We've always assigned more importance to some, giving them a higher value thus when a high value commodity is taken we lament more openly and vociferously.
Please explain what you mean by "we've always assigned more importance to some." Who is this "some"?
Quote:
Of course - but I said "less significant", not insignificant. Personal tragedy is never insignificant to the people involved, but this whole sub-thread is about weather the aruba alleged-murder should be significant enough for news or not.
I agree e# but don't you think ther are much more important things to report on right now?
I agree e# but don't you think ther are much more important things to report on right now? [/B]
Since this case involves the safety of millions of American tourists in foreign lands, I could make the argument that this is even more important than the recent London bombings.
Note to londoners - please do not be offended, I am using this as an example only.
Since this case involves the safety of millions of American tourists in foreign lands, I could make the argument that this is even more important than the recent London bombings.
Note to londoners - please do not be offended, I am using this as an example only.
What?! Are you serious?! What happened to this girl happened because of her own stupidity and lack of foresight. Why didn't she go back to her hotel instead of with two guys that she barely even knew? You think if I go abroad I'm going to be worried about being kidnapped? No because first off I'm a guy (i know that doesn't make you invincible but guys are more apt to attack girls because they are perceived to be weaker) and second even if I was a girl I would have the sense to take my ass home when its 2 in the morning.
What?! Are you serious?! What happened to this girl happened because of her own stupidity and lack of foresight. Why didn't she go back to her hotel instead of with two guys that she barely even knew? You think if I go abroad I'm going to be worried about being kidnapped? No because first off I'm a guy (i know that doesn't make you invincible but guys are more apt to attack girls because they are perceived to be weaker) and second even if I was a girl I would have the sense to take my ass home when its 2 in the morning.
I'll admit, it wouldn't have been an entirely serious argument. But this case is more important than you people are letting on.
American tourists should be safe under all conditions in these tropical paradises, otherwise it will deter business.
Tourists should be safe under all conditions no matter where they are, whether it's a tropical paradise or Manhatten.
Likelihood = low.
The difference is that people who are victims of crime in manhatten, at least can rely on a competant and non-corrupt law enforcement and judical system.
You can't nessessarily know that in Aruba - they have a much higher bar to jump, because their systems have not yet proved themselves to be of the same calibur.
The difference is that people who are victims of crime in manhatten, at least can rely on a competant and non-corrupt law enforcement and judical system.
You can't nessessarily know that in Aruba - they have a much higher bar to jump, because their systems have not yet proved themselves to be of the same calibur.
In your opinion.
I don't have the time right now to find a list of faulty justice in North America. I concede that it may be possible that the Dutch system of law, which is upheld in Aruba, may not be of the same standard as that executed in North America (and Manhatten, specifically).
I don't think either of us are able to come to some quantitative, objective conclusion on that. You can't really compare the two, as they are based on different fundamentals.
There was a decent article on the Fox News website (here) which made some good points which might nudge you towards believing that the system employed in Aruba might actually be better than the US system in places.
From the article:
Quote:
There are indications that Dutch law, at least as it concerns the detention and questioning of suspects in criminal cases, is unexpectedly more robust than U.S. law. Joran van der Sloot, who in recent days looks to be the chief suspect in Holloway's disappearance, has been held for an extensive period of time for questioning and was not permitted to see his father, though he had requested it. It's possible, however unlikely, that van der Sloot remained and spoke with police voluntarily, though the turning down of a request to see his father indicates against it.
In the United States, police frequently succeed in detaining uncharged suspects who are legally not in custody and therefore legally free to leave. However, the legal status of being "in custody" triggers a suspects' Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, and in the U.S., the longer an uncharged suspect is with police, the greater the presumption that he is in custody and that his Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment protections are triggered. It's possible that a six-hour stint in a police station is not custodial, but that an hour-long visit is, depending on what occurs there.
In the United States, the average suspect would by now be deemed to have been in custody, which would implicate his constitutional rights. As a general matter, in the United States, people must be charged or released within 24 hours of being taken into custody, and must have the charges read before a judge or magistrate (with the defendant present) within 24 hours of that.
From another article at the Birmingham News (Alabama):
Quote:
As part of the kingdom of the Netherlands, Aruba follows Dutch law. Here are a few details of the criminal procedure:
After arrest, suspects can be questioned for six hours before they become official detainees. (The two men in the Holloway case were arrested Sunday morning and officially detained at 2 p.m.) Prosecutors can then accuse them of a range of crimes that can be narrowed down later.
The initial interrogation period can last for two days after they are detained. The prosecutor then must determine whether there is reason to hold them longer. (In the Holloway case, the prosecutor has made that determination, said Vivian van der Biezen, spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office.)
