Double life for Gay Murderer
“Calling him ‘an evil human being,’ a judge ordered consecutive life sentences Friday for a former nurse convicted in the murders of a businessman and a gay prostitute whose remains were dumped along New Jersey highways. Richard W. Rogers, 55, stood stoically during his sentencing, declining to explain what drove him to kill… Both victims disappeared in New York in the early 1990s, but Rogers, a surgical nurse at New York’s Mount Sinai Hospital, wasn’t caught until 2001, when investigators matched fingerprints taken from the plastic bags containing the victims’ remains. Rogers’ fingerprints were on file in Maine, where he was acquitted in 1973 in the hammer-beating death of a roommate at the University of Maine. He had claimed self defense. Rogers also was acquitted in a 1990 case in which the victim testified he met Rogers in a New York bar and woke up in Rogers’ home bound at the legs and wrists. Mulcahy disappeared July 8, 1992, during a business trip. His remains were found a month later — some at a state Department of Transportation maintenance yard in Burlington County, others in a trash barrel at a Garden State Parkway rest stop. Marrero’s remains were found 10 months later near a road in Manchester, also in double-knotted plastic bags. Rogers was convicted in November, despite his lawyer’s assertion that police arrested the wrong man. The lawyer, David Ruhnke, plans to appeal. He contends that prosecutors never proved the men were killed in New Jersey and that the court didn’t have jurisdiction as a result.” — CNN (US)
(Thanks to Dogboy for the link.)
Here are a few pictures of Mr. Rogers: one from a long time ago, another from a while later, a recent picture, and finally a picture from his sentencing. He has that gay preppy look, which makes him resemble more the man whose name he shares — Mr. Rogers the tv personality — than an “evil human being.” But then again, as The Shadow used to say, who knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men?
In sending the link, Dogboy commented: “I must be really jaded. I think the weirdest thing about this article isn’t the crime but the appeal strategy — claiming not that the defendant is innocent but that the victims weren’t killed in state.” It’s true, Dogboy. The crime may be hideous but it’s not unusual. Gay or straight, sex murders happen all the time. And while sex murders may not be rational, they do not undermine a rational view of the world. You could even argue that it’s the hallmark of a rational attitude to accept reality and thereby adjust itself to the presence of irrational events, like murder. Isn’t it irrational to hold the world to an ideal of rationality?
On the other hand, law is supposed to be logical, consistent, fair — in a word, rational. This expectation makes it hard to accept when a guy who’s convicted of murder gets off on a technicality. In all probability, Mr. Rogers is a serial killer. Does it really matter where he committed his crimes? Or does it matter simply that he committed his crimes? Common sense would say the latter, but precisely because the law is rigorous in these points, the law says the former. The bodies of his victims were found in New Jersey, but he lived and worked probably picked up his victims in gay bars in New York. No evidence indicated where the crimes themselves took place. Maybe Mr. Rogers drove to Florida, killed his victims there, then drove them back to New Jersey. Technically that would give Florida jurisdiction over the murder charges. That’s the way the law works.
So you’re not really jaded, Dogboy. You’re just reasonable. It’s the law that, in its superior rigorousness, ends up being weirdly unreasonable. Even the judge seemed to sense this, since he ended his sentencing by declaring his (personal?) desire that Mr. Rogers “die in some hole in some prison without ever having freedom again.” Some hole, some prison — it seems to express a hope that there exist a stateless prison for crimes committed nowhere known to man.
It’s a wonderful day in the neighborhood, the neighborhood, the neighborhood…
won’t you be my neighbor…
It looks like Dikkie Rogers was “bad to the bone” when he was’t bonning one of his playmates.
I wonder, in the heat of passion, did somebody bitch-slap Mr. Rogers and set him off?
I love to see two faggots fight, they can be so funny dancing around and kicking and scratching each other.
Oh, by the way, Mr. Rogers will probably enjoy his two life sentences in prison. I’ll bet he’ll be everybody’s sweetheart.
“And while sex murders may not be rational, they do not undermine a rational view of the world. You could even argue that it’s the hallmark of a rational attitude to accept reality and thereby adjust itself to the presence of irrational events, like murder. Isn’t it irrational to hold the world to an ideal of rationality?”
If by rational you mean, “to adjust ones attitude to accept reality”, or the reality we know within our own subjective reality, then I don’t see why you would generalize that all murder is “irrational” when murderers simply have different interpretations and valuing than the those against it. People have a range of values that they may apply in a situation, but the value, the meaning that they apply to the situation is based in their mind. Often it is assumed certain values are “absolute” or external to the subjectivity. But meaning bis subjective meaning, and with contradictions of different assumptions, values, and ideas, to say that meaning has any basis outside of the mind and that all values are equally absolute, would be to say that “Good is Evil”. To then say that one paradigm is absolute is to disregard other mindsets at the same time not being able to prove any of the assumptions made.
“On the other hand, law is supposed to be logical, consistent, fair — in a word, rational”
No, laws stand simply because a large enough majority have faith in the absoluteness or “natural” rights that the laws assume. Obviously there are rights(in their minds).
One thing about “fair”, seriously, I thought you’ve read Sade…I mean theres alot I disagree with in his philosophy-the determinism, naturalism, and belief that “vice” is “superior”-but one thing I remember is that he said somewhere, that if he assumes that all humanity is of equal value, that would mean he would take pleasure in enacting the fair, equal cruelty that would bring him pleasure from all humans he got control of.
Of course as Sade said later, he doesn’t value them all equally, that their are certain characteristics he finds more appealing than others, though it might different someones else’s valuations.
But Sade will sometimes assume values of “superior” to “inferior” people, which I disagree with. There is neither superior inferior nor equality, since the only reasons such values are assumed to be absolute because enough people have faith in them.
So really what I’m saying is there can be “rational” murderers. There can be “irrational” murderers and “rational” and “irrational” non-murderers.
Interpreting what we percieve has variations in differing mindsets. A person valuing “compassion” feels pity on a destitute teenager, and gives her money, and takes her out to a restaurant. A sadist finding the same teenager, having empathy for her situation, instead takes her to his house rapes her, tortures her, and finally kills her. It’s just different values and interpretations based on the percieved situation of the teenager.
Homophobes on PervScan? How disappointing!
All comments become the property of PervScan. You must use an email address to post a comment. However, PervScan disallows email addresses in the text of comments.
Major Boobs