Jail for 'honour killing' family

From the BBC website.

Quote:

---

A father who ordered his two sons to carry out the "honour killing" of his daughter's boyfriend after she became pregnant has been jailed for life.
The body of electrical engineering student Arash Ghorbani-Zarin, 19, was found with 46 stab wounds in Oxford on 20 November last year.

Bangladeshi waiter Chomir Ali, 44, must serve a minimum of 20 years in jail.

Sons Mujibar Rahman, 19, and Mamnoor Rahman, 16, were given minimum terms of 16 and 14 years respectively.

'Shame and dishonour'

Mr Justice Gross, at the Royal Courts of Justice in London, said it was a "cold-blooded intentional killing".

He told the three, who were all present in the dock: "Far from vindicating your family's honour you have permanently dishonoured your family with the stain of murder."

During the trial, Oxford Crown Court heard the two sons killed Mr Ghorbani-Zarin due to the "shame and dishonour" brought on the family by his relationship with Manna Begum.

The pair met in 2003 through school friends, who described them as devoted to each other, with Miss Begum becoming pregnant in August 2004.

But Miss Begum's father had planned for her to have an arranged marriage.

---

So do you think the sentence is enough. Or should have been more ?
Personally I think it is to little and should have been life without parole.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesWolf

Personally I think it is to little and should have been life without parole.

---

I don't like the idea of life imprisonment with no hope of release - it seems to remove one of the key reasons the prison service exists - to reform - since anybody who does reform can never be released. And whilst you might argue that a person will never reform, I think that you cannot be sure of what a person may be like in twenty years' time. I think that for crimes like this the option of life long imprisonment should be available, but there should always be the possibilty of release.

Arash Ghorbani? He must have been an Iranian.

Quote:

---

cold-blooded intentional killing".

---

Quote:

---

was found with 46 stab wounds

---

This was cold blooded intentional planned murder.
Why should they be released, as far as Im concerned they should all be executed for the crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesWolf

This was cold blooded intentional planned murder.
Why should they be released, as far as Im concerned they should all be executed for the crime.

---

They should only be released if they have clearly reformed. Otherwise, they can stay in jail.

Quote:

---

A father...has been jailed for life... must serve a minimum of 20 years in jail.

---

Hmm. You've got a different concept of 'life' over there it seems.

Quote:

---

They should only be released if they have clearly reformed. Otherwise, they can stay in jail.

---

So, saying you're sorry you killed someone and are now a better person makes the dead come back to life?

Crazed Rabbit

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

Hmm. You've got a different concept of 'life' over there it seems.

Crazed Rabbit

---

It's the same in America. Actually I think it's less

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

So, saying you're sorry you killed someone and are now a better person makes the dead come back to life?

---

Of course not. Nothing will bring the victim back to life, not imprisonment for the rest of the criminal's life, not the death penalty, nothing. But keeping a reformed person in jail serves no purpose: the person has reformed, so is no longer a threat to society, so keeping the person in prison is only revenge, not justice. Plus, it's wasting tax payers' money.

I actually don't see how this is an honour killing.

she was betrothed to somebody (picked by her family) else and disobeyed her father - that screams insulted family honour to me.

kill em

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dâriûsh

Arash Ghorbani? He must have been an Iranian.

---

Iranians are natural chick magnets :san_kiss:

Didn't you read the article? It's Bangladeshi.

And Faisal, why do people perform honor killings? (Want a Muslim perspective.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesPanther

It's the same in America. Actually I think it's less

---

Depends on the degree of murder. Murder in the first is no parole. 2nd and 3rd has parole. 3rd is only like 14-20 years I think. But that's crimes of passion, not premeditated.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff

she was betrothed to somebody (picked by her family) else and disobeyed her father - that screams insulted family honour to me.

---

That rather screams, "Don't touch my stuff," to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeonGod

That rather screams, "Don't touch my stuff," to me.

---

Well, yeah, you could put it that way too.

Defend my honour, defend my stuff.

Quote:

---

Of course not. Nothing will bring the victim back to life, not imprisonment for the rest of the criminal's life, not the death penalty, nothing. But keeping a reformed person in jail serves no purpose: the person has reformed, so is no longer a threat to society, so keeping the person in prison is only revenge, not justice. Plus, it's wasting tax payers' money.

