In your Pontius Pilate moment; which prisoner do you free?

All four should stay in jail and rot, but as I understand the question I have to let one go free.
The choice sickens me, but is simple.
A) killed 2 people and lots of animals.
B) Ruined the life of a child, but killed no one.
C) Killed a Mother and 2 children
D) Killed 2 people.

B goes free. I hope some concerned citizen smokes his ass.

<A> did not muder the people, maybe it was their own fault they could not get out in time, but regardless, you are right, 2 deaths did occur.

C goes free. The crimes of the other three were intentional and premeditated.

The intention of C was to get drunk (again), not to kill someone. That was just the unfortunate result of his actions. Hopefully the guilt of having killed three people will change him profoundly so that he either dedicates his life to helping others or takes his own life.

I doubt that A would have been prosecuted on the deaths as anything worse than negligent homicide – if he was prosecuted for them at all. He’d be getting out of jail pretty soon, anyway. I’d let him out on a supervised release, dependent upon his holding a job and seeing a counselor regularly about his pyromania.

I would also choose B. How many nieces does he have. It was supposedly consensual. This guy will still have a record correct, people can look him up and use caution or if he commits a like crime again it will count against him, not sure how that part of pardons work I think it can be dictated? So as sick it is it is the best option. A pyro are usually serial and they just want bigger flame the next time.
C was manslaughter only but an 8th DUI the guy can’t stop.
D what was his first crime that he was trying to prevent witnesses, or was he just an in ept hit man? Either way the guy took human life not once but twice intentionally and it only gets easier from there.

@rosehips: Having been molested by a family member as a pre-teen, I can assure you that “non-force” does not mean consensual. There are many forms of manipulation and coercion that do not involve violence. Besides which, a pre-teen doesn’t really comprehend what she is consenting to or why, nor the long-term implications. And what if the perpetrator’s taste for young girls will prompt him to find more victims and ruin more lives?

@hearkat I am sorry you experienced that and believe me I am strongly in the women’s corner, though not at the cost of all else.
Let me explain child molestor’s don’t do well in prison, isolation or beat up. So less is more he will have a higher incentive not to come back.

I believe they would have a shorter sentence then involuntary manslaughter and higher crimes.
Especially if labeled consensual.

You were probably referencing my consensual remark. I understand that often times these things aren’t actually consensual. Power and ignorance plus family can be very confusing and a yound individual is rarely prepared for that sort of dilemma.

Although that is not always the case. Sometimes a girl understands the law and her rights and is the pursuer regardless, not meaning she is capable of good judgment. Hopefully she will grow up to understand the flaw in her thoughts.

We were not given enough info to decide what the actual circumstances were.

You might not agree with me. It couldn’t be consensual in any shape or form. I have seen some predatory youths so while I think this behavoir indictative of a larger problem
I hesitantly disagree.

The distinction is she will grow up. She will have a choice to change. These other people won’t or don’t.

Also I am thinking he will have record meaning he can be looked up or traced.

Also I would like to ask if your life is ruined? Sure it was tough it was a trauma something to overcome and in someways you probably deal with it a little everyday much less the triggers.

But it is who you are. And I happen to think you are a smart thoughtful and caring person from the posts I have seen. I think this helped shape you and of course you don’t want to expose anyone else to that trauma. But I absolutely don’t think it ruined your life.

Which sounds presumptuous except I experienced sexual abuse and abuse in general and though I wish it hadn’t happened I know I have become a stronger person because of it.

So under the assumption that they would all pick up their criminal activities again I drew the line at human life. Because those people don’t have a choice to become stronger, they cease to exist.

I’d have to agree with @cookieman, for the same reason.

But honestly @Hypocrisy_Central, this has absolutely no relation to a Pontius Pilate moment. Pilate succumbed to political expediency, not to a perverted sense of justice. And the mob would not have asked for one of these four to be freed, unless they were planning to lynch them.

Tough choice. Lucky for Pilate that he could let the crowd decide. I would release <A>. Everyone else is likely to repeat their crime (family rapists are often accepted back into the family and almost always strike again, someone on his eighth DUI will have a ninth, and the last guy sounds like a contract killer). The crimes are past, the damage is done. Releasing the arsonist is the least likely to result in further harm, so he’s the one who gets released if I have to pick one.

@rosehips Non-force does not mean consensual. A preteen niece cannot consent.