View Full Version : Sarah Kruzan: Sentenced to Life Without Parole at Age 16
Frisky
20-09-2009, 11:08 PM
This video just makes you stop and think for a second.
In my opinion, she shouldn't be in jail at all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR7mno6p9iQ
What do you think?
It's so sad :(
Frisky
21-09-2009, 02:50 PM
Sorry can't edit
Facebook group:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=135555313406&ref=search&sid=690611804.226590493..1
adaym
21-09-2009, 03:10 PM
Did she kill him?
Immenseman
21-09-2009, 03:14 PM
very sad. it's a shame, she realised she should be punished because she ended his life but to have to die in prison is horrible, i think she has served long enough.
Black_Apalachi
21-09-2009, 03:16 PM
When will the law wake up and punish parents? I wasn't surprised one bit when it said her mother was on drugs and abused her.
Alkaz
21-09-2009, 03:21 PM
He groomed her from the age of 11. He prayed on a small, innocent girl who all she wanted is some safety and security from someone as her mother was abuse too as she was an alky. She killed him after 3 years after he put her on the streets as a prostitue.
Its so bad who it seems the judge never took that into account and how he raped them other girls and how it has messed there lives up. I agree that she commited an unforgiveable offence but the history of the case should definately been taken into consinderation. That law is ridiculous and I think that someone should go to the top and raise the awareness of that law to Mr. Obama.
Jordy
21-09-2009, 04:21 PM
I've always believed prison is a place for rehabilitation, it's to punish you but also to make you a better person who you get out, so you've learnt your lesson and know how to progress with your life. That's not to say that there shouldn't be exceptions, for example people who have taken away many lives etc should indeed spend a life in prison without parole.
20 years for that murder would be reasonable, certainly no more than that. At such a young age she could of easily changed for the better. Frankly I'm amazed she is how she is, I'd of gone for the easy way out.
AlexOC
21-09-2009, 05:29 PM
Maybe the ***** shouldnt of killed someone?
Harsh yes, but if you kill, you get long time. End of.
But beating a homeless..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5scLwg1pT14&feature=related
Isnt that bad.
Jordy
21-09-2009, 05:31 PM
Maybe the ***** shouldnt of killed someone?
Harsh yes, but if you kill, you get long time. End of.Watch the video.
AlexOC
21-09-2009, 05:36 PM
Watch the video.
I did watch the video :rolleyes:
She comitted murder.
Alkaz
21-09-2009, 05:37 PM
But then you would know that she was groomed and raped as a 13 year old girl and then raped again for 3 years because of that monster.
He also did it to other girls if you listen.
Japan
21-09-2009, 05:50 PM
She looks just like someone from my school =o
Anyway, isn't that sort of thing for serial killers, not teenagers who kill their abusers/rapists?
Jordy
21-09-2009, 05:57 PM
What she did was pretty much just killing someone in defence and it's completely wrong that the Judge didn't take the circumstances into consideration. It's also wrong the fact that she is treated as an adult when she was infact a juvenile and should be treated accordingly.
If she committed a murder in cold blood, an if she doesn't have any mental issues then she was in the right state of mind and she deserves to die in prison. Justice has, for once, been served. Although reading futher, if she did do this in self-defence, its an entirely different issue.
Frisky
21-09-2009, 06:53 PM
In all honesty, noone really knows why she killed him. Noone was there except for him and her and at the end of the day, I think she's a bright girl and most cases like these tend to black people in America who get these charges so it's most likely a racist judge. It's been said in many articles for her case.
Now be honest, if your in that situation where your whole life you've been bought up like that, treated like ****, you would eventually get that adrenaline rush and say "No, I've had enough" and you would do the same thing.
GommeInc
21-09-2009, 09:04 PM
But then you would know that she was groomed and raped as a 13 year old girl and then raped again for 3 years because of that monster.
He also did it to other girls if you listen.
She still killed someone... No matter who it was, she still committed murder. It's hard to say if the rape charges and prostituition issues were taken into account, but murder is murder :/
Alkaz
21-09-2009, 09:29 PM
Ye, I know its different laws, different countries but I was reading an official report from a court and someone got away with just 12 years for killing 2 people and incest. When you compare it to things like that it doesnt add up.
Ridiculous that people are saying she deserved it. She was 16 at the time of sentencing. Thats still only classed as a young adult, verging on child. She committed a murder yes, but under certain circumstances, murder is not the worst thing that couldve happened. She could have contracted HIV or AIDs, passed this onto several people and died a horrible death. She killed a man which had sex with minors, had a chain of prostitutes and recruited minors and trained them up to be prostitutes.
