Girl In Taped Beating Case Arrested Again:
Mercades Nichols, she of the Victoria Lindsay beating, has been arrested once again for charges not related to the beating.
Sometime between Oct. 31 and March 28, Nichols stalked and threatened the victim online and in person, even when Nichols was aware that an injunction had been placed against her, Wood said.
“She harassed, cyber-stalked and placed the victim in fear,” Wood said, reading from the arrest warrant.
The victim is said to be Nichols’ ex-boyfriend.
She’s being held without bond.
Sphere: Related Content
“I do think these sites should be made less accessible, so that anyone who really wants to see this kind of thing would have to register in a way that would identify them to law enforcement, just in case they are tempted to translate their voyeuristic tendencies into actions that harm anyone.”
I don’t think censorship is helpful. The more we see this the sooner we’ll recognize what the real problem is. When I was a teenager I remember when fights would happen and how hundreds of people would gather around. It’s human nature to watch a fight, which is why we have sports like boxing, wrestling, and MMA.
The problem here isn’t 1 vs 1 fighting. The problem is 5 vs 1 bullying. When you censor the bullying it actually promotes the behavior further. So I think it’s actually a good thing to have the videos exist. That being said I don’t think these videos should be something sites profit from, so while I’m fine with it being uploaded on YouTube, I’m not fine with it being uploaded to porn sites if what you say is true.
My point is that when criminal acts are caught on camera it’s called evidence. Evidence of a crime, or just evidence in general, and if we blame YouTube, or the fact that the act is recorded, or the people viewing it, it’s placing the blame on individuals who didn’t commit a crime. And no it’s not a crime to view women or men fighting. Just as it’s not a crime to watch boxing, MMA, or view it in person.
It is a crime to kidnap a person, lock them in a house, and beat them up 5v1. I don’t think this would be such a big deal if it were just 1 on 1 and both girls were fighting each other, thats not bullying thats a fight, and both agreed to it.
gompertz don’t let your emotions get the best of you. Yes these are girls but thats not whats important. What you really have to consider is that these are young minds, young doesn’t have anything to do with physical age but spiritual advancement. These are young minds that don’t know right from wrong.
It’s not about male and female minds, it’s about young and old minds. Old minds know through reasoning or experience that certain behaviors are wrong. Young minds are just like a child that dont know about gravity, they might walk off a cliff clutching their doll. It’s difficult to blame a mind which doesn’t know or understand whats guiding them off the cliff, but it’s the string pulling their doll which they are following which is guiding them off the cliff.
An old mind can control the strings because we/they can SEE the strings and others cant. Censorship ultimately only hides the doll but it doesn’t change the fact that the young minds will just be pulled off the cliff by something else, so that’s like changing the subject in hopes of forgetting about the problem. I say we should stay on the subject and analyze the videos and evidence. It’s like pointing out the strings which guide the behavior itself, so that we can gain control of those strings and redirect them.
The energy and forces at work don’t have anything to do with whether or not there are videos on YouTube. The people who like to watch fighting have a predisposition or instinct to like watching violence, and they need an outlet. The people who like to fight have a predisposition and instinct to like being violent and they need an outlet. When you ban the videos it doesn’t change the fact that you have hundreds of millions of people who have certain instincts which need an outlet somewhere.
I say the outlet should be virtual rather than physical, but if it must be physical then it should be organized 1vs1 duels, in a boxing or kickboxing ring, where there is a ref. Let them fight it out, let the people who like to watch fighting watch it and bet on it, and when it’s over, hopefully if they’ll decide to become prize fighters and at least they don’t bully innocent people.
Aggression and violence is an instinct, therefore it’s like an energy source which we can only direct into safe outlets but which cannot be diminished or removed.
With all that being said, I don’t think Victoria is a fighter at all. I think that people who aren’t fighters shouldn’t be challenged to a duel.
On the other hand if you know someone is of the same size and weight, and has the fighters instinct, what you ought to do is challenge them 1 on 1 in the ring. That’s what I’d do rather than 5v1.
