Elisabeth Fritzl Begins Testimony [and updated news on her children]

Shadmia's World ^ | July 14, 2008 | shadmia

[Sherman Logan]

I think the mods made a mistake. You put "Australia" (the land down under) in parenthesis on my thread title when the case is taking place in AUSTRIA.

I don't think the US Constitution applies in Oz either.

Although they'd probably be better off if it did. Especially the 2nd Amendment.

[nw_arizona_granny]

Thank you for the update.

[BillyBoy]

>> No need to get snippy. You originally posted this in the news forum. I’m certain that I wasn’t the only one who assumed this was U.S. news. <<

You not only assumed it was U.S. news without reading the article, but you've also expressed doubt that Josef Fritzl is gulity through this thread. For those of us who have been following this story, it's a pretty open and shut case with a 99.999999% chance he's gulity of the charges leveled against him. I don't think anyone here who read the details of the Fritzl case would express doubt that he locked his daughter and grandchildren in the basement celler for 20+ years and repeated raped her. He's even admitted it, though she says he began to molest her when she was a child and he claimed it wasn't until she was 18.

My suggestion is that you read the articles relating to this case, see how it's unfolded over the last few monthes, and then come back to this thread and tell us whether you're concerned about Fritzl not being able to confront live witnesses. I think the fact these kids had never seen sunlight in their lives and that Fritzl had an 8 ton locked door installed in his basement that only he knew the combo to is pretty damning.

[grellis]

and he or his council can't challenge or question her.

No, it doesn't mean that. It means that cross examination will be slower than it would be if the victim were forced to appear in court with the man who did his damnedest to ruin her life. I think it's a shame this isn't done more frequently in our country.

[Jean S]

He’s very lucky that he doesn’t live in the U.S.

[Jean S]

Correction, the victim is very lucky that he doesn’t live in the U.S.

Our rights are the best in the world, I don’t care if there is a 99.9% chance that he is guilty. The 6th amendment was written for a reason and many of you are glad that it doesn’t apply in other countries.

Scary.

[Jean S]

No, it doesn't mean that. It means that cross examination will be slower than it would be if the victim were forced to appear in court with the man who did his damnedest to ruin her life. I think it's a shame this isn't done more frequently in our country.

Repeal the 6th amendment to the Constitution and you'll have your wish.

[BillyBoy]

Ping.
Fritzl family photo, c. 2001 or 2002.
[ don't know why the media feels the need to "censor" the faces of the Fritzl children who lived normal lives, since photos of what the "upstairs children" (that were born in the celler but allowed to have normal childhoods) look like today have been previously published.]

Thought you guys who followed this story months ago might want to hear about the latest updates on the case. Jean S, who hasn't followed this case, is actually arguing we need to be concerned about "the rights" of the criminal. Wonder if you guys might want to weigh it on that.

As someone else noted, this guy has been caught with multiple rapes, child abuse, false imprisonment and incest over a period of 20 years and the most they can give him under Austrian law is 15 years. And of course Josef gets allowed three square meals a day, walks outside to enjoy the sunlight, and a nice spacious cell with a window -- none of which he EVER allowed HIS victims. And let's not forget Elisabeth only agreed to talk to police on the condition that she would NEVER have to see her father again.

Yet Jean S thinks Austrian law is too harsh and should give Josef more "rights" to "face his accusers" -- the blood relatives he traumatized and tortured for two decades.

Unbelievable.

[Pontiac]

Jean S, who hasn't followed this case, is actually arguing we need to be concerned about "the rights" of the criminal.

As someone else noted, this guy has been caught with multiple rapes, child abuse, false imprisonment and incest over a period of 20 years and the most they can give him under Austrian law is 15 years. .

Thanks for the ping.

I agree and disagree with Jean S.

I agree that Fritzl should have the right to face his accuser. It is a basic human right. Yes Fritzl denied his daughter every human right that I can think of short of her life. But rights are rights because the government can not deny them to an individual no matter the crimes he may have committed. Remember it is the hated enemies of freedom that always say it is the seriousness of the charges that demand that a Republican resign before any investigation is even begun.

I would hope that with counseling Elisabeth will be able to face her father and tell the court of his evil.

If not perhaps the children’s testimony will suffice to convict him and if the children will not testify there is the testimony of the police which should be enough.

It does seem odd that fifteen years is all they can send him to prison for considering the number of charges that they could have on him.

[PGalt]

Thanks for the update. Josef Fritzl deserves the same dungeon, should endure the same rapes, and then be thrown into the furnace of hell.

[AnAmericanMother]

Video-hookup testimony in child rape cases is very common even in this country. The defense lawyer has the right to ask questions in real time.

In the case of a minor victim, the trial court has the discretion to balance the potential harm to the child against the right of confrontation.

This is an unusual case because the victim is now an adult. However, the crimes were committed when she was a child. In addition, I could make a strong argument that she is an incapacitated adult because of the extended mistreatment she suffered at this man's hands, and therefore is entitled to the same consideration as a minor child.

Most importantly, the article says that Fritzl has waived his right to be present. A defendant can waive all sorts of rights.

So even if Austria had a 6th amendment, he's waived it.

It's a shame that the law doesn't recognize consecutive sentences for multiple offenses. But hopefully he'll serve every day of whatever they manage to stick him with. The prosecutors and the court know that this case is notorious.

[Paved Paradise]

Jean S is either a complete idiot or has not an empathetic bone in her body. When these people feel compassion for monsters, do they even for one millisecond try to imagine the horrors of the victims????

This is why those who do not believe in God must live paltry lives. While justice may not happen on earth, we have the comfort in knowing that God’s justice which is completely perfect, will deal with this kind of pure evil.

[Paved Paradise]

What constitution are you talking about lady?

[nmh]

This is hard to believe ... but I know it’s true.

[Kimmers]

Thank you for the update....I wish they would give this monster an hour in the general population.

This just sickens me, prayers for the victims....

[ktscarlett66]

This is the first you’ve heard of this case??? The very first time the story broke, months ago, I knew it was Austria.

[Jean S]

What constitution are you talking about lady?

I'm no lady and no, I have never heard about this case until this thread. Crimes in Austria do not interest me, U.S. politics interest me. My problem is this, people are happy about this decision which, if it was in the U.S., it would violate the 6th amendment of the U.S. Constitution. Several posters suggested that they agree with the decision and I suggested that they might want to repeal the 6th amendment.

[CatherinePPP]

Who is Jean S?

I think that in normal circumstances an accused criminal should have the right to face his accuser, but I don’t think that should apply when the accuser is an abused child. And although this poor lady is an adult now, she has been imprisoned since her childhood, and her kids are still children. I think they should be left to heal in peace. There is enough evidence of this man’s guilt, without having to disturb this family further.

[AnAmericanMother]

As I just explained up thread, even if this did occur in the U.S., it would not violate the Confrontation Clause.

The defendant waived his right to be present.

End of story.

[BillyBoy]

A freeper who's been arguing in this thread since post #2 that we need to be concerned about Josef Fritz's "rights"