# Mother sets fire to her daughter's gloating rapist **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 25, 2009, 2:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363 "2009-02-25T14:27:52Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 10
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 1:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/181 "2009-02-26T13:56:40Z")
The sad case of Polly Klaas comes to mind. Her murderer taunted her father _in the courtroom_, and most people would have looked the other way if the father chose to dismember that fucker right there on the bench. > **[Richard Allen Davis](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Allen_Davis)** > > Richard Allen Davis (born June 2, 1954) is an American convicted murderer whose criminal record fueled support for the passage of California's "three-strikes law" for repeat offenders and the involuntary civil commitment act for sex offenders and predators. He was convicted in 1996 of first-degree murder with special circumstances (burglary, robbery, kidnapping, and an attempted lewd act upon a child under the age of 14) of 12-year-old Polly Klaas. As of April 2022, he remains on California's d... But he resisted the urge, which is what most people in civilized society would have done. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/182 "2009-02-26T14:02:54Z")
> [@alterego](#): > > For fun I would like to argue the opposite. All male rapists of females should be sentenced to immediate death. The reason is that genes for raping people are highly exploitative. They will tend to spread in the gene pool. Further, it is relatively straightforward for a single man to rape hundreds of women, thus hastening the propagation of these genes. As a society if we do not kill all rapists as soon as they are discovered then genes for raping will quickly proliferate. Jailing rapists is only acceptable if it is a life sentence. For fun I’ll play along. Is it in fact the case that rape is a highly successful reproductive strategy? Do rapists actually impregnate many women? Do most of these pregnancies go to term? If not, then it does not appear likely after all that we must sanction the burning alive of rapists as a necessary measure to prevent the propagation of their genes, and we are forced to conclude that your eugenic thought-experiment is nothing more than sophistry intended to justify your blood-thirst against rapists. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/183 "2009-02-26T14:20:56Z")
> [@ivan\_astikov](#): > > Did you read the link? > Was it the way he said it that made it a taunt? How do we know he wasn’t genuinely concerned? Do we accept the word of a woman who was described as mentally ill? Don’t try to weasel out of it. If you’re calling for punishment, you have to say what you think is fair. ---
**Author:** ![Q.E.D](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/51bf81/32.png) [@Q.E.D](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Q.E.D)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/184 "2009-02-26T14:53:09Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > I wonder if you who say the woman must be punished would be satisfied with trial, conviction and probation (any more rapist fires and she goes to jail) or if you think she should serve time in a jail cell, and if so, how long? How much more suffering do you want to inflict on this woman? Same as any cold-blooded murderer in her jurisdiction would get. And if you’re going to try to tell me it was a crime of passion and she just snapped on the spur of the moment because of his “taunt”, you tell me how many elderly women carry around bottles of gasoline in their purses. No, she had to go and find a bottle, find a gas station and fill it up and go back to where the guy was–plenty of time for cooler heads to prevail. ---
**Author:** ![Dead\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/9fc29f/32.png) [@Dead\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dead_Cat)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/185 "2009-02-26T14:57:11Z")
> [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](#): > > Bullshit. My duty is to what is right, not to what the law says, as sometimes the law is an ass. > > A juror is not the same as a judge, and the law cannot be right in every circumstance. If I were, say, on an American jury in the 1800s, faced with deciding the guilt of a person charged with theft of property for helping an fugitive slave, my ethical and moral duty is to vote for acquittal and to campaign for it in the jury room, because the law itself is unjust and must be opposed. > > And yes, I am quite aware that this argument can be used to justify letting persons like [Byron De La Beckwith](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Byron_De_La_Beckwith) off the hook. But that doesn’t change my position. _My obligation to do what is right is absolute._ I think **Malacandra** provided a far more eloquent response to this than I can manage on page 3, so I’ll just add that the way to change what you perceive to be an unjust law is not to act dishonestly as a juror. Why not cast your jury vote in accordance with the current law and the facts of the case, and then campaign for the law to be changed outside the courtroom? Arguing about it in court is about as likely to get the law changed as arguing over a decision with a sports referee is going to change their decision, or shouting the loudest in the audience at the conclusion of a reality TV contest will change the result of the telephone vote. Secondly, it is common in the UK for a person to be convicted of a crime, but the judge decides (for example) not to impose the jail sentence that would normally be given due to mitigating circumstances. This case seems like a prime candidate for that sort of thing, although if I were the judge I would still send the woman down for at least some time. > [@Clothahump](#): > > I should have made it clear that I was speaking in terms of being called for a U.S. jury. In the USA, juries are the ultimate triers of fact and we still have the right of jury nullification. Under that concept, if the jury thinks the accused was charged with the wrong crime or something similar, they can vote to acquit no matter what evidence was presented. > > [Jury nullification - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jury_nullification) And I think you would be wrong to do so in this case, otherwise we are on the slippery slope to vigilante justice. ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/186 "2009-02-26T15:09:39Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Don’t try to weasel out of it. If you’re calling for punishment, you have to say what you think is fair. But for the fact she did this in a crowded pub, I’d be happy to have her escorted around a few hospital burns units, just to remind her of the magnitude of her offence against public civilty. As it stands, she could do with some time in a mental institution, as a prison sentence would not benefit anyone… unless she has took a liking to this form of expression! ---
