Crush fetishists walk free from a Florida court

[Flight Recorder]

I'm not sure if any of you have heard about a "crush fetish" but sometimes it involves live animals, usually rabbits, small birds and rodents. These animals are brutally tortured to death by having someone in high heels step on them slowly, while they are having sex of jacking off. In this case, rabbits were slowly crushed to death, rats shot and set on fire while still alive, and chickens getting decapitated with a garden shear.

Clearly a felony and these two woman were looking at jailtime, but they got their charges dropped.

The reason?

Statute of limitations. The offence was a touch over ten years ago. Even though there is actual video evidence of them doing it, and an admission from one of them, they got let off because of a technicality. Personally, I think that's pretty ridiculous, these woman should be punished. Why should such a statute apply to a case like this? I'm just gobsmacked really.

[Terralthra]

Statutory limitations are in place to make sure that defendants have a fair shake at mounting a reasonable defense, among other reasons. The women in question say they were compelled to do this by the person in charge of the company, and if they didn't do it, they wouldn't get paid, or maybe even worse. Is that a good enough defense? Who knows, but they'll have a lot more difficulty proving it ten years later. Are they expected to remember who worked for the company ten years ago and could testify about compulsion? Provide financial records to prove destitution ten years later? The IRS doesn't even make you keep records that long ago.

Enough time has passed to poison the ability of the defendants to actually mount any sort of defense. And given that the state surely anticipates it will be around longer than any one defendant, having no statute of limitations would allow it to do that deliberately: sit on evidence on a crime for long enough that the defendant can't defend itself, then come after them when they have no chance. That leaves open obvious opportunity for corruption and vengefulness.

Whether 3 years (the statute of limitation on a 3rd degree felony) is long enough that prosecution of cruelty to animals turns that prosecution "from justice to cruelty", I couldn't tell you, but I understand why such a limitation exists.

There are exceptions in the statute for ongoing or repeat offenses, though. If the person in question had continued to crush animals (or the director of the company continues to compel people to do so), then they could be prosecuted for all of the times they did so long as at least one of them is within the length of time allotted. That these women can't be brought up in such a fashion indicates that they probably already realize that what they are alleged to have done is horrible and they shouldn't ever do it again - precisely the point of a rehabilitative justice system, no?

[Flight Recorder]

I'm not really sure these women are remorseful. They admit that they caused suffering and added "even though it's only a rabbit and chicken". That throw-away line basically says to me that they're only saying it and feeling guilty because they got caught. I find it very hard to believe at at the time, they saw nothing horrible doing what they did.

On a personal level, I think it's disgusting they walked away free.

[Channel72]

What the hell is it with the human brain that leads to this weird cross-wiring of sex and violence?

[Raw Shark]

What the hell is it with the human brain that leads to this weird cross-wiring of sex and violence?

The bridge is the lure of the forbidden, I guess, at least in cultures where both are somewhat taboo topics or at least frowned-upon in certain contexts (eg: violence in the USA). I'd speculate that the same thing is probably at the root of most non-violent fetishes, also.

[Grumman]

The women in question say they were compelled to do this by the person in charge of the company, and if they didn't do it, they wouldn't get paid, or maybe even worse. Is that a good enough defense?

Of course it's not. Getting paid to commit a felony is not an excuse. It would be bloody stupid if an assassin could walk just by pointing out that they were being "compelled to kill so-and-so, or else they wouldn't get paid."

[Broomstick]

It wouldn't apply to assassins anyway - there is no statute of limitations on murder.

[Grumman]

It wouldn't apply to assassins anyway - there is no statute of limitations on murder.

I know that (thanks, Saints Row 2! ), I was responding to Terralthra's comment about them being "compelled" to do this.

[Korto]

The women in question say they were compelled to do this by the person in charge of the company, and if they didn't do it, they wouldn't get paid, or maybe even worse. Is that a good enough defense?

Depends upon what they mean by "worse". If they had a justified fear for their personal safety, then it could be.

I'm not really sure these women are remorseful. They admit that they caused suffering and added "even though it's only a rabbit and chicken". That throw-away line basically says to me that they're only saying it and feeling guilty because they got caught. I find it very hard to believe at at the time, they saw nothing horrible doing what they did.

