Sun Tzu

I attempt to investigate topics from various points of view. I know this topic has been here before and fellow members provided some good facts and statistics. When the death penalty was discussed in an earlier thread, I admitted that I was not practicing emotional neutrality to the degree that would probably have provided a clearer view. My concern with death penalty has always been a run away slippery slope or innocent individuals being put to death. Some countries have a swift execution; in the US the guilty sit in a cell for 20 years. Forensics have reached a far more effective level contributing to seeing the right person get convicted. It still doesnt address the points of those opposed to capital punishment such as two wrongs dont make a right, or the ineffectiveness of determent.


Section from State of Louisiana vs Patrick Kennedy--

It was not disputed that the victim was brutally raped. On the morning of March 2, 1998, the victim was transported by ambulance to Children’s Hospital where she was examined in the emergency room. The victim’s predominate injury was vaginal with profuse bleeding. Her entire perineum was torn and her rectum protruded into her vagina. Dr. Scott Benton of Children’s Hospital testified as an expert in pediatric forensic medicine that the victim’s injuries were the most serious he had seen, within his four years of practice, that resulted from a sexual assault.
However, as a result of pain, the victim had to be fed gallons of stool softener through a tube to permit her to begin defecating again. Arguello testified that he could not remember whether the defendant said his niece or his daughter has “just become a young lady.”
These phone calls made to Arguello and Madere were not known to police until several days after the rape, and later served to shift the focus of the investigation to the defendant. pediatric surgeon was called in to repair the damage, which was repaired successfully.

www.lasc.org/opinions/2007/05KA1981.opn.pdf



With the professional and (assumed proclaimed) fact based opinions of social workers mentioned in the following column, this is apparently the progressive view I should strive for--

April 18 (Bloomberg) -- As an 8-year-old girl lay bleeding from a rape so brutal she would need emergency surgery, her stepfather called his boss to say he wouldn't be at work. He also asked how to remove blood stains from a white rug.
After that, by 7:40 a.m., he called a carpet cleaning company to set up an urgent appointment for bloodstain removal. Chemicals found later indicated he tried to clean the carpet himself.
Eventually, at 9:18 a.m., Patrick Kennedy called 911 to say that his stepdaughter had just been raped.
Kennedy, who lived outside of New Orleans, claimed neighborhood boys did it, and the girl backed him up. But the evidence pointed not to them but to him, and later she told her mother, and much later police, that when she had awakened to that terrible morning, her stepfather was atop her.
It takes no more than a cold reading of the facts for the viscera to want death for the man who did this, so horrific was the physical and, no doubt, psychic damage he inflicted.
As emotionally satisfying as that might be, allowing the death penalty for rape, even child rape, is wrong, if what you want is to help the victim.
Convicted and sentenced to die, Kennedy is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to declare Louisiana's 1995 law allowing execution for child rapists unconstitutional.
But just because the high court is limited to the issue of constitutionality doesn't mean columnists are.
So, before we get to constitutionality, consider an argument filed by advocates for the sexually abused who take a position that may surprise you.
Social Workers
Social workers who counsel raped children and nonprofit groups devoted to combating sexual assault say states do victims more harm than good when they allow capital punishment for child rape.
For one thing, the law encourages the rapist to kill the victim, as he would have little to lose and might get away with the crime by killing the only witness to it.
So argues a friend-of-the-court brief filed by the National Association of Social Workers, the National Alliance to End Sexual Violence and related organizations.
``What's the incentive to keep the victim alive?'' asks Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation Against Sexual Assault.
If the victim survives, reports the crime and the accused goes to trial, ``Louisiana's law would greatly magnify the trauma that child victims already experience while participating in the criminal justice process,'' the social workers say in their brief.
Years of Appeals
A death penalty case brings more publicity, more pretrial hearings, more post-trial hearings and years and years of appeals, thus requiring the child to relive the trauma time and again and delaying healing.
Nor is healing helped along by the guilt that can come with putting your father, your stepfather, your mama's boyfriend, your teacher or your minister on death row.
But the biggest concern is that a law like this makes the already serious problem of underreporting even worse.
``Victims are inhibited from coming forward out of shame, guilt, fear of being punished and fear that the abuser will retaliate against the victim or other family members,'' the brief says. Underreporting is most common when the abuser is a relative, family friend or otherwise close to the victim, as is the case in 70 percent of child sexual abuse cases.
So anywhere from 67 percent to 90 percent of child sexual abuse goes unreported, according to multiple studies over the past decade, as cited by the brief.
``Often the victim has ambivalent feelings toward the offender,'' Benitez says. ``They want the sexual abuse to stop, but very often they don't want the offender to go to jail, much less get the death penalty.''
More Molesting
And when no one reports what happened, the molester goes on molesting.
``That's no justice for anybody,'' Benitez says.
This case presents one of those counterintuitive situations where tough-on-crime legislation backfires.
You might find another example if you ask your district attorney about mandatory minimum sentences. In Georgia, prosecutors in the mid-1990s were finding ways around a new law requiring 10-year minimum prison terms for seven specific crimes. Then-Governor Zell Miller lambasted them -- and judges, too --for skirting the law he promoted.
Likewise, when Californians voted in 2006 on ``Jessica's Law,'' forbidding registered sex offenders from living within 2000 feet of a school or park, opposition came from an unlikely foe, the Child Molestation Research and Prevention Institute.
``Jessica's Law sounds good and is well-intentioned,'' the group says, but it is ``severely misguided'' and ``will likely decrease safety for children.''
Sufficiently Populated
That is because sex offenders are less likely to re-offend when they have stable lives and can reside in an area sufficiently populated to have treatment available. Residency requirements interfere with that.
As for child rape, at this week's Supreme Court arguments, justices who focused on other matters cut Kennedy's lawyer off when he twice tried to mention the social workers' viewpoint.
The main question for the court is whether it is cruel and unusual and therefore unconstitutional to impose a death penalty for a crime in which no one died. Is the sentence proportional to the crime?
I think not. What is more, allowing rape to be punished by death invites a throwback to the racist sentencing of decades past that made black men far more likely to be executed for rape than whites. It also flies in the face of irrefutable evidence that juries sometimes send innocent people to death row.
All that aside, if the Supreme Court says such laws can stand, then those who counsel young victims of rape, those who try to detect the crime and catch the rapists, will have an even tougher job on their hands.

