Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

themarshallproject.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 152 posts

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#111

Post by dwaltrip »

roel_v wrote: post #34
sgift wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The incarceration is the punishment handed out by the state, the state being a proxy of 'society'. There is however no moral obligation for any citizen to take over the stance of that 'abstract society' that a prisoner can be released for whatever reason. While true this is a reflection on society itself. Some people learn this the hard way, when they end on the wrong side of it and then ask "why do people not forg…

"You either stand for your principles in all circumstances or none. If they only count for 'easy' cases they are worthless anyway." So a third-striker convicted to 15 years in jail for stealing a loaf of bread is equally 'deserving' of help than a child murderer? Okay... Look I would agree if you would say 'we'll focus on a group and if there happen to be undeserving people in that group, we'll grudgingly accept that…

> child murderer

Is she a murderer, or someone who committed murder once over 20 years ago?

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#112

Post by jhall1468 »

pc86 wrote: post #62
Geekette wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Plenty of very highly qualified scholars who didn't grow up in the context that she did, whose backgrounds aren't comparable. Doesn't make her less deserving of this opportunity; she committed a crime and did her time, she's allowed to move on.

She absolutely is and should not have any impediments from the state in moving on with her life. Private individuals and institutions are under no such obligation, though.

Harvard is a private institution that receives funding from the Government in the form of Pell Grants. This is not just a small business in Wisconsin. If Harvard wants to be able to extend the punishment of someone who has served their time, they should no longer receive Government funding.

You don't get to have it both ways.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#113

Post by Geekette »

frgtpsswrdlame wrote: post #70
Geekette wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post states she had a suffered psychological breakdown at that time, which clearly indicates she wasn't in the right frame of mind. It also outlined how the patterns of abuse she grew up with contributed to how she treated the child generally; its what she'd learned and knew no better.

I think we're trying to extrapolate too much from too little information. However, I do believe in some minimum level of culpability for your actions. Serial killers aren't excused for their often terrible childhoods. I think child killers belong in the same box. The idea that anyone in modern society "didn't know better" than to beat their small child then leave them for days strikes me as farcical.

She was a 14 year old child who was raped, who had experienced other abuse before and while pregnant. Given her circumstances, she probably had no access to alternatives or any real choice in whether/not to bear a child that resulted from rape. Given her upbringing and the manner of conception, it's not surprising she transferred patterns of abuse onto the child. Not excusing the crime or culpability (she was punished significantly for it), but recognizing that the context is significantly different.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#114

Post by jhall1468 »

santoshalper wrote: post #102
danso wrote: post #22

I've been less of a fan of "Shawshank Redemption" as I've grown older, cynically seeing it as being overly Pollyannish, but this sounds like a scene right out of it: > Incarcerated in 1996, Jones worked for five years in the law library at Indiana Women’s Prison, and got certified as a paralegal. She received a bachelor’s degree from Ball State University in 2004, and audited graduate-level classes at Indiana Univers…

Except, she actually did kill a child in a way that was undoubtedly agonizing and terrorizing. She did not suffocate him in his sleep, and she did not poison him, she beat a small child to death. Can you imagine the terror and pain they went through? To the extent I believe her backstory (we are only hearing her account of things), I am incredibly sympathetic about the damage done to her, but I am also sympathetic to…

> I don't know that something like that is ever forgivable to me.

You aren't in position to give forgiveness. That belongs to the person she harmed and those that loved him. The conversation at hand is whether or not we continue punishing her because of what she did. That's no our job nor is it Harvards. They have every right to not accept her as a student should they believe it would put other people at risk. But that's not what happened here, what happened here is Harvard didn't want bad press.

That's pathetic and something I would expect literally anywhere outside of a prominent educational system that has an endowment the size of Harvard. This is exactly the type of thing it's supposed to be immune to.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#115

Post by troupe »

throwaway287391 wrote: post #21
subroutine wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some quotes from the article makes it seem like they are more worried about the potential social and political backlash, than their personal beliefs on whether she has been rehabilitated. > " We didn’t have some preconceived idea about crucifying Michelle,” said John Stauffer, one of the two American studies professors. “But frankly, we knew that anyone could just punch her crime into Google, and Fox News would proba…

... wow. I'm pretty shocked that a Harvard prof would admit to overturning someone's admission due in part to them being a racial minority, fearing the prospect of bad press from Fox News . Fox has really won the culture wars in a major way.

> shocked that a Harvard prof would admit to overturning someone's admission due in part to them being a racial minority

Harvard has come under a lot of criticism for having a lower standard for blacks and a higher standard for asians. He seems to imply that he felt or that others would feel (I can't exactly tell) that Harvard would not have accepted someone in the same situation who wasn't black. This is different than saying he didn't think she should be accepted because of her skin color.

I'm not arguing for or against their decision--just that within the context of current lawsuits against Harvard, his statement has a bit different meaning.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#116

Post by dwaltrip »

santoshalper wrote: post #107
CossieRay wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At what point will she simply be referred to as Michelle Jones as opposed to "this child murderer"? It's just not right to blatantly disregard all her twenty years of transformation

I think it is. I do not believe there is anything she can ever do to balance that scale. Not in 20 years, or 200. She should never have been released from prison. Like it or not, torturing a small child to death is the defining feature of her life.