---

So if a person killed 5 people in one day, then reformed within a week of going to prison, you'd let him out?

And what if somebody killed 7 people 30 years ago, then reformed, but only just got caught? Would you put him in prison at all?

Punishment is justice.

Crazed Rabbit

Life in jail is a harsh figure a type from the days of capital punishment, for those countries that have overcome them. It's the equivalent to death penalty, of course it doesn't has the little drawback of no return, but it's still inhumane and only shows that there's no measure to hold the irrationality of men.
The "correct" way to go in my opinion is to give him no more than 18 years, with parole. Of course there's always a "more" correct way to go (but I'll not enter philosophycal in this one.)

18 years?
why that number?

Is there anything lower than a kinslayer? Whatever honor you claim to defend is forfeit for killing your own child.

edit: yah, so it was the boyfriend, not the daughter. Quite a surprise. Still a low thing to do.

You make your choices then live with the consequences. :san_shocked:

As far as the retribution element of the sentence is concerned I think it is long enough.

However this seems to be the sort of case where a deterrent element would also be justified. There are too many of these crimes, as well as the general attitude that you can carry on in Basingstoke just the way you would in Bangladesh, and its lawful in those circumstances to impose an exemplary sentence pour encourager les autres. Or to discourage them in this case.

IMHO the father should have had a whole life tariff.

Personally I think they should paint his ass red and throw him in a cage with 100 horny baboons and keep him there for the rest of his life. Who the hell do they think they are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Personally I think they should paint his ass red and throw him in a cage with 100 horny baboons and keep him there for the rest of his life. Who the hell do they think they are.

---

Just for the hell of it i think we should have a world government with Frag and Dev Dave as ministers for justice.

Of course we'd need to save the game before we installed them in power so we could go back to the old ways, but you have to admit we'd see some amusing punishments while it lasted.

Pre-meditated murder, death sentence, all three of 'em.

This will amuse some of you, I actually think life (ie until dead) in jail with no parole is too inhumane to use as a punishment.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lugh

Pre-meditated murder, death sentence, all three of 'em.

This will amuse some of you, I actually think life (ie until dead) in jail with no parole is too inhumane to use as a punishment.

---

Ah, but don't you know we shouldn't be punishing criminals, prison is all about rehabilitation after all his victims are already dead so why worry about them. We should be more concerned with making sure that criminals are really, really sorry and they promise not to do it again, then we can release them in the certain knowledge that we can all sleep soundly in our beds. Apart from the victims of course, but isn't that a small price to pay to know that we have "cured" a murderer of something that was obviously societies fault for putting too much pressure on them.

Don't that make you feel just dandy, if only the rest of humanity could be as enlightened as us.

Next year we can move on to "Rabies, don't kill them embrace them", you might lose half of your family but think of all the mad, sick beasts you will save.

Have a very Merry Christmas all. :san_undecided:

And to them I give:

When one person kills another, there is immediate revulsion at the nature of the crime. But in a time so short as to seem indecent to the members of the personal family, the dead person ceases to exist as an identifiable figure. To those individuals in the community of good will and empathy, warmth and compassion, only one of the key actors in the drama remains with whom to commiserate—and that is always the criminal. The dead person ceases to be a part of everyday reality, ceases to exist. She is only a figure in a historic event. We inevitably turn away from the past, toward the ongoing reality. And the ongoing reality is the criminal; trapped, anxious, now helpless, isolated, often badgered and bewildered. He usurps the compassion that is justly his victim’s due. He will steal his victim’s moral constituency along with her life.
-- Willard Gaylin
Too large for my sig :san_embarassed: , but it about sums up my feelings.

It's more than they would have been given in Belgium (probably), so i'd say it's enough. The father should have gotten more perhaps, since he is also partly responsible for ruining the lives of his sons.

The sons, it's sad, but they made their choice. :san_sad:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DemonArchangel

Didn't you read the article? It's Bangladeshi.

And Faisal, why do people perform honor killings? (Want a Muslim perspective.)

---

They didn't really specify if he was bangladeshi or not (the victim).