Greg, rereading what I wrote I don’t see where I was calling for censorship. For example, there is technology in place that makes it possible for parents to prevent their children from being exposed to certain things on TV and the Internet. Would you call that censorship? If so, yes I am in favor of censorship, when it comes to children, simply because they lack the maturity to process some of the more sordid aspects of reality. I just don’t see equating regulation with censorship. As for fight videos on the Internet, the problem is that they are unregulated. I first became aware of the whole phenomenon of “girl fights” through this case we are discussing. That was in April. I did not get my first computer until end of May, so only then did I begin to understand what it was about, when I started surfing the Net. And yes, I was shocked by some of the images. As I stated above, many of the fights are relatively innocuous, being one-on-one and even exhibiting a certain attentiveness to rules of fair play. That may be OK though I still have a problem with it, which I did express above and will reiterate in a minute. The main problem is that mixed in with these are some, a small percentage, which are anything but benign. I’m sure you can access them if you want, I saw some I don’t ever want to see again, and they were truly sickening, in the same way that the Lakeland video was, involving the brutal beating of helpless, unwilling victims. Yes, they are there, and I cannot help but think that I have just witnessed a violent crime. I don’t look at them again, but I cannot get these images out of my mind, and just like my concern for Victoria, I wonder about these victims. I don’t care to even describe them further, if you look long enough you will know what I mean. I don’t really recommend it. Still, I certainly agree that they should NOT be banned, especially since they can serve as evidence for law enforcement. I would like to know if these violent acts are actually being prosecuted. The problem is that the operators of these sites are not required to provide information that would assist the police, and so these acts of violence go unpunished. At least that is my understanding, and if I am mistaken, perhaps someone could correct me. You state correctly that it is not a crime to watch people fighting. True. I think it is not even a crime to watch someone being beat up, though I’m not sure about that. However, here’s my problem. I know men here in NY, quite a few in fact, who are fans of girlfights, and I really don’t think their enjoyment is the same kind of enjoyment that one gets from boxing or UFC. I myself have a collection of videos of Muay Thai fights in Thailand, very violent, and yes I do understand the interest is such things. But those who enjoy girl fights include a number of individuals for whom the interest is more sinister. I base this opinion at least partially on my own observations of the reactions of these individuals, including their excited gestures and verbal cues. It is on that basis that I call it pornographic, because for these individuals it provides that kind of enjoyment. And remember these are mostly underage girls who are providing that enjoyment, so the added stigma of pedophilia is applicable here. It may be argued that for some people, the enjoyment really is innocent, like watching a boxing match. I give them the benefit of the doubt. But I stand by the contention that for many it is not innocent. It all depends on the individual. I believe that some people just can’t watch these things without being stimulated in ways that may lead to their being tempted to commit crimes (probably against children). People do vary in their ability to process certain stimuli. That is why I favor regulation, so that potential troublemakers can be identified. And I believe that sex crimes against children are so vile that such control(not censorship) should be exercised, even if it inconveniences some innocent viewers. So if I were told that I could not view a Muay Thai match without entering a special ID code, I could live with that, knowing it serves the purpose of protecting children. But of course the “security vs. freedom” argument will go on and on. Let me underscore my concern by presenting an argument that could be made against my case for regulation. It may be said that it is not fair to restrict access to sites that are enjoyed by many just because some individuals(presumably disturbed) can’t handle them. Take examples of sexual deviations such as those discussed in Kraft-Ebbing’s epic study of the subject. A perversion like bestiality afflicts only a comparatively small number of people. Images that stimulate someone so afflicted would presumably not have the same effect on normal people. Kraft-Ebbing mentions cases of men being stimulated by seeing someone riding a horse. Should we forbids horseback riding(at least in public places) just because some deviate might derive improper pleasure from it? Yes, I would accept that kind of argument in this kind of case, and bestiality tends to elicit laughter rather than horror, at least when