Third Party & Independents Archives

As horrid and repulsive as child rape is, there seems to me to be an obsession with this crime.
Whether there is some Freudian psychology behind this, I have no idea, but it seems likely.

In reading about the recent events in Mineola, Texas. I am reminded of the McMartn case in California, and the Little Rascals daycare in North Carolina. While this case was about a Louisiana Law, the obsession with turning pedophiles into scarlet letter pariahs seems more like something from the 1600’s than 2008. I occasionally read about witch’s being burned in Africa or other distant locals, is this so different here? Is this really all that dissimilar from the Salem witch hunts.

Don’t get me wrong, when I moved back to Houston, two teenage girls were raped and killed by a group of mostly teen aged “gang” thugs in a park where I ride my bike. One girl could have escaped but returned to the cries of her friend. A memorial pair of facing benches were erected in their memory, and the thought makes me cry several years later, even as I type this. I didn’t know these girls, but it still feels me with rage toward those punks.

If we believe at all in humanity, we have to believe in redemption. Society has to be more than about simple revenge. I umderstand the rage, fear and hatred. I also see misguided fear, and tragedy. If justice is to be a teacher and guide to citizens, then we must consider fairness and redemption.

Posted by: googlumpugus at June 25, 2008 03:11 PM

IMO death is to good for a child rapist. I think life in prison in a cell block that hates inmates who brutilized children so they can live the rest of their lives being brutilized by the inmates because that child will live the rest of his or her life remembering the brutality.

Posted by: KAP at June 25, 2008 04:59 PM

The numbers of child molesters released to repeat the same crime over and over is disturbing. The deterrent of being caught and punished has minimal impact, because many of the perpetrators can not control themselves. And since there are no laws or effective rehabilitation, the crime is repeated again and again by the same perpetrators.

The public is increasingly outraged, but the voters repeatedly reward the same incumbent politicians, legislators, and judges with re-election which allows the problem to go ignored.

It is yet another example (of countless examples) of the far-reaching ramifications of voter irresponsibility (apathy, complacency, etc.). However, the children are the innocent victims, without the right to vote. The only voters (if any) that are unlikely to forget which judges, legislators, and parole boards allowed those repeat criminals to harm them and their children are the victims and their parents. Perhaps, as with so many things in a voting nation, when enough people are also victims (or survivors of the victims), the voters will finally question the bad-habit of repeatedly rewarding the same legislators, judges, and politicians that not only continue to ignore these problems, but in many cases, make it worse with repeated early releases and enabling molesters to repeat the same crime over and over.

Posted by: d.a.n at June 25, 2008 06:49 PM

The problem with the death penalty is that you are relying on witnesses, the police, and the court system. The nature of the crime is irrelevant. You can’t take it back, if there was some kind of mistake, as happens so often in our system. Incidentally, under U.S. law, GWBush is eligible for the death penalty if he gets convicted for war crimes.

Here is The Onion, on the SCOTUS and the death penalty: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hyph_DZa_GQ

Posted by: ohrealy at June 25, 2008 07:18 PM

d.a.n and goo, both of your comments invite the issue of rehabilitation. It is the topic, no one but prisoner’s families want talk about.

Which means, as KAP’s comment demonstrates, that their is a chasm between the rational Constitutional justice of the Supreme Court for example on the one hand, and passions of the public who rightfully want retribution for the victims. In the center of that chasm is the issue of rehabilitation.

The Sup. Ct. has not ruled that society has an obligation to rehabilitate. And the voter’s generally don’t want to pay for it if the Courts ruled rehab into existence.

Yet, there is growing volumes of research to demonstrate that failing to rehab prisoners creates enormous costs to society well above what moderate rehabilitation programs would cost if mandated by law.

Some rehab programs have proven statistically to reduce recidivism. But, they are not widely implemented, and our prisons are increasingly being operated on the cheap. If cost of incarceration were the only criteria, it would make economic sense to execute every 2nd time offender. But, it isn’t, and never will be the only factor.

