An EYE FOR A EYE

[Danno 1,228]

Eye for an eye: Iranian man sentenced to have drops of acid poured onto his face for blinding his lover's husband

An Iranian man who blinded his lover's husband is to suffer a similar fate in a #######-for-tat sentencing - by having acid poured into his eye.

Iran’s Islamic code allows for ‘an eye-for-an-eye, a tooth-for-a-tooth’ retribution - known as 'qisas' - in cases of violent crime.

The convict, named only as Mojtaba, threw acid in the face of his rival Alireza, a taxi driver, after an illicit affair with the victim’s wife, Mojdeh.

All three are 25 and live in Qom, Iran’s clerical nerve centre 60 miles south of the capital, Tehran.

The grotesque penalty was passed by a lower court and upheld by Iran’s supreme court, a government daily, Iran, reported this weekend.

The Qom prosecutor, Mostafa Barzegar Ganji, said the victim had used his right to qisas.

'We have asked for forensic specialists to oversee the blinding of the convict,' he added.

Extreme punishments can be waived if the victim chooses to accept 'blood money' in reparation, and ‘eye for eye’ punishments are rarely carried out.

Similarly in capital cases, there have been several instances in Iran and Saudi Arabia where a convicted murderer’s life has been spared at the eleventh hour when their victim’s family has shown mercy.

Qisas sentences infuriate local reformists and are invariably branded as an 'abhorrent' form of 'judicial torture' by international human rights groups.

In August, a Saudi man convicted of paralysing a countryman in a cleaver attack two years earlier was sentenced to have his spinal cord cut as punishment. But it appears the punishment was not carried out.

Two leading Saudi hospitals insisted they would not conduct the operation and the judge later denied that he had seriously considered ordering the mutilation.

He was reportedly persuaded to backtrack by King Abdullah, the Saudi monarch, who wants to clamp down on extremist ideology and improve his country’s forbidding image.

In February last year a university student in Iran was sentenced to be blinded in both eyes for having hurled acid in the face of a female classmate, who refused his proposal of marriage. Again, there has been no reported confirmation that the sentence was carried out.

Ten years ago an Egyptian worker had an eye surgically removed in a Saudi hospital as punishment for disfiguring a compatriot in an acid attack six years earlier.

That was said to be the first time in 40 years that a Saudi court had applied the principle of 'an eye for an eye', local media said at the time.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1337957/Eye-eye-Iranian-man-sentenced-drops-acid-poured-face-blinding-lovers-husband.html#ixzz183c3sx7L

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Eye for an eye: Iranian man sentenced to have drops of acid poured onto his face for blinding his lover's husband

Right down you alley, isn't it? You should really consider relocating into that neck of the woods where the justice system is so much more to your liking. No bleeding hearts to put up with. Just imagine what a paradise that would be for folk like you. Oh, and I noticed you missed the thumbs up on this one.

[Danno 1,228]

Right down you alley, isn't it? You should really consider relocating into that neck of the woods where the justice system is so much more to your liking. No bleeding hearts to put up with. Just imagine what a paradise that would be for folk like you. Oh, and I noticed you missed the thumbs up on this one.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

Mr. Big Dog:

Imagine the following scenario and give me your personal opinion, if you will.

Your 6 year-old daughter is raped by a guy, repeatedly, vaginally as well as anally. Once he's done with her, and despite her inner bleedings and muted crying, he then carves out her eyes, cuts off her arms and legs and dumps her in a trash container.

The guy is caught and tried for his crimes. The sentence is life in prison without the chance of parole.

Do YOU think justice has served, that the man has been sufficiently punished, even if he can only watch TV once a day, or do you think in some instances it would be an improvement for the US law to actually consider a more drastic approach, even if it's just working in a "chain gang" as it was the case in the early days?

[mawilson 2,133]

do you think in some instances it would be an improvement for the US law to actually consider a more drastic approach

Such as the death penalty, which is still practiced in 35 states?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

Mr. Big Dog:

Imagine the following scenario and give me your personal opinion, if you will.

Your 6 year-old daughter is raped by a guy, repeatedly, vaginally as well as anally. Once he's done with her, and despite her inner bleedings and muted crying, he then carves out her eyes, cuts off her arms and legs and dumps her in a trash container.

The guy is caught and tried for his crimes. The sentence is life in prison without the chance of parole.

Do YOU think justice has served, that the man has been sufficiently punished, even if he can only watch TV once a day, or do you think in some instances it would be an improvement for the US law to actually consider a more drastic approach, even if it's just working in a "chain gang" as it was the case in the early days?

I don't believe that there is any punishment in a scenario as described that would do any justice. Would I feel the urge for revenge? I would think so. Would revenge be justice? Would that change what happened to the victim(s)? Not in the least. Look, there are sickos out there that I don't believe deserve to live - or die peacefully, for that matter. That said, I'm not going to turn into one of them. They might be animals but I'm not one of them. Unlike many people on this planet and unlike many people in this country, I have left the cave.

[The_Dude 1,142]

There is a distinction between vengeance and justice that many on this board don't seem to comprehend.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

There is a distinction between vengeance and justice that many on this board don't seem to comprehend.

Bingo!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

There is a distinction between vengeance and justice that many on this board don't seem to comprehend.