discussed by someone like Al Franken. But I reject that kind of argument and others like it which I have heard, because I do not see any analogy with sex crimes against children. I believe that such crimes are so egregious, so inherently evil, that anything that has a reasonable risk of stimulating such behavior needs to be given special treatment. I believe girl fight videos are such a risk. It is important to note that I base this view not on abstract arguments but on my own observations. I have seen that some videos which most people find horrifying,like the Lakeland video, are viewed with great enjoyment by some, and those who enjoy it, and watch it over and over, are sick. It’s not just a matter of taste. I understand the enjoyment of horror movies, viewing maiming and mutilation and murder. I also understand dark humor, I’ve listened to my share of “dead baby” jokes. But there are videos here, like the Lakeland one, with real victims, and there is no sign of any consequences. Remember that the Lakeland girls were only caught because the video did not make it to Youtube. If it had not been intercepted and handed over to the police, there would probably have been no prosecution. They understood this. That’s why theyr told Victoria that if she went to the police, they would beat her even worse. So putting it on the Internet to be viewed by thousands would not jeopardize the perpetrators, if only the police were not called in by the victim. That is why greater regulation is needed. Just having it on video is not enough. There must be measures in place that allow police to identify the people on the videos, and website operators must be held accountable to provide that information. It’s a huge country, and the internet provides anonymity, even if you film yourself in the commission of criminal acts. Also, as for the pornographic advertising accompanying these sites. That doesn’t apply to Youtube, usually. Youtube has cleaned up its act pretty much. The really nasty girl fights have simply moved to other sites. As far as I can tell, blogs make money on advertising. Including. Like blogs, the fight websites carry advertisments along the side, outside the viewing area. Since their advertising tends to be hardcore pornography, I can only conclude that they know the tastes of their viewers. Just like if you watch Spongebob Squarepants or iCarly on the Nick channel, you will see advertisements that appeal to children. And if you watch girl fight videos on Gorillafights or Fightzilla websites, you will see a different kind of advertising. So I think I’m justified in seeing a connection between girl fights and pornography.
One thing I forgot. I said I would add a comment on the videos that I call “relatively innocuous” and why I think they are really not as harmless as they seem. So I feel I must append this to my already lengthy post, just because I said I would. It is not these fights themselves that is the problem. AsI said, I know some female martial artists who fight in tournaments. Good for them. Here is the difference. These girl fights are often(or mostly) organized and instigated by boys who want to see these girls fight. What’s wrong with that? Well, nothing at all, if the girls really want to fight. It’s great for girls to learn self-defense. Sure, it wasn’t like that when I was young, but it’s a new world and I think it’s a good thing. I’ve always believed in women’s liberation. Still, in many of these videos the girls don’t seem to want to fight, and don’t fight very well at all. Probably they are not interested in fighting and only do so to please their boy friends. It’s the attitudes of these boys that bothers me. “If you love me, you’ll fight this other girl” they seem to be saying. Not that different from “If you love me, you’ll get bigger breasts” I would say. So what could be so liberating becomes just another form of bondage. I think it’s great that women are becoming more self-reliant. But they must take control of their lives. That means you fight if you want, preferably under the guidance of trained martial artists rather than immature boys, and if you don’t want to fight but would rather “stay home and make cookies” well, dammit, that’s your right too! I’ve seen too many young women suffer because they care too much about what a boyfriend thinks. You ask what made Mercades do what she did. I ask too. I suspect it was her excessive feelings for a boyfriend who just wasn’t worth it. She was hurt by this creep and it felt so bad she decided to act tough to please him, because that’s the way a girl pleases a boy nowadays. That’s my problem with these videos. No problem at all if the girl is really doing what she wants, but a big problem if it becomes just another form of control. Sorry I get carried away and start ranting but I feel very strongly about this, having seen so much pain that could have been avoided with clear thinking and meditation. To all young women I say:these guys are a dime a dozen, none are worth fighting over. I don’t always organize my thoughts as well as I could, I hope now I’ve clarified a little better what my position is.
