American Horror Story

[Gabriel Macht]

This is disgusting to all levels. What they did to this child they should be either put to death or put in jail till the day they die and let them suffer a slow and painful death.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

A Pennsylvania couple went car shopping, bought pizza and engaged in sexual activity as the woman's unresponsive 3-year-old son lay dying after weeks of escalating abuse that ended in three days of systematic torture, authorities said Thursday.

Jillian Tait, 31, and Gary Lee Fellenbaum, 23, were charged Thursday with murder in the death of Tait's son, Scott McMillan, and aggravated assault in the beating of his older brother.

They are accused of laughing as Scott was hung upside down and whipped, striking him repeatedly with a frying pan, and eventually beating him to death.

Chester County District Attorney Thomas Hogan called the case "an American horror story."

"It was an unspeakable act of depravity," he said.

The couple met working at Wal-Mart and last month moved in together, along with Fellenbaum's estranged wife and three children - Tait's 6- and 3-year-old sons and the Fellenbaums' 11-month-old daughter. The six lived in a mobile home park outside the city of Coatesville, about 35 miles northwest of Philadelphia.

The prosecutor said what started as spankings morphed into "concentrated, repeated, escalating abuse." Then, "over three days he was systematically tortured and beaten to death," Hogan said.

The three adults told authorities "that Scott McMillan had been punched and beaten with blunt and sharp objects, whipped, taped to a chair with electrical tape and beaten, hung up by his feet and beaten, and suffered other acts of violence," police said in affidavits released Thursday.

"During one incident," the affidavits say, "Gary hung Scott and (his older brother) up by their feet one at a time and beat the boys while they were hanging upside down. Jillian stated that she and Gary were laughing during the incident."

Hogan said the older brother apparently knew that if he struggled while being hung from the back of a door, it would only get worse. But his younger brother squirmed and struggled, he said.

"They thought that was funny," he said.

Fellenbaum's 21-year-old estranged wife, Amber Fellenbaum, was charged with child endangerment for allegedly failing to help the child. She ultimately called 911 Tuesday night, authorities said. By then, Scott had been unresponsive for hours and had been put in a shower for more than 30 minutes by his mother and her boyfriend, investigators said.

When the boy failed to awaken, they placed him on an uninflated air mattress and went shopping, authorities said. The couple returned with a pizza and, after eating, took a nap and engaged in sexual activity, according to Tait's statement to police. Tait said she then checked on Scott and yelled for someone to call 911 because he wasn't breathing.

Noting that investigators found no evidence that drugs or alcohol had been involved, Hogan said: "This is just evilness."

The prosecutor said late Thursday he had not yet been notified of the couple having obtained lawyers.

Gary Fellenbaum severely beat the boy for refusing to eat toast both Monday and Tuesday morning, authorities said. The "discipline" included throwing him against a wall, knocking him off a chair with a punch and then taping him to the chair to keep him upright for more beatings, police said.

Tait said Fellenbaum had thrown the boy against the wall so hard, it "caused a hole in the wall," according to the statement she gave police.

She told police that she took part in the abuse and saw the scars on her younger son, court documents said.

Police said her older son also showed signs of abuse.

"It is going to take us years to put him back together again physically and mentally," Hogan said.

There was no evidence the infant was harmed, authorities said. She and the 6-year-old were placed in the custody of relatives, the prosecutor said.

Tait and Fellenbaum were being held without bail after their arraignments Thursday. They are scheduled for a preliminary hearing Nov. 14.

Amber Fellenbaum was being held on $500,000 bail. No attorney was listed in court records.

 

[Gay Tony]

Death Penalty.

[gtamann123]

I agree. The reason We maintain the death penalty is for sh*t like this.

[Vehicles]

Anyone thinks that they should be hung upside down and thrown into a wall before death penalty?

Edited November 11, 2014 by Kowai7108

[Gay Tony]

I agree. The reason We maintain the death penalty is for sh*t like this.

 

People like this should simply be taken out of human existence. For justice and for the humanity of it.

 

Pennsylvania has death penalty so I hope the utilize it.

[LightningLord]

This sickens me. Such a waste of human life. It's crazy to see that something like this could actually happened. I hope proper discipline is in order.

[gtamann123]

They may still have it but when was the last time they actually executed anyone? Some states have the death penalty on the books but actually haven't used it in decades

Edited November 11, 2014 by gtamann123

[Murdick]

Makes me sick to my stomach.

[Gay Tony]

I don't know to be honest but they do have it.

 

And if anyone should get the death penalty its those two.

Edited November 11, 2014 by mr toasterbutt

[Finn 7 five 11]

They don't need the death penalty.

 

Rehabilitation so they feel bad for what they did and have to live with it their entire life whilst in prison.

 

Also is it bad that I was masturbating before and while reading this...then continued to do so?