Therefore, it can be argued that their is benefit and economic prudence in establishing rehabilitation programs and at least making attempts to lead our society toward a greater acceptance of ex-cons back into society allowing them the opportunity to vindicate themselves as law abiding productive citizens like everyone else.

The problem with such an approach however, is that our laws are not structured to mandate that and ex-con NOT be allowed to return the cultural and social environmental conditions that may have fostered their crime in the first place. Modifying our laws in that manner would require public support, and that is clearly absent.

Hence, it appears to me that America has created an intractable situation for itself, in which 1st time offenders are conditioned to become more criminal in nature by their time in prison, and then released, and allowed to go back to what is familiar to them and failed to prevent them from their crime in the first place.

People are conditioned by their environments, associates, families, neighborhoods, mentors and role models or lack thereof, and the statistical evidence of that correlation is overwhelming. Some like KAP may chime in here with anecdotes about some few who rose above it all to become model citizens out of sheer force of will and goodness alone. But, such anecdotes only serve as the exceptions to the rule.

As a parent, I have seen potential criminals in the making through my daughter’s childhood as she has been the victim of taunting and abusive behavior by others on her school bus. In Texas there is no mandate that supervision be provided on the school buses, and my daughter’s buses have never been supervised. All manner of crimes have taken place on her bus from sexual harassment to outright gang beatings of a single individual student on that bus by students 3 years older.

Name tags or assigned seating on the buses are not in place or required, thus, the students on my daughters bus attend several different schools and are anonymous to each other except for first names, generally. This is a perfect anti-social breeding ground for uncivilized and unsupervised youth behavior which is rewarded again and again by the lack of accountability and anonymity of the students perpetrating criminal and anti-social behaviors.

Our society in so many ways, is failing the concept inherent in H. Clinton’s book, It Takes a Village To Raise a Child. We have so very many opportunities to stem the tide of anti-social behavior and pre-criminal behavior amongst our young, yet we seem to be moving further and further away from those opportunities. Fears of intrusion by authorities into personal family’s life certainly underwrites such a back turning, and fears of retribution for putting in place accountability procedures for youth activities also precludes folks from wanting to take control of this situation.

America has more of people per capita in its penal system than any other nation in the world. Some say that reflects our diligence in pursuing wrong doing. Others say it reflects a culture out of control and failing to foster unity, cooperation, respect for each other, and mindfulness of our children’s growth and development.

Whatever the reasons, America is one of the most plagued nations in the world by crime, handily beating out even nations founded by criminals like Australia.

Is it just that we as a nation confess we don’t know what to do about this, and go about our way toward becoming some criminal’s next victim or the next person to be apprehended for a fit of rage at injustices we have had to suffer?

America needs to address this issue as urgently as it is now addressing gas prices and mortgage foreclosures. But, where is the focus, the leadership, and political will to do so?

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 25, 2008 08:07 PM

David R. Remer wrote: But, where is the focus, the leadership, and political will to do so?

Good question.

We don’t lack for good, common-sense, no-brainer ideas and solutions, but unfortunately, Congress (and some other governments) are where good ideas and solutions go to die.

However, voters are culpable too, and 70% disapproval ratings and 90% re-election rates for Congress don’t make sense either. And that is one of the major reasons we don’t have leadership, focus, and the will:

because too many voters repeatedly reward irresponsible incumbent politicians with perpetual re-election.

Victims (and/or their survivors) of these crimes are outraged AFTER it has happened.

Where is the outrage BEFORE it happens?

ANSWER: it’s absent. Too few care, and most don’t care until it’s too late, and they are then suddenly frustrated by the indifference, apathy, and complacency of everyone else.

Perhaps enough voters will care enough to do something about it when enough of them are victims of crimes they and their elected officials have ignored for too long.

At any rate, the voters have the government that the voters elect.

Posted by: d.a.n at June 25, 2008 11:19 PM

David execellent article and IMHO you handled the subject very well. I Heard Savage and some other buffoon on the AM radio today insulting Kennedy for doing his job and just handling the subject badly in general.

