As Katie Oliver checked her reflection in the mirror she felt attractive, confident and happy. She was viewing the dress that she had designed for her entry into her school's last event for the 6th form girls. She didn't know that a few hours' later her life would be interfered with in the cruellest way for a teenager who believed that she had everything to live for. A kidnapping starts a journey of revenge that challenges Dan Turner, DSI of the MET's Special Crimes Division and Grace Fletcher, profiler and psychoanalyst, due to the absence of any evidence. Someone is ensuring that the Oliver family never go to bed at night without thinking about the past and struggling to rebuild the present.
Mariel and Connor are best friends since high school and as professional adults, they share a home. They have such a strong bond; they consider each other family. After a night playing pool with friends, the roommates wake up in bed together with no memories of what happened the night before. Shortly after that night, their home is vandalized. Connor's estranged brother, James, comes back to Philadelphia after being gone for five years. Claiming to be clean and sober, James tries to reconnect with his brother Connor, however Mariel has misgiving about James. She believes he is dangerous. Meanwhile, Connor falls in love with a woman who loves science fiction as much as he does, and Mariel meets a man that wants to be more than just friends. Mariel begins to have memory flashes of the night she and Connor slept together. Memories that indicate that night did not happen as they thought. As the police continue to investigate Connor and Mariel's home being vandalized, they discover that it may be connected to why the friends turned up in bed together with no memories of that night. Mariel suspects that James may be involved with the unfortunate events. Can the police solve the mysteries surrounding Mariel and Connor before something more sinister happens to them or to the people they love? Is their bond strong enough to survive?
"In Getting Even, Charles Barton contends that revenge can be a form of justice that is constructive and healing for our society. Our current judiciary system, he explains, denies both victims and the accused an active role in the legal proceedings and resolution of their cases, reducing them to bystanders in what is essentially their own conflict. Barton does not argue for an individual's right to take the law into his own hands, but does show that the courts should recognize the revenge motive as legitimate and rational within the rules of justice."--pub. desc.
As a physician of souls, John Downame begins this important book by carefully defining anger and distinguishing between righteous and unjust expressions of it. He then helps us consider the properties, causes, kinds, and effects of unjust anger. Finally, moving beyond diagnosis, he presents the cure of sinful anger by prescribing practical strategies for both preventing and overcoming unjust anger in its different forms. Downame writes as a skilled practitioner who has assembled a comprehensive moral and spiritual pharmacy for treating sin-sick souls. Table of Contents: 1. The Nature of Anger 2. Righteous Anger 3. Unjust Anger 4. Internal Causes of Unjust Anger 5. External Causes of Unjust Anger 6. The Properties of Unjust Anger 7. The Different Kinds of Unjust Anger 8. The Evil Effects of Unjust Anger 9. Removing the Causes of Unjust Anger 10. Subduing Anger by Laboring for Patience 11. Remedies to Cure Unjust Anger 12. Remedies to Cure Anger in Others Series Description Interest in the Puritans continues to grow, but many people find reading these giants of the faith a bit unnerving. This series seeks to overcome that barrier by presenting Puritan books that are convenient in size and unintimidating in length. Each book is carefully edited with modern readers in mind, smoothing out difficult language of a bygone era while retaining the meaning of the original authors. Books for the series are thoughtfully selected to provide some of the best counsel on important subjects that people continue to wrestle with today.
Nick Blade grow up believing his father abandoned them. When he learns his father has a new family that he seems to be happy with. Anger and revenge build up inside of Nick. Things are not always what they seem...
In this article I examine the legitimacy of allowing crime victims' desires for revenge to serve as a factor when imposing criminal punishment upon wrongdoers. I argue that revenge is in and of itself a value neutral emotion; an emotion which simply describes a victim's desire to get back at his victimizer. For example, if the victim wishes to mete out punishment upon a person who actually committed a criminal wrong upon him, such a desire for revenge, I suggest, is moral. Furthermore, if the punishment inflicted by the wronged party is proportional to the harm suffered, I argue that such a punishment represents a just resolution of the criminal matter. In other words, I disagree with the notion that revenge is, per se, immoral or unjust.My article then examines the historical and religious reasons why revenge justice was supplanted by State imposed justice, and concludes that it was not because of a belief in the inherent immorality of the desire for revenge, but rather, was due to the very practical concerns that revenge justice often punished the innocent, and permitted disproportionate and inequitable levels of punishment. Revenge justice also frequently created an endless and escalating level of violence which threatened, and in some cases, actually destroyed early civilizations.Based upon the above analyses, the article critically examines the traditional theories of Retribution and Utilitarianism as justifications for imposing criminal punishment, and concludes that both theories are deficient in that they fail to recognize and address the victim's interest in assuring just punishment. Similarly, the article also criticizes the notions that traditional tort remedies and restorative justice models, provide adequate venues for victim involvement and redress.The article thus concludes that victims' desires for revenge deserve to be recognized as a legitimate factor when deciding what the level of punishment should be, so long as the ultimate sentencing authority remains with the State. I then offer a number of procedural mechanisms which would enhance the level of victim participation at the sentencing phase of criminal justice proceedings, including granting victims party status at all proceedings where sentencing decisions are rendered.
