ABC-News link.
In the Netherlands is currently on trial a 46-year old lady, Germaine X. The Dutch DA has demanded 30 months in prison. Dutch public opinion is deeply divided, with as much a 70 % of Dutch population thinking the sentence is outrageously harsh. On the other hand, the Dutch Moroccan muslim community is outraged as well and has made threats to the woman, who as a result has been hiding for that last three years.
The case somewhat resembles the USA Rodney King case.
It is a shame that both protagonists in this drama are so deeply unsympathetic. I myself don’t really know what to think; considering the woman has been awaitng trial for three years, I think a sentence of six months or so is appropriate.
The Moslem community is getting into an extremely dangerous position.
They are using their race as a cover for the criminal behaviour of just a few, and no doubt the ones doing this rabble rousing have their own agenda too.
This was not about race, but the fact that htis woman has had to go into hiding instead of the judiciary dealing with it seems to me that some Moslems think they are beyond the law.
Those behind the threats should be imprisoned - one day I fear the backlash against Islam in Western nations will be devastating.
How can a 19 year old kid be a convicted thief and awaiting trial on armed robbery charges without his family knowing? Is this truly a cultural phenomenon?
That is a very American viewpoint, as it is even legal in many states to shoot somebody trespassing on your property. Not so, however, in the Netherlands. The judges viewpoint is that purse snatching doesn’t deserve a death sentence, and that we can’t have vigilante justice or retalatory action. “Being one’s own judge” is heavily frowned on here. I’m not saying that stance doesn’t have its drawbacks as wel as advantages compared to the American system; but it IS a difference.
Not the crime and the way the perp was killed, no. But race/nationality had everything to do with the resulting uproar.
They would know, but they would probably turn a blind eye anyway, be in denial, make lots of excuses, point accusing fingers, etcetera.
That failure by the Muslim community to publicly accept even a small part of the blame for the wrongdoings caused by a small group of their youngsters, is a big part of the irritation many Dutch feel towards “Muslims”.
Seriously, though, examine the case without race/religion involved. He was a scumbag, she acted incredibly irresponsibly. I would hope that the court comes down largely in her favour, but I’d be surprised if she wasn’t censured in some way.
The article you quote seems to paint the Moroccan community with a brush that wouldn’t be considered seemly for the UK media (except in the tabloid press, in op-ed pieces). The “sweet good boy” defense happens in all communities, not just immigrant.
That said, the knee-jerk “defend one of our own reagardless” reaction happens all the time over here too.
USA Dopers, can anyone draw a parallel here with how some of your own minority groups dealt with their criminal youngsters? Suppose that in the past, young men from minority group X had a well deserved reputation for crime. And suppose that minority group X was a religiously close knit community that , perhaps unconsciously, milked its status as victim/minority/proud culture for all that it was worth.
Did such minority groups exist? Over time, how did they deal with their young criminal sons? Denial? Public excuses? Promises to raise the kids better? How did that work out?
The case seems to me to be what we’d call here “reckless driving causing death”. That involves a maximum fine of $20,000 and/or five years in prison. The 30 month prison term for this woman may well get bargained down, anyway, but I think it looks fair.
That sounds reasonable. However, I wonder if the DA will also persecute the threats made against Germaine C. It’s been three years, and so far no such arrests have been made. I have to say that irks me. If Germaine is prosecuted, fine, but then so should the cowards that make threats.
In the UK, pursuing and killing a fleeing purse-snatcher would be a crime (presumably ‘manslaughter’ if the car was provably deliberately aimed to kill and ‘causing death by dangerous driving’ if it wasn’t.
I don’t like thieves (but he didn’t use violence).
I certainly don’t like vigilantes, especially using a car to ram (which could easily kill other people)
I don’t like stirring up threats using racial prejudice and ignorance.
Snatching valuables out of a car should be a death sentence, carried out by a civilian?
Would you be as content if the woman had shot him on the street?
Yeah, I can’t say I’m a fan of this kind of action either. There’s a fair amount of evidence that she should have known this would likely cause great harm or worse to the thief.
Quite agree. He definitely didn’t deserve to die, but this was not vigilante justice. This was in media res, in the heat of the moment; vigilante justice would be her going round to his house afterwards. He stole and took off and she pursued him. This pursuit happenned to end with his death. I have no problem with that. If someone stole your wallet, you’d run after them, wouldn’t you? Suppose you tackled them and they hit their head on a stone and died; how is this different? No one is saying that she reversed over him repeatedly.
No, but she is on trial for possibly deliberately ramming the guy into a tree with a car and killing him. I don’t know if she did but neither do you. That’s what the trial is for.
No it is not. In roughly half of the states, you can shoot someone who is in your house, uninvited and threatening you with bodily harm. YOU CANNOT SHOOT SOMEONE WALKING ACROSS YOUR YARD, and that’s true in all 50 states.
