Luis Resto applies for a trainer's license. Yes, THAT Luis Resto.

[Kev]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

I am not very knowledgeable with regards to the law applying to this case. Maybe you are, so you can probably correct any of my misconceptions. Or we have some US legal professionals posting here in Saddo who can answer these.

Isn't it up to the commission to decide whether Resto gets the trainer's license? Is there anything in the law that states that they cannot get a feedback from the victim's family? If there isn't, then they should have the courtesy of hearing what the Collins family has to say. After so many years, they still are the victims. I don't think there is any expiration date on when they cease to be the victims in this case. Now, after hearing the statements from the Collins family and they decide not to grant Resto that license, did the commission then break any laws?

In the final analysis, it's still the commission who will be making the decision. Justice is served impartially by an authorized source based on all available information that is at their disposal.

[LobowolfXXX]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

I am not very knowledgeable with regards to the law applying to this case. Maybe you are, so you can probably correct any of my misconceptions. Or we have some US legal professionals posting here in Saddo who can answer these.

Isn't it up to the commission to decide whether Resto gets the trainer's license? Is there anything in the law that states that they cannot get a feedback from the victim's family? If there isn't, then they should have the courtesy of hearing what the Collins family has to say. After so many years, they still are the victims. I don't think there is any expiration date on when they cease to be the victims in this case. Now, after hearing the statements from the Collins family and they decide not to grant Resto that license, did the commission then break any laws?

In the final analysis, it's still the commission who will be making the decision. Justice is served impartially by an authorized source based on all available information that is at their disposal.

This is reasonably and fairly put. At parole hearings and in criminal court sentencing hearings (in the USA) victims and victims' families are given an opportunity to be heard (make "impact" statements), and there is nothing improper about judges or parole boards deferring to their wishes, assuming they're within sentencing guidelines.

-LobowolfXXX (Esq.)

[Kev]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

I am not very knowledgeable with regards to the law applying to this case. Maybe you are, so you can probably correct any of my misconceptions. Or we have some US legal professionals posting here in Saddo who can answer these.

Isn't it up to the commission to decide whether Resto gets the trainer's license? Is there anything in the law that states that they cannot get a feedback from the victim's family? If there isn't, then they should have the courtesy of hearing what the Collins family has to say. After so many years, they still are the victims. I don't think there is any expiration date on when they cease to be the victims in this case. Now, after hearing the statements from the Collins family and they decide not to grant Resto that license, did the commission then break any laws?

In the final analysis, it's still the commission who will be making the decision. Justice is served impartially by an authorized source based on all available information that is at their disposal.

I'm sure they will be considerate of the Collins family and will contact them as a matter of courtesy. But the idea that a victim of a crime should be able to decide the outcome of something just goes against the very notion of Western justice.

As Western democracies we put our trust in the rule of law and institutions of justice to determine fair outcomes.

The boxing commission obviously is not a law court, but it is the elected body with the authority to decide in this case. They will decide whether they believe Resto has paid his dues and is no longer a risk. I think they should give him another chance personally, but again it's totally up to the commission. There is every chance they will turn it down too I guess. It just sounded like you were advocating the Collins family having the final say and that would be a primitive and likely barbaric way for justice to work. That's how Arab societies work, recently some who woman disfigured for life by an acid attack had the final say on whether or not her attacker should have his own face aruined by acid. It was her call. At the last minute she decided no, I think the media pressure and publicity was too much for her. But personally I think it's a horrible way to serve justice. The decisions need to be made by an outside authority. Rule of law, not eye for an eye.

[LobowolfXXX]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

I am not very knowledgeable with regards to the law applying to this case. Maybe you are, so you can probably correct any of my misconceptions. Or we have some US legal professionals posting here in Saddo who can answer these.

Isn't it up to the commission to decide whether Resto gets the trainer's license? Is there anything in the law that states that they cannot get a feedback from the victim's family? If there isn't, then they should have the courtesy of hearing what the Collins family has to say. After so many years, they still are the victims. I don't think there is any expiration date on when they cease to be the victims in this case. Now, after hearing the statements from the Collins family and they decide not to grant Resto that license, did the commission then break any laws?

In the final analysis, it's still the commission who will be making the decision. Justice is served impartially by an authorized source based on all available information that is at their disposal.

I'm sure they will be considerate of the Collins family and will contact them as a matter of courtesy. But the idea that a victim of a crime should be able to decide the outcome of something just goes against the very notion of Western justice.

As Western democracies we put our trust in the rule of law and institutions of justice to determine fair outcomes.