As for the aspect of honor in society, its pretty big, when someone is dishonored he is looked down upon by society, which is why they resort to killing the person who caused it(it still happens even in advanced muslim states, like egypt for example, mostly in rural areas).

Rather backwards thinking, at least here when a family are dishonoured, they don't resort to killing, they immediatly dis-own their son/daughter who caused it, still far better than resorting to killing someone, becuase its stated that killing is absolutely forbidden.

The victim was Iranian if I remeber the coverage correctly.

That was quite a good quote Lugh.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

As far as the retribution element of the sentence is concerned I think it is long enough.

However this seems to be the sort of case where a deterrent element would also be justified. There are too many of these crimes, as well as the general attitude that you can carry on in Basingstoke just the way you would in Bangladesh, and its lawful in those circumstances to impose an exemplary sentence pour encourager les autres. Or to discourage them in this case.

IMHO the father should have had a whole life tariff.

---

Seconded, from beginning to end. The terror caused by such killings does immense damage to their own community, first of all the women, and also to society at large. In my view the interest of society (as opposed to considerations of revenge) should always weigh in most when deciding a criminal sentence, and this is one case where the interest of society lies clearly in max deterrence plus lots of publicity to accompany it plus a campaign to cause a heads-up in places where the media don't reach. There is a whole tribal ideology behind this killing and it needs to be shredded, literally taken apart in public, to discourage others.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

There is a whole tribal ideology behind this killing and it needs to be shredded, literally taken apart in public, to discourage others.

---

Yes! Indeed! And how do you intent to do that? I like the shredding part mind you, but that would require some serious stigmatisation no? Or maybe perhaps conditionally eventually dare I say it even assimilation?

It is the "culture" of misconceived honour that should stand trial here.
The real victim is the girl that lost her father, 2 brothers and her lover.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crazed Rabbit

So if a person killed 5 people in one day, then reformed within a week of going to prison, you'd let him out?

---

No, I would give a lengthy prison sentence, firstly because a long period of time would be needed to observe the extent to which the person has reformed, secondly because the sentence acts as a deterent.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taffy_is_a_Taff

18 years?
why that number?

---

It's just a number between 15 and 20. Both are good, I only added the relevant risers of the conviction. That's just a valoration, if you ask me, no penalty will reform him, nor society, but there I go with my politically incorrect ideas again...:san_lipsrsealed:

I'd execute all of three of them. I agree with the Texanhere. :san_grin:

I'd deport them to Bangladesh and pay for them to have those jail terms served there.

No cable television for you boys.:san_laugh:

I oppose death penalty on principle, therefore I'd not suggest them here. But such crimes deserve to have a very, very strong deterrent: the convicts should be put to serve for life in prison. Honor killings are...barbaric to the extreme. It is the obligation of a free society to tear this concept down, as it limits individual's liberty to an extreme low. This case seems to be considering two major ugly things that I'd not hesitate to cuss at the notion:

1) The girl was considered a property by her father. Why, then, would he order the death of the man she loves, because he has decided to force her into another marriage? This, sir, should be punished to the greatest extent by law.

2) The murder being considered a legitimate way to "restore one's honor." One should never intrude upon another's life (one of the main principles against death penalty, in fact) based on abstract concepts.

The little scumbag was having sex outside of marriage , in his lustful irresponsibility he didn't even take precautions thus bringing another welfare sucking bastard into the world at tax payers expense . String him up in the town square and pelt his putrid corpse with rotten vegetables .
Uphold family values and decency , you damn liberals attacking the poor family , they may have commited a crime but it is only a crime because your poncy government is operating on a leftist agenda undermining tradition and the family unit .
The father and sons should be rewarded not punished , plus the so called victim was Iranian , that means that he was a terrorist who was probably planning an atrocity . And it was a mixed race relationship diluting the purity of the races .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fragony

Yes! Indeed! And how do you intent to do that?

---

By following your example: join demonstrations and beat the crap out of.. well, you know.. out of 'them'.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

By following your example: join demonstrations and beat the crap out of.. well, you know.. out of 'them'.

---

Mcarthyism was better, really, after all, anyone might be a commie, whereas this way we are limited to brown people.