A completely 'justified' murder. Punishment, yes. life without parol? No. She was young at the time, had been raped by the man, and has realised her wrong doings.
ifuseekamy
21-09-2009, 10:03 PM
It is good that they charge people irrelevant of age, but I don't think this specific girl deserves to be incarcerated alongside sick-minded individuals who kill for fun because it's not the same thing.
adaym
21-09-2009, 10:18 PM
Nothing can justify murder. Nothing.
Self defence isn't murder. I don't know the ins and outs of this story but if she murdered him then she deserves life. Simple.
PaulMacC
21-09-2009, 10:52 PM
Nothing can justify murder. Nothing.
Self defence isn't murder. I don't know the ins and outs of this story but if she murdered him then she deserves life. Simple.
If I was going to be killed I would do everything in my own power to prevent that.
Alkaz
21-09-2009, 10:55 PM
Nothing can justify murder. Nothing.
Self defence isn't murder. I don't know the ins and outs of this story but if she murdered him then she deserves life. Simple.
Thats really narrow minded to be honest and it sounds like that law is too.
PaulMacC
21-09-2009, 11:00 PM
I agree with Joe. She shouldnt be jailed for life.
FlyingJesus
22-09-2009, 08:48 AM
"Sara Kruzan grew up with her mother in RIVERSIDE MOTHER******, California"
This was not a self defence case. If it was going on from her youth obviously it's difficult to get away from that but she quite clearly had time to go to the police or something as she was still school age and as far as I'm aware not locked up in GGs house for all her time. If at the time or her killing him he was attempting to kill her then it's self defence, otherwise it's the premeditated murder that she's been convicted of. So she's 16 and not 60, that means nothing. She still killed a man no matter how awful a person he was and the law shouldn't bend to say that a killing to improve her life is the same thing as killing to save her life, especially when there were other ways of getting change to come around
adaym
22-09-2009, 09:46 AM
Thats really narrow minded to be honest and it sounds like that law is too.
Couldn't really care. The law is there for a reason and in no circumstance should be be broken. Murder is murder.
Couldn't really care. The law is there for a reason and in no circumstance should be be broken. Murder is murder.
if you were in her situation i bet youd want a less harsher punishment...
FlyingJesus
22-09-2009, 04:23 PM
Yeah and I'm sure mass murderers and terrorists wish there were more lenient punishments when they get caught but that doesn't change much
Yeah and I'm sure mass murderers and terrorists wish there were more lenient punishments when they get caught but that doesn't change much
yeh but they know that what theyve done deserves harsh punishment. She said she knew she deserved punishment, but what she didnt know. I think killing a man for raping is a lot less serious than the person that was in the news for killing her two daughters, who will actually get out..
No, the sentence is unjustified, only by law.
adaym
22-09-2009, 04:43 PM
if you were in her situation i bet youd want a less harsher punishment...
What a fine argument you bring across :rolleyes:
Hushie
22-09-2009, 04:53 PM
I feel sorry for her, doesn't deserve life
Black_Apalachi
22-09-2009, 06:40 PM
The life she has now is better than the life she had before. This would be the motivation behind the crime which I can completely understand.
What a fine argument you bring across :rolleyes:
If u read the above post... :rolleyes:
Jordy
22-09-2009, 06:54 PM
What a fine argument you bring across :rolleyes:I believe you can "kill" someone in self-defence in the UK, I'm pretty sure there's only been the one case in recent times and they won due to self-defence? It's very difficult to prove things are self-defence though to be honest and your life really does have to be in danger to kill in self-defence.
I understand in this particular case it wasn't directly self-defence but in my opinion, the circumstances should of been taken into account when sentencing.
Frisky
22-09-2009, 06:55 PM
"Sara Kruzan grew up with her mother in RIVERSIDE MOTHER******, California"
This was not a self defence case. If it was going on from her youth obviously it's difficult to get away from that but she quite clearly had time to go to the police or something as she was still school age and as far as I'm aware not locked up in GGs house for all her time. If at the time or her killing him he was attempting to kill her then it's self defence, otherwise it's the premeditated murder that she's been convicted of. So she's 16 and not 60, that means nothing. She still killed a man no matter how awful a person he was and the law shouldn't bend to say that a killing to improve her life is the same thing as killing to save her life, especially when there were other ways of getting change to come around
when I read 'Riverside' I completely thought the same thing LOL.