Within three days, the prosecutor must go before a judge, who will decide whether the extended detention is legal and the case has so far been conducted properly. That is according to international human rights law, which Holland follows. (This is expected to happen today in the Holloway case.)
The maximum period for the second detention is eight days. The prosecutor then must again go before a judge to justify any extended detention. Van der Biezen said suspects may be detained a total of 116 days before trial.
Once the investigation is complete, the prosecutor presents in court a formal written case with the charges, and the trial begins.
Aruban authorities customarily refuse to release detainees' identities, or may refer to them only by their initials. (In the Holloway case, the two suspects' last names both begin with J, according to their attorney, Chris Lejuez.)
While we could argue about the validity of the US Constitution as a protection against an unfair detainment (and the possibility that the requirement to release could in fact hamper justice), I don't feel that the methods used in Aruba are wrong. The Aruban authorities seem to be doing the best they can and have been actively seeking help in the investigation from both the Netherlands and the US. With such a large burden on the Aruban prosecution, I'm quite sure that they'd be counting grains of sand on that beach if required.
I'm still waiting for the LAPD to get back to me from the time I was the only witness who stuck around after a pedestrian hit and run on La Brea in 2002. \
But - a island with 100K residents has a much better chance of conflict of interest in the justice system than a town with 10M people. The judges and lawyers probably know the suspects. If you have ever lived in a small town, then you would know what I mean.
Also, the US legal system is constantly in the media - the strengths and weaknesses of our legal system are well understood by the public. The same is not true of the Dutch or Arubian legal systems.
Well, people may disagree, but there should be no debate about whether the Holloway case is newsworthy. It clearly isn't. Unlike the cable news narrative, there really is no national epidemic of missing pretty white women. And I don't think our nation needs to worry about the safety of middle class pretty white chicks on vacation in relatively safe countries when perhaps millions live in unsafe abject poverty here in our own country. No comparison.
you can bitch all you want, it won't accomplish anything, the news media will always pick up on these type of stories : )
that said, it is an interesting case imo. Aruba is pretty much crime free and this is a horrible crime that has happened, probably the worst in its entire history
Comments
We've always assigned more importance to some, giving them a higher value thus when a high value commodity is taken we lament more openly and vociferously.
Please explain what you mean by "we've always assigned more importance to some." Who is this "some"?
Of course - but I said "less significant", not insignificant. Personal tragedy is never insignificant to the people involved, but this whole sub-thread is about weather the aruba alleged-murder should be significant enough for news or not.
I agree e# but don't you think ther are much more important things to report on right now?
I agree e# but don't you think ther are much more important things to report on right now? [/B]
Since this case involves the safety of millions of American tourists in foreign lands, I could make the argument that this is even more important than the recent London bombings.
Note to londoners - please do not be offended, I am using this as an example only.
Originally posted by e1618978
Since this case involves the safety of millions of American tourists in foreign lands, I could make the argument that this is even more important than the recent London bombings.
Note to londoners - please do not be offended, I am using this as an example only.
What?! Are you serious?! What happened to this girl happened because of her own stupidity and lack of foresight. Why didn't she go back to her hotel instead of with two guys that she barely even knew? You think if I go abroad I'm going to be worried about being kidnapped? No because first off I'm a guy (i know that doesn't make you invincible but guys are more apt to attack girls because they are perceived to be weaker) and second even if I was a girl I would have the sense to take my ass home when its 2 in the morning.
Originally posted by Protostar
What?! Are you serious?! What happened to this girl happened because of her own stupidity and lack of foresight. Why didn't she go back to her hotel instead of with two guys that she barely even knew? You think if I go abroad I'm going to be worried about being kidnapped? No because first off I'm a guy (i know that doesn't make you invincible but guys are more apt to attack girls because they are perceived to be weaker) and second even if I was a girl I would have the sense to take my ass home when its 2 in the morning.
I'll admit, it wouldn't have been an entirely serious argument. But this case is more important than you people are letting on.
American tourists should be safe under all conditions in these tropical paradises, otherwise it will deter business.
Originally posted by e1618978
I'll admit, it wouldn't have been an entirely serious argument. But this case is more important than you people are letting on.
American tourists should be safe under all conditions in these tropical paradises, otherwise it will deter business.
Tourists should be safe under all conditions no matter where they are, whether it's a tropical paradise or Manhatten.
Likelihood = low.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Tourists should be safe under all conditions no matter where they are, whether it's a tropical paradise or Manhatten.
Likelihood = low.
The difference is that people who are victims of crime in manhatten, at least can rely on a competant and non-corrupt law enforcement and judical system.
You can't nessessarily know that in Aruba - they have a much higher bar to jump, because their systems have not yet proved themselves to be of the same calibur.
