German cannibal guilty of murder A German man who killed and ate an apparently willing victim has been sentenced to life in prison after he was found guilty of murder. Armin Meiwes, 44, was sentenced to eight-and-a-half years in prison in 2004 after being found guilty of the manslaughter of Bernd Juergen Brandes. But a judge ordered a retrial after ruling the sentence was too lenient. During the retrial, prosecutors said Meiwes, of Rotenburg, had a "fetish for human flesh" and could re-offend. This has been one of the most extraordinary trials in German criminal history, says the BBC's Tristana Moore in Berlin. Meiwes slaughtered his victim like a piece of livestock and treated him as an object of his fancy A prosecutor in the case Profile: Armin Meiwes At the retrial, the prosecution made a graphic case that Meiwes was guilty of murder and argued he should never be released from prison. A psychologist said Meiwes, who had admitted he still had fantasies about devouring the flesh of attractive young people, could reoffend. A video which Meiwes filmed during the acts of cannibalism was central to the prosecution's case. It said the video proved that Meiwes killed his victim for his own sexual pleasure. Meiwes's lawyer admitted his client had a fetish for human flesh, but claimed he was no danger to society. Mr Brandes, a 43-year-old computer engineer, apparently agreed to the idea of being eaten after making contact with his killer on an internet chatroom. This led the court to convict Meiwes of the less serious charge of manslaughter at his trial in 2004. The pair met at Meiwes's home in Rotenburg in March 2001, where they had sex before Meiwes cut off Brandes's penis, which the men then cooked and attempted to eat. Meiwes later stabbed and killed Brandes, before cutting him to pieces and freezing parts of his body, some of which he later ate.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ May 9 2006, 10:14 PM) [snapback]252534[/snapback]</div> Hey Jared I just posted the same thing in the Vegetarian thread
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(maggieddd @ May 9 2006, 10:26 PM) [snapback]252543[/snapback]</div> LOL! Very funny!
Sure... why not? As long as you can somehow "prove" to some reasonable degree that neither party was mentally ill or something amongst those lines, go for it. After all, we're not really different from any other mammal anyway... h34r:
When I clicked on this topic, the thread under it was "Tom Cruise SUCKS". I thought to myself, "yeah, but probably not hard enough to be convicted of cannibalism..."
"As long as you can somehow "prove" to some reasonable degree that neither party was mentally ill or something amongst those lines, go for it." That might prove difficult.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ May 10 2006, 11:16 AM) [snapback]252768[/snapback]</div> Ahh, its good knowing we have other twisted topic posters here I have seen some of the opposite sex that looked yummy
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jared2 @ May 10 2006, 11:16 AM) [snapback]252768[/snapback]</div> True, very true.... Conceptually though, it totally fine as per my prior statement... Oh yeah, IMO... Of course, I suppose there's a whole other discussion here on the legality of suicide, or assisted thereof... I heard or read somewhere, suicide was actually an illegal act "on-the-books"...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ May 10 2006, 01:36 PM) [snapback]252955[/snapback]</div> Literally or not, the thought of eating a person is disgusting. I don't care how tasty they look. And those wafers are actually pretty good... especially with strawberry jelly.
Secular Humanism. Right and wrong defined by the individual. I am so glad I am not "of" the world and only have to live in it a short time.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Schmika @ May 10 2006, 03:42 PM) [snapback]253016[/snapback]</div> Not too short, I hope. You're right. This is exactly what happens when right or wrong is defined by isolated and fragmented individuals - by "atomized" individuals, as the French writer, Michael Houellebecq explores in his novels. You might want to look at some of them - "Platform" and "The Elementary Particles" are good. On the other hand, what is the alternative - for right and wrong to be defined by the church, the pope, the Dalai Lhama, G. Bush? You are "of the world" whether you like it or not. (End of diatribe)
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(heliotropehead @ May 10 2006, 02:51 PM) [snapback]252972[/snapback]</div> They always stuck to the roof of my mouth, kind of like peanut butter when I was a kid. Maybe if they served more wine with them... Tom
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ May 10 2006, 02:36 PM) [snapback]252955[/snapback]</div> Sort of puts a new spin on the concept of "Serving your Fellow Man"
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ May 10 2006, 11:36 AM) [snapback]252955[/snapback]</div> During the first Gulf War I attended a Congregational UCC church to support the minister, who always gave powerful anti-war sermons. So one day they passed around communion and I just passed the tray on without taking any. A very sweet old lady behind me tapped me on the shoulder and said, "In our church everyone is welcome to take communion." I thanked her, but told her that I am a vegetarian. Her reply took me by surprise: she said, "We use grape juice." I thanked her again and did not press the matter. But I have always thought that the idea of eating human flesh, and drinking human blood, even if only symbolically, is ghoulish. As for the original news story (assuming it's even true) a court of law would probably regard anyone who voluntarily submitted to being eaten as mentally incompetent to give consent. And assuming there's any truth at all to the story, I don't believe anyone would consent to having his penis cut off, and then eat it. Additionally, he'd certainly be in too much pain to share in the meal. I think there's something bogus here. Either the story itself, or the killer's assertion that his victim consented.