Edited November 11, 2014 by •¿F¡ññ4L¡ƒ£?•

[Mr. Scratch]

Damn, bitches be cray.

[gtamann123]

They don't need the death penalty.

 

Rehabilitation so they feel bad for what they did and have to live with it their entire life whilst in prison.

 

Yeah so the normal headed honest working people get to pay their room and board for the next 60 years. Sounds great man.

[Raavi]

 

They don't need the death penalty.

 

Rehabilitation so they feel bad for what they did and have to live with it their entire life whilst in prison.

Yeah so the normal headed honest working people get to pay their room and board for the next 60 years. Sounds great man.

 

 

Fun fact the death penalty is much costlier than life imprisonment.

[gtamann123]

 

 

 

They don't need the death penalty.

 

Rehabilitation so they feel bad for what they did and have to live with it their entire life whilst in prison.

Yeah so the normal headed honest working people get to pay their room and board for the next 60 years. Sounds great man.

 

Fun fact the death penalty is much costlier than life imprisonment.

Shouldn't be.

[Gay Tony]

Fun fact the death penalty is much costlier than life imprisonment.

 

It shouldn't be.

 

Not that money should be a point of death penality anyways. (But on a moral level, how can you force society to support these people anyways?)

 

Is it the method of execution that's so costly?

 

How the hell is keeping someone locked up for life and all their living expenses cheaper than getting rid of them?

Edited November 11, 2014 by mr toasterbutt

[Raavi]

 

Fun fact the death penalty is much costlier than life imprisonment.

 

It shouldn't be.

 

It shouldn't be an option in any Judicial system, let alone in a so called civilised one.

 

Is it the method of execution that's so costly?

 

How the hell is keeping someone locked up for life and all their living expenses cheaper than getting rid of them?

 

This is a breakdown of the costs of the Death Penalty in the state of California, which I reckon is similar to most US states.

 

• Pre-trial and trial costs (there are essentially two trials ergo the double the cost)

• Automatic appeals

• State Habeas Corpus Petitions,

• Federal Habeas Corpus Appeals

 

- Supreme Court

 

And of course incarceration costs which are HIGHER for Death Row inmates.

[Mr. House]

It doesn't matter whether it 'should' or 'shouldn't' be. It is. If you want some form of primitive retribution which doesn't do anything you're free to move to some backwards country like Saudi Arabia

 

or Texas.

 

I am a cock gobbler and I like to gobble cocks.

[Gay Tony]

It doesn't matter whether it 'should' or 'shouldn't' be. It is. If you want some form of primitive retribution which doesn't do anything you're free to move to some backwards country like Saudi Arabia

 

or Texas.

 

I am a cock gobbler and I like to gobble cocks.

 

You do realize the death penality is legalized in 32 states?

 

Justice isn't primitive. As long as it's humane and quick it's the just moral thing to do in this situation. (Just a matter of opinion now so I don't think anyone will change their mind on this basis.)

[Mr. House]

You do realize the death penality is legalized in 32 states?

 

Justice isn't primitive. As long as it's humane and quick it's the just moral thing to do in this situation. (Just a matter of opinion now so I don't think anyone will change their mind on this basis.)

I was mainly making a jibe at the state of Texas, but yes I understand that a large portion of the United States consists of hillbillies and murder junkies. Have a good one.

 

I am a cock gobbler and I like to gobble cocks.

[Raavi]

Justice isn't primitive. As long as it's humane and quick it's the just moral thing to do in this situation. (Just a matter of opinion now so I don't think anyone will change their mind on this basis.)

 

 

There is absolutely nothing moral or just about the death penalty whatsoever.

[Gay Tony]

I was mainly making a jibe at the state of Texas, but yes I understand that a large portion of the United States consists of hillbillies and murder junkies. Have a good one.

 

I am a cock gobbler and I like to gobble cocks.

 

Yes I agree.

 

Pro Death-Penality = Hillbillies and Murder Junkies.

 

I understand now.

 

There is absolutely nothing moral or just about the death penalty whatsoever.

 

Moral for the victims and on behalf of 3-year old child in this case.

Edited November 11, 2014 by mr toasterbutt

[Coin]

Money is often the point because pro-death penalty people like to argue that it is cheaper than life imprisonment.

 

Thankfully the death penalty is completely abolished here and won't ever return. It's a form of 'punishment' that has no place in modern society.

[Mr. House]

 

There is absolutely nothing moral or just about the death penalty whatsoever.

 

Moral for the victims and on behalf of 3-year old child in this case.

 

The three year old child is dead and these people being dead serves little purpose other than some very vacant sense of retribution.

 

I am a cock gobbler and I like to gobble cock.

[Panz]

I've always been split on this.