**Author:** ![Find\_Friends](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/c37758/32.png) [@Find\_Friends](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Find_Friends)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/187 "2009-02-26T16:26:02Z")
> [@VunderBob](#): > > …Or illegal trash burning. The noun that is the third word in your sentence here may be entirely too kind. Or, to put it another way, a completely unjustified “promotion.” IOW, I’m with you. 🙂 Of course she broke the law, and a trial is in order. Or at least a hearing. I mean, where would you draw the line in immediately dismissing “understandable” vigilante actions? (Heck, there has to be at least a hearing in most of the clearly self-defense cases.) Having said that, I hope she has an excellent attorney and she is declared not guilty. By the line Giles suggested, that is, perceiving a threat, (I add whether or not a real threat was intended), temporary insanity, whatever the local law will bear. Some here have spoken of proportional response. Yes, there is a proportional legal response, and she clearly (should I add “allegedly” here?) went beyond that. Now that she has done what she did, though, the proportional \*\*real-world \*\*response is for her to get off. Anyway the legal defense can manage. - “Jack” ---
**Author:** ![Snarky\_Kong](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/a183cd/32.png) [@Snarky\_Kong](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Snarky_Kong)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 4:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/188 "2009-02-26T16:51:27Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Killing people should _never_ be OK, but no-one seems to agree with me. What about in self defense? ---
**Author:** ![Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bcef8e/32.png) [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Petrobey_Mavromihalis)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/189 "2009-02-26T17:04:56Z")
> [@Snarky\_Kong](#): > > What about in self defense? The situation might arise (rarely) that you need to kill someone in self defence. This doesn’t mean that the action is “OK” and not to be regretted. What’s with you lot? How come you regard taking a life so lightly? ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/190 "2009-02-26T17:09:41Z")
> [@alterego](#): > > Is this really true? Is a society in which men can freely rape women’s daughters without fear of death the only way a civilized society can function? > > For fun I would like to argue the opposite. All male rapists of females should be sentenced to immediate death. Ah, yes, the magical land of Aibara Aiduas. Let’s analyze the unintended consequences of various forms of punishment. 1. Punishment for rape is less than the punishment for murder. Unintended consequence: sometimes outraged citizens wish to take the law into their own hands to exact a harsher punishment. 2. Punishment for rape is equal to that of murder. Unintended consequence: there’s no downside to murdering your rape victim, because no further punishment could be added. In fact, it becomes _smarter_ to kill the victim, because then she can’t testify against you. 3. Punishment for rape is always death. Unintended consequence: false accusations of rape will skyrocket, along with the use of _threats_ to accuse as a means of extorting someone to do what you want. “If you don’t do XYZ, I’ll tell everybody that you raped me, and you’ll die.” Law leverages women into power and men become permanent second-class citizens. 4. Same as 3, but only for men. Unintended consequence: Women may feel free to rape men. Men become afraid to report rape, because she can say “I’ll just tell everybody you raped me instead! Take that.” Worse. I still think 1 is superior for a functioning civilized society. If you can make the case otherwise, feel free. ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/191 "2009-02-26T17:10:39Z")
> [@Q.E.D](#): > > Same as any cold-blooded murderer in her jurisdiction would get. And if you’re going to try to tell me it was a crime of passion and she just snapped on the spur of the moment because of his “taunt”, you tell me how many elderly women carry around bottles of gasoline in their purses. No, she had to go and find a bottle, find a gas station and fill it up and go back to where the guy was–plenty of time for cooler heads to prevail. How elderly is she? Young enough to have had a 13yo daughter seven years previously? If she’d felt able to beat the shit out of a 69-year-old man with her bare hands or, hell, even the nearest non-lethal weapon within reach, I’d happily wink at that. Burning someone to death is another story. I don’t buy “temporary insanity” either. I don’t believe anyone can be temporarily insane enough to forget that dousing someone in lighted petrol will probably burn them to death, or that burning people to death is wrong. If people want it to be legal to burn rapists to death then they should lobby for rapist-burning to be legal and assume the moral consequences of having such a law on the statute books. ---
**Author:** ![Grumman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/43a26b/32.png) [@Grumman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Grumman)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/192 "2009-02-26T17:12:02Z")
> [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](#): > > How come you regard taking a life so lightly? Because the world is better off if people who think it is okay to prey on innocent people are incapable of doing so. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/193 "2009-02-26T17:13:58Z")