The boxing commission obviously is not a law court, but it is the elected body with the authority to decide in this case. They will decide whether they believe Resto has paid his dues and is no longer a risk. I think they should give him another chance personally, but again it's totally up to the commission. There is every chance they will turn it down too I guess. It just sounded like you were advocating the Collins family having the final say and that would be a primitive and likely barbaric way for justice to work. That's how Arab societies work, recently some who woman disfigured for life by an acid attack had the final say on whether or not her attacker should have his own face aruined by acid. It was her call. At the last minute she decided no, I think the media pressure and publicity was too much for her. But personally I think it's a horrible way to serve justice. The decisions need to be made by an outside authority. Rule of law, not eye for an eye.

ITNC isn't suggesting that the commission isn't the ultimate decision maker. Taking victims statements and wishes into account is entirely consistent with western justice

[InTheNeutralCorner]

I'm sure they will be considerate of the Collins family and will contact them as a matter of courtesy. But the idea that a victim of a crime should be able to decide the outcome of something just goes against the very notion of Western justice.

As Western democracies we put our trust in the rule of law and institutions of justice to determine fair outcomes.

The boxing commission obviously is not a law court, but it is the elected body with the authority to decide in this case. They will decide whether they believe Resto has paid his dues and is no longer a risk. I think they should give him another chance personally, but again it's totally up to the commission. There is every chance they will turn it down too I guess. It just sounded like you were advocating the Collins family having the final say and that would be a primitive and likely barbaric way for justice to work. That's how Arab societies work, recently some who woman disfigured for life by an acid attack had the final say on whether or not her attacker should have his own face aruined by acid. It was her call. At the last minute she decided no, I think the media pressure and publicity was too much for her. But personally I think it's a horrible way to serve justice. The decisions need to be made by an outside authority. Rule of law, not eye for an eye.

I believe hearing the Collins family's side and deferring to their wishes is within the western law.

And eye for an eye, which appears to be punishement identical to the crime as you gave in your example, does not apply in this case.

[Hulk]

I am going against popular opinion here but here's my take on this.

I would separate the Margarito injustice with that of the case of Luis Resto. Not because something wrong was committed with regards to allowing Margarito to fight again, doesn't mean that fairness will be served by allowing Resto to get a trainer's license. The difference is that he DESTROYED A LIFE, the life of a promising boxer which led to his demise.

If it's up to me, I will have that license commission get a feedback from the Collins family. They are the victims here, not Resto. If they are alright in him getting a trainer's license, that means they have forgiven him and had put this incident behind them. Then he should be given that license. If they object, that means the pain is still there after all these years. Then he should not get that license. Resto is still alive and he can do any other jobs not related to boxing whereas the Collins family loss a loved one. At least give them the courtesy to find out how they feel about this issue.

I actually don't agree with this at all. The laws that govern us are a society's laws we don't have fuedal justice or an Arabic eye for eye, blood money system.

We have law courts, legal systems, governing bodies, elected officials etc to determine justice for the good of society. It's not up to the desires of the victims or the criminals.

Whichever boxing governing body which is presiding over this has the authority to decide, that's how our Western democracy's work. Justice is served impartially by an authorised source, not handed out by those involved.

Excellent post Bilbo ! YES !

The victim's family is very often going to be extremely vengeful and vindictive and in no way fair or impartial.

If things were left up to the victims family then I would just now be getting out of prison for an incident where I knocked a kids teeth out when I was 17.

Instead I had to pay his dental bills, got 1 years probation, and served 20 days of work release.

Haven't been in trouble since.

[InTheNeutralCorner]

The victim's family is very often going to be extremely vengeful and vindictive and in no way fair or impartial.

Not always. There had been many instances of victim's family forgiving the offender.

Victim's Family Forgives Teen Driving in Fatal Crash

Family of murder victim forgives killer and accomplice | NOLA.com

Victim's family forgives San Diego DUI fatality driver

Victim's family forgives child rapist because of their Christian beliefs. Rapist avoids jail as a result...then rapes another child 8 days later. : WTF

Man says he forgives Humble officer who killed his brother

If the family remains vindictive, it's because they are still suffering from that incident.

If things were left up to the victims family then I would just now be getting out of prison for an incident where I knocked a kids teeth out when I was 17.

Your case is different from that of Resto. Those teeth that you knocked out of that kid will grow back. Whereas Collins life can not be returned.

iAlso, in your case there were only two choices. Either you get released at some point in time or you stay locked up forever. In Resto's case, if he gets denied the trainer's license, he still has multiple choices. He can choose other jobs and there are hundreds of thousands of them.