 

I do find it's a better punishment to suffer in jail for life rather than just ending it all, and if you end a murderer's life for, well, killing someone, doesn't that make the legal system just as bad? However, it is ridiculously expensive to keep so many prisoners. We spend quite a bit more on that in the U.S. than we do on education. Of course, lethal injections aren't cheap, either. And then there's always the fact when you consider someone who may have murdered many, many people or tortured them to death, which I find to be much worse, and then you start to wonder whether that person even deserves to have a life.

Edited November 11, 2014 by Morgan

[sivispacem]

Victims should have no say in the punishment for criminals. It should be based solely on factual evidence regarding what works as far as crime prevention and reintegration into society is concerned. Opening it to the whims of hysterical and emotionally biased individuals is simply barbaric.

 

Retributive justice is every bit as bad as the violence it's supposed to be a response to. It serves no purpose other than pandering to a small number of victims to the detriment of wider society.

[AlienTwo]

 

Justice isn't primitive. As long as it's humane and quick it's the just moral thing to do in this situation. (Just a matter of opinion now so I don't think anyone will change their mind on this basis.)

 

 

There is absolutely nothing moral or just about the death penalty whatsoever.

 

I agree. Personally, I don't want my government killing my fellow citizens under any circumstances, whether it be by drone after a secret panels approval, or by whatever "the handsome" is for any particular age. Civilized nations need not kill their own.

[Gay Tony]

Victims should have no say in the punishment for criminals. It should be based solely on factual evidence regarding what works as far as crime prevention and reintegration into society is concerned. Opening it to the whims of hysterical and emotionally biased individuals is simply barbaric.

 

Retributive justice is every bit as bad as the violence it's supposed to be a response to. It serves no purpose other than pandering to a small number of victims to the detriment of wider society.

 

 

The death penality is simply ridding society of these dangerous/violent individuals who don't care or respect humans rights or their feelings to begin with.

 

How is the death penality by itself barbaric? Some of you keep saying this.

[AlienTwo]

 

Victims should have no say in the punishment for criminals. It should be based solely on factual evidence regarding what works as far as crime prevention and reintegration into society is concerned. Opening it to the whims of hysterical and emotionally biased individuals is simply barbaric.

 

Retributive justice is every bit as bad as the violence it's supposed to be a response to. It serves no purpose other than pandering to a small number of victims to the detriment of wider society.

 

 

The death penality is simply ridding society of these dangerous/violent individuals who don't care or respect humans rights or their feelings to begin with.

 

How is the death penality by itself barbaric? Some of you keep saying this.

 

Basically it's barbaric because it involves the killing of other human beings. Murder in any form is barbaric, and for our government, of for and by the people, to be participating in this is just a dirty thing.

[Frank Brown]

You cannot in the same sentence criticize the morality of the death penalty while claiming that prison time is worse and therefor a more suitable punishment. If you believe that someone should rot in prison because the death penalty is immoral, you're a hypocrite. This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone in this topic, it's just some of the responses I've seen towards this topic.

 

If there is irrefutable evidence (confession, high quality video, etc.) and the crime is horrendous, why shouldn't their life be taken? We give our governments permission to jail these people for life and take away their liberties, why can we not execute them? Why is someone entitled to keep their life after taking someone else's?

 

 

 

Victims should have no say in the punishment for criminals. It should be based solely on factual evidence regarding what works as far as crime prevention and reintegration into society is concerned. Opening it to the whims of hysterical and emotionally biased individuals is simply barbaric.

Retributive justice is every bit as bad as the violence it's supposed to be a response to. It serves no purpose other than pandering to a small number of victims to the detriment of wider society.

 

 

The death penality is simply ridding society of these dangerous/violent individuals who don't care or respect humans rights or their feelings to begin with.

 

How is the death penality by itself barbaric? Some of you keep saying this.

 

Basically it's barbaric because it involves the killing of other human beings. Murder in any form is barbaric, and for our government, of for and by the people, to be participating in this is just a dirty thing.

 

 

You must be against war then?

Edited November 11, 2014 by Frank Brown

[Gay Tony]

You cannot in the same sentence criticize the morality of the death penalty while claiming that prison time is worse and therefor a more suitable punishment. If you believe that someone should rot in prison because the death penalty is immoral, you're a hypocrite. This isn't necessarily aimed at anyone in this topic, it's just some of the responses I've seen towards this topic.

 

If there is irrefutable evidence (confession, high quality video, etc.) and the crime is horrendous, why shouldn't their life be taken? We give our governments permission to jail these people for life and take away their liberties, why can we not execute them? Why is someone entitled to keep their life after taking someone else's?

 

-snip-

 

You must be against war then?

 

I agree with everything you said.

 

But there are litterally no justified physical conflicts or wars outside of self-defense and punishment for force such that was done on-you.

 

Someone let me know if they can think of one.