I think anyone who was victimised in a highly personal way whether it be losing a child to a sex attacker would want some sort of violent revenge on the perpetrator, whether or not they would end up going through with it is another matter - but the point is that the justice system is supposed to be impartial, which is why you wouldn't put the victim or the victim's family in positions where they'd be emotionally compromised.

It's why a murder detective would never be put in charge of the murder investigation of a close family member.

[Brother Hesekiel 2,236]

The justice system is supposed to be impartial, but the punishment should fit the crime. Sadly, that's not the case in some extreme instances. While I would not by a long shot condone cutting of the hand of a person who stole, there are some animals in human guise living among us that need to know that being locked up or putting softly to sleep is not going to cut it.

If a potential child rapist knew that his d*ck would be cut off with a knife and he would the be watched bleeding to death, I -- honestly -- believe it would save some of our children from becoming victims.

[Danno 1,228]

I don't believe that there is any punishment in a scenario as described that would do any justice. Would I feel the urge for revenge? I would think so. Would revenge be justice? Would that change what happened to the victim(s)? Not in the least. Look, there are sickos out there that I don't believe deserve to live - or die peacefully, for that matter. That said, I'm not going to turn into one of them. They might be animals but I'm not one of them. Unlike many people on this planet and unlike many people in this country, I have left the cave.

And this is the critically flawed thinking, which has so hindered our "justice system".. as well as many other areas of public policy.

Big dog actually considers harming the "evil doer" ....as an equivalent to the deeds done by the evil doer to an innocent child.

Do we "become one of them".... when we impose a fine on the thief?

Do we become one of them when we incarcerate the Kidnapper?

Once upon a time in this country we had harsh punishments.. without becoming barbaric.

People were publicly flogged, put in Stocks, sentenced to "hard labor" (for real).

There were fewer victims then.

[Peikko 1,575]

The justice system is supposed to be impartial, but the punishment should fit the crime. Sadly, that's not the case in some extreme instances. While I would not by a long shot condone cutting of the hand of a person who stole, there are some animals in human guise living among us that need to know that being locked up or putting softly to sleep is not going to cut it.

If a potential child rapist knew that his d*ck would be cut off with a knife and he would the be watched bleeding to death, I -- honestly -- believe it would save some of our children from becoming victims.

History tells us that you are wrong. It might be worth noting that violent criminals typically do not think beyond the crime itself, do not anticipate getting caught, do not worry about what might happen if they were to be and and moreover those who perpetrate particularly horrendous, cruel and wicked crimes are rarely rational human beings prone to weighing the pros and cons of a course of action. As has been said already, expecting to find some kind of satisfaction and a feeling of justice through barbaric practices toward criminals simply lowers us down to the level of the brutality that the sentence is supposed to prevent. That's just messed up.

Personally, I believe that justice is best served by removing such criminals from society and keeping them locked away. How they spend their days is immateriality except in so far as they need to be kept in such a way as to reduce the probability of harm coming to those who are there to supervise the incarceration. It might help to understand that keeping prisoners calm and docile is one of the main reasons why prisoners have access to some small 'luxuries'.

[mawilson 2,133]

History tells us that you are wrong. It might be worth noting that violent criminals typically do not think beyond the crime itself, do not anticipate getting caught, do not worry about what might happen if they were to be and and moreover those who perpetrate particularly horrendous, cruel and wicked crimes are rarely rational human beings prone to weighing the pros and cons of a course of action. As has been said already, expecting to find some kind of satisfaction and a feeling of justice through barbaric practices toward criminals simply lowers us down to the level of the brutality that the sentence is supposed to prevent. That's just messed up.

Personally, I believe that justice is best served by removing such criminals from society and keeping them locked away. How they spend their days is immateriality except in so far as they need to be kept in such a way as to reduce the probability of harm coming to those who are there to supervise the incarceration. It might help to understand that keeping prisoners calm and docile is one of the main reasons why prisoners have access to some small 'luxuries'.

[Peikko 1,575]

And this is the critically flawed thinking, which has so hindered our "justice system".. as well as many other areas of public policy.

Big dog actually considers harming the "evil doer" ....as an equivalent to the deeds done by the evil doer to an innocent child.

Do we "become one of them".... when we impose a fine on the thief?

Do we become one of them when we incarcerate the Kidnapper?

Once upon a time in this country we had harsh punishments.. without becoming barbaric.

People were publicly flogged, put in Stocks, sentenced to "hard labor" (for real).

There were fewer victims then.

Your knowledge of history as with everything else is fatally flawed. The times when people were publically flogged and sentenced to hard labour were indeed barbaric and brutal times for those exposed to it which was everyone except the monied elites. Seriously, you should consider relocating to somewhere more in step with your uncivilized and uneducated opinions rather than attempting to drag the US back to the 17th century.

[Danno 1,228]

Your knowledge of history as with everything else is fatally flawed. The times when people were publically flogged and sentenced to hard labour were indeed barbaric and brutal times for those exposed to it which was everyone except the monied elites. Seriously, you should consider relocating to somewhere more in step with your uncivilized and uneducated opinions rather than attempting to drag the US back to the 17th century.

MC, I don't mind you shadowing my every post, it does get tiresome to hear you repeat the same tune over and over.

If you can't come up with some new thought.... some new criticism.... move on.