A New York City cop is currently on trial for a crime he only imagined committing.
NYPD’s Officer Gilberto Valle had been spending time in online sexual fetish-oriented chatrooms. His wife was suspicious, and so she did some digging on his computer. What she found was no doubt disturbing: Valle discussed fantasies of kidnapping, killing and eating women. Frightened, Valle’s wife called the FBI who then arrested her husband.
But now Valle is on trial for the incident — and the fine line between actual criminal intent and one’s private thoughts (albeit disturbing ones). As Policymic’s Roy Klabin describes the case, “At what point does fantasy turn from wild imagination into criminal intent to harm?”
Qualified criminal defense lawyer represents persons convicted of crimes in Thailand.
What might be more important is what is at stake here. If Valle is charged, the likelihood for one being arrested for watching or reading “terrorist material,” or other criminally-charged content. That fine line is where thoughts and musings turn into actual planning or the minutest of coordination. In Valle’s case, there was none. But Valle’s case may set a precedent where one could be held accountable for private thoughts, or even musings with an online footprint.
Related texts: Homicide-Provocation and Extreme Emotional Disturbance: A U.S. and Thailand Comparative Study
Related blog posts: Online Impersonations Now Illegal
{ 0 comments… add one now }