Should this woman be put in a microwave for five minutes

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2564668/Woman-23-cooked-kitten-microwave-five-minutes-attacked-pet-goldfish.html
On an intellectual level I understand why revengeful justice is wrong - but on a visceral level I just think this woman should suffer at least as much as the poor kitten.

I am owned by cats - and love them. Two have been with me since birth - I watched them born. Even mum I have known since she was a day old because she was partially hand reared. It breaks my heart to think of cats having to suffer in any way - outright evil cruelty like this just deserves outright evil cruelty back.

The depths of human depravity knows no bounds! How the hell could anyone do that to any animal, it's beyond cruel.

Sassy wrote:The depths of human depravity knows no bounds!   How the hell could anyone do that to any animal, it's beyond cruel.

I honestly dont know sass - Cats might be more independent than dogs but they still love you and trust you and depend on you, I dont want to even think about what that poor little mite when through and if I saw the woman I would end up behind bars myself for what I would do to her.

As a bitch................... I will never ever be cooked thank you.

gerber wrote:As a bitch...................  I will never ever be cooked thank you.

My apologies - use of bitch was an insult to bitches - I will change it.

Still think this woman is beyond evil though.

Afraid cannot edit the poll - Ben if you are reading could you please change the "bitch" in the poll to "supreme evil human scum". Thank you.

Makes me feel sick even thinking about it, it must have suffered so much. How would you ever give her a punishment that was appropriate to the crime.

sphinx wrote:

gerber wrote:As a bitch...................  I will never ever be cooked thank you.

My apologies - use of bitch was an insult to bitches - I will change it.

Still think this woman is beyond evil though.

Thank you and will now go to the poll..

xx

Sassy wrote:Makes me feel sick even thinking about it, it must have suffered so much.   How would you ever give her a punishment that was appropriate to the crime.  

She has not even been remanded awaiting sentencing - she is out on unconditional bail.

RSPCA have said they only bought the case to get her banned from keeping animals.

What is wrong with this world ?

That's sick, you mean she is not even going to be locked up?

Sentencing is March 13th - she is on unconditional bail until then. She is probably going to get nothing anyway because her defence is mental health.

I know this sounds harsh but it is about time the court system started doing away with reasons for lesser sentencing - there are thousands of people with the same mental problems as her that never hurt a fly - in any crime where a lesser sentence is given because the offend is ??????? there are many in the same boat that dont break the law.

She needs to be punished.

sphinx wrote:Sentencing is March 13th - she is on unconditional bail until then.  She is probably going to get nothing anyway because her defence is mental health.

I know this sounds harsh but it is about time the court system started doing away with reasons for lesser sentencing - there are thousands of people with the same mental problems as her that never hurt a fly - in any crime where a lesser sentence is given because the offend is ??????? there are many in the same boat that dont break the law.

She needs to be punished.

I notice that the RWhinge are always keen on punishment, which never achieves the desired effect, this woman has mental issues and if she has not fabricated them for her defence then one must assume that she is incapable of looking after pets.

The offence has been highlighted, which in itself might act as a warning for the scores of pensioners who have put their "pets" in the microwave to dry them.

scrat wrote:

sphinx wrote:Sentencing is March 13th - she is on unconditional bail until then.  She is probably going to get nothing anyway because her defence is mental health.

I know this sounds harsh but it is about time the court system started doing away with reasons for lesser sentencing - there are thousands of people with the same mental problems as her that never hurt a fly - in any crime where a lesser sentence is given because the offend is ??????? there are many in the same boat that dont break the law.

She needs to be punished.

I notice that the RWhinge are always keen on punishment, which never achieves the desired effect, this woman has mental issues and if she has not fabricated them for her defence then one must assume that she is incapable of looking after pets.

The offence has been highlighted, which in itself might act as a warning for the scores of pensioners who have put their "pets" in the microwave to dry them.

bullshit...................... too late to read an essay love you

What about that cats Cruelty to the gold fish? As a fish lover the cat needed punishment.        but microwaving is too cruel     

veya_victaous wrote:What about that cats Cruelty to the gold fish? As a fish lover the cat needed punishment.         but microwaving is too cruel     

A MAGIMIX.................

 

AS ANY lowlife_scum that could even think of microwaving kittens can't have much of a brain...

I WOULD suggest just microwaving her head..

AS she would then still be alive to suffer the punishment, while having that opportunity to realise what she did to those poor cats !   

The article says that her problems include psychosis and depression and that she had been sectioned under mental health legislation several times.

While what she did is inexcusable locking her up in prison isn't going to solve anything.  She needs specialist mental health treatment as an inpatient.  Too many people are sent to prison rather than getting the treatment they need.  The state of our mental health service is disgraceful  

what ever her legal punishment it won't be enough, sad sad woman.