“That is why I favor regulation, so that potential troublemakers can be identified. ”
I agree with regulating convicted sex offenders. But if the individual just likes watching girls fight, and these girls are underage, yes I can agree with you that this is creepy, but unless they take actual steps to do something, like if they were actually arranging situation then I’d agree with you.
I think it depends entirely on their level of involvement and not so much whether they view it. I do think that when they admit that they like this sort of thing it makes their proclivities yes we should pay attention to the fact that there is a demographic of individuals who have dangerous proclivities. But I do not believe in thought crimes because I don’t think individuals have any control over their thoughts.
I believe we have to outlaw very specific patterns of behavior associated with people who have the proclivity. For example it should be an extra offense of we find that an adult planned, conspired or exploited teenagers in these situations. But if it’s adults just watching the videos, it’s creepy, but to put them in a database just for having creepy thoughts is a thought crime and in my opinion not in the same league as sexual assault or sex crimes.
I agree with you, I’d rather the girls be over 18 when they become prize fighters. I favor formal rules to the fighting. I think it’s wrong to deliberately “pervert” the situation by putting girlfight videos on pornsites, because thats deliberately creating the association in the minds of men. But the situation in my opinion is such that this would be happening even if there were no videos, there would simply be stories, or books and movies like lolita which further “pervert” the minds of men.
So if it’s directly contributing to or causing the harm of a minor, then I’m all for outlawing that. The cause has to be directly linked, such as if a group of these adult makes physically go to these fights, film them, and cheer them on, then these adults need to be arrested and charged because they become part of the problem which produces the market for these situations.
On the internet at least a far as I knew, nobody is allowed to profit from this evidence. If we find out they are profiting from it, the penalties should be extremely high, years in prison because we can see a direct link between the crime, and a money trail, and the main thing I worry about is the girlfights underground community becoming an organized industry, that has to be stopped. And the bumfighting industry must be stopped as well.
I don’t think we should allow people to make profits from crime. That’s my official stance on crime. But I’m all about free speech, civil liberties and human rights so I don’t think the underground community shouldn’t exist at all, I just think they need to be regulated in the sort of way that no new victims are created by their behavior. They can have sick thoughts if that what their brain is built for, but if they try to act any of it out they should go to prison.
I don’t know if manipulation causes girls to fight, it probably does. But girls manipulate boys to fight in the same way and there is a boyfight underground as well. If they agree to fight for their gf or bfs honor, I think it’s a fair situation, I even think it’s fair if there is a prize(even if the prize is love) and two people fight for that. I don’t think it’s fair if the fight is just one person beating on a defenseless individual. I don’t really consider that to be a real fight. I also don’t consider an unfair fight to be something worth bragging about.
It’s one thing if you kick someones ass who is the same size, weight, as you, who wants to fight you and you film that. It can be arranged formally through a contract, where they each sign their names on the dotted line so there wont be the possibility to sue each other after wards. I’m very much in favor of formal duels, I’m very much against bullying, there is a huge difference.
It’s not really about gender. Bums are being made to fight for crack and that to me is as bad, and often these are men. The people going around offering crack to homeless crack heads to convince them to fight each other, is exploiting the crackhead for their own profits. So it’s not that I entirely disagree with what you are saying, just the gender angle is what I disagree with.
I know I posted the video on how the media destroys the minds of women and how women are exploited, but men are exploited too. This is happening to both genders and I’d say men are being programmed to be violent as well.
I’d say we have to ignore stuff like race, gender, and things such as that and look entirely at the behavior. The behavior of the person who exploits the crackhead bums into fighting is very similar to the behavior of the person who exploits teenage girls. The individual adopting this behavior doesn’t care about the life of wellbeing of the subject. This individual also doesn’t care what the consequences are.
I’m all for prize fighting, but making people who are clearly vulnerable fight for crumbs, or for your own amusement to me is just as bad as offering individuals medicine which will make them sicker, or offering them bad loans which you know they cannot afford to pay. There ought to be some standards, all sports have standards, this should be made into an actual sport, if people want to fight MMA style for money it should be treated as a sport and not done in this sorta way. The Romans had the Olympics, duels have always existed through Asia, Africa and America, and there were always rules. The rules evolved over time to become MMA and prize fighting, the most humane way to fight, and I suppose what we could do is promote MMA, kickboxing, boxing and prize fighting so that the youth can fight the correct/honorable way.
