aren't proposing that we treat all inmates like death row inmates.

Any prisoner put in solitary confinement is confined to a cell for approx. 23 hours per day.
 
That's simply not correct legally. The standard of (civil) culpability which a natural or legal person has for failing to protect a person in their custody is negligence, which is more restrictive than strict liability, but less than intentional.



Opposing rape is not bigoted.

Randomly shouting insults at liberals and stomping on gay rights is pretty bigoted if ya ask me.
 
*sigh*

Yes, I know. But all the people in prison are not child rapists (I don't know why this has to be explained). So overall prison crowding isn't just because we're only throwing child rapists into prison, but also other folk who have not committed violent crime. The prison overcrowding on aggregate is one of the major contributors to the dangers in prison because it becomes hard to keep and control such large numbers. Thus, reducing the prison population is a way through which we can help to secure the well being of our prisoners who are legitimately in prison.

This is not a vacuum problem, this is not an isolated case; this is an aggregate problem with our prison system in general. You cannot treat this as singular.

It's all good, with pot being legalized you'll probably see the prison systems clear up a bit.
 
I think that there is something to be said about reasonable expectation...but can we presume every prisoner is a violent offender and NOT house them with others without violating SOMEONES rights? If they had put the sex offender in isolation 'for his own protection' would he also be able to sue because he was being isolated and discriminated against?

At some point they will have to prove intentional negligence, not "prison is a dangerous place cuz there are all those pesky prisoners in it..."

Many prisons and jails segregate vulnerable prisoners (sex offenders, police informers, ex-police officers and others) from the general population for their safety without keeping them in solitary.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top Bottom