Yes. A based judge would say I don't give a fuck about your culture. This is Canada and our culture. We don't pickup little boys for ice cream.
You made a deadly mistake taking your inferior culture to our land. Now face the wall.
A judge in Canada already let a black father go without jail after her beat his daughter to death for not doing her chores ''because corporal punishment acceptable in his culture and his community forgave him''.
But don't you dare point-out these people are not part of our culture and community.
Mind you, corporal punishments to children are illegal here.
Apparently our laws don't even apply to them. They can kill and get away with it.
So, Manoj Govindbalunikam saw a 9-year-old boy fishing at the river and asked if he wanted a ride home and offered him a fidget spinner to play with. He told him to go ahead and leave his fishing tackle and bike behind because it wouldn't fit in his car.
Then he took the boy out for ice cream. Then he asked the boy for his home address. He drove to the home address, but apparently didn't come to a complete stop. He slowed down to like two miles an hour and started accelerating again.
The boy's father saw his son in the car with a stranger, and came out screaming to get the fuck away from his son, which Govindbalunikam did.
Nothing sexual or violent happened, and he doesn't have any other history suggestive of being a pedo, but it's a huge what the fuck was that. In any culture, I'd think. I don't think there's any culture where it's cool to just pick up other people's kids and drive them around town.
He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, and I don't believe there's been a deportation hearing yet.
Of course all of that shit matters. If someone walks up to a 9-year-old and says "Hey, little man!" and offers a high-five, we don't call for death by firing squad. It may not be a perfectly appropriate thing to do, but it's not monstrous, either.
Yeah but he told the kid to leave his stuff, and put him in a car. So he should be shot to death in public or hanged in public. Put to death in someway in public to deter people from doing what he did.
You are correct. Just talking to kids in public isn't a crime. Whet this guy did after that should be though!
It's a big difference: "Hey lil dude! Catch anything? Nice day eh? Good luck!"
vs:
"Leave your gear behind & come get ice cream with me, I'll drive you home for reals!"
Boku no Pico starts with a car ride to get ice cream, ...or so I've been told!
Yeah. I agree. Taking a kid of the streets and driving them around for a day should definitely be a crime.
It shouldn't be the same crime as diddling a kid, though.
Which is why it matters whether this was attempted diddling or just a crazy person thinking it would be fun to pretend to be this kid's big brother for the day.
Careful, there. Throughout history, people who have been too gleefully casual about talking about handing out "the rope" have often been among the first against the wall.
He's obviously not "crazy" (a term often used to excuse criminal behaviour); he justified his actions rationally. And he justified it using his own culture, which is notorious for normalising rape.
If his intent was, inferred via his own admission, to rape the kid, should he get a reduced sentence just because someone stopped him?
You can't have it both ways. If "intent matters" such that good intentions absolve bad actions, then bad intent needs to be punished as though the actual crime was committed.
What he did wasn't "kidnapping" ... until he started driving away. Then it 100% was.
However? While what he did was HIGHLY "sus" it wasn't a crime. Giving a kid a ride home, grabbing a snack? Because they're (I presume) the same "community" that's not unheard of. Maybe it looked like rain? BUT if the kid wasn't also a jeet? That's highly suspicious. Plus the "leave your gear here" is a huge red flag.
So the act of talking to the kid, giving the kid a ride & even getting a treat aren't criminal. The gear is huge & the driving away IS a crime.
18 months is a HUGE sentence in Canada, slaps on the wrist for non-Whites is SO commonplace.
Good point, especially if they're under 12 & might not understand such things well enough.
Coupled with "don't take candy from strangers" which this boy's parents omitted :/
I don't know what his motive was. I don't know if he's simply a pedophile, or if he had some emotionally-fucked-up reason to want to play Big Brother for a few hours, or if there are voices in his head telling him to protect the kid from the Terminator, or just what the fuck that was all about.
Obviously it's wrong to take a kid for a drive while his parents panic. And obviously it's a lot more wrong if he was about to molest the kid than if the kid was never in any real danger. Those two crimes are quite different, and the penalty for them should be very different.
