Another human rights case

Printable View

17-12-2010, 05:44 PM
Takeovers

Another human rights case

I put this into the Lounge as I only have a german language link.

The story over years in short. This is about Markus Gäfgen who hijacked and murdered a boy and then demanded ransom.

He was caught by police who were sure he is the hijacker but he did not admit to the crime and did not give the location of the boy. A police officer then threatened him with torture in the hope to save the boy. Gäfgen admitted under the threat and led police to the boy. He could not be saved as he had been dead a while already.

The police officer was dismissed, charged, and given a suspended sentence for the torture threat.

The murderer was sentenced to life for murder. The court decided the admission was under threat and could not be used as evidence. However the evidence found at the crime scene was regarded as legitimate and clear evidence of the crime by Gäfgen.

The lawyer of Gäfgen is now trying to overturn the sentence on grounds of illegally acquired evidence with the European Court of Human Rights.:ourrules:

I sure hope he rots in jail.
17-12-2010, 05:58 PM
Bettyboo

Poor cop... Threatening violence to save a life in that situation should be a requirement!
17-12-2010, 08:08 PM
Mr Lick

Although the officer broke the law, he did so with the intent of saving a young boy's life. I hope that the citizens of the area in which he resides appreciated his effort and personal sacrifice and pledge financial and moral support for the man.

As Gafgen is entitled to legal representation during his appeal, lets just hope his lawyer isn't working too hard eh! :)
17-12-2010, 08:52 PM
Takeovers

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Poor cop... Threatening violence to save a life in that situation should be a requirement!

You cannot legalize it. That would be crossing a border and give powers to police they should not have. The suspended sentence is a good compromise. I do hope somebody offered him a good job afterwards, someone should.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mr Lick

As Gafgen is entitled to legal representation during his appeal, lets just hope his lawyer isn't working too hard eh!

He is working overtime. This is already the second attempt on a european court if I recall correctly. The first one was rejected. It seems he sees his chance to become infamous if not famous.
17-12-2010, 09:14 PM
Bettyboo

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bettyboo

Threatening violence to save a life in that situation should be a requirement!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Takeovers

You cannot legalize it. That would be crossing a border and give powers to police they should not have. The suspended sentence is a good compromise. I do hope somebody offered him a good job afterwards, someone should.

I understand your concern, but I don't agree.

The reality is that such powers and greater are available to government security forces under certain situations. What situation is more urgent than the murder of a child? It is the policeman's duty to do everything in his power to attempt to save the child.

It comes down to a simple question: what are our security forces for? Many extreme laws are used to the benefit of politicians and their stances, but don't seem to be so important when saving a child is on the line. Politicians will shout terrorism or such lines and invoke all sorts of laws which empower them... but, seemingly, a policemen is tied from doing his duty of saving a child. That is plain wrong.

Society, and Germany and the UK are two excellent examples, is failing. Honest citizens (and their children) are left to die, literally, whilst the 'system' and those that benefit from it maintains itself with extreme measures. It is just wrong. By my interpretation of the law, which is open to interpretation and common sense, context, etc, that is what law is about, is that this policeman did nothing wrong.

I'll give you another example. A sino-Thai doctor I know walked past a car wreck and refused to help the dying passengers. His excuses were about 'legal aspects', etc. I do not accept this. He has a duty, as a doctor (and a human being) to attempt to help another person in need. When we are restrained by 'laws', and the right thing (and we all know what was the right thing to do in these situations...) is ignored due to legal contrainsts which leave innocent people to die, then society has reached a point that must be close to breaking.