How I responded on another board about the USSC decision on child rapists

[LuckyTheDog]

Victim's rights groups wanted the court to rule as its did on the issue of the death penalty for child rapists. Why? Because, in many cases of child molestation or rape, the perpetrator is a parent or close relative.

The thinking was that a family would close ranks behind the rapist rather than bring charges that could get a relative executed.

And then, there is the issue of asking a 4-year-old to give testimony that could lead to the death of a parent. Even if the parent is the lowest form of life on Earth, that's a lot to ask of a child.

Victim's right groups feared (with some justification) that many cases would never be reported -- let alone prosecuted. And in cases in which prosecution is attempted, the victim or the family of the victim might not cooperate. Sending a relative to a possible death by execution is a heavy thing to do. Many would never do that.

The REAL issue here is: What is the goal? If the goal is to get more perverts prosecuted and put away, then allowing the death penalty for child rape has a good chance of backfiring.

Allowing the death penalty for child rape makes sense only of the goal is to make people feel like they are being "tough on crime" and/or if they want a lot of cases of child rape to be covered up by families of the victim.

This to me is similar to the issue of abortion. Banning it by statute would make a lot of holy rollers feel good about how well the letter of the law “affirms life.” But it would be unlikely to actually reduce the real-world abortion rate. And as a kicker, it's get a bunch of young women killed by back-alley butchers. There are far better ways to go of the goal is to reduce the abortion rate.

[ulysses]

1. well said.

[skooooo]

2. creeping capital punishment...

Once you okay its use in this circumstance, there will be arguments for it in other cases that you may not agree with.

[readmoreoften]

3. Yes but what about our bloodlust?

This could've been disastrous to real kids.

[Jackpine Radical]

4. There are probably more innocent people convicted of sexually violent acts

against children than any other serious crime.

I testified in a case where a retarded child with a speech defect identified an uncle as having molested him. The uncle was convicted and is on his way to prison. The molestation continues--the child's mother has reported continuing anal injuries and emotional disturbances in the victim even with the supposed perpetrator in jail and awaiting shipment to prison. The convicted person was known to the child as "PJ." The person whom I believe is the actual perpetrator is known as "DJ." I think that a bizarre sequence of events was set off when an interviewer misunderstood the child to say PJ when he was trying to say DJ. The wrong person was identified, the stepfather (a domineering cop) always hated PJ and browbeat the victim into continuing to misidentify his abuser.

This is only one case. I could tell you of others. Most of them involve estranged parents using their children as weapons against each other.

[TreasonousBastard]

5. The specific case being heard also had...

the problematic testimony of a small child who changed it at least once, and admitted that he knew who the police wanted to arrest.

Of course, this was another 5-4 decision. Can you guess who the four were?

[LuckyTheDog]

6. And imagine this

A sister finds out that her troubled brother has molested one of her children. She wants to come forward, but cannot bear the thought of potentially sending her own flesh and blood to the death chamber. So, she decides to deal with things "in the family" and to "not get outsiders involved." That kind of thing happens enough as it is.