Subject:
|
Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 16 Jul 2001 19:23:49 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1180 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> Even if it can sometimes avenge or even prevent crimes, the link
> between most kinds of writing and future events is too tenuous to generaly
> admit as evidence. I would not object to a perp's written letter to newspapers
> or the police being used as evidence, but that seems materially different.
Yeah--a journal is, traditionally, a private forum for articulating one's
thoughts. A letter to the papers could easily be construed as a statement
of intent. I'm still torn, though; in college I argued passionately for the
impossibility of identifying authorial intention in writing, but a case like
this seems more of a grey area.
> Further, It seems to me that this particular deranged individual might need
> some kind of ficticious outlet like that to let off steam so that he needn't
> bend to his internal pressures. Obviously I'm speculating wildly, but I think
> that making a case for there being a victim of a fictional story is pretty
> tough.
Working with your speculation: if through his writing the individual was
able to achieve some kind of release that he didn't then have to seek in
real life, I say let him write whatever he wants! It's hard to distinguish
between written intention and written fantasy, but you're right; a fictional
victim is hard to avenge.
One caveat I would offer, though it's not ironclad, depends on the names
of the children as given in the journal. If they referred to children in
the neighborhood or previous victims, I might regard those as mitigating
circumstances, but I still don't know how exactly to treat them.
> It would depend mostly on how the journal was recovered. I'm assuming that
> enough detail can be matched between the 'story' and the event to be
> reasonably sure that coincidence can be ruled out. If the evidence was
> obtained legally, then it should be presented to a jury. If they aren't
> sure, then they shouldn't convict.
I can't recall the specifics, but I remember a case some years ago about a
man suspected of killing his wife or mistress, but little evidence was found
other than files on his computer including (I seem to recall) a list of
"things to do" to accomplish the murder. He asserted that the files were
preparation for a novel he was working on, but I don't think the jury
believed him. I wish I could remember more about it.
Dave!
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: Laws about sex.... (was something else)
|
| (...) That's true, but I think Tom's point is that this is a dangerous thing to allow the courts. Even if it can sometimes avenge or even prevent crimes, the link between most kinds of writing and future events is too tenuous to generaly admit as (...) (23 years ago, 16-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
189 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
