Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by n1 on Monday April 24 2017, @06:06AM   Printer-friendly
from the capitalism-religion dept.

On April 12th, a terror-attack against the team of one of the major German soccer clubs, BVB, was reported by several news agencies. The attack was carried out with three bombs, enclosed by metal bolts for maximum damage. Luckily, only one player was injured at his hand. Some clumsy letters found at the scene pointed to an Islamic background, another equally clumsy pamphlet pointed to the left-wing, but due to the bad spelling and grammar was immediately suspected to be a false flag, potentially set by some right-wing extremist.

As evident by the links above, the media happily picked up the Islamic theme; the German right-wing party AfD (Alternative für Deutschland, alternative for Germany) also happily embraced the opportunity.

Turns out, the actual background seems to be a completely different one, neither political nor religious: The BVB is in the stock market. The perpetrator bought "put" options and tried to kill as many team-members as possible to make a fortune when the stocks would plummet.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 3, Insightful) by AthanasiusKircher on Monday April 24 2017, @01:46PM (1 child)

    by AthanasiusKircher (5291) on Monday April 24 2017, @01:46PM (#498834) Journal

    I'm not going to weigh in on the usefulness of "hate crime" or terrorism distinctions for crimes, but your assertions about "mind reading" in law simply aren't true. Intent is an important distinction in the definition of many criminal statutes, perhaps the most well-known being the difference between murder vs. manslaughter. Different "degrees" of other crimes are often also determined by intent (e.g., whether harm inflicted was intentional, negligent, etc.). And differing punishments for different intent are frequently justified because of the goals of criminal justice, which isn't simply an "eye for an eye" simplistic punishment system. Increased punishment for different intent may serve as deterrent for deliberate crimes society deems more egregious given their societal impact, etc. (or, theoretically, different crimes may need different rehabilitation depending on their intent, though in most systems the level of interest in actual "rehabilitation" is merely nominal).

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +1  
       Insightful=1, Total=1
    Extra 'Insightful' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   3  
  • (Score: 2) by bradley13 on Monday April 24 2017, @06:46PM

    by bradley13 (3053) on Monday April 24 2017, @06:46PM (#498993) Homepage Journal

    Fair enough, but it's a matter of degree. As I understand it, "Mens Rea" covers the difference between murder and manslaughter: i.e., was it intentional or not.

    Beyond establishing intent, I submit that it doesn't matter. Did that dude assault and rob you because he wanted your money, or because he disliked your skin color? What difference does it make? Differing societal impact because it was a "hate" crime? Is the dude going to hate you less, after spending more time in prison?

    IMHO anything beyond establishing intent treads far too close to prosecuting "thought crime". From where it is far too small a step to punishing thought in the absence of crime.

    --
    Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.