Scotland's Decision

[Julianne]

The release by the Scottish Court of the convicted terrorist has caused much rancor among Scots and most Americans.
The modern world has much more empathy perhaps then we are willing to accept for what is
"compassionate" release.

I find the decision abysmal.  
Scotland is it's own country and can do what it likes...however...as a ScotsAmerican....I have to admit I am "upset" that this happened.
thoughts?

Is Scotland looking for something else in this?

This is a modern topic.  I expect all who enter their opinion do so with the "celtic" pride in mind.
Be courteous.

[RSLeask]

Well, to me personally, I'm rather indifferent to the whole thing of the release.  Certainly what he did was a travesty against mankind, heartless and cruel, and with my upbringing as the son of a police officer, with a healthy respect for the law, he deserves to rot in prison for the rest of his life.  That said, I do see the Minister of Justice's point of view, that to a man with an effective death sentence now, they can show to him the mercy he did not show others, and not sink to his level.  That even the worst of us can be shown forgiveness, or at the very least, compassion.

Honestly, I look at something else as far worse than what Scotland did in releasing him... that Libya basically welcomed him home, complete with ticker-tape parade.  They truly showed their colors as a country in that one.

[Julianne]

Thank you for responding.

Aye...it's not our decision to make.  We had many victims there but ultimately he was tried and sentenced there.

I have to ask meself...why wasn't this man allowed to die in a Scottish Hospital rather then being released?

There has been much said that he was a very low player in the whole affair..did he suffer too much?

Nae...If he's a player in the destruction in the skies over Lockerbee...then he should suffer the deaths of Lockerbee.  He should hae died in Lockerbee.


And the more that I think about it ...the more passionate I become.

I believe that not only was this decision anti-scottish....it was anti-celtic.

Guilty by association was many a gaelic person condemned.

[RSLeask]

Guilty by association was many a gaelic person condemned.

If you really do think about it, what would be more Celtic then to show the man the mercy to be with his family in his final days?  If he truly was a low-level player in the affair, and took the brunt of the fall for others that actually carried out that atrocity (as many have made claim of), what would be more befitting a testament to people who had suffered the same type of punishment (and worse) for no reason other than their ties to someone wanted by the courts of England?  The man is condemned.  He will die.  I will grant that for once, I actually find myself in agreement with President Obama that he should not be allowed to walk the streets free, that the most he should have is be under house arrest... but there is no greater tribute to a people than to rise above and show to others that which your ancestors were not shown themselves.

[Julianne]

bah...

I think that most of the "world leaders" involved in this case expected it to all slip away quietly.  Nonsuch the place.

You speak of 21st ideaology when the crime commited had non of that therein.

The Scots already gave compassion to this man by not sentencing him to death....a lot more then I would have done...I'll admit that.

I heard one Scot say on NPR...."compassionate release would have been for him to die in proper hospital...not go home..as his victims never did"

I favor that.

[RSLeask]

You speak of 21st ideaology when the crime commited had non of that therein.

Actually, this is ideology I've held in longstanding, through my life... as part of a diverse heritage, as a Christian (not to be mistake for those that twist the Word to their own goals, please... I've faith, not religion), as someone who does believe that the world could be better if we would take the first steps to making it that way.

However, that ideology does have its limits.  Parts of me are conflicted over it.  The lawman's son side of me believes this man should rot for eternity, even as the Christian side says that vengeance is God's alone, not man's to take.  And both sides are valid as my beliefs, which is why I am ultimately indifferent in the matter.  It does mean that I can see both sides of the argument... those outraged by his release, and those who released him.  Not that I'm sure... or even really believe... that they released him just because it was "right to do".  But it is what they say, and I can see the reason to it.

So believe me when I say, I don't necessarily disagree with you.

[Julianne]

I agree with you in a Utopian way.  Unfortunately we are still a society that reckons blood for peace.

What conflict do you have with the offender being released to hospital to die in Scotland?

By the way, my "compassion" ends with the taking of innocent lives.  Liberal or not, mother or not, woman or not, christian or not, you have no way of categorizing me to suggest what I would or wouldn't believe.
I would have sentenced Death upon conviction...but that's long by gone...to release on "compassionate" grounds because of terminal illness is by far too ridiculous for discussion.

There was some other reason or reasoning behind this most atrocious decision.
Guilty by association means "world wide" under Interpol and the United Nations did you know in advance of a crime you could prevent by telling?