Maybe she should do her time, yes, she even agress, but I don't think life without parole is a good idea. Life over in the UK is only like 25 years in jail, it isn't actually LIFE.
-Adam
22-09-2009, 08:46 PM
when I read 'Riverside' I completely thought the same thing LOL.
Maybe she should do her time, yes, she even agress, but I don't think life without parole is a good idea. Life over in the UK is only like 25 years in jail, it isn't actually LIFE.
Ye, but life should mean LIFE. Maybe then it would stop people doing the harsh things they do, maybe not, who knows.
Sammeth.
22-09-2009, 09:06 PM
I would have snapped way before 3 years.
FlyingJesus
22-09-2009, 09:41 PM
I would have snapped way before 3 years.
Maybe she wasn't that tight
Black_Apalachi
22-09-2009, 11:28 PM
I would have snapped way before 3 years.
Same :rolleyes:
Maybe she wasn't that tight
How is it tight? It's tight on her.
in all fairness, she could have done many things like gone to the police, she didn't have to kill him regardless of whatever he did was wrong and sickening or not. agreed, she should be punished and i do partly agree that life is too much, perhaps quite a long sentence would suffice.. but I do not agree that she should be 'freed'.. sure, she's had a hard life but you can't just release people because of a sob story?
Black_Apalachi
23-09-2009, 01:35 AM
Yeah I know what you mean. If I'm totally honest, what has happened is what should happen based on her actions. I'm just wondering though, if this is the sentence given to her as a minor, what would have the sentence been for an adult? At least knock off the 'without parole' bit for a minor.
adaym
23-09-2009, 10:13 AM
I believe you can "kill" someone in self-defence in the UK, I'm pretty sure there's only been the one case in recent times and they won due to self-defence? It's very difficult to prove things are self-defence though to be honest and your life really does have to be in danger to kill in self-defence.
I understand in this particular case it wasn't directly self-defence but in my opinion, the circumstances should of been taken into account when sentencing.
It's not self defence at all. What she committed was murder not self defence. Self defence would be if a man was attacking her attempting to kill and she did what she could to protect herself (inc. killing) but that wasn't the case. She deserves all she gets.
How is it tight? It's tight on her.
Sexual innuendo, get with it :P.
Frisky
23-09-2009, 02:10 PM
This is just crazy:
WIKIPEDIA:
Like other areas of criminal law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law), sentences handed to minors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_%28law%29) may differ from those given to legal adults (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult). A few countries worldwide allow for minors to be given lifetime sentences that have no provision for eventual release. Of these, only the United States actually have minors serving such sentences, according to an updated 2008 joint study by Human Rights Watch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch) and Amnesty International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_International). As of May 2008, Human Rights Watch has calculated that there are 2,484 youth offenders serving life without parole in the United States.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment#cite_note-0)
IceNineKills
07-10-2009, 04:36 PM
People moan that people don't get long enough sentances but when they do, people still moan.
Well i think it's obvious she isn't a danger to anyone anymore. I don't think she should have to live her whole like in torment because that has what she has done.
IceNineKills
07-10-2009, 05:54 PM
You got that from watching that video? Everyone can act nice for a few minutes.
-:Undertaker:-
07-10-2009, 06:00 PM
This is just crazy:
WIKIPEDIA:
Like other areas of criminal law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Criminal_law), sentences handed to minors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minor_%28law%29) may differ from those given to legal adults (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult). A few countries worldwide allow for minors to be given lifetime sentences that have no provision for eventual release. Of these, only the United States actually have minors serving such sentences, according to an updated 2008 joint study by Human Rights Watch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_Rights_Watch) and Amnesty International (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amnesty_International). As of May 2008, Human Rights Watch has calculated that there are 2,484 youth offenders serving life without parole in the United States.[1] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_imprisonment#cite_note-0)
That is justice.
People moan that people don't get long enough sentances but when they do, people still moan.
Different circumstances, People moan mass murderer's dont get long enough
Not pubescent children
ifuseekamy
07-10-2009, 07:35 PM
Different circumstances, People moan mass murderer's dont get long enough
Not pubescent children
Being a minor doesn't make you a naive "child" incapable of comprehending your actions. It doesn't matter if you're 16 or 60, unless you have a mental disorder you know what you're doing and should be made to face the consequences.
There are thousands of young adults that get abused similar to how she was, what there aren't thousands of are young adults that murder their abusers. What she did was clearly the actions of a psychopath and prison is probably the best place for her now as she has clearly been affected by what happened in her teenage years. It is a shame but if she was fit to walk the streets and live a normal life she wouldn't of acted in the way that she did, normal people don't murder.