Motive is everything in a case like this. It's all I'd want to know if I were somehow in charge of sentencing him.
If he wanted to molest this kid, I want him locked away for life. If he just wanted to push the kid on a swing and drive him back home, I want him locked up for maybe like two months and then put under supervision for a few years, just as a very strong "Don't do that shit, you might think it's harmless but it terrifies parents. It's downright fucking traumatic. Never do anything like that again."
We can’t read his mind so we can’t guess his intent! Na, I’m going to go ahead and guess his intent was molestation. If he is innocence and totally just told a kid to leave his belongs, took him out for ice cream and then got bizarre about dropping the kid off or not but was totally not up to something, oh well! It’s better to assume something suspicious with incredibly suspicious behavior than not do anything because we lack the ability to read minds.
We can't read his mind, but we can check his phone and computers and browsing history and interview a variety of people who know him. There's almost no pedophile who doesn't leave some kind of evidence trail that a search warrant will turn up.
The articles I read aren't clear on whether this was done. I hope it was. If it was, then obviously the search didn't turn anything up, since if it had he'd be looking at a much longer sentence.
I'm also hoping he's had a psychiatric evalution. The defense "It's okay to take strange children for rides in India" is an insane one. Of course it's not. It's not okay anywhere.
That’s great your ideas are fake and gay. He told a kid to leave his belongs out in the open and go for a ride with him. He is from India the land of scammers, rape, shitting on the street, and throwing trash where ever you want. He isn’t worth a deep dive investigation because of the less than 1% chance he totally wasn’t doing something nefarious when he TOLD A CHILD TO LEAVE HIS STUFF IN PUBLIC AND GET IN THE CAR.
And if the searches do happen and turn up nothing i dont give a shit. He fucking told a kid to leave his shit and get in a car and then didnt stop to let him out at his home. Seems like a molester who didn’t quite have the courage to do it and im not going to waffle because we can’t read his fucking mind. His actions point to a nefarious motivation. He shouldn’t be here, he should be in India
Motive is completely irrelevant in the case. And you are demonstrating inferior intelligence if you can't figure out why. Because it's actually really simple. Sure you don't want to take a crack at it?
And you're still overlooking the important part that you yourself quoted.
You didn't even bother making an argument. You just sneeringly repeated yourself.
An observation: I've heard the phrase "demonstrating inferior intelligence" about fifty times at this point, and not once have I heard it from anyone who has ever had anything remotely intelligent to offer in any discussion.
It is relevant if there's some ambiguity. When he started driving away? THAT left no ambiguity at all: straight-up kidnapping.
But before that he was highly "sus" but not criminal.
Without the drive-off, would I let this guy within 10 meters of any kid? Hell no! What a creep. Boku no Pico Material eh?
It's not irrelevant. Legal definitions of "abduction" frequently require the intent. For example, intent to deprive of liberty or to conceal then from an entity lawfully entrusted with them (parents, school, etc.).
The problem is you are defaulting to the white person mentality of being impartial in an attempt to operate in a high trust society. The problem is, that is no longer a thing and whites must adopt the in-group preference that all other races have. This was a jeet doing it, then who cares what happens. No one would be coming to save you or rationalize it the same way you are doing it if he were white.
We give other Whites the benefit of the doubt because we have a high trust culture of helping each other, even if we're strangers. We take intent into consideration because White people know what it feels like not to have had breakfast, so to speak. It's actually plausible that a person raised in a White Western culture would give a strange kid a ride without nefarious intent. Not so with any other culture (maybe Japanese, although they would likely expect the kid to take care of themselves).
I think of high trust societies as a high performance race car; it can do incredible things that other cars simply can't, but it needs high performance components and has a very low tolerance for error.
Allowing infinite immigration is like filling the gas tank with grain alcohol or fixing components with duct tape. There are cars that are built like tanks that will run (like crap) on grain alcohol, but the high trust race car will explode.
If we can't stop immigration, we can't have a high trust society and we need to go backwards 1500 years to clanism.
