LA - ***ARREST*** Mickey Shunick, 21, Lafayette 19 May 2012 - #34

[fairest of them all]

But not everyone hunts for food. Some people do it just for the sport.

I have just wondered for a long time how people that hunt felt about it and if empathy ever came in to play.

I personally don't think I could look an animal in the eye and then kill it. To me, if it is an animal or a human, I don't think I could kill it.

I have also wondered how we expect our soldiers to go back and forth to war -in and out of it being morally acceptable to kill,then not kill,kill and not kill. And then they wonder how a soldier ends up killing back in the states.

Well IMO hunting is more humane than buying meat at the store because most massed produced type of meat comes from animals that live in crowded miserable conditions. Watch "meet your meat" on YouTube and you will probably agree that hunting is a lot more humane than buying meat in stores jmo

 

[KateB]

I thought I had seen another ADA name presented.
At the link below:
Assistant District Attorney Keith Stutes is expected to handle the case, he said.

http://www.dailyworld.com/article/2...grand-jury?odyssey=tab|topnews|text|Frontpage

Looks like some good late night reading then.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/classics/vengeful/11.html

The State of Louisiana versus Richard J. Schmidt went to trial on Thursday, October 15, 1998.
It was a tough case, says assistant district attorney Keith A. Stutes, the lead prosecutor, because it was a totally circumstantial case. The scientific evidence didnt prove he did it, or not. It really boiled down to the rest of that evidence.

 

[fairest of them all]

But not everyone hunts for food. Some people do it just for the sport.

I have just wondered for a long time how people that hunt felt about it and if empathy ever came in to play.

I personally don't think I could look an animal in the eye and then kill it. To me, if it is an animal or a human, I don't think I could kill it.

I have also wondered how we expect our soldiers to go back and forth to war -in and out of it being morally acceptable to kill,then not kill,kill and not kill. And then they wonder how a soldier ends up killing back in the states.

And as for the millitary. It will make or break you. Seems as though the ones it helps don't see action like actually killing people or watching their best friends die. IMO watching your friend die beside you can make a person pretty angry. The people who I have seen or known of who are truly proud of their military background haven't ever been in combat life or death situations.....all my opinion.......but bsl was in the military.

 

[bessie]

I think it is odd that he broke into her house, tied her up, blindfolded her and have a sharp object and he didn't rape her. This may be the first case a rapist listened to his victim for mercy. It goes against everything a sex offender is.

But he did rape her. What mercy did he show? Is oral sexual assault less harmful than vaginal assault?

Sexual assault is any type of sexual contact or behavior that occurs without the explicit consent of the recipient. Falling under the definition of sexual assault are sexual activities as forced sexual intercourse, forcible sodomy, child molestation, incest, fondling, and attempted rape.

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/sexassault.htm

A revenge rapist, (aka anger rapist, anger retaliatory rapist) describes a small percentage of sexual offenders, but he's among the most dangerous. He blames the victim for the transgressions placed upon him in the past. Sexual gratification has little or nothing to do with the act. Oral and anal assault are a means to humiliate the victim. Everything I've read in that police report indicates that BSL falls into this category. The suddeness of the attack, ripping off the clothes, the forced oral assault while the victim is tied up, and finally the threat to burn down her home with her family inside if she tells anyone he raped her. The report states two telephones were yanked out of the wall, and the sheets and blankets were pulled off and thrown on the floor aside the bed. Those are all signs of an enraged, brutal attack. And contrary to what some might think, some rapists do have compassion for their victims. Not this type, though.

http://books.google.com/books?id=iV398oA5DdsC&lpg=PA106&ots=P2Zs3kYw7z&dq=anger%20retaliatory%20rapist&pg=PA106#v=onepage&q=anger%20retaliatory%20rapist&f=false

http://www1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-5.htm

 

[Whiteorchids]

She was the cousin of his ex-girlfriend. I wonder what the dynamics were? Maybe she always looked 'down' on him and was one of the people urging his ex to break up with him. I got the feeling it was kind of a revenge type of thing. A way to feel 'all powerful' by sneaking in to where she should have felt the safest. And hog tying and blindfolding her. The ultimate in humiliation.

I see your point, but there was some reason he did not rape her vaginally, and i dont think any of that has to do with compassion. Compassion didn't exist in that assault.
His story of what occurred, made even less sense, because things kept not adding up, like his finger prints being located inside the house on objects which he claimed he had never touched.

Yeah, him leaving the obvious wash cloth wasn't very smart at all.
I'd cut him some slack and say maybe there was more to his 1999 incidence than we know. But not with all of the other things he has in his past and now. He seems pretty capable of it.

It was the cousin of a gal he was dating. Maybe he was afraid of getting her pregnant.