By listening to this AM crap I got the impression from both of these buffoons that there was only 1 choice on the matter , the death penalty or you 1. are a liberal and love child rapist or 2 you are a liberal and are a child rapist. Of course this all or nothing nonsense is pure foolishness. The rapist will serve a considerable length of time in prison, and not immediatly be let free to rape again. This must be emphasized for those that listen to these talk shows and beleive what they hear.

We must remember that killing the rapist doesnt make the child well nor does it ease the guilt of the parent. The taste for revenge may be satiated a bit but two wrongs still dont make a right.

If we as a nation were to allow the death penalty for child rape how much longer before the far right got worked up into a frenzy over another crime and we started allowing the death penalty for minor seatbelt violations? Its time to put the authoritarians in check.

Posted by: j2t2 at June 25, 2008 11:28 PM

d.a.n said: “Victims (and/or their survivors) of these crimes are outraged AFTER it has happened.

Where is the outrage BEFORE it happens?”

Very well said, d.a.n. If we were all just a bit more our brother’s keepers, perhaps we would all share a bit more empathy and outrage for insults suffered by our fellow citizens, and we could act politically and locally to prevent such insults from occurring through vigilance, compassion, and some responsibility (ability to respond appropriately) to and for the actions of each other.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 02:15 AM

j2t2, yes, those with a limited focus, narrow purpose, motivated viscerally, and lacking in understanding of the intent of our founding documents and fathers, would predictably react negatively to Kennedy and this ruling.

Education is so vital to our nation’s future to broaden folks understanding and rational facilities in order to better manage their passions and visceral motivations. Empathy for a raped child is something most of us are capable of. Understanding how to minimize such crimes requires much more in the way of education. To maintain a justice system which is dispassionate, requires not only education but particular talents as well. Americans do a terrible job of electing judges all too often. Which is why the Supreme Court is not, and should never be, an elected branch of government.

While we are taking back our nation from the authoritarians, we should be mindful too that our highest courts are populated by wisdom of the ages and not just political agendas attending special interests.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 02:29 AM

Kennedy’s words, “The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child”, do adhere to a founding principle in our Constitutional system, that justice shall be proportional and to the extent possible, contribute no greater harm to the society at large or its future. BTW excellent Post DAVID R. The role of the swing or independent or moderator is not always popular, but it was Just.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at June 26, 2008 02:54 AM

Thanks Rodney Brown. I Appreciate hearing from other folks with whom I can find agreement on issues. I appreciate also those with whom I can’t find agreement, as they help shed light, via the debate, on the various perspectives and approaches available to those seeking to make a decision of their own.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 03:19 AM

I have to say it is probably the “correct” ruling; however, if it was my child the perp beter hope the police catch him first. I am normally a law abiding citizen but that is one thing that would drive me to extract revenge myself and the authorities would never find the body.

Posted by: timesend at June 26, 2008 09:02 AM

timesend, I think every parent would feel the same way if it were their child. Hence, the need for rule of law instead of rule of passion.

My daughter was victim to an attempted molestation at the age of 12. I felt the rage. But, I also suffered through years of waiting for the perp to finally go to prison. In the end, he did, and for more than just what he did to my daughter.

Had I lost faith in the justice system to take this individual off the streets and force consequences for his actions upon him, I am not sure what I would have done. Taking the law into my own hands risked depriving my daughter of her father for years or longer as I became the one behind bars. That was not acceptable, either.

Responsibility, the ability to respond appropriately, I have learned requires some distance from one’s passions when those passions run to revenge, hate, and retribution. I considered many options and alternatives during those years of waiting for him to finally be incarcerated. None of them were preferable to allowing the rule of law to take its sweet bloody time, as regrettable and frustrating as that was.

I did learn also that our justice system and penal systems are crumbling, rapidly, under the weight of the vast numbers of persons being processed through it. It brings the Libertarian out in me to demand that victimless crimes be wiped off the books as crimes at all.

