""""... He says he is innocent and started the hunger strike in September 2007 - two years after he was convicted without physical evidence....'''

feminit law requires physical evidence !!!!!!!

how many men are doing time right now merely upon malicious feminiit misspokes

even high government officials have recourse to misspokes

Are there ANY other crimes that can see a man locked up without a SHRED of evidence? Any?

Raping your own wife..

What a ludicrous concept!

Quote from haahoo

Raping your own wife..

What a ludicrous concept!

Exactly!

Connecticut's Department of Correction claim the state is legally obligated to ensure the inmate's physical well-being,

Hmmm....So, does that mean the state is "legally obligated" to prevent prison rape from occurring?

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/prisons.htm

On December 31, 2007 —
– 2,293,157 prisoners were held in federal or state prisons or in local jails – an increase of 1.5% from yearend 2006, less than the average annual growth of 2.6% from 2000-2006.
– 1,532,817 sentenced prisoners were under state or federal jurisdiction. – there were an estimated 506 sentenced prisoners per 100,000 U.S. residents – up from 501 at yearend 2006. – the number of women under the jurisdiction of state or federal prison authorities increased 1.7% from yearend 2006, reaching 114,420, and the number of men rose 1.8%, totaling 1,483,896. At yearend 2007 there were 3,138 black male sentenced prisoners per 100,000 black males in the United States, compared to 1,259 Hispanic male sentenced prisoners per 100,000 Hispanic males and 481 white male sentenced prisoners per 100,000 white males.

What is the problem in "the land of the free?"

Looks like 2% of the male population is incarcerated!

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...il-790007.html

bump

anyone else seen this?

http://www.christianparty.net/r2000.htm

Sixty one countries containing 3.3 billion citizens of the world reported to the UN a total of 76,040 convictions for rape and sexual assault in 1990, an average conviction rate per 100,000 population of 2.3. The US, who did not report its data to the UN, had 158,166 inmates in prison for sexual assault in 1992, an incarceration rate of 63 per 100,000 population, and a conviction rate of 16. Thanks mainly to feminist jurisprudence we already had a *conviction rate* seven times greater than the world average and 37 times greater than Italy, Greece, and Japan http://christianparty.net//worldrapeconvictions.htm by 1992. But our prison population increased two thirds since then to two million, putting a third of the men in the world behind bars in a country which contains only 4.5% of the world's population. Our sexual assault conviction rate thus skyrocketed to somewhere between 24 to 96, putting between 260,000 and 1,045,910 American men in prison for rape & sexual assault--up to two thirds of the world's sexual assault convictions!

Our rape conviction rate is 73X higher than Japan, 50X higher than Switzerland, and 15X higher than Greece.

http://www.christianparty.net/scheck.htm

PROFESSOR SCHECK: Very few. Very few people have replied who were guilty pleas. Very few. They are all people that have been convicted after trial and what is interesting is that while there have been inclusions, right, the percentage -- the number of cases that finally get to the laboratory for testing, the number of exonerations far outnumbers the number of inclusions.

Our rape conviction rate is 73X higher than Japan, 50X higher than Switzerland, and 15X higher than Greece.

It's quite evident that in countries with a greater infestation of feminism we see a correlating high rate of rape conviction and sexual assault. These rates proliferated as definitions became all-encompassing. If the state-sponsored feminist witch-hunt continues in the same vein, the only men not in prison will be the jailers, politicians and a slave workforce!

http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=3285

There is also an article there and comments about this case.

Comments are immediately attacked by feminists and the topic pushed away with various comments that 'women have it worse'....

OK accepting that we don’t believe that he’s on a hunger strike in the true sense, since he must be taking some form of nourishment to last more than 3 months. Also, accepting that he’s convicted without evidence beyond the wife’s statement and wants to protest his innocence by ‘hunger strike’. What are your opinions of his ‘right’ to make this protest in the first place?

Should he wish and is capable of starving to its ultimate conclusion, should he be stopped? It is easy for us to say he must not be allowed to die. Maybe he would say that himself if the tables were turned. But only he knows all the injustice he experienced. Only he knows if he can live with any associated trauma if the injustice remains unresolved.

If it’s that bad for him, shouldn’t he be free to express his intolerance of fatal injustice however he chooses to? Suicidal or not, unless he’s proven insane, if he feels life with this injustice is worse than death then what gives the state the right to prevent him?