You do realize others may think that several decades is long enough for a full and thorough reformation to potentially occur? Especially in case like this, when the crime was committed at a young age in a fairly severe context.

Obviously, we must perform a careful evaluation to ensure that this is the case. But to deny any possibility of reformation seems wrong, and not reflective of the reality in which people sometimes change significantly over time.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#117

Post by Geekette »

Helmet wrote: post #74
Geekette wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The post states she had a suffered psychological breakdown at that time, which clearly indicates she wasn't in the right frame of mind. It also outlined how the patterns of abuse she grew up with contributed to how she treated the child generally; its what she'd learned and knew no better.

Stop making excuses for her. Many of us grew up in abusive households and/or have suffered emotional and mental breakdowns. She murdered her 4 year old child. And not manslaughter or crime of passion or whatever murder - but cold blooded beat him to death then hide the body murder.

Recognizing the significantly different context in that she was a 14 year old child who was raped, who had experienced other abuse before and while pregnant (she probably had no real choice or access to alternatives), which led to a breakdown, etc is not "making excuses for her".

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#118

Post by moneytalks »

nxsynonym wrote: post #68
moneytalks wrote: post #60

Can't believe we're to the point of debating whether a private educational institution can base an admissions decision, in part, on a past murder conviction. This isn't about redemption or rehabilitation. No one is suggesting she's going to beat, starve, abandon and murder another 4-year-old. That's very unlikely. But, what we are suggesting is that a private institution should be able to consider a person's entire s…

>>But maybe the issue here is that the woman's punishment was much less than what most people would consider full justice, so they feel compelled to mete out slightly more to compensate. Peoples justice is not justice, it's revenge. You can't cherry pick the decisions of the justice system to fit your personal world views. You either believe in the ability of the justice system to impose the correct sentences, or you…

Criminal justice attempts to align punishments with the public's sense of fairness, not the other way around.

When people regularly feel compelled to mete out vigilante justice, it's a sign that the justice system is broken not people's sense of fairness.

The alternative is to make the criminal justice system into some kind of religion lecturing to the public about what value system they should have.

And, here, if you polled the general public you'd like get an overwhelming majority who believe that serving 20 years in prison for the beating, starvation, abandonment and murder of a child was too light a sentence. Habitually ignoring such sentiment is detrimental for a society long term as people lose faith in the government being able to protect them and maintain the right to be the sole arbiter of justice. (Avoiding mob justice is equally important, but this is not a case of ambiguous facts or uncertain guilt, just whether 20 years could ever be the right sentence for this abhorrent crime.)

Remember, governments get their power from and serve the people. Not the other way around.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#119

Post by aaron695 »

Beltiras wrote: post #83
aaron695 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

She murdered a 4 year old child. Kept it secret for a period of time (two years). Hid the body and mislead police on it's location to confuse them. To this day it has not been found (One assumes because she is still keeping it hidden) Also her boyfriend (the high-school senior) has never been charged with rape (and had custody of the child until he was 3 so one assumes no allegations were made back then) But assuming…

You misunderstand me. I objected to the minimization of the rape. The "what she calls" language.

I think you are being political on the back of an awful incident / world.

And distracting from the important point, once a person does their time, society should also move on.

But to spell it out -

She has to stick to her story of all the awful things that happened to her (which I'm sure most did). But you can't just take it all at exact value.

If the story says it was rape (which is now a militarized word which is what you're trying for), it effects a real person's life, who possibly has a family.

If she's under playing it, it could be because she doesn't want to harm them, for many reasons. For instance it's not true.

I assume both parties were under age, so neither consented in some ways. And given the possibility of drugs etc who knows what really happened. They seemed to have had a further relationship. Everything seemed messed up in her life.

It wasn't "What she calls" it was "What she called", it's a quote and it seems to me the writer is helping her out.

She chose that phrasing, whatever happened to her when she was 14, happened to her. If she chooses it, it's her choice for her reasons, not yours.

Re: From Prison to Ph.D.: The Redemption and Rejection of Michelle Jones

#120

Post by mcguire »

wallace_f wrote: post #67
TheAdamAndChe wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the same time, I see why it was done. Should someone who happened to go to prison have limited prospects for the rest of their life? Should someone who happened to get arrested for drugs need to work hard labor for the rest of their life to survive?

There is nothing wrong with choosing to put chemicals in your body as long as you aren't hurting anybody else in the process. There is something horribly wrong with torture and murder of a 4 year old. How many good and decent people work hard labor most of their lives simply because they were born on the wrong side of some arbitrarily drawn border? Because they happen to be born into a world where their intellectual…

"There is nothing wrong with choosing to put chemicals in your body as long as you aren't hurting anybody else in the process.

"There is something horribly wrong with torture and murder of a 4 year old."

I know plenty of people who disagree and feel there is no great difference between the two. Why are you right and they wrong?

Post reply on HN