The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
"the cannibal" only had 8 years, i belive for inviting people into his house and eating them he shouldnever be allowed back on the streets
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
Page:
"the cannibal" only had 8 years, i belive for inviting people into his house and eating them he shouldnever be allowed back on the streets
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
he says he recorded it all and put it on a website (yuk!)
unlitimate thrill YHEA RIGHT!!
You're an idiot.
Spell.
Spell.
Well what did you expect? Him to be convicted of first degree murder or whatever they have in Germany, despite the fact that his victim wanted to die? It wasn't like he was begging for his life.
This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong - his 'victim' was totally willing, and his conviction is a JOKE.
in my casual-news-watching opinion of course
in my casual-news-watching opinion of course
The man has played the law quite well. Cannibalism isn't technically illegal in Germany, and since the man consented to be killed, it isn't murder.
Of course, that he manipulated a man in need of psychiatric help into his home where, upon request, he repeatedly stabbed him and then ate him is an absolute atrocity. That it only lightly brushes the wrong side of the law is hilarious, and you can guarantee that there are a few hundred lawyers working with politicians in any number of countries, not just Germany, trying to tie up the gaps and prevent anything like this happening - or falling through the net - again.
Of course, that he manipulated a man in need of psychiatric help into his home where, upon request, he repeatedly stabbed him and then ate him is an absolute atrocity. That it only lightly brushes the wrong side of the law is hilarious, and you can guarantee that there are a few hundred lawyers working with politicians in any number of countries, not just Germany, trying to tie up the gaps and prevent anything like this happening - or falling through the net - again.
El Blokey wrote:
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong
So, cutting off a man's penis, cooking it and sitting down and eating it together cannot be considered 'morally wrong'?
What, in your mind, is?
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong
So, cutting off a man's penis, cooking it and sitting down and eating it together cannot be considered 'morally wrong'?
What, in your mind, is?
El Blokey wrote:
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong -
> his 'victim' was totally willing, and his conviction is a JOKE.
Eh? Nothing morally wrong? Are you human?
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong -
> his 'victim' was totally willing, and his conviction is a JOKE.
Eh? Nothing morally wrong? Are you human?
Insane Bartender wrote:
> El Blokey wrote:
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong
>
> So, cutting off a man's penis, cooking it and sitting down and eating
> it together cannot be considered 'morally wrong'?
>
> What, in your mind, is?
Bessants spelling.
> El Blokey wrote:
> This man is not a menace to society in any way, he has not committed
> murder, nor has he done anything that can be seen as morally wrong
>
> So, cutting off a man's penis, cooking it and sitting down and eating
> it together cannot be considered 'morally wrong'?
>
> What, in your mind, is?
Bessants spelling.
I *think* Blokey is joking :-P
Either that or he has a serious mental problem.
Either that or he has a serious mental problem.
Insane Bartender wrote:
> Of course, that he manipulated a man in need of psychiatric help into
> his home where, upon request, he repeatedly stabbed him and then ate
> him is an absolute atrocity.
Didn't the guy answer an advert? And did the cannibal know he was in need of psychiatric help?
Sexual fetishes don't cause the raising of an eyebrow (unless it's to do with harming others; ie beastiality or paedophilia). What is different between spanking and whipping a consenting adult, and eating their penis?
> Of course, that he manipulated a man in need of psychiatric help into
> his home where, upon request, he repeatedly stabbed him and then ate
> him is an absolute atrocity.
Didn't the guy answer an advert? And did the cannibal know he was in need of psychiatric help?
Sexual fetishes don't cause the raising of an eyebrow (unless it's to do with harming others; ie beastiality or paedophilia). What is different between spanking and whipping a consenting adult, and eating their penis?
Page: