Why was this man convicted?
As only a Pound Pup can appreciate, sometimes life happens because the wrong face is presented at the wrong time, and claimed as being "the one".
May I introduce the identified JOSEPH BELARDE GARCIA - H-01695
 |
 |
How does an adult adoptee find comfort in his own personal identity if he finds his life is a puzzled mess filled with assumed targets and quotas?
Does faith alone in ministry restore a man's belief that not all humanity has gone to the dogs?
Comments
profiling
Do you think there's an element of prejudiced criminal-profiling taking place, not only because a person fits within a certain look or race, but because so-called experts offer "expert opinions" on certain types of people in high-profile court cases. I mean, let's be honest, expert-witnesses can make pretty good money in big court cases, especially if they coin a new phrase for themselves. Look at what "If the glove doesn't fit" phrase did for one lawyer!
So let's say someone hears the phrase Adopted Child Syndome, which in essence "explains" and details RAD. Both terms paint a very grim future, with little hope for improvement. Do you think there are lawyers and judges pushing to convict older kids (young adults) because they fit a profile no one wants to help fix? Do these people think dark troubled personalities need to just go away, never to be seen again, hoping removing the problem-child from society will remove the problem neglect caused by CPS and adoption services keep causing an entire society?
Can the world really be that cruel?
tough on crime
In a world where "tough on crime" seems to be a prerequisite for politicians to be taken serious at all. With populist terms as "three strikes" and "zero tolerance", the modern day breed of public office seekers invariably use crime as the arena to show they are indeed tough guys. Created by the very politicians that so much like to show off their virility, this arena is is of course as safe an environment as possible, dominated by well educated country club ladies and gentlemen, who never in there lives lived in slums, never had to face homelessness, didn't grow up among drug users, dealers and gangs.
Initially started as a weapon of conservative American politicians to counter the civil rights movement, the method of spreading fear and demanding higher and higher measures of punishment was so successful it became mainstream, not only in the US, but here in the Netherlands too. The result: a growing prison system and more and more kids who end up in jail, treated as if they were adults. Where on the one hand the age limit for drinking in the US was raised from 18 to 21, because people in between those ages were considered not mature enough to decide between right and wrong, the number of juvenile delinquents serving life without parole grew, indicating they were considered mature enough to be held completely accountable for their deeds.
In a climate where being tough is politically the only viable option, there is very little room for thoughts on rehabilitation. A heinous crime is a heinous crime and deserves a heinous punishment. Since capital punishment on minors is not allowed, it is done by proxy, giving them a life sentence without parole. In all that, circumstances of the crime don't seem to play much of a role, nor does the chance of recidivism get any attention.
In the end this is a game in which almost everybody loses: it doesn't solves the societal issues underlying many crimes, it makes convicts suffer more than they deserve and it even gives politicians less room to manouvre. The only ones who benefit from "tough on crime" are the owners of companies working for the penal system, the higher the influx and the higher the sentences, the more guaranteed income.
Tough-Luck Choices
"Tough on crime"... is that toughness against child-trafficking and CPS neglect and irresponsibility in their actions, as well?