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=ajGopn7.ZfSM



At this point in time I cant bring myself to be content that it is justice individuals like this should be supported by the system or worse possibly be let free at a later point in time.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

highthief

Is the debate over this any different from the debate over captial punishment for murder? I would imagine people either support it or don't, based upon their current stance on capital punishment for murder.

Personally, I don't believe in the death penalty so as much as this is a sickening crime, the facts of this case do not change that.

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

Tully Mars

While I see a difference in this debate from other death penalty debates, I maintain killing people is wrong. I've always found the logic behind the death penalty odd. Killing people is so wrong we're going to kill you if you do it. Just doesn't make sense to me.

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

ratbastid

While I hope Kennedy's stay in one of our fine correctional institutions is as miserable as his fellow inmates can possibly make it, the heinousness of the crime doesn't change my view on capital punishment.

Sun Tzu

Honesty, even though I felt like it was justified, until this case I never knew any of the states considered capital punishment for anything other than murder. As of yesterday this behavior obviously wont be considered grounds. You are right the conversation does revert back to the basic debate of whether or not capital punishment should be considered for anyone regardless of what they have done.

Those that stated they dont agree with it before probably wont have anything new to say. Im wondering if there is anyone that agrees with the death penalty, but agrees the supreme court's view of cruel and unususal punishment. I read the court and police records and a few more articles similiar to the second one I submitted and still question where the justice is. According to many social workers not having a death penalty actually protects the child's life, as the adult rapist would probably not want witnesses. Huh?

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Terrell

I don't support the death penalty in cases where the victim is not physically murdered. The only exception to that should be Treason, but limited only as specifically defined by Article 3 section 3 of the US constitution, and only during a formally declared war. Life without parole is IMO the apropriate penalty for rape. He should have to do hard labor for the rest of his life but he should not be executed, since his victim was not killed.

Willravel

I don't support the death penalty under any circumstances, even a theoretical case in which guilt is 100% certain.