We can no longer afford to be putting pot smokers in prison for repeat offenses of possession of personal stashes. That is ludicrous and extremely harmful to our society now, as we early release rapists and armed robbers and drunk hit and run drivers to make room for pot smokers. That absurdity must be remedied ASAP. I don’t know where Obama stands on that issue, and I don’t expect him to take a stand on that hot political potato in the campaign. But, if he wants my vote 4 years later, he will have to move on this in office. Failure to, could result in making Bob Barr appear to be an attractive candidate in 2012.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 09:23 AM

timesend wrote: I have to say it is probably the “correct” ruling; however, if it was my child the perp beter hope the police catch him first. I am normally a law abiding citizen but that is one thing that would drive me to extract revenge myself and the authorities would never find the body.

Especially when you know the perpetrators are repeatedly released to commit the same crimes over and over (an estimated 52%-to-90% of the time; 88.3% of the time by one Canadian study).

How many crimes of this type are too many?
One strike?
Two strikes?
Three strikes?

Especially if there is no cure?

Perhaps these offenders should have to wear a permanent ankle bracelet, or something?
Or perhaps these offenders should never be released into the public again?
Until there’s a cure, can we protect our children against repeat offenders?
Are parents looking at the Sexual Offenders Registry databases?

Or, perhaps we should be focusing on the judges, politicians, lawyers, and parole boards that allow this situation to continue to be ignored?
Unfortunately, too few people care enough about the issue, until they (or their’s) are a victim.

The judicial dysfunction and lawlessness is what (understandably) drives some people to vigilantism.

Ever see the movie, “In The Bedroom”?

Posted by: d.a.n at June 26, 2008 12:03 PM

David,

Your understanding of a complete lack of rehabilitation is unusual. In fact, our prison system often burdens ex-cons with even more economic and social burdens that encourages recidivism.

I worry, in part, that this may be a result of the outsourcing and privatization going on in prisons.

My main concern regarding pedophilia, is the atmosphere of hysteria surrounding it. Beyond the double message of our media, there seems to be some self satisfying need to make bigger monsters than reality justifies. There are something like 400,000 sex offenders in jail. 1/3 of sexual assaults involve a minor.

Recidivism rates of pedophilia vary widely, between 20 and 50 percent. Treatment seems to reduce recidivism in some types of pedophilia.

Most sexual assaults of minors involve someone they know:
Acquaintance perpetrators are the most common abusers, constituting approximately 70-90% of all reported perpetrators.
-Finkelhor, D. 1994.

• 89% of child sexual assault cases involve persons known to the child, such as a caretaker or family acquaintance.
-Diana Russell Survey, 1978

Pedophiles often show signs of anti-social behavior from an early age.

I think most of us can identify with the outrage.
Becoming knowledgeable about the actual stats is unusual. There are things that make sense and would likely help the situation. Like David says, irrational reactions, though, make it difficult for politicians to respond moderately.

TV, sadly, sensationalizes this rather than providing realistic and reasonable discussion. It seems to me most seem to think it is rampant and untreatable. The monsters CAN be locked up for life, but they are a rather small number. The far bigger portion need to be treated (with the family) and rehabilitated, to stop the in-family cycle.

Posted by: googlumpugus at June 26, 2008 12:31 PM

So what’s so just about letting these bastards live to rape another child? And that’s exactly whats happens 99.9% of the time.
The only other way to keep our children safe from these subhuman pieces of human waste is to give them life in prison without parole. And with liberal states like California that want to think these subhuman piles of cow waste can be rehabilitated it just aint gonna happen.
So the vicious cycle of a child being raped, the bastard put in prison for 2 years, declared rehabilitated, released, and another child raped continues.
Just when do we quit worrying about these scumbags right to live and start worrying about the rights of our children to be able to play in their front yards or on playgrounds without having to worry about some asshole coming along and raping them?
And how many of y’all that want to keep these subhuman piles of crap alive ever had to live with a child that was raped?

Posted by: Ron Brown at June 26, 2008 01:23 PM

Ron Brown, without the opportunity for redemption, there can be no democracy, only authoritarian regimes which exact permanent and irrevocable justice on the slightest of infractions. See Mao’s China. If the state determined you were in posession of contraband like a banned detective fiction book, you had two choices, submit to brainwashing or die.