“She was hurt by this creep and it felt so bad she decided to act tough to please him, because that’s the way a girl pleases a boy nowadays.”
Boys please girls this way also. Don’t forget that boys are just as vulnerable to that as girls.
And you are also correct, if a guy, or a girl, demands you fight PHYSICALLY to defend their honor, you better be sure they are willing to fight to defend yours, and most of the time they aren’t.
Partners should protect each other and each others interest, thats loyalty. If the partner is trying to talk you into doing something which will have bad consequences for you, simply because it will make them feel better emotionally, don’t do it. On the other hand if you love a partner you do have a responsibility to protect them, it’s just about knowing how do to so in a way which is smart.
So yes it’s important to be willing to fight to protect a partner, but thats not the same as fighting physically over words on the internet.
Sure I can understand the emotion behind it, and it’s just not smart.
Greg, as usual you make many good points and I have just a few followup comments. In drawing my conclusions I rely mainly on my own observations of people in various social settings. Some of my contacts are devout Buddhists, some are violent people who live on the other side of the law. By being very tolerant I get to observe all varieties of human behavior,and sometimes even to intervene, hopefully, in a positive way. I have found it easier to find the “dark side” in New York than in places like Pittsburgh or Oklahoma City. And I suspect I’m not alone in that opinion. I just thought I would interject a personal note in case anyone wonders what my own involvement is. Thanks for reminding me of bumfights. I see that as another variation on the same theme, of exploiting the weak. Yes, I am certainly aware that men can be victinized, and that women can be just as cold-hearted, manipulative, violent and cruel as men. Also, while I fully support the women’s lib movement, I realize that it is a social revolution with far-reaching and sometimes unpredictable consequences. Still I have reservations, because (I am happy to say) men and women are still different, and, as far as I know, any abolition of these differences is still in the realm of science fiction. Only women get pregnant, and the statistics on single-parent homes clearly shows most are headed by women. It’s so much easier for a man to evade his responsibilities. Also, while men get battered too, it’s usually the man doing the battering. You just have to look at the individual cases. In the particular case of Mercades, I stand by my opinion, that she was the victim. I once asked on this blog, what kind of man would take out an order of projection against a girl. I still ask it, in this case. (Of course I’m only referring here to the prior case, involving the boyfriend. The beating case is another matter, still some things are murky about her involvement there). And I’m basing my opinion on my reading of the facts as stated in the affidavits. What is presented there shows that she seems to have emotional issues, but of the kind that could be dealt with by counseling, not imprisonment. But then I’m not on the jury. Just one more point, on the matter of profiting from these fights. I really don’t know what the laws are. There are of course laws forbidding gambling, or at least regulating it. But my understanding (I may be wrong) is websites make money on advertising. Blogs are a kind of website and I do see advertisements there. Now I don’t expect any blog operator to reveal trade secrets, but I believe that’s all legitimate. My big problem is with the lack of responsibility of blog operators. Bill O’Reilly recently showed a video of an infant being physically abused, which appeared on some site. It was not easy for the police to trace the source. The site operator can simply claim he doesn’t know the source. He is not required to keep precise records about where it came from, it seems. It is difficult to see how that can be changed without running into some First Amendment issues. Just like when Al Jazeera airs a video from ben Laden. You can’t hold the people at Al Jazeera responsible to reveal where he is, they probably don’t know anyway. Now I just want to raise one last point. You said above that you don’t want to put people in a database for their thoughts, and I agree. I wonder if you could clarify when you think database are appropriate, if there is a general principle here.
Correction: that should have read: the responsibility of site operators…
The sex offender database is appropriate when an individual is convicted of a sex crime. I don’t think an individual should go into the database for just their thoughts alone, but if there clearly are victims and they are the victimizer then they need to go into the database.