I can see the logic behind not having the death penalty for child rape, but quite frankly it's based on incorrect assumptions about the effect of the death penalty. The death penalty has been demonstrated through study after study to not be effective as a deterrent. In other words, assuming one who might want to kill the child to avoid the death penalty, while intuitive, may be incorrect.

ASU2003

I'm a fan of cruel and unusual punishment, so the only reason I don't support the death penalty is that it is an easy way out. But, I don't have any problem with them reducing our population numbers by killing violet prisoners. Sheriff Joe was my sheriff for a few years and tent city with no air conditioning, pink underwear and bologna sandwiches everyday is a good start.

Sun Tzu

I'm not a parent yet, but hope to be one at some point in the future. I have had the opportunity to work in emergency room and neonatal ICU environments. I saw some pretty bad cases of child abuse and a small number of child rape. The patients of the rape cases where all molested by other adolescents. While the number was alarmingly high for abuse inflicted by adults, the rape numbers were low. When I read the court case above I was sickend and angered as Im sure most were. (not at the courts ruling- but Kennedy's actions) IMO ending someone like that (especially if I were the parent)

will, I could be wrong but if I remember right the information you are referring to in numbers really didnt give a break down into child rapists, crimes of passion, premeditated murder did they?

I will admit I am cherry picking what I find within moral boundries and what crosses them- it is good Im not sitting on the Sepreme Court. Between a man that hits another too hard in a bar fight and kills him, another walking in when his wife is having sex with another man and killing him, or a man that rapes a six year girl so brutaly that he causes internal bleeding- an anal protrusion- and taken away her chance to ever have children (not to mention the emotional scarring forever) have significant differences.

Im curious- (putting aside any numbers some of the lowlifes get out and repeat their crime on another child) lets assume a person gets life with no chance of parole. The choice is made to put the convicted child rapist in the general prison population. In a hypothetical scenerio the powers that be know by doing so they are giving him an unofficial death sentence. Do you consider that to be the same as lethal injection? Do they deserve the protective isolation most get? Keep in mind some go to forensic mental health facilities and recieve substandard "rehabilitation" which is really nothing more than psych techs that contain them and give them patio breaks to smoke cigarettes while the others go to jail with no rehab. That certainly does little to deter if at all. Is it about prevention, justice, or a little of both?

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Willravel

The studies were clear in that it wasn't a deterrent. There might be a small margin of error, but I doubt that margin of error is equal to the percentage of rapes in which the victims are children.

Seaver

In my opinion live w/out parole is a better fit. Not because I'm against the death penalty by any means, but because the shit he'll endure in prison is much worse than a needle every could give.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Willravel

This is most certainly true. If you're all about an eye for an eye, it's life in prison.

Personally, I suspect most people who are capable of raping a child belong in a psychiatric hospital instead of a prison.

Baraka_Guru

Hospitalization, yes. Old Testamentation, no.

__________________
Knowing that death is certain and that the time of death is uncertain, what's the most important thing?
—Bhikkhuni Pema Chödrön

Humankind cannot bear very much reality.
—From "Burnt Norton," Four Quartets (1936), T. S. Eliot

Sun Tzu

I understand but was there specifics? Again is determent really even the goal with capitol punishment? Even with numbers in a general sense, do you think the people that commit the crimes really have a concern for aftermaths? Excluding new husbands that obtain insurance for their brides and then turn their air off when they go diving on their honeymoon.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Willravel

I don't have access to the raw data. I know that once upon a time a University of Buffalo professor by the name of Isaac Eehrilch conducted a biased study which state that each execution saved eight innocent lives. This sparked many studies, which immediately poked massive holes in Eehrilch's conclusions. I suspect the best known was in the Yale Law Journal back in the late 1970s. I believe the final verdict in most studies is something to the effect that there is no credible evidence that it acts as a deterrent.