It was pretty effective throughout Mao’s lifetime. But, your and Mao’s shared view on this just doesn’t set well with our Constitution or Idealism in the Declaration of Independence. With freedom comes the open door to choose good or ill and choices are influenced by a myriad of factors ranging from organic brain defects to personal lack of responsibility.

Hitler had a view similar to yours regarding anyone with organic brain defects or personality disorders.

Proportional justice and opportunity for redemption and re-acceptance into society is one of the fundamental tenets that distinguishes America from the Nazi and Mao regimes. I have read your capacity for compassion, so, I am confident with some reflection you can find your way to recognize that this ruling was ‘just’ all things like the above, considered.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 03:49 PM

goo, I worked for several years as a night and weekend counselor for a federal prisoner halfway house program. It was an eye-opening experience, to work with and share time with these men of so very differing natures and capacities.

Many were on early release track programs based on good behavior in prison. Successful negotiation of the halfway house requirements improved some of their chances. There were always a small percentage that just couldn’t handle the responsibility of freedom of choice, and failed the halfway house program to be returned to prison. I never had a problem recommending their return to prison. But, I was impressed by the low numbers that were returned compared with those who made it through.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 26, 2008 04:04 PM

Good post David. This is a really tough issue for a reasoned debate. There is no doubt that someone who hurts a child in that way is the lowest of the low and should be grouped in the same category as murder as they have killed the innocence of a child. I would feel in no way sorry for this person if they get executed and even though I don’t believe in the death penalty I don’t feel sorry for the guilty people who receive this punishment. I just don’t think that the state should have this power over its citizens as the state is not perfect and if anyone thinks we haven’t executed an innocent person is dreaming. As to this specific ruling, I think that they have done the right thing, even though I would probably have the same reaction as timesend if my son or daughter were the victim of such a crime. David, you have unfortunate personal experience with this issue which makes your point even more compelling. Tough issue, right decision.

Posted by: tcsned at June 26, 2008 05:17 PM

David,

I’m not sure that encoding the proportional test for punishment makes the decision just. I believe that proportionality has dangerous implications in making sentences both too severe and not severe enough.

I’m also not sure that it was just sense the court had the ability to extend the ruling to the death penalty as a whole rather than narrowly framing the issue. The death penalty in my mind is never just for two reasons. First, once executed, there is no ability to meaningfully correct mistakes. Second, as both a population and as individuals we should always avail ourselves of every reasonable alternative to prevent the taking of a life. In the criminal justice system, there are always reasonable alternatives.

Posted by: Rob at June 26, 2008 05:25 PM

David:

Excellent, excellent article. I really like the approach you used. It is not often that I see a piece written that presents an emotionally charged issue with such respect for the opposing view. IMHO the quality and tone of the responses is a tribute to the quality of your work.

My disqualifier is that I am not well read on the statistics on the rehabilitation aspect of this issue, but my understandings(if incorrect please, inform me) are that the recidivity rate for pedophilia is extremely high and that most pedophiliacs were sexually abused at a young age. I base my position on these two “truths” so IMHO it is imperative if they are incorrect they be corrected. IMHO, these two “truths” are fairly common beliefs held by the general populous.

Now I am in favor of the death penalty in capital murder cases and as it can be applied in many UCMJ violations, especially in time of war. I also think it would have been just for child rapists. Not for the “eye for an eye” reason that is popularly given, but for what I believe to be a pragmatic reason. IMHO when someone commits a crime that that is so heinous that it deprives a person of his/her life and liberty on a grand scale, he/she should forfeit his/her own. At this time I cannot see how a state should be denied the right to execute a person that commits a crime with the lasting effect and damage to both the victim and society.