I saw this yesterday. It sickened me so much. I put it on facebook so her face gets around. I swear that if I met this human detritis in the street I'd find the nearest weapon and smash her to a pulp regardless of the consequences.

Tess. wrote:I saw this yesterday.  It sickened me so much. I put it on facebook so her face gets around.  I swear that if I met this human detritis in the street I'd find the nearest weapon and smash her to a pulp regardless of the consequences.

i seem to remember a case in the US when a woman took her pet dog out for a walk in the rain, and microwaved it to dry the dog off, killed it of course then successfully sued the microwave company as it did not say you could microwave your dog..

heavenly father wrote:

Tess. wrote:I saw this yesterday.  It sickened me so much. I put it on facebook so her face gets around.  I swear that if I met this human detritis in the street I'd find the nearest weapon and smash her to a pulp regardless of the consequences.

i seem to remember a case in the US when a woman took her pet dog out for a walk in the rain, and microwaved it to dry the dog off, killed it of course then successfully sued the microwave company as it did not say you could microwave your dog..

Reminds me of this story:

Winnebago winner?

"This year's runaway First Place Stella Award winner was Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City, who purchased a new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich.

"Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually leave the driver's seat while the cruise control was set

http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Incredible-lawsuit-tales-1826357.php

feelthelove wrote:

heavenly father wrote:

i seem to remember a case in the US when a woman took her pet dog out for a walk in the rain, and microwaved it to dry the dog off, killed it of course then successfully sued the microwave company as it did not say you could microwave your dog..

Reminds me of this story:

Winnebago winner?

"This year's runaway First Place Stella Award winner was Mrs. Merv Grazinski, of Oklahoma City, who purchased a new 32-foot Winnebago motor home. On her first trip home, from an OU football game, having driven on to the freeway, she set the cruise control at 70 mph and calmly left the driver's seat to go to the back of the Winnebago to make herself a sandwich.

"Not surprisingly, the motor home left the freeway, crashed and overturned. Also not surprisingly, Mrs. Grazinski sued Winnebago for not putting in the owner's manual that she couldn't actually leave the driver's seat while the cruise control was set

http://www.chron.com/news/casey/article/Incredible-lawsuit-tales-1826357.php

pretty amazing isn't it, this is why I started a thread on whether we should make rules to protect idiots or whether they should be left to kill themselves and not dilute the gene pool further with their stupidity. :D 

feelthelove wrote:The article says that her problems include psychosis and depression and that she had been sectioned under mental health legislation several times.

While what she did is inexcusable locking her up in prison isn't going to solve anything.  She needs specialist mental health treatment as an inpatient.  Too many people are sent to prison rather than getting the treatment they need.  The state of our mental health service is disgraceful  

I could not agree more - but in this time of self determination and rights of the individual it will not happen - people with mental illness will remain free to refuse to take medication even when that means they will harm themselves, others, and animals.

sphinx wrote:

feelthelove wrote:The article says that her problems include psychosis and depression and that she had been sectioned under mental health legislation several times.

While what she did is inexcusable locking her up in prison isn't going to solve anything.  She needs specialist mental health treatment as an inpatient.  Too many people are sent to prison rather than getting the treatment they need.  The state of our mental health service is disgraceful  

I could not agree more - but in this time of self determination and rights of the individual it will not happen - people with mental illness will remain free to refuse to take medication even when that means they will harm themselves, others, and animals.

Yes Sphinx, I was reading this earlier:

Schizophrenic with a gangrenous leg allowed to refuse amputation

A paranoid schizophrenic with a gangrenous leg has been allowed to refuse a life-saving amputation after a judge ruled that choice is “a part of what it means to be human” and a forced procedure would be “criminal assault”.

Doctors at a West Midlands hospital were faced with the medical dilemma after the unnamed woman, whose infected foot became mummified and fell off, refused to undergo the operation.

What started as a superficial ulcer on the woman's right foot turned gangrenous and, when her foot “came off” in January, medics told her she would have to lose her leg, or quite possibly her life.

However, medics were left with a crisis of conscience after the woman in her 60s, who has suffered from paranoid schizophrenia for most of her life, refused to consent to the operation.

In a unique case, lawyers representing the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust rushed to the Court of Protection in London seeking permission to carry out the amputation without the woman's consent.

However, Mr Justice Peter Jackson ruled that her mental illness had not robbed her of the power to make rational decisions and told medics they will have to abide by her wishes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10653650/Schizophrenic-with-a-gangrenous-leg-allowed-to-refuse-amputation.html

Yes cook the bitch

feelthelove wrote:The article says that her problems include psychosis and depression and that she had been sectioned under mental health legislation several times.