 

[Darcyline]

There are a lot of reasons why he might not have raped her vaginally and none of them have to do with having a heart, compassion, or "showing mercy" to me. I think you have to stop thinking like a person when you try to get into the head of a monster. They don't feel or think or react like we do. To him, maybe he wanted to humiliate her and the most humiliating thing may have been oral sex over vaginal. Some rapists actually DO worry about vaginal sex and pregnancy or leaving behind DNA. Most criminals know about DNA and forensics. Maybe oral sex gets him off more than vaginal sex. Maybe he felt like he was controlling her even more by making her beg. Maybe he feels above women and actually having sex feels dirty to him. Maybe it was his first time and he decided to start slow. Oral sex, to me, is just as violating and serious. There is an implicit idea that oral sex is not as "serious" or "going all the way" as vaginal sex and only vaginal sex can be the true goal of a rapist. This is not always true.
You just don't know-I still don't feel like a man who breaks into a house and hog ties someone and then later murders an innocent stranger (if not more) has the ability to feel or react in normal human ways (mercy, compassion, empathy). There are other motivations for actions than the ones that feel most normal for actual humans with souls especially when we are considering violent, raping, murdering monsters.

 

[cluciano63]

Maybe he thought she wouldn't tell, wouldn't think she was "technically" raped. I can't try to figure out what goes on in the minds of these people...I don't think we'll ever really know. They are not honest, so they are not good subjects for studies.

 

[bessie]

Does he even see his child? Do we know if he has visitation?

According to this article, the mother was granted sole custody after his conviction. When released, he attempted to gain visitation rights, but the court determined Louisiana was not the right venue for the case because the child and ex-wife had lived out of state for several years. That was in 2009. The article doesn't say that he pursued the issue any further, but I'd wager he didn't. Doesn't mean he never sees her, but who knows.

http://www.dailyworld.com/article/2...jury?odyssey=nav|head&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

 

[Whiteorchids]

There are a lot of reasons why he might not have raped her vaginally and none of them have to do with having a heart, compassion, or "showing mercy" to me. I think you have to stop thinking like a person when you try to get into the head of a monster. They don't feel or think or react like we do. To him, maybe he wanted to humiliate her and the most humiliating thing may have been oral sex over vaginal. Some rapists actually DO worry about vaginal sex and pregnancy or leaving behind DNA. Most criminals know about DNA and forensics. Maybe oral sex gets him off more than vaginal sex. Maybe he felt like he was controlling her even more by making her beg. Maybe he feels above women and actually having sex feels dirty to him. Maybe it was his first time and he decided to start slow. Oral sex, to me, is just as violating and serious. There is an implicit idea that oral sex is not as "serious" or "going all the way" as vaginal sex and only vaginal sex can be the true goal of a rapist. This is not always true.
You just don't know-I still don't feel like a man who breaks into a house and hog ties someone and then later murders an innocent stranger (if not more) has the ability to feel or react in normal human ways (mercy, compassion, empathy). There are other motivations for actions than the ones that feel most normal for actual humans with souls especially when we are considering violent, raping, murdering monsters.

Maybe they need to pull "The Fifty Shades of Grey" off the bookshelves. I think it promotes and glamorize BDSM. I cant understand why this book is New York Times #1 Bestseller.

 

[fairest of them all]

With all due respect I do not know of any rape case where the rapist was worried about the risk. It was pretty darn risky to break in and tie someone up for an assault. A rapist is just that. Now I have heard of rapists having the forethought of using condoms.

He did leave that washcloth there which to me means either he is really not smart or maybe the crime isn't as much of a crime as it seems. He did plead guilty so that he would not face a burglary charge.

I am not defending him but so much here does not add up.

I am agreeing with you as far as "maybe the crime isn't as much of a crime as it seems"
Something isn't right IMO. IMO not only would he have made sure to take the washcloth with him...but IMO even if it were consentual the girl would not say so because she wouldn't tell her mom or her cousin whom was his girlfriend IMO.....also the baby momma took the child to see him in prison...so that IMO would seem to indicate that she maybe doubted the cousins story too! All moo

 

[fairest of them all]

According to this article, the mother was granted sole custody after his conviction. When released, he attempted to gain visitation rights, but the court determined Louisiana was not the right venue for the case because the child and ex-wife had lived out of state for several years. That was in 2009. The article doesn't say that he pursued the issue any further, but I'd wager he didn't. Doesn't mean he never sees her, but who knows.

http://www.dailyworld.com/article/2...jury?odyssey=nav|head&gcheck=1&nclick_check=1

In order to take the child out of the country you either have to get the noncustodial parent to sign for the child to get a passport or have their rights terminated. IMO, I think she wanted to move out of country with new man, he wouldn't sign to let her take the baby out of country so she terminated his rights. All my speculation.