> [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](#): > > The situation might arise (rarely) that you need to kill someone in self defence. This doesn’t mean that the action is “OK” and not to be regretted. > > What’s with you lot? How come you regard taking a life so lightly? Killing an assailant in self-defense or defense of an innocent is regrettable, sure. In the sense that the person doing it is likely to feel bad. But it’s okay. It’s ENTIRELY okay. The feeling of guilt and regret for killing the assailant, though natural, and probably unavoidable for most people, is misguided and erroneous, because if you kill a person who has attacked you without justification andwith evident intent to kill, maim, or rape you, you have done nothing wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Fish](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/bc8723/32.png) [@Fish](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fish)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/194 "2009-02-26T17:20:06Z")
> [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](#): > > The situation might arise (rarely) that you need to kill someone in self defence. This doesn’t mean that the action is “OK” and not to be regretted. > > What’s with you lot? How come you regard taking a life so lightly? Taking a life isn’t an easy decision to make, nor is ordering a life to be taken, but in the case of self-defense I don’t see there’s a reasonable choice. 1. Stand there passively and die, and say “I have no regrets.” Attacker moves on to kill your family and take all your stuff. 2. Fight back with as much force as necessary to defend yourself and your home/family. 3. Run like a little chicken. In order words, fight or flight. These are biologically programmed responses. It makes no sense to try to legislate against our own biology. Might as well pass a law saying it’s illegal for a man to get an erection without a woman’s consent, or illegal to fart in a crowded room. And so the situation _does_ arise: if you kill another, we call it murder, unless he started it, in which case it’s self-defense. If a whole bunch of someones try to kill your country we call it _war_. Fine distinctions between types of death. What’s the alternative? ---
**Author:** ![Malacandra](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Malacandra](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malacandra)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/195 "2009-02-26T17:21:30Z")
Strangely, considering how old news this is, this seems to be getting discussed a lot to judge by the Google hits. Can’t seem to find out what happened to Senora X, though. ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/196 "2009-02-26T17:26:00Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Because the world is better off if people who think it is okay to prey on innocent people are incapable of doing so. That’s not the only aspect of our world that is affected by these actions. Society in general is harmed when we allow our world to be ruled by emotions. We become collectively less as humans if all our responses are driven by rage. ---
**Author:** ![Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/bcef8e/32.png) [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Petrobey_Mavromihalis)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/197 "2009-02-26T17:30:20Z")
> [@Grumman](#): > > Because the world is better off if people who think it is okay to prey on innocent people are incapable of doing so. The world would be better off if burglars were incapable of committing crimes. Should we off them too? Perhaps pre-emptive action is in order? [QUOTE=Skald] The feeling of guilt and regret for killing the assailant, though natural, and probably unavoidable for most people, is misguided and erroneous, because if you kill a person who has attacked you without justification andwith evident intent to kill, maim, or rape you, you have done nothing wrong. [/QUOTE] Ok, I’ll try again. The problem is _where_ you draw the line, and _who_ draws it. You say “maim”. What do you mean? Who decides? [QUOTE=Fish] And so the situation does arise: if you kill another, we call it murder, unless he started it, in which case it’s self-defense. [/QUOTE] I don’t think I’ve said anything contrary to this, or to the other points you raise. ---
**Author:** ![Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Skald\_the\_Rhymer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Skald_the_Rhymer)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 5:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/198 "2009-02-26T17:41:08Z")
> [@Petrobey\_Mavromihalis](#): > > Ok, I’ll try again. The problem is _where_ you draw the line, and _who_ draws it. You say “maim”. What do you mean? Who decides? If a man wants to throw hands and I cannot defuse the situation, I am justified at throwing hands in return, but assuming I manage to overcome him I am not justified in inflicting killing damage. If a man comes at me or an innocent with a weapon that can reasonably be thought lethal–a gun, a butcher knife, an axe–I am justified in killing him to defend myself, and it is not necessary to know whether he intended to kill me, cut of my arm, or just remove my pinkie finger. As it is also impossible for me to know that, the act of attacking with potentially lethal force means the person has sacrificed his right to life if I must kill him to protect myself. However, if I manage to subdue him, I may not arbitarily kill him under most circumstances. But I’m not going take any special risks to preserve his life until I know I and the innocent are safe. ---
**Author:** ![Clothahump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/51bf81/32.png) [@Clothahump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Clothahump)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/199 "2009-02-26T18:21:42Z")
> [@Dead\_Cat](#): > > And I think you would be wrong to do so in this case, otherwise we are on the slippery slope to vigilante justice. No. Quite the opposite, actually. ---
**Author:** ![Ludovic](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ab992/32.png) [@Ludovic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ludovic)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 6:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363/200 "2009-02-26T18:31:20Z")
… [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363.md?page=9) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mother-sets-fire-to-her-daughters-gloating-rapist/487363.md?page=11)