I support the human liberation movement also known as libertarianism. I support women and mens rights. I think Mercades has to get jailtime because she’s being charged with kidnapping, even if it’s true that she never laid a hand on Victoria, the punishment system must be consistent and apply to all equally. I cannot say that prison really helps anyone, but thats because prisons often aren’t designed to help, and thats a different issue, but on crime I’m strict and consistent, kidnapping is a serious crime, and from the looks of it, it seems that all the potential witnesses are making deals and will be claiming Mercades masterminded the entire thing. I don’t know what the truth is, the jury will sort it out, but if you commit a crime you must pay the consequences no matter if you are male, female, child or adult.
I do think there should be more options for people in prison so they can actually grow intellectually and spiritually while they are there. I don’t think prison should JUST be about punishment, it also has to be about reform and changing the bad habits which lead them there in the first place. Because it’s a violent crime, I don’t think anyone expects it to lead to just counseling and the main reason it cannot lead to that is because millions of people are watching this trial and if these teens receive no jail time at all, then there will be thousands of new videos like this on Myspace, and Youtube because teenagers will believe they can get away with it.
And I think the reason Mercades BF took out the protection order on her is because he was either afraid of her, or perhaps he didn’t want to be violent towards her. It’s complicated but there are valid reasons why men can take out restraining orders against women, women can be dangerous, and the bf in this case claims Mercades paid or tried to pay someone to beat him up, so what do we expect him to do in that situation? I’m not saying he’s a good guy, from what I read about him he’s not, but it does seem like he was scared and felt threatened.
I think in Mercades case, she seems to have grown up in a bad environment, she had bad friends, and I know how it is, I grew up in an environment just as bad and I know that yes her environment and the friends she had probably are what lead to this. But that has little or nothing to do with the trial as probably the majority of people in jail are in jail for similar reasons. If you were involved in a robbery, whether or not you actually carried a gun or shot anyone, or even took any money, if you are just involved, you’ll go to prison.
About databases, I think we need databases which record sex crimes, violent crime and domestic violence. If you beat up your wife, or your gf and you get charged and convicted, you should go into a database. If you punch a random old man in the face and stomp on him and he charges you and you get convicted of assault, you should go into a database.
This is for the purposes of backround checks. If an individual has a violent history it should be known. If an individual is a sex offender it should be known. Women and men should be able to conduct backround checks, it will help prevent domestic abuse situations and protect children from being abused by sex offenders.
I don’t think websites have to trace the source of all this stuff. Thats law enforcements job. The FBI has tools which can monitor internet traffic at the ISP level with deep package inspection. Now I think website operators should have the right to sell or volunteer information to law enforcement which might be related to a crime, but this information could just be related information and not a direct link to a source.
They can sell their logs for example. They can sell information about which websites certain individuals are browsing for, they can do little things but blog owners are not law enforcement. Law enforcement at least violent crime and child porn, should be handled at the ISP level, you go to the ISP of the blog owner and you ask them for their logs of who connected, you can piece it all together to figure out which account uploaded the file.
But it’s ultimately the responsibility of the person who uploads the original distribution. You find that person and you question them, the blogs, they are just relaying copies. It’s better for law enforcement and for accomplishing the goals tactically if we let people upload whatever BS they want and monitor it in secret, and go after the most extreme cases using paid informants.
Rather simple, you pay them to tell you where they got the video from, or you threaten to put them in prison for it unless they help you track it to the source.
mercades should be disciplined.
I know, here I am again, commenting on this case, blah, blah…but wait!
Now they could start a whole new thread with the title MERCADES NICHOLS ARRESTED AGAIN because guess what- it just happened again!
According to the Lakeland Ledger
http://www.theledger.com/article/20090702/NEWS/907025055
I wonder how those mental health and anger management evaluations worked out?
Gomp, I just posted that…
http://www.mycrimespace.com/2009/07/03/mercades-nichols-back-in-jail/