If I am correct on the facts of this case in particular, the victim was forced into sex to the point that she required surgery for her sexual assault. This is a very young girl. What portion of her life has been sacrificed by the attacker? How long will her rehabilition take? What is the probability that she will perpetrate this same crime versus if she had not been a victim? IMHO he could have not have done much more to curtail her potential in life had he put a gun to her head and pulled the trigger. Can she overcome this? Absolutely, but it will affect her every day of life in an adverse manner and make life difficult almost beyond belief. She will be scarred for life in a way that I will never be able to fully understand.

If a person is willing to violate the rights of a child in this manner, why should he be allowed to live? If the chances are that he will do it again, why should there be any chance that he will be able to walk freely again just to add another victim, especially if that victim is more likely to to become a perp? What should the rights of a victim or as importantly, a preventable victim be?

Please accept most of my questions to be rhetorical, used just to provoke thoughts that lead to my conclusions. I will expand more on my thoughts if anyone wishes, but I would like to again thank you for the job you did penning this article.

Posted by: submarinesforever at June 26, 2008 07:20 PM

David -

We should have NO death penalty whatsoever.

Why? Here’s something from the Chicago Tribune last month about a man who, after being convicted of raping a fifteen-year-old girl, had his conviction overturned on DNA evidence.

“The exoneration by DNA is the 29th such case in Illinois. The case is another example of an erroneous eyewitness identification leading to a wrongful conviction, said Alba Morales, an Innocence Project attorney who has been working on Cage’s case for several years. More than three-fourths of the wrongful convictions uncovered by DNA testing have involved faulty eyewitness testimony,”

FAULTY EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY. And this was the 29th case…in just ONE state, let alone all fifty.

No matter HOW heinous the crime may be, it does NOT justify the execution of innocent men and women.

Makes one wonder how many innocent people have been executed in America in the name of justice….

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at June 26, 2008 07:35 PM

Ron Brown,

You said, “And that’s exactly whats happens 99.9% of the time.”

Actually it isn’t. But, as David pointed out, emotion often trumps reasoned debate.

Glenn,

While I think death may sometimes be more just and less cruel than life in prison, I’ve always had a problem with the state applying death.

To paraphrase Clint Eastwood in Unforgiven: When you kill someone you take away everything he’s had or ever gonna have. It makes the issue of whether his crime or the state’s sentence is the more heinous act.

Given the results of the Innocence project and what I, and many observers have witnessed in the Texas judicial system, a moratorium on the death sentence seems the smart, but don’t count on it in Texas anytime soon.

Posted by: googlumpugus at June 26, 2008 08:00 PM

David,
Why you might be surprised to know that I do not agree with the Supreme Court, I do respect and understand why they made the Ruling. However, as a way to further the debate on the issue I wonder what would be considered fair in the yeys of the Law.

For why Life in Prison without the chance of parole in general population may lead to an early death, I cannot see how putting them in privilege conditions would be fair to the victim or the State. No, if the time is to fit the crime than the person convicted of Rape should be subjected to the same mental and physical torture as their victims suffer the rest of their life to include death if the victim commits suicide.

And why I know that MPO is extreme, I do think that in the case of Raping a Child the punishment should be mandated Life at Hard Labor without Parole instead of the revolving door.

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at June 26, 2008 11:50 PM

Henry -

Please do not think that we liberals are in favor of being soft on crime. Instead, please understand that we’re just trying to place more of an emphasis on making sure that the innocent are not wrongfully arrested and convicted.

You state that the ones convicted of rape should be “to the same mental and physical torture as their victims suffer the rest of their life to include death if the victim commits suicide.”

The problem with that is that if you’ll research the matter, you’ll find out about the hundreds of wrongful rape convictions nationwide…and then you MUST realize that those wrongfully convicted would then have undergone the same torture you describe above.

And which is more important? That the rightfully-convicted rapists receive the torture that you describe? Or that the wrongfully-convicted innocents do NOT receive that same torture?