The guy went over the line on what's considered absolutely nopetastic in a modern and aware society, at multiple layers. And even if there's a sliver's chance in hell that he didn't have horrible intentions he still made some monumentally stupid choices, to the point to where at the very fucking least he doesn't belong and shouldn't deserve to stay in a Western country.
And that's separate from how I already think we need to stop inviting foreigners in such absurdly high numbers, tantamount to inviting invaders to take over.
Rape is VERY prevalent in their "culture" but somehow they don't train their kids to, you know, NOT talk to strangers.
It's weird. They want their kids to grow up care-free and cheerful, but leave them wide-open to predators :/ As soon as the girls hit a certain age though? They clamp them down & isolate them. Boys get away with being brats right up to their mid-teens.
He's right, don't deport, garrote. Publicly.
Canadian Judge: "I was already going to let you go, you don't need to sell me."
It is absolutely acceptable in his culture. His evil, subhuman, devil worshipping culture.
Execute him anyway.
Jeet: "You have to let me do this because it's my culture, you bigot"
Judge: "Okay, we don't do that here, go live in where your culture is practiced"
Jeet: "Oh, how cruel! Why would you sentence me to this fate worse tham death!"
well if it's worse than death, death you shall have.
It's not acceptable in Canadian culture, which is kinda the point. He's not Canadian, never will be.
Yes. A based judge would say I don't give a fuck about your culture. This is Canada and our culture. We don't pickup little boys for ice cream.
You made a deadly mistake taking your inferior culture to our land. Now face the wall.
A judge in Canada already let a black father go without jail after her beat his daughter to death for not doing her chores ''because corporal punishment acceptable in his culture and his community forgave him''.
But don't you dare point-out these people are not part of our culture and community.
Mind you, corporal punishments to children are illegal here. Apparently our laws don't even apply to them. They can kill and get away with it.
lol. who said that
Based.
Dear judge,
Impaling pajeets niggers and kikes is my culture. You must be tolerant of my Romanian culture you bigot!!!
Looked it up. Weird fucking story.
So, Manoj Govindbalunikam saw a 9-year-old boy fishing at the river and asked if he wanted a ride home and offered him a fidget spinner to play with. He told him to go ahead and leave his fishing tackle and bike behind because it wouldn't fit in his car.
Then he took the boy out for ice cream. Then he asked the boy for his home address. He drove to the home address, but apparently didn't come to a complete stop. He slowed down to like two miles an hour and started accelerating again.
The boy's father saw his son in the car with a stranger, and came out screaming to get the fuck away from his son, which Govindbalunikam did.
Nothing sexual or violent happened, and he doesn't have any other history suggestive of being a pedo, but it's a huge what the fuck was that. In any culture, I'd think. I don't think there's any culture where it's cool to just pick up other people's kids and drive them around town.
He was sentenced to 18 months in jail, and I don't believe there's been a deportation hearing yet.
None of that shit matters. YOU. DO. NOT. APPROACH. OTHER. PEOPLE'S. CHILDREN, EVER.
Of course all of that shit matters. If someone walks up to a 9-year-old and says "Hey, little man!" and offers a high-five, we don't call for death by firing squad. It may not be a perfectly appropriate thing to do, but it's not monstrous, either.
Ok , but it’s a jeet. So you can be sure he wanted to rape the kid
Yeah but he told the kid to leave his stuff, and put him in a car. So he should be shot to death in public or hanged in public. Put to death in someway in public to deter people from doing what he did.
Yea, that's called "grooming."
You are correct. Just talking to kids in public isn't a crime. Whet this guy did after that should be though!
It's a big difference: "Hey lil dude! Catch anything? Nice day eh? Good luck!"
vs:
"Leave your gear behind & come get ice cream with me, I'll drive you home for reals!"
Boku no Pico starts with a car ride to get ice cream, ...or so I've been told!
Yeah. I agree. Taking a kid of the streets and driving them around for a day should definitely be a crime.
It shouldn't be the same crime as diddling a kid, though.
