Graveyard killer jailed for 20 years

OrbitalDawn

Ulysses Everett McGill
Joined
Aug 26, 2011
Messages
47,659
Reaction score
9,337
Location
Aboard the Nostalgia For Infinity
News24.com said:
Graveyard killer jailed for 20 years

Virginia - Welkom graveyard killer Chane van Heerden will have to spend at least the next 20 years behind bars, the Virginia Circuit Court ruled on Friday.

Free State Judge Albert Kruger declared Van Heerden a dangerous criminal.

He ordered her to return to court in 20 years for the re-evaluation of her case.

The court would decide then, with the help of experts, whether she was fit to be released back into society or needed to remain in jail.

Emotionless

Van Heerden, who sipped water from time to time during the judgment, showed no emotion as she listened to the judge.

After the sentence was passed, she stood up and left the courtroom without a word, despite attempts by journalists to get comment from her.

Kruger ordered that she receive psychotherapy until her next court appearance in 2031.

Van Heerden, 20, was accused of luring Michael van Eck, 23, to the Welkom cemetery where she killed and dismembered him in April, allegedly with her co-accused Maartens van der Merwe.

Their cases were separated earlier on in the trial. The case against Van der Merwe, 24, has been postponed until February. He has yet to enter a plea.

Lack of remorse

Some of Van Eck's remains were found in a shallow grave at the cemetery, while others - including his facial skin, an eye and his ears - were found in the couple's fridge. Other body parts were found in a cupboard and in their garden.

Kruger held that he could find no merit in the mitigating circumstances forwarded by Van Heerden’s defence.

The court held that there was a possibility that she could murder again.

"The theme throughout, in all evidence, was that she would do it again," Kruger said.

He said Van Heerden's lack of remorse was worrying.
- SAPA

Something like this really makes me wonder if the death penalty shouldn't be brought back. This girl is an absolute monster. She's 21 and now the taxpayer has to pay a boatload of money to keep this beast alive for an extended length of time. :sick:
 
Agreed.

I just wonder why Michael agreed to meet her at a cemetery anyway. If I was asked to meet an online stranger at 21:00 at a cemetery, I'd be a little worried ...
 
Only two years more than that guy in the US got for hacking his neighbours Wifi and terrorising them.
 
How can they even consider releasing someone like this to the public?

This should be a case of life in prison with no chance of parole, period...I mean really. They had the mans eye balls and **** laying around the house. You must terminate her and her partner in crime and make sure they don't reproduce, ever.
 
:( she will be 40 and even more screwed up when she comes out! This should have been life without parole.
 
No, never.

Well then you can pay. People who feel these psychos should be kept alive can pay to keep them alive.

20% tax increase for you should do and a tax cut for the rest of us.
 
She must have been real hot if guys were willing to meet her in a cemetery, or either they were just very desperate.
 
7d64e64692f5418c930b90bfedcbab78.jpg
 
He shouldv'e gotten the fk outta there as soon as he saw the black nail polish :P
 
Well then you can pay. People who feel these psychos should be kept alive can pay to keep them alive.

20% tax increase for you should do and a tax cut for the rest of us.

I agree with this. If you want to subsidise sub-human savages for the rest of their lives, you are most welcome.
 
Well then you can pay. People who feel these psychos should be kept alive can pay to keep them alive.

20% tax increase for you should do and a tax cut for the rest of us.

I agree with this. If you want to subsidise sub-human savages for the rest of their lives, you are most welcome.

I think you guys should be paying more taxes... it costs more to give someone the death penalty then life imprisonment.

Why? because of trial costs (both of them, one to decide if the person's guilty or not and one to decide if they should be executed) and the cost of their time on death row. In texas the average death row length is a bit more then 10 years!

You'd have to be a sub-human savage to hand out death sentences to people just because you think they deserve it.
 
I think you guys should be paying more taxes... it costs more to give someone the death penalty then life imprisonment.

Why? because of trial costs (both of them, one to decide if the person's guilty or not and one to decide if they should be executed) and the cost of their time on death row. In texas the average death row length is a bit more then 10 years!

You'd have to be a sub-human savage to hand out death sentences to people just because you think they deserve it.

In principle I am against the death penalty, but our country is so crime-ridden that it seems draconian measures are necessary to make any kind of impact.
 
I think you guys should be paying more taxes... it costs more to give someone the death penalty then life imprisonment.

Why? because of trial costs (both of them, one to decide if the person's guilty or not and one to decide if they should be executed) and the cost of their time on death row. In texas the average death row length is a bit more then 10 years!

Perhaps with the dysfunctional system in the U.S.

You'd have to be a sub-human savage to hand out death sentences to people just because you think they deserve it.

6de645bf-2479-4321-bdae-428cd32d030a.jpg


and I think you're sick in the head for wanting to grant murderers, child killers etc free board and lodging for life on the backs of law abiding decent hard-working people.
 
In principle I am against the death penalty, but our country is so crime-ridden that it seems draconian measures are necessary to make any kind of impact.
No impact if the likelihood of getting caught is low, and the chances of getting convicted are low. Supporters of execution talk about it like some magical remedy.

In principle I'm not against the death penalty, but there are so many problems with evidence and court systems that it cannot be reliably applied. As an act of revenge it needs to be applied with 100% reliability since there's no demonstrable deterrent value.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X