While what she did is inexcusable locking her up in prison isn't going to solve anything.  She needs specialist mental health treatment as an inpatient.  Too many people are sent to prison rather than getting the treatment they need.  The state of our mental health service is disgraceful  

Agree with this very much FtL. Treatment should be given but in the case of reoffense secure mental units are something I agree with- for people who commit all manner of psychotic crimes (or even think they might and who continue to think they will after treatment).

I went for the second option in the poll- I love cats too; but once justice becomes quick and on base instincts we have lost the right to call ourselves civilized.

feelthelove wrote:

sphinx wrote:

I could not agree more - but in this time of self determination and rights of the individual it will not happen - people with mental illness will remain free to refuse to take medication even when that means they will harm themselves, others, and animals.

Yes Sphinx, I was reading this earlier:

Schizophrenic with a gangrenous leg allowed to refuse amputation

A paranoid schizophrenic with a gangrenous leg has been allowed to refuse a life-saving amputation after a judge ruled that choice is “a part of what it means to be human” and a forced procedure would be “criminal assault”.

Doctors at a West Midlands hospital were faced with the medical dilemma after the unnamed woman, whose infected foot became mummified and fell off, refused to undergo the operation.

What started as a superficial ulcer on the woman's right foot turned gangrenous and, when her foot “came off” in January, medics told her she would have to lose her leg, or quite possibly her life.

However, medics were left with a crisis of conscience after the woman in her 60s, who has suffered from paranoid schizophrenia for most of her life, refused to consent to the operation.

In a unique case, lawyers representing the Heart of England NHS Foundation Trust rushed to the Court of Protection in London seeking permission to carry out the amputation without the woman's consent.

However, Mr Justice Peter Jackson ruled that her mental illness had not robbed her of the power to make rational decisions and told medics they will have to abide by her wishes.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/10653650/Schizophrenic-with-a-gangrenous-leg-allowed-to-refuse-amputation.html

To be fair that is not necessarily a mental illness issue - and the only one subject harm is herself. There are plenty of non mentally ill people choose to refuse life saving or extending treatment. I do support the right of people to refuse such procedures.

I am more concerned at those who are diagnosed with mental illness that can be medicated, who are known to be a risk to others when not medicated, and who are allowed to choose to not medicate and live free in the world with no support or supervision.

I mean dont get me wrong I fully understand why people with mental illness may wish not to medicate - and yes they should have the right to that but at the moment the system is not balanced so such a person stays unsupported and unsupervised. The system needs to be such that if a person wishes to stay off medication they have to be restricted and supervised for the protection of others as well as their selves. People should have the right to risk harm to themselves but not to risk harm to others.

Before anyone comes charging in yelling about prejudice against the mentally ill I am well aware that the number of mentally ill who may pose a risk to others is very very low - but they do exist and as it is at the moment there is a massive hole in the system.

Eilzel wrote:

feelthelove wrote:The article says that her problems include psychosis and depression and that she had been sectioned under mental health legislation several times.

While what she did is inexcusable locking her up in prison isn't going to solve anything.  She needs specialist mental health treatment as an inpatient.  Too many people are sent to prison rather than getting the treatment they need.  The state of our mental health service is disgraceful  

Agree with this very much FtL. Treatment should be given but in the case of reoffense secure mental units are something I agree with- for people who commit all manner of psychotic crimes (or even think they might and who continue to think they will after treatment).

I went for the second option in the poll- I love cats too; but once justice becomes quick and on base instincts we have lost the right to call ourselves civilized.

I went for option two also Les x

If she hadn't been ill I'm ashamed to say I probably would have opted for the uncivilised alternative.  I cannot stand cruelty to animals of any kind

Why is it that every time someone does something downright cruel and sick it's always blamed on mental illness? Doesn't anyone believe in good and evil nowadays? Can't anyone just accept that there are some pretty nasty people out there who aren't mentally ill - just bad.

I am reassured that most are going for option 2 - the feeling of intense anger but countered by a recognition that justice must be civilized.

I also have to say that I am not convinced that what she did and her mental illness are linked. Not every nasty or bad thing a person who is mentally ill does is due to the diagnosis but it may be used as an excuse. The punishing cat for attacking fish sounds far too normal thinking processes if that makes sense. If she had said she thought the cat was possessed or something I would accept it was her mental state - as it is I have a horrible feeling she would have done the same even if not mentally ill, that she thought microwave was a reasonable punishment, that she thought punishment was a reasonable response to natural behaviour.

Tess. wrote:Why is it that every time someone does something downright cruel and sick it's always blamed on mental illness?  Doesn't anyone believe in good and evil nowadays?  Can't anyone just accept that there are some pretty nasty people out there who aren't mentally ill - just bad.