Sort of takes the fun out of all the questioning (though Asian babes under the bed could be more rewarding...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by AdrianII

By following your example: join demonstrations and beat the crap out of.. well, you know.. out of 'them'.

---

I am glad you don't shy away from applying such a precision instrument.

I am very much for the family unit and a strong believer in marrage.
From what I have read the girl and the murdered person were' in-love' or 'lust' which everway you want to look at it.

Who knows what would have happened, if the relastionship had of run its course and the child had been born. They might have lived happily ever after or we might have another single mother demanding a council flat.

However, what gives the girls father the right to murder the girls boyfriend and then force his daughter to have an abortion, infact he has ruined more that one life.

The dead mans family have lost a son and a potential grandchild
The girl has lost the person she loved and a child. She has also lost her father and brothers. But I would imagine this is the least of her worry.

Also the girls mother has lost her husband and two children for a long time.

This is a very sad story, and I feel very dearly for both the girl and the murdered persons family. I CANNOT and WILLNOT have any sorrow for the murderers. I feel that the sentence is far to low and these 'people' should never be allowed to see the light of day again. If we cannot execute them, because of the liberal do gooders, then we should lock them away for the rest of there life never to see freedom again. They should be forced to earn the food they eat and not be supported by the state.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesWolf

This is a very sad story, and I feel very dearly for both the girl and the murdered persons family. I CANNOT and WILLNOT have any sorrow for the murderers. I feel that the sentence is far to low and these 'people' should never be allowed to see the light of day again. If we cannot execute them, because of the liberal do gooders, then we should lock them away for the rest of there life never to see freedom again. They should be forced to earn the food they eat and not be supported by the state.

---

I'm playing devil's advocate here BUT:

Don't you think a 16year old raised in a fundamentalist family that was ordered to kill his sister and probably had very little choice (maybe they even threatened to kill him if didn't do it, at least he would have been cast out of the family) in the matter does deserve, after serving a LONG sentence, a second chance at life ? God knows a lot of 16year olds do very stupid things. Okay, this is far beyond what the average 16y old does, and 'deserve' is probably not the right word here, but, wouldn't it be the humane/compassionate/even reasonable thing to do ?

Personally I feel that the current sentence (barring early release) is pretty good for the youngest son. he'll be 30 when he gets out, just enough time to have a second try at life. Hopefully he will have learned something and build up a decent life.

This of course, only applies if he shows serious signs of remorse, if he was just a cold blooded killer, let him rot. But I don't know the whole story.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by English assassin

That was quite a good quote Lugh.

---

Can't claim it I'm afraid, saw it in a sig on swordforums.com

@ doc_bean : He's shown himself to be either a murderous little sumbitch, or so influenceable to be a tool of anyone who whispers in his ear.

As others have mentioned, this is part of a tribal sub culture that needs to be smashed. Id've thought it'd be eroded by urbanization but unlike the usual course, immigrants aren't experienceing the cosmopolity of urban life that put paid to things of this manner in the west. Break up the urban ghettos, ban religious schools and religious paraphernalia in them, and teach a balanced cultural curriculum but with a heavy emphasis on the indiginous culture. It should all have been started decades ago, unfortunately we'll have the problem for decades more because of this.

Quote:

---

Don't you think a 16year old raised in a fundamentalist family that was ordered to kill his sister and probably had very little choice (maybe they even threatened to kill him if didn't do it, at least he would have been cast out of the family) in the matter does deserve, after serving a LONG sentence, a second chance at life ? God knows a lot of 16year olds do very stupid things. Okay, this is far beyond what the average 16y old does, and 'deserve' is probably not the right word here, but, wouldn't it be the humane/compassionate/even reasonable thing to do ?

---

No

We all know right from wrong. Its illegal in this country to murder.
What comes first a countrys law or some tribal culture.

We all have a choice if we dont like the law we can always leave and more to another country that best fits the way we feel. At the moment, my family and I are seriously considering leaving the UK and moving somewhere else, with less liberal law.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ShadesWolf

We all have a choice if we dont like the law we can always leave and more to another country that best fits the way we feel. At the moment, my family and I are seriously considering leaving the UK and moving somewhere else, with less liberal law.

---

That would rule out most of Europe, and most US states, maybe you can move to Texas :cowboy: