Jump to content
Cruise Critic Community

Canadian mom on cruise jailed in Bahamas, mom of 15 years old called police after ...

mking8288

By mking8288,
in Norwegian Cruise Line

 Share

Recommended Posts

Lido_Deck

Lido_Deck

Posted
Posted
How so?

My argument was based on the facts as they were presented in the article with no assumptions.

 

No, you are simply making an assumption he wasn't drinking. Just because it was not mentioned in the article does not make it fact.

 

The article did not state that the boy used a condom, therefore, using your logic, the boy did not use a condom.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nissach

nissach

Posted
Posted
How so?

My argument was based on the facts as they were presented in the article with no assumptions.

 

Lido_deck you are making the assumption that the boy was drinking because it was stated he was in bar...no where did it say that he was actually drinking!

So IMO electro is basing his/her argument on what was in the article and you are making an assumption in your argument. Facts are facts, as they are presented, period!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lido_Deck

Lido_Deck

Posted
Posted (edited)
Would you want him hanging around your 15 year old daughter?[/quote

 

Why must you ALWAYS try to twist things?

 

I wasn't twisting anything. It was just a mental image that came to my mind when you said that. Think about it.

 

Would you want a guy that is nailing older women hanging on your 14 or 15 year old daughter?

.

Edited by Lido_Deck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lido_Deck

Lido_Deck

Posted
Posted
Lido_deck you are making the assumption that the boy was drinking because it was stated he was in bar...no where did it say that he was actually drinking!

So IMO electro is basing his/her argument on what was in the article and you are making an assumption in your argument. Facts are facts, as they are presented, period!

 

Implications and even statements were made that he was drinking. Period.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
electro Great Review Rare

electro

Posted
Posted
No, you are simply making an assumption he wasn't drinking. Just because it was not mentioned in the article does not make it fact.

 

The article did not state that the boy used a condom, therefore, using your logic, the boy did not use a condom.

 

No, I am not making assumptions. I did not say the boy was not drinking, I said that the article did not say he was drinking and I have no reason to assume otherwise. I am basing its on what was presented, not on what was not presented. I have no idea if he used a condom and will not make an assumption on that either.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
beerman2

beerman2

Posted
Posted

 

I wasn't twisting anything. It was just a mental image that came to my mind when you said that. Think about it.

 

Would you want a guy that is nailing older women hanging on your 14 or 15 year old daughter?

.

 

The situation was he was hanging in an adult environment, his mother should have been watching him because of that.

 

If it was a mental image you had , nothing more needs to be said. Really???

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lido_Deck

Lido_Deck

Posted
Posted
No, I am not making assumptions. I did not say the boy was not drinking, I said that the article did not say he was drinking and I have no reason to assume otherwise. I am basing its on what was presented, not on what was not presented. I have no idea if he used a condom and will not make an assumption on that either.

 

In the article I posted (see post #12) it was in fact presented the teen was drinking. You can doubt the word of the woman's mother if you want, but it has been presented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Two Wheels Only

Two Wheels Only

Posted
Posted
You missed the whole point.

 

My point was THERE IS BLAME on mother, son, and the woman.

 

If a stupid act precedes an illegal one, the stupid act isn't justification for the illegal one.

 

Was mother stupid? Probably

Was son stupid? Probably

 

Is any of that relevant to the case against the 23 year-old? No.

 

For example, it was stupid for that armored car driver to leave that bucket of gold flake unattended. Does the stupidity of the armored car driver and crew help the man that was arrested for stealing the gold? No. Would the crime have taken place if the driver and crew weren't so stupid? No...but that is irrelevant to the case against the man who was arrested.

 

The crime supersedes the stupid act(s) of the mother and son.

 

This is a legal issue. The moral issues "Mom shouldn't have had her son in the casino...the boy shouldn't have lied...the woman shouldn't have had sex in the bathroom (a separate crime in the Bahamas, btw)...the mother of 3 should be more responsible by now..." are separate.

 

Too many people are combining the acts as "blame" for the situation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Lido_Deck

Lido_Deck

Posted
Posted (edited)
Read it....he was 'allegedly' drinking....so no real proof...a statement from the accused's mother. Until it is actually confirmed it is an assumption.

 

O-kay...The woman "allegedly" had sex with him...so no real proof...an accusation from the boy's mother. Until it is actually confirmed it is an assumption.

.

Edited by Lido_Deck
Link to comment
Share on other sites
electro Great Review Rare

electro

Posted
Posted
O-kay...The woman "allegedly" had sex with him...so no real proof...an accusation from the boy's mother. Until it is actually confirmed it is an assumption.

.

 

Yes it is. But the fact that she is being charge with having sex with a minor is not an assumption, it is fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mjkacmom

mjkacmom

Posted
Posted
If a stupid act precedes an illegal one, the stupid act isn't justification for the illegal one.

 

Was mother stupid? Probably

Was son stupid? Probably

 

Is any of that relevant to the case against the 23 year-old? No.

 

For example, it was stupid for that armored car driver to leave that bucket of gold flake unattended. Does the stupidity of the armored car driver and crew help the man that was arrested for stealing the gold? No. Would the crime have taken place if the driver and crew weren't so stupid? No...but that is irrelevant to the case against the man who was arrested.

 

The crime supersedes the stupid act(s) of the mother and son.

 

This is a legal issue. The moral issues "Mom shouldn't have had her son in the casino...the boy shouldn't have lied...the woman shouldn't have had sex in the bathroom (a separate crime in the Bahamas, btw)...the mother of 3 should be more responsible by now..." are separate.

 

Too many people are combining the acts as "blame" for the situation.

 

The guy who stole the gold knew he was commuting a crime, the 23 year old woman did not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
nissach

nissach

Posted
Posted
O-kay...The woman "allegedly" had sex with him...so no real proof...an accusation from the boy's mother. Until it is actually confirmed it is an assumption.

.

 

Not quite...neither is denying they had sex. Her own mother says they went into the bathroom and 'did what they wanted to'.

 

But I am done arguing with you...have a nice rest of your day ....I have a Jets game to watch! ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
  • Forum Jump
    • Categories
      • Welcome to Cruise Critic
      • ANNOUNCEMENT: Set Sail on Sun Princess®
      • Hurricane Zone 2024
      • Cruise Insurance Q&A w/ Steve Dasseos of Tripinsurancestore.com June 2024
      • New Cruisers
      • Cruise Lines “A – O”
      • Cruise Lines “P – Z”
      • River Cruising
      • ROLL CALLS
      • Cruise Critic News & Features
      • Digital Photography & Cruise Technology
      • Special Interest Cruising
      • Cruise Discussion Topics
      • UK Cruising
      • Australia & New Zealand Cruisers
      • Canadian Cruisers
      • North American Homeports
      • Ports of Call
      • Cruise Conversations
×
×
  • Create New...