Evil; is an interesting concept Tess, fascinating from a philosophical pov. I believe people can do evil things; there are actions which are unquestionably evil; and evil ideologies. However I don't believe 'evil people' exist in a traditional sense we think of evil- that would imply people can be born evil which is unimaginable- an evil baby, can you imagine?

Don't look on the word 'illness' as strictly a get-out clause though. To take a famous example, Ian Brady; I think Brady in mentally deranged, sick in the head; I don't however believe there is any help for such a man, and even if there was he has done too much. When I said earlier about having people in secure mental units I meant for life; because I don't think there is any help for them and they are a danger to society.

Tess. wrote:Why is it that every time someone does something downright cruel and sick it's always blamed on mental illness?  Doesn't anyone believe in good and evil nowadays?  Can't anyone just accept that there are some pretty nasty people out there who aren't mentally ill - just bad.

Of course Tess, there are plenty of evil people around who are not ill.  You make a very valid point though, how do we know if the cruelty she inflicted was because she is a wicked person or down to her mental health issues?  

I talk myself around in circles on this.  We deem psychopaths to be mentally ill; are they ill or are they just evil?  Do we apply a "mental illness" definition because we just cannot accept that another human being can act in such a way?

Was Ted Bundy a psycopath, mentally ill therefore needing treatment and not responsible for his actions???

feelthelove wrote:

Tess. wrote:Why is it that every time someone does something downright cruel and sick it's always blamed on mental illness?  Doesn't anyone believe in good and evil nowadays?  Can't anyone just accept that there are some pretty nasty people out there who aren't mentally ill - just bad.

Of course Tess, there are plenty of evil people around who are not ill.  You make a very valid point though, how do we know if the cruelty she inflicted was because she is a wicked person or down to her mental health issues?  

I talk myself around in circles on this.  We deem psychopaths to be mentally ill; are they ill or are they just evil?  Do we apply a "mental illness" definition because we just cannot accept that another human being can act in such a way?

Was Ted Bundy a psycopath, mentally ill therefore needing treatment and not responsible for his actions???

I think the important differentiation is knowing that just because someone is a psychopath and cannot 'help' doing evil things- does not absolve them or mean they should be 'let off'. They should still be punished if they act on their instincts and they should definitely be kept away from society.

I will point out that psychopaths can help doing evil things - there are plenty of people who fit the diagnostic criteria of psychopathy who never commit a single crime. They can be extremely successful legally - it is not unusual among successful businessmen and politicians.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-25116826

Eilzel wrote:

feelthelove wrote:

Of course Tess, there are plenty of evil people around who are not ill.  You make a very valid point though, how do we know if the cruelty she inflicted was because she is a wicked person or down to her mental health issues?  

I talk myself around in circles on this.  We deem psychopaths to be mentally ill; are they ill or are they just evil?  Do we apply a "mental illness" definition because we just cannot accept that another human being can act in such a way?

Was Ted Bundy a psycopath, mentally ill therefore needing treatment and not responsible for his actions???

I think the important differentiation is knowing that just because someone is a psychopath and cannot 'help' doing evil things- does not absolve them or mean they should be 'let off'. They should still be punished if they act on their instincts and they should definitely be kept away from society.

I think it's the "illness" and "hospital" terms used that I sometimes can't get my head around Les.  I agree that those with severe mental health problems and/or personality disorders who are a danger to others should be detained but in a mental health prison.  

Illness to me means hospital rather than a punishment.  For example Broadmoor Hospital is for those suffering severe mental illness...........maybe it should be a mental health prison for the criminally insane?! See I'm at it again!  

Tess. wrote:Why is it that every time someone does something downright cruel and sick it's always blamed on mental illness?  Doesn't anyone believe in good and evil nowadays?  Can't anyone just accept that there are some pretty nasty people out there who aren't mentally ill - just bad.

Spot on......

sphinx wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2564668/Woman-23-cooked-kitten-microwave-five-minutes-attacked-pet-goldfish.html
On an intellectual level I understand why revengeful justice is wrong - but on a visceral level I just think this woman should suffer at least as much as the poor kitten.

I am owned by cats - and love them.  Two have been with me since birth - I watched them born.  Even mum I have known since she was a day old because she was partially hand reared.  It breaks my heart to think of cats having to suffer in any way - outright evil cruelty like this just deserves outright evil cruelty back.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2580240/Laura-Cunliffe-microwaved-pet-kitten-death-jailed-14-weeks-judge-describes-act-utterly-horrendous-cruelty.html

At first sight 14 weeks in prison for this horror sounds like nothing - but further reading into the defence and reactions of the her family and it seems the judge has handed down as hefty a sentence as is likely to stick.

Even her defence was forced to admit she knew what she was doing and did it because she lost her temper. I can only hope that they extend her ban on keeping animals and no other innocent creature is entrusted to her care.