Originally posted by e1618978
The difference is that people who are victims of crime in manhatten, at least can rely on a competant and non-corrupt law enforcement and judical system.
You can't nessessarily know that in Aruba - they have a much higher bar to jump, because their systems have not yet proved themselves to be of the same calibur.
In your opinion.
I don't have the time right now to find a list of faulty justice in North America. I concede that it may be possible that the Dutch system of law, which is upheld in Aruba, may not be of the same standard as that executed in North America (and Manhatten, specifically).
I don't think either of us are able to come to some quantitative, objective conclusion on that. You can't really compare the two, as they are based on different fundamentals.
There was a decent article on the Fox News website (here) which made some good points which might nudge you towards believing that the system employed in Aruba might actually be better than the US system in places.
From the article:
There are indications that Dutch law, at least as it concerns the detention and questioning of suspects in criminal cases, is unexpectedly more robust than U.S. law. Joran van der Sloot, who in recent days looks to be the chief suspect in Holloway's disappearance, has been held for an extensive period of time for questioning and was not permitted to see his father, though he had requested it. It's possible, however unlikely, that van der Sloot remained and spoke with police voluntarily, though the turning down of a request to see his father indicates against it.
In the United States, police frequently succeed in detaining uncharged suspects who are legally not in custody and therefore legally free to leave. However, the legal status of being "in custody" triggers a suspects' Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Amendment rights, and in the U.S., the longer an uncharged suspect is with police, the greater the presumption that he is in custody and that his Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendment protections are triggered. It's possible that a six-hour stint in a police station is not custodial, but that an hour-long visit is, depending on what occurs there.
In the United States, the average suspect would by now be deemed to have been in custody, which would implicate his constitutional rights. As a general matter, in the United States, people must be charged or released within 24 hours of being taken into custody, and must have the charges read before a judge or magistrate (with the defendant present) within 24 hours of that.
From another article at the Birmingham News (Alabama):
As part of the kingdom of the Netherlands, Aruba follows Dutch law. Here are a few details of the criminal procedure:
After arrest, suspects can be questioned for six hours before they become official detainees. (The two men in the Holloway case were arrested Sunday morning and officially detained at 2 p.m.) Prosecutors can then accuse them of a range of crimes that can be narrowed down later.
The initial interrogation period can last for two days after they are detained. The prosecutor then must determine whether there is reason to hold them longer. (In the Holloway case, the prosecutor has made that determination, said Vivian van der Biezen, spokeswoman for the prosecutor's office.)
Within three days, the prosecutor must go before a judge, who will decide whether the extended detention is legal and the case has so far been conducted properly. That is according to international human rights law, which Holland follows. (This is expected to happen today in the Holloway case.)
The maximum period for the second detention is eight days. The prosecutor then must again go before a judge to justify any extended detention. Van der Biezen said suspects may be detained a total of 116 days before trial.
Once the investigation is complete, the prosecutor presents in court a formal written case with the charges, and the trial begins.
Aruban authorities customarily refuse to release detainees' identities, or may refer to them only by their initials. (In the Holloway case, the two suspects' last names both begin with J, according to their attorney, Chris Lejuez.)
While we could argue about the validity of the US Constitution as a protection against an unfair detainment (and the possibility that the requirement to release could in fact hamper justice), I don't feel that the methods used in Aruba are wrong. The Aruban authorities seem to be doing the best they can and have been actively seeking help in the investigation from both the Netherlands and the US. With such a large burden on the Aruban prosecution, I'm quite sure that they'd be counting grains of sand on that beach if required.
I'm still waiting for the LAPD to get back to me from the time I was the only witness who stuck around after a pedestrian hit and run on La Brea in 2002.
In your opinion.
I don't have an opionion on which is better.
But - a island with 100K residents has a much better chance of conflict of interest in the justice system than a town with 10M people. The judges and lawyers probably know the suspects. If you have ever lived in a small town, then you would know what I mean.
Also, the US legal system is constantly in the media - the strengths and weaknesses of our legal system are well understood by the public. The same is not true of the Dutch or Arubian legal systems.
Originally posted by ShawnJ
Well, people may disagree, but there should be no debate about whether the Holloway case is newsworthy. It clearly isn't. Unlike the cable news narrative, there really is no national epidemic of missing pretty white women. And I don't think our nation needs to worry about the safety of middle class pretty white chicks on vacation in relatively safe countries when perhaps millions live in unsafe abject poverty here in our own country. No comparison.
you can bitch all you want, it won't accomplish anything, the news media will always pick up on these type of stories : )
that said, it is an interesting case imo. Aruba is pretty much crime free and this is a horrible crime that has happened, probably the worst in its entire history