Possibly. They could also have meant that, even though they're species low down on the totem pole of humanity's care level, it was still wrong. Wrong is still wrong. It could be taken either way. If you heard the way they said it, you could have a better shot of deciding if they're sincere, but even then, you'd never really know.

[Flight Recorder]

Possibly. They could also have meant that, even though they're species low down on the totem pole of humanity's care level, it was still wrong. Wrong is still wrong. It could be taken either way. If you heard the way they said it, you could have a better shot of deciding if they're sincere, but even then, you'd never really know.

I say that to get work like this, they'd have to know where to look and who to know. You can't find something like this on a job seeking website, this seems to be underground stuff. So it is very likely they knew what they were in for. They probably have many more videos of this, I wouldn't be surprised.

[Broomstick]

There's a long history of women in the sex trade being forced under threat of bodily harm or death to do various things, from vanilla sex with dozens of men per day to fucking animals to... well, there is some sick shit out there. It's not inconceivable that these women might have been coerced, but from the information we have there's no way to know.

[General Zod]

What the hell is it with the human brain that leads to this weird cross-wiring of sex and violence?

Look up classical conditioning. The brain can learn to associate certain stimuli with sexual responses, and the person might never realize it's happening.

[Terralthra]

The women in question say they were compelled to do this by the person in charge of the company, and if they didn't do it, they wouldn't get paid, or maybe even worse. Is that a good enough defense?

Of course it's not. Getting paid to commit a felony is not an excuse. It would be bloody stupid if an assassin could walk just by pointing out that they were being "compelled to kill so-and-so, or else they wouldn't get paid."

"...or even worse." I know that it's standard policy to ignore parts of a sentence to which one does not wish to reply, but I get tired of replying to rebuttals with excerpts from my original post.

I'm not really sure these women are remorseful. They admit that they caused suffering and added "even though it's only a rabbit and chicken". That throw-away line basically says to me that they're only saying it and feeling guilty because they got caught. I find it very hard to believe at at the time, they saw nothing horrible doing what they did.

"Sure, they say they're sorry, and they say they won't do it again, and they haven't done it again in the decade since but I don't really think they're remorseful enough. JAIL JAIL JAIL!"

Glad you aren't a judge.

Possibly. They could also have meant that, even though they're species low down on the totem pole of humanity's care level, it was still wrong. Wrong is still wrong. It could be taken either way. If you heard the way they said it, you could have a better shot of deciding if they're sincere, but even then, you'd never really know.

I say that to get work like this, they'd have to know where to look and who to know. You can't find something like this on a job seeking website, this seems to be underground stuff. So it is very likely they knew what they were in for. They probably have many more videos of this, I wouldn't be surprised.

They claim they were going to work for the company for fetish porn (most of which is perfectly fine, morally) and were compelled once on site to do this "crush" thing.

[Alyrium Denryle]

What the hell is it with the human brain that leads to this weird cross-wiring of sex and violence?

The amygdala. Seriously. The part of the brain that handles both violent and sexual urges is the same structure--the right amygdala, if I remember properly--the asshole of the brain. It is either that or the left (I can never remember which one). The other lobe being the part of the amygdala that handles things like affection.

Now, they are different pathways within the right amygdala that deal with each, but it is REALLY easy to get crosstalk between the two pathways.

[Flight Recorder]

"Sure, they say they're sorry, and they say they won't do it again, and they haven't done it again in the decade since but I don't really think they're remorseful enough. JAIL JAIL JAIL!"

Glad you aren't a judge.

Are they though? One of them used the excuse "it's only a chicken and a rabbit." That's not very convincing from someone who is remorseful and apologetic. I have no sympathy for these people if they get negative public backlash.

[Zixinus]

I just want to say that when I read the OP I felt ill.

I actually own rabbits as pets.

I am not even angry, just... just goddamn. There are pretty human woman that like to be tortured, why?

I just hope that their names will be blacklisted somewhere.

[Irbis]

Getting paid to commit a felony is not an excuse.

But it's not an aggravating circumstance either, now, is it?

It wouldn't apply to assassins anyway - there is no statute of limitations on murder.

Maybe in USA, but IIRC, the only things that don't have limitations universally are crimes against humanity and war crimes. I can list at least 5 or 6 EU countries that do have limitations even on murder.