Which is why it matters whether this was attempted diddling or just a crazy person thinking it would be fun to pretend to be this kid's big brother for the day.
I feel like you're too hung up on leaving little loopholes for the slightly-creepy-but-not-rapey pedos to get away with it.
They should both get the rope. And you too if you disagree even slightly.
Careful, there. Throughout history, people who have been too gleefully casual about talking about handing out "the rope" have often been among the first against the wall.
For the sake of executing pedos, I'll take my chances
He's obviously not "crazy" (a term often used to excuse criminal behaviour); he justified his actions rationally. And he justified it using his own culture, which is notorious for normalising rape.
If his intent was, inferred via his own admission, to rape the kid, should he get a reduced sentence just because someone stopped him?
You can't have it both ways. If "intent matters" such that good intentions absolve bad actions, then bad intent needs to be punished as though the actual crime was committed.
Agreed, never seen this comment section be so off before.
Impale pajeets
So a child kidnapping in broad daylight isn't enough for you?
Since you got here you've refused to make a lot of very simple moral judgments but this just might take the cake.
What he did wasn't "kidnapping" ... until he started driving away. Then it 100% was.
However? While what he did was HIGHLY "sus" it wasn't a crime. Giving a kid a ride home, grabbing a snack? Because they're (I presume) the same "community" that's not unheard of. Maybe it looked like rain? BUT if the kid wasn't also a jeet? That's highly suspicious. Plus the "leave your gear here" is a huge red flag.
So the act of talking to the kid, giving the kid a ride & even getting a treat aren't criminal. The gear is huge & the driving away IS a crime.
18 months is a HUGE sentence in Canada, slaps on the wrist for non-Whites is SO commonplace.
You do not, EVER, feed someone else's kid without asking.
Is the kid lactose intolerant? Deadly allergic to peanuts? How do you know?
This is why it's simply never appropriate to interact with a strange child unless the very first thing you're doing is contacting their parents.
Good point, especially if they're under 12 & might not understand such things well enough.
Coupled with "don't take candy from strangers" which this boy's parents omitted :/
I don't know what his motive was. I don't know if he's simply a pedophile, or if he had some emotionally-fucked-up reason to want to play Big Brother for a few hours, or if there are voices in his head telling him to protect the kid from the Terminator, or just what the fuck that was all about.
Obviously it's wrong to take a kid for a drive while his parents panic. And obviously it's a lot more wrong if he was about to molest the kid than if the kid was never in any real danger. Those two crimes are quite different, and the penalty for them should be very different.
Motive is entirely irrelevant. So why you're trying for that besides an obvious attempt at a red herring, I'd have to speculate.
Personally I think you're feigning ignorance.
You even quoted a very important part as to this pajeet subhuman's intent yourself but you seem to have missed it.
Motive is everything in a case like this. It's all I'd want to know if I were somehow in charge of sentencing him.
If he wanted to molest this kid, I want him locked away for life. If he just wanted to push the kid on a swing and drive him back home, I want him locked up for maybe like two months and then put under supervision for a few years, just as a very strong "Don't do that shit, you might think it's harmless but it terrifies parents. It's downright fucking traumatic. Never do anything like that again."
We can’t read his mind so we can’t guess his intent! Na, I’m going to go ahead and guess his intent was molestation. If he is innocence and totally just told a kid to leave his belongs, took him out for ice cream and then got bizarre about dropping the kid off or not but was totally not up to something, oh well! It’s better to assume something suspicious with incredibly suspicious behavior than not do anything because we lack the ability to read minds.
We can't read his mind, but we can check his phone and computers and browsing history and interview a variety of people who know him. There's almost no pedophile who doesn't leave some kind of evidence trail that a search warrant will turn up.
The articles I read aren't clear on whether this was done. I hope it was. If it was, then obviously the search didn't turn anything up, since if it had he'd be looking at a much longer sentence.
I'm also hoping he's had a psychiatric evalution. The defense "It's okay to take strange children for rides in India" is an insane one. Of course it's not. It's not okay anywhere.