Under "my law" this man should have died in the country that he was convicted in.

[RSLeask]

The only conflict I have with him being released to a hospital, is that if you're going to release him, then release him.  If you are going to keep him under lock and key, albeit to be cared for better in his condition, then keep him in prison.  Even worse still is the idea of intentionally caring for and attempting to prolong his life in captivity, it would be better to just let the cancer take him as soon as possible, if that were the case.

Totally agreed that the taking of innocent lives, by the way, is appalling.  Unfortunate enough when they become casualties because some use them as body shields, but it's a whole different thing when it is intentional, calculated, and carried out in cold blood.

[Julianne]

Well then, you kind of answered my question for me.

There is no doubt that her Majesty's Prison System Hospital would be the most "humane and compassionate" view.  Because this would have provided this man the best care possible in his final days. 

I don't see anything more humane than that.  But...oh right....under his thinking...a heroes welcome and dying in pain means so much more.  Right...I forgot that.

I think you are confusing amnesty and compassion.

[RSLeask]

I think you are confusing amnesty and compassion.

The compassion is that he be with his family in his last days.  It is no less than caring for him and prolonging his life, though he still is dying, is a hospital, secluded and alone.  Which is the worse of the two?

[Julianne]

That's a real hard question.

Most appropriately addressed and aptly questioned.

Perhaps that is his true punishment.

Did the victims have that choice?


I can justify alone with compassion more than I can reconcile the other.

[Angus]

I am appalled with the decision!

I have a quite strong opinion about this "mistake". 

Had I not re-enlisted when I did, I would have been on that flight home from europe, with my family!  I knew people on that flight, that never got to see their families ever again. this criminal (for lack of a better term) was convicted in a Scottish Court for for his involvement in this attack, and sentenced to LIFE in prison for it.

I have zero compassion for this murderer, he should die in prison for his crimes, his release was a slap in the face of those people who died, and Scotland let him go home to live out his remaining days with his family, bovine poopie!

What about the people who didn't get to live because of this Bastard?

[sweetpea63]

I have to agree with Angus.  It is a slap in the face to the families who lost loved ones in that terrorist attack.  If he was a "low man" in the hierarchy of the attack planning, then he should have given up names of those higher than him.

Why does he deserve to be with his loved ones as he is dying?  To return to his homeland?  There are a few situations where mercy has no place.  Some things so heinous that there shouldn't be.  This is one of them, IMHO.

I cannot imagine how you handled being so close to being on that flight, Angus.  I'm also sorry for your loss of friends on that flight.

Kelly

[Auryn]

I hope you do not mind me joining this conversation. Although I do not technically have any celtic heritage that I know of (the family history I am aware of only goes back about 300 years and its all wrapped up in Italy and Spain) my heart has always been drawn and found peace in the celtic heritage and people.

In regards to this topic. I believe that in letting him go the Scottish government allowed him to become a sung and recognized hero. It makes me wonder if some backdoor dealings were made with Libya.

Personally I think they should have put him in a room with the surviving family members of all the victims lost, and let them decide his fate.

I believe that crimes of this nature and magnitude show a complete lack of humanity on the part of the perpetrator (regardless of how low in the ranks he was, after all he knew exactly what was going on) and thus should afford that no humanity need to be shown to him.

Then again I believe that if they allowed public punishments (after a just and well carried out honest trial) the level of crime in this world would drop dramatically.

[Poldugarian Warrior]

Well, I have not heard of this situation or what the man had done, but by the looks of it he's a terrible person and he deserves to rot in jail, like many terrorists, and the like. I too was a Christian, but I've seen so many bad things go down in the world, I can't see how a compassionate God can let this all happen, but you all can believe what you want, yer not wrong and if you think I'am, well yer entitled to your opinion and I hope I'am wrong so that one day we all may meet in heaven. At any rate, if anything this is why we have courts because God is slow to anger and judgement so the bible says, and so at times I guess we as a civilization must hand out the punishments, even if it is death. The Bible in the Old Testament, actually has statements saying if there a evil people in your midst and you have seen then perform evil acts, you are to get rid of them eithet by exile or execution. So I guess God not only has the right to punish and execute people we do too. Or so the good book says. So bottom line if your evil and your foudn guilty of it you should either rot in jail, or be executed, but in fact an execution is actually a release from suffering in jail, so I say give'em jail for life, yeah it may cost us some dough, but hey that guy/girl is gettin theirs.