Such is why I’m against the death penalty…and such is why much of Europe sees our system of justice as barbaric.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at June 27, 2008 12:23 AM

David
Anyone that rapes a child aint deserving of redemption. Children are our most precious and most innocent resource. They are also the among the most defenseless of our society. Anyone that preys on them is the lowest piece of dog crap there is and don’t deserve another chance to hurt another one.
But sense y’all don’t want to give these low life piles of whale dung what they deserve (a very slow very painful death) would y’all be willing to put their sorry asses in prison for the rest of their miserable worthless lives? And in the general population and not some special punk unit?

googlumpugus said: Actually it isn’t.
Do ya have any statistic on how many of these low life scum suckers don’t rape a child again? I’ll bet it aint even 1 in 10,000,000.

timesend said: however, if it was my child the perp beter hope the police catch him first. I am normally a law abiding citizen but that is one thing that would drive me to extract revenge myself and the authorities would never find the body.

There’s one asshole that doesn’t know how lucky he is the cops got to him before I did. And like you, the body would’ve never been found.

Of course we can always put these bastards in a room chained to the wall and let the child’s parents in there alone with them for say about 10 minutes.

Posted by: Ron Brown at June 27, 2008 12:25 AM

Ron -

Given the frequency of wrongful convictions of rape, do you agree with Henry that those convicted should be tortured? And if so, then how do you say, “I’m sorry” to the innocent man or woman who underwent that torture?

And before you think I’m soft on rape, I was one of the first members of the SAVI - Sexual Assault Victim Intervention - response group on board the USS Abraham Lincoln. I hate rapists, too.

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at June 27, 2008 12:38 AM

Glen Contrarian,
Please note that I said to further the Debate. However, in this case that went before the Nine I do not see the problem with using extreme measures.

No, do not take me wrong and think that as a Liberal I do not share your argument of the innocence. Nevertheless, the idea that a Rapist gets “Special Treatment” in jail and can get released in a few years has proven not to work. Therefore, I want to explore what we can do politically to make the Law work fairly for the victim and not the Rapist.

Does Life at Hard Labor without parole stop the act?

Does making Rape like a Drug Charge stop the act?

No, I do not have the answer, but I do know that “We the People” do need to find a manner that can not only prevent Rape, but offer the Individual driven by such thoughts a proper release of their actions. Would a Robotic Child cure the problem?

Posted by: Henry Schlatman at June 27, 2008 03:15 AM

Ron Brown, you advocate torture and death as punishment. I sure hope you didn’t present yourself as a Christian in your bid to become a School Board member. Because your position runs contrary to the central message of Jesus of forgiveness and redemption and salvation.

The act of rape of a child is heinous indeed. But, no more heinous than a father beating the hell out of their 3 or 4 year old to vent his anger over a spilled cup of coffee or highball. The child doesn’t perceive the difference between having their flesh bruised and cut in the genital area or around the face and neck. And far, far more flesh damaging injuries to children result from parental abuse than from rape.

What say you, Ron, should these parents also be tortured and put to death for having lost control of their emotions and beaten a child causing serious bruises and cuts and even broken bones?

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 27, 2008 04:42 AM

Ron Brown,

Do ya have any statistic on how many of these low life scum suckers don’t rape a child again? I’ll bet it aint even 1 in 10,000,000.

You Lose. Recidivism rates vary between 10 and 50%.

If you’d read my post you would know that. I also noted most child molestation occurs within families or by close acquaintances. It’s usually a dysfunctional family. Watching TV is not the best source for information.

Posted by: googlumpugus at June 27, 2008 07:57 AM

BTW, rates of sexual assault overall, have dropped over the last several years in the US.

Taking sexual assaults seriously, and education about how to treat victims has likely improved things.

Posted by: googlumpugus at June 27, 2008 08:03 AM

some intresting statistics to go with the conversation.
sorry I lost the link or I would have posted it.

Statistics:

“According to FBI statistics, over 18,000 people were murdered in 1997.”

“In 1998, 33,622 children age four and under died in the U.S. Of those 2,689 died in accidents and 721 were murdered, which were the two leading causes of dead.”

“1,009,970 children are “maltreated” every year, 906,075 of them by natural mothers,”

“Between 1976 and 1994 an estimated 37,000 children were murdered.” This is a little over 2,000 per year.”