IceNineKills
07-10-2009, 11:47 PM
There are thousands of young adults that get abused similar to how she was, what there aren't thousands of are young adults that murder their abusers. What she did was clearly the actions of a psychopath and prison is probably the best place for her now as she has clearly been affected by what happened in her teenage years. It is a shame but if she was fit to walk the streets and live a normal life she wouldn't of acted in the way that she did, normal people don't murder.
Anyone is capable of murder.
Anyone is capable of murder.
Your point is? Just because it's possible to murder someone doesn't mean that we actually would. The people that have murdered should not be walking the streets. They are dangerous and are highly capable of murdering again.
FlyingJesus
08-10-2009, 02:46 AM
Well i think it's obvious she isn't a danger to anyone anymore. I don't think she should have to live her whole like in torment because that has what she has done.
Where are you getting the idea that she's not a danger any more? Anyone who can snap and kill a man with full intent to do so is dangerous, whatever that person has done. In fact her being so messed up by him makes her even more of a danger than many other people who've killed
LuketheDuke
09-10-2009, 03:16 PM
Where are you getting the idea that she's not a danger any more? Anyone who can snap and kill a man with full intent to do so is dangerous, whatever that person has done. In fact her being so messed up by him makes her even more of a danger than many other people who've killed
Then why wasnt she tried under a state/federal mental health act?
The way in which she was tried for the crime is completely ridiculous, crime isnt just a bunch of statistics its about situations. Do we know whether she could go to the police without being found out and being beaten, maybe potentially murdered herself? No, we dont.
The video is pretty sucky for concrete evidence.
Then why wasnt she tried under a state/federal mental health act?
The way in which she was tried for the crime is completely ridiculous, crime isnt just a bunch of statistics its about situations. Do we know whether she could go to the police without being found out and being beaten, maybe potentially murdered herself? No, we dont.
The video is pretty sucky for concrete evidence.
I don't think he was trying to say that she has a mental health problem, I think he was saying that if she has already committed murder then she is highly likely of doing it again.
I believe you can "kill" someone in self-defence in the UK
Self-defence can be used as a mitigating factor in English law, that is one can claim their act was in self-defence in order to minimise the possible sentence they may receive if found guilty. It is rare that self-defence can be considered a total defence for a crime. The reason for this is because of the term "reasonable force"; the Criminal Law Act 1967 reads - "A person may use such force as is reasonable in the circumstances in the prevention of crime, or in effecting or assisting in the lawful arrest of offenders or suspected offenders or of persons unlawfully at large". This is essentially confirmed by the common law principle (common law is law created by the courts) established in R v Beckford - "A defendant is entitled to use reasonable force to protect himself, others for whom he is responsible and his property. It must be reasonable."
The problem in English law is what is reasonable force. English law is very confusing in the fact that reasonable force is open to interpretation - and this is what makes cases where defendants claim self-defence occasionally some of the most controversial around.
In regards to this case (not being aware of the differences between English and American law - and there are many, as well as not knowing the details of the criminal act) I do not think her act was in self-defence. As FlyingJesus said earlier in the thread, self-defence would require immediate threat or danger to her or someone else. It's difficult to establish whether this was the case because I don't know the details of her act however one can be sure that the case would be tried differently in the event that the murder was committed in self-defence.
However, I do believe she could argue provocation in this case. In English law to use the defence of provocation requires two things;
1) the jury must establish that the person was actually provoked.
2) the jury must then establish that a reasonable person would act in the same way the defendant did.
One could argue that the repeated abuse, rape and grooming of this woman could amount to provocation. I recall Sammeth saying, earlier in this thread, that he would of broken before three years. In my opinion a jury would agree and would assume that this was long-term provocation and any reasonable person would have acted in the same way.
Nevertheless, this is English law and not American. Additionally, without knowing the details of the case it's impossible to make a fair decision. The video is a very biased view on her imprisonment after all. Personally, on the basis of what I know, her sentence is quite harsh. Yes, she deserved punishment but seriously - wouldn't any reasonable person behave the same way as her. I certainly would.
IceNineKills
14-10-2009, 11:25 PM
Your point is? Just because it's possible to murder someone doesn't mean that we actually would. The people that have murdered should not be walking the streets. They are dangerous and are highly capable of murdering again.
Even if it was selfdefence or manslaughter?
FlyingJesus
15-10-2009, 12:02 AM
It wasn't either of those things
Want to hide these adverts? Register an account for free!
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions Inc. All rights reserved.