That’s great your ideas are fake and gay. He told a kid to leave his belongs out in the open and go for a ride with him. He is from India the land of scammers, rape, shitting on the street, and throwing trash where ever you want. He isn’t worth a deep dive investigation because of the less than 1% chance he totally wasn’t doing something nefarious when he TOLD A CHILD TO LEAVE HIS STUFF IN PUBLIC AND GET IN THE CAR.
And if the searches do happen and turn up nothing i dont give a shit. He fucking told a kid to leave his shit and get in a car and then didnt stop to let him out at his home. Seems like a molester who didn’t quite have the courage to do it and im not going to waffle because we can’t read his fucking mind. His actions point to a nefarious motivation. He shouldn’t be here, he should be in India
Motive is completely irrelevant in the case. And you are demonstrating inferior intelligence if you can't figure out why. Because it's actually really simple. Sure you don't want to take a crack at it?
And you're still overlooking the important part that you yourself quoted.
You didn't even bother making an argument. You just sneeringly repeated yourself.
An observation: I've heard the phrase "demonstrating inferior intelligence" about fifty times at this point, and not once have I heard it from anyone who has ever had anything remotely intelligent to offer in any discussion.
I repeated myself because that's how you make stupid people understand concepts they find difficult. Repetition.
Still can't figure it out? It's in your own post for goodness sakes.
It is relevant if there's some ambiguity. When he started driving away? THAT left no ambiguity at all: straight-up kidnapping.
But before that he was highly "sus" but not criminal.
Without the drive-off, would I let this guy within 10 meters of any kid? Hell no! What a creep. Boku no Pico Material eh?
Hey you figured out the part that the other guy literally quoted and somehow overlooked.
Um, ok? Thanks for participating, here's your medal. 🙄
It's not irrelevant. Legal definitions of "abduction" frequently require the intent. For example, intent to deprive of liberty or to conceal then from an entity lawfully entrusted with them (parents, school, etc.).
Motive is very relevant.
The problem is you are defaulting to the white person mentality of being impartial in an attempt to operate in a high trust society. The problem is, that is no longer a thing and whites must adopt the in-group preference that all other races have. This was a jeet doing it, then who cares what happens. No one would be coming to save you or rationalize it the same way you are doing it if he were white.
Exactly.
We give other Whites the benefit of the doubt because we have a high trust culture of helping each other, even if we're strangers. We take intent into consideration because White people know what it feels like not to have had breakfast, so to speak. It's actually plausible that a person raised in a White Western culture would give a strange kid a ride without nefarious intent. Not so with any other culture (maybe Japanese, although they would likely expect the kid to take care of themselves).
I think of high trust societies as a high performance race car; it can do incredible things that other cars simply can't, but it needs high performance components and has a very low tolerance for error.
Allowing infinite immigration is like filling the gas tank with grain alcohol or fixing components with duct tape. There are cars that are built like tanks that will run (like crap) on grain alcohol, but the high trust race car will explode.
If we can't stop immigration, we can't have a high trust society and we need to go backwards 1500 years to clanism.
The guy went over the line on what's considered absolutely nopetastic in a modern and aware society, at multiple layers. And even if there's a sliver's chance in hell that he didn't have horrible intentions he still made some monumentally stupid choices, to the point to where at the very fucking least he doesn't belong and shouldn't deserve to stay in a Western country.
And that's separate from how I already think we need to stop inviting foreigners in such absurdly high numbers, tantamount to inviting invaders to take over.
High-trust White small towns where people either know eachothers directly, or by proxy of their family.
I don't think even in the far east can you just pick up random kids like that.
Rape is VERY prevalent in their "culture" but somehow they don't train their kids to, you know, NOT talk to strangers.
It's weird. They want their kids to grow up care-free and cheerful, but leave them wide-open to predators :/ As soon as the girls hit a certain age though? They clamp them down & isolate them. Boys get away with being brats right up to their mid-teens.
Holy shit, similar story in Baltimore
https://archive.ph/03BtQ
Jimmy Kimmel voluntarily lies face down when he is ass raped.
what color is this "Canadian" judge?