If someone commits the perfect crime. Do they deserve to get away with it?

If someone commits the perfect crime. Do they deserve to get away with it?

If, for example, I find the perfect way to rape a woman. It never leaves behind any DNA evidence EVER of any kind. No camera / cell evidence. Nothing.

And I can repeat this crime over and over and over. Many MANY women come forward and acuse me. But are unable to present any physical or circimstantial evidence what so ever.

Do I deserve to get away with my crimes?

 

Without any evidence you deserve an innocent verdict in a court of law.

 

What a weird question...

What you deserve and what the appropriate legal options are would be two different things.

You would deserve whatever punishment was warranted based on the offense you committed.

What you should get is whatever the legal process determines.

 

What you deserve is to be tied up and locked in a cage with all those women you raped and a couple dozen really sharp knives.

 

This all depends of the definition of a "perfect crime" is.

If someone somehow managed to pull an Ocean's Eleven perfectly and there be absolutely no suspects, then I personally wouldn't even be mad but impressed.

 

No, and you will not get away with it because a criminal always sets his own trap. Take a chicken outside and kill it where no one can see. You just be horny dude. Maybe some female will give you some some day.

 

..........

 

A basic observation... a "perfect" crime is one that never is known.

 

Basically the nature of a "perfect crime" is that you get away with it without doubt. Unfortunately, any perfect crimes out there are secrets, because as soon as a perp opens their mouth or leaves the story behind in any way, it's no longer a perfect crime.

In terms of what people deserve. The universe itself rewards intelligence and punishes stupidity, but in your examples your victims do not deserve to be raped and we make a better society by protecting victims. So while a smart and disciplined rapist may be more likely to get away with it, they deserve punishment like any other rapist because of the harm they cause to others.

 

such a silly question and the answers are nearly as inane. less than half of the murderers in this country are ever even prosecuted. crimes, even violent crimes, are often simply ignored in the cause of expediency. do you people just not get it? crime, any crime, is an act of stupidity, but we live in in a stupid culture. it's so easy to go through life without committing a single crime, but most of us won't take that path. we are all morons.

what i find most amusing is the reaction to the op's example of rape. so many consider this simple assault, having less to do with sex than with power, to be grounds for torture and execution. i can't help but wonder how many of the usual suspects consider rape to be a more heinous crime than murder simply because it violates the sensibilities of a protected class. i keep on reading this **** and wondering why those usual suspects consider such a violation more severe than the destruction of the truly innocent.

i refuse to answer enter into the poll, but i will answer the op's question here. most of us "deserve" to have our brains blown out of the back of our heads. for our stupidity, our ignorance, our many failures and a myriad other reasons, we should all burn in some imaginary hell. however, we are all also innocents deserving of nothing less than a second chance. consider this a paradox if you will, but ....

 

It's nuanced

BLM, as scams go... they made off with a sh!t-ton of money. Can't say their crimes are perfect though, as they are just protected from above.

The Clinton's and all their crimes?? The Clinton Foundation... brilliantly conceived; but again, in an honest world they'd easily be unraveled.

Buden's?? Same thing... "The Big Guy" bragging about withholding tax $$ to cover their a$$e$... nothing "perfect" there either.

-------------------------------

For a crime to be "perfect", it has to take down bad actors, government, banks, etc.

Most ingeniously crafted robberies come undone b/c of loose lips, or some small detail that was overlooked.

One comes to mind is a bank robbery carried out in LA by a Chicago crew. They almost got away with it, but when they left the apartment they had rented, they had wiped they place clean, no prints anywhere - except in the dishwasher, lol.

The guy tasked with cleaning up the kitchen forgot to turn the dishwasher on!!! Everybody's prints were in there

 

Saw another interesting bank job documentary a couple months ago - in Italy. Can't remember when it was done - a while ago.

They had gotten away scot-free for quite a while, but then one of the guys went thru a divorce, and his soon to be ex ratted him out for spite.

They all did time, and all are out now - they never did recover all the money

 

How about the "sleep over bandits" scenario... that movie, Bandits, with Bruce Willis and Billy Bob Thornton was based on a true story.

 

What type of question is this?

Of course in life, in this world, people do not always get what they deserve.

I don't even see where this question comes from, unless a person has some very different definition of ethics like "might makes right" along the lines of Nietzsche.

 

We may going way off topic now, but in my personal opinion (probably unpopular opinion) it should be a lot more punishment when the victim involved a girl who was saving her virginity than another female who had already been around the block and was willing to sleep with almost anyone.

long thread with more details and thoughts about that: Should a rapist be punished more if he takes her virginity?

You are correct that to some women, sex means very little.
But to other women (and their husbands and family members) sex means very much.

But this thread discussion is not about rape. I think Turin was just using that as one example.

 

Is rape just one example of a crime you are talking about, or were you specifically trying to focus on the issue of rape accusations, Turin?

I am a little bit confused. I could see either of two points you might be trying to make.

If you want to discuss whether we should believe women when multiple women accuse a man of rape, I did share some of my thoughts in this thread:
Multiple women coming forward accusing famous men of rape (Apr 19, 2019 in Law & Justice section)

 

you seem to be obsessed with sex. rape is simply an assault which happens to include a sexual component. why should that even be a consideration? if the radical feminists are to be believed, one's sex should never be taken into consideration.

 

"What if.. the Perfect Crime"..."

Dumb question up there with...
"If the Martians Land in Hoboken"..."
"If one lives forever..."
"If the world explodes tomorrow..."
"If Democrats stopped being radical crazies..."

 

Before we begin discussing that, I think we should wait for Turin to clarify for us what issue he actually wanted to discuss, because it's not clear from his first post.

I don't want to start a complicated discussion specifically about rape if that's not what the first poster, Turin, intended.

 

'Deserve' isn't really the best word... but basically yes, if a crime can't be proven beyond a reasonable doubt to a jury of your peers, then you committed no crime.

 

If one wanted to get away with a crime, don't have a co-defendant and keep your mouth shut.

Most crimes are easy for the police to solve because people can't shut the hell up.

But you should try to live a life without trying to get away with crime because even if you get away with it there is karma

 

Well, that's not quite true. That may be what the common public believes, but it's actually often not true. I've covered many such cases in the Law & Justice section of this forum.
Sometimes the burden for evidence to result in a conviction in certain sorts of cases can be rather low... very questionably low.

The second part of that, "committed no crime", isn't entirely true either.

You mean "committed no crime" in the eyes of the law.

Just realize that some people spend more than a year in half in prison conditions before their trial. It's very common.
Yet another thing a lot of the public doesn't realize.

If we are looking at this philosophically, it seems a little like the "If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it, did it really fall?" question.

So the question is does the concept of "guilt" all derive only from how it is treated?

In other words, if one man rapes a woman and is given an award by society for doing that, and another man helps a woman escape sexual slavery and is punished by society for doing that, then which man has done "good" and which has done "bad".

 

I rarely even think about folks in jail. I don't think much about six fingered Irishmen either. Neither are really on my radar.

 

That's probably why there are so many issues and problems surrounding this in society. Because it's the type of thing most people don't think about and don't want to think about.

But none of you can stay on topic, can you? Just more inane and senseless comments, ruining the first page of someone else's thread trying to discuss a philosophical issue.

 

Well... "the perfect crime" is kind of like "ultimate BJ"... it may not even exist...