Sun Tzu

Work in one for 6-12 months civil or forensic, you may have a different view afterward. A majority of the criminals end up on the forensic side which will always be state ran. Talk to the nurses and techs that work with that population, look at the results. Most state facilities have a mission statement of rehabilition for for civil and criminal. Criminals are there either to establish whether or not they are competent enough to stand trial, or they were found guilty but insane. Either way the "rehab treatment" is nothing more than a softer jail with required doses of antipsychotic behavior modifying medications. If they follow the treatment plan they are given the possibilty exsists to be transfered to the civil side within half their sentencing. Once there the road to being released is fairly easy. With that said ask the people that work with them every day, how many of their "patients" do they feel are playing the system. The eye for an eye philosophy is obviously not one you agree with; so are there any limits to your mindset on that?

I believe in other discussions I heard you state you would not have a problem defending yourself or your family with a firearm ( I might be wrong ). If thats the case, it means you would kill if it means stopping harm to your family. But if you were 5 minutes too late and the police caught the killer 2 blocks from your house your mindset would go from killer instinct wanting to possibly rehab the person?

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Willravel

You've never met my mother. She's a really nice lady, still teaches piano (for fun). She's also a PhD in psych and can read people. It's funny, too, because she never had a BS meter before going int grad school and then working with criminals. 6 months and she knew if I was even telling a half truth. 12 and she knew if anyone was telling a half truth.

People don't give mental health professionals enough credit. Instead of putting a murder amongst murderers, don't you think they'd have a better shot of being a contributing member of society after they served their sentence?
No, the opposite, actually. I would never, ever, under any circumstances, take the life of another human being. I'd sacrifice myself to save innocent people especially my family, but I will not take a life. This tends to piss off people who are gun proponents because we don't have that common ground, the feeling that defending one's self or family earns them the right to take a life.

If someone killed my whole family, I'd not want them dead. I mean I'd want to kill the guy as an instinct, but I would even be willing to speak on his behalf if it meant not killing him.

Sun Tzu

I worked in behavorial health for five years with the worst of the worst. Everything from men that brutally raped their own mothers to other things I wont even mention. Yes, there are some truly sick people out there. Most everyone I worked with would agree there are generally two groups when it comes to the forensic side: those that are so far gone, its doubtful they will ever be sane enough for the community- and the manipulators. With speaking about the later of the two; they belong in jail. That proably sounds as though I think there are criminals in the midway area that cant be rehabilitated. Well IMO it is hard to define what normal is. Just watching the news it is easy to see it is a mad world we live in. To me it is not a matter of whether or not they can be rehabilitated, but they dont deserve the opportunity.

A local example is 2 years ago a couple of men were driving around Maricopa County at night doing what they called their favorite pastime: recreational violence. They were shooting anything that was breathing for laughs: horses, dogs, and people. Several innocent people were killed. That is insane behavior. It seems apparent to me these guys are crazy, but the insanity plea didnt go anywhere for these two, and we will find out in the next few months if they will get the death penalty. That fact the death penalty in AZ didnt deter these guys doesnt mean much as I agree with the state in they dont deserve to be kicking it in therapy groups for the next 10-12 years with popcorn and movies on the weekends. They took innocent lives for the fun of it.

Wow. I had to read that a few times to process it. I can't say that it would be a bad society if everyone thought like this. That is a very . . . harmonious mindset. I'm completely opposite. I can't say that I would be happy if put in a scenerio like that, thats why I hope no one ever invades my property. Partially because the way the laws are in AZ, and partially because I have no way of being completely sure what an intruder's intentions would be or if they have a weapon. If it means putting someone down that could potentially bring harm to family, Im shooting to kill. If its between my loved ones and a person with bad intentions, I choose my family.

I have person seen 2 people get tazered and pull the barbs out with no effect. The same thing happened to a Phoenix police officer recently when he tazered a man only to have they guy pull the barbs out, and have his own tazer turned on him. The man killed the police officer before being put down by another cop. I'm not gung ho about this, I wouldnt have a smile on my face and I hope it never comes to that.

I will say I am disappointed in the courts ruling. While the death of that twisted excuse for a human would have not changed the fact that he most likely fucked the rest of her life up- it would assure he would never again be able to destroy an innocent life. As far as the death penalty for an effective deterent for child rapists---we will never know as he would have been the first.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Willravel

Oh and here's the kicker: I'm not religious at all. I'm not a militant atheist, but I'm definitely an atheist. I see the pragmatism in leading by example, though, and I feel this particular attitude of mine would benefit our species if it were widespread.