 

[CajunStrong]

But he did rape her. What mercy did he show? Is oral sexual assault less harmful than vaginal assault?

http://www.ovw.usdoj.gov/sexassault.htm

A revenge rapist, (aka anger rapist, anger retaliatory rapist) describes a small percentage of sexual offenders, but he's among the most dangerous. He blames the victim for the transgressions placed upon him in the past. Sexual gratification has little or nothing to do with the act. Oral and anal assault are a means to humiliate the victim. Everything I've read in that police report indicates that BSL falls into this category. The suddeness of the attack, ripping off the clothes, the forced oral assault while the victim is tied up, and finally the threat to burn down her home with her family inside if she tells anyone he raped her. The report states two telephones were yanked out of the wall, and the sheets and blankets were pulled off and thrown on the floor aside the bed. Those are all signs of an enraged, brutal attack. And contrary to what some might think, some rapists do have compassion for their victims. Not this type, though.

http://books.google.com/books?id=iV398oA5DdsC&lpg=PA106&ots=P2Zs3kYw7z&dq=anger%20retaliatory%20rapist&pg=PA106#v=onepage&q=anger%20retaliatory%20rapist&f=false

http://www1.csbsju.edu/uspp/CrimPsych/CPSG-5.htm

Oh no, I agree that it is certainly sexual assault and had to be terribly traumatizing for the victim. And it does not make him a nicer man by no means. I just felt that it doesn't fit most sexual crimes. Do not want to detract from what a horrible crime it is or what type of horrible person would commit it.

 

[CajunStrong]

There are a lot of reasons why he might not have raped her vaginally and none of them have to do with having a heart, compassion, or "showing mercy" to me. I think you have to stop thinking like a person when you try to get into the head of a monster. They don't feel or think or react like we do. To him, maybe he wanted to humiliate her and the most humiliating thing may have been oral sex over vaginal. Some rapists actually DO worry about vaginal sex and pregnancy or leaving behind DNA. Most criminals know about DNA and forensics. Maybe oral sex gets him off more than vaginal sex. Maybe he felt like he was controlling her even more by making her beg. Maybe he feels above women and actually having sex feels dirty to him. Maybe it was his first time and he decided to start slow. Oral sex, to me, is just as violating and serious. There is an implicit idea that oral sex is not as "serious" or "going all the way" as vaginal sex and only vaginal sex can be the true goal of a rapist. This is not always true.
You just don't know-I still don't feel like a man who breaks into a house and hog ties someone and then later murders an innocent stranger (if not more) has the ability to feel or react in normal human ways (mercy, compassion, empathy). There are other motivations for actions than the ones that feel most normal for actual humans with souls especially when we are considering violent, raping, murdering monsters.

I completely agree with all of this. The part that stood out to me was her telling him that she was a virgin and he can't take that from her. Now it would be a huge stretch for me to think like a sex offender but it would seem that would be a challenge to him. And if he really wanted to be sadistic he would have taken it from her. Again, I never meant he is less of a monster. Any rape would just be awful.

 

[bessie]

I gotcha, CajunStrong. Sorry if I hopped up on the soapbox too quickly.

 

[CajunStrong]

It was the cousin of a gal he was dating. Maybe he was afraid of getting her pregnant.

Of the girl he was dating then? Well, you should have an interesting perspective then. Must have been a scary time for your cousin as well.

 

[fairest of them all]

I see your point, but there was some reason he did not rape her vaginally, and i dont think any of that has to do with compassion. Compassion didn't exist in that assault.
His story of what occurred, made even less sense, because things kept not adding up, like his finger prints being located inside the house on objects which he claimed he had never touched.

Yeah, him leaving the obvious wash cloth wasn't very smart at all.
I'd cut him some slack and say maybe there was more to his 1999 incidence than we know. But not with all of the other things he has in his past and now. He seems pretty capable of it.

Well everything else in his past is all rumor! So really that one incident before this one (Mickey) is all anyone can base any judgement of his character on....so if you are questioning that one incident there really is nothing left.....if he vandalized that graveyard guess what....so did literally hundreds of other high-school kids in the area. It is supposedly haunted! ....as fir the housefires...there is a convicted serial arsonist in him family!

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Perhaps BSL believed that Mickey wasn't a virgin, which would make her a "*advertiser censored*" (in his eyes) and she "deserved" to die.

 

[CajunStrong]

I gotcha, CajunStrong. Sorry if I hopped up on the soapbox too quickly.

I am glad!! I wouldn't want anyone to think I felt that way. Two of my dear aunts were raped many years ago. One by a family friend and the other by a stranger that broke into her office late at night. It was a terrible time and neither will ever forget.

 

[jujube]

It was the cousin of a gal he was dating. Maybe he was afraid of getting her pregnant.

He and the gf had broken up.

I feel like I'm in a Twilight Zone episode with people thinking oral rape is not as bad as vaginal rape. Rape is rape.

 

[LafayetteMom]

I also noticed that new red area on his forehead.
Don't understand why he took a new mugshot either.

The first orange jumpsuit mugshot only listed 2 charges--the kidnapping and murder ones. This newer one with the scar covered up lists 3--the failure to register as a sex offender has been added to the list. Maybe for whatever reason, they had to do a new mugshot when they added that. Idk.

And I agree, they def covered his scar on purpose.