“Over three children die each day from child abuse (1211 per year). Since 1985, the number of reported child abuse fatalities has increased over 38%. Over 50% of the children were less than
one year of age at the time of death. These figures most likely represent the lowest estimate of the problem.”

“Children under 18 account for 11% of all murder victims in the US in 1994. Nearly half of these 2,660 child victims were between 15 and 17

In a single year, 3,012 children and teens were killed by gunfire in the United States.

“2000 children per year are killed by drunk drivers” Do drunk drivers have to register, so everyone will know to avoid them? Is a drunk driver likely to drive drunk again?

In 1994, the year Megan Kanka was murdered, there were only 9 other similar murders in the entire U.S. A child being killed by a crazed pedophile is probably the least common cause of death among children, yet no greater focus has ever been placed on a single cause of death of children than sexually related causes. There are probably more children killed in car air-bag accidents, than by sexual predators. Never have so many suffered so much for the actions of so few.

How Much do Sex Offenders Reoffend?

“Contrary to popular belief, convicted sex offenders have relatively low rates of recidivism compared to other offenders. On average, untreated sex offenders sentenced to prison have a recidivism rate of 18.5%. In comparison, recidivism rates range around 25% for drug offenses and 30% for violent offenses. Thus, people convicted of sex crimes tend to reoffend less than people convicted of many other types of crime.”

Sex offenders are of grave concern to the public due to the nature of sexual offending. The public tends to believe that the recidivism rates of sexual offenders, particularly pedophiles, are quite high. This information sheet is intended to provide a quick overview of the research on this topic.

Recidivism is defined as being charged with the commission of a new offence. In the case of sex offenders, the public is most concerned with sexual recidivism - the commission of a new sexual offence. Recidivism rates vary by the time frame being looked at and by the type of sexual offending.

Recidivism Rates

One research project looked at 61 previous studies of sexual recidivism using a 4-5 year follow up period. This research on sex offenders found that 13.4% recidivated with a sexual offence, 12.2% recidivated with a non-sexual, violent offence and 36.6% recidivated with any other offence.1

A long term follow-up study of child molesters in Canada found that 42% were reconvicted of sexual or violent crime during the 15-30 year follow-up period.2

In addition, the long-term follow-up study (15-30 years) of child molesters showed that the average recidivism rate for this group of offenders is actually lower than the average recidivism rate for non-sexual offenders (61% versus 83.2% respectively for any new conviction).

Likelihood of Recidivism

The long term follow-up study referred to above included a control group of non-sexual criminals. The highest rate of recidivism (77%) was for those with previous sexual offences, who selected boy victims outside the family and who were never married.3

In general, rapists reoffend more often than child molesters.4

Among child molesters, those with male victims have been found to have the highest recidivism rates, followed by those with unrelated female victims.5

Incest offenders show the lowest recidivism rates of all sexual offenders.6

Factors Related to Recidivism

Canadian research on what triggers recidivism among sex offenders found that the recidivists were generally considered to have poor social supports, sexual pre-occupations, attitudes tolerant of sexual assault, antisocial lifestyles, poor self-management strategies and difficulties cooperating with community supervision.7

This same study found that the number of recidivists and non-recidivists who had attended treatment programs was the same. However, the recidivists were more likely to have dropped out or to have been described as poor treatment candidates.

Success While on Supervision

Recent amendments to the Corrections and Conditional Release Act, designed to deny more sex offenders access to conditional release, suggest that there is a perception that sex offenders on conditional release are at high risk for re-offending or violating conditions. However, studies have shown that sex offenders have success rates on conditional release similar to the general offender population.

A follow-up study of sex offenders on conditional release found that almost 80% were successful on conditional release.8 In comparison, National Parole Board statistics for 1996/97 show that over 85% of offenders on parole and statutory release were successful.9

Treatment Issues

Treatment is one variable associated with recidivism that can be influenced by correctional programming, making treatment a high priority for sex offenders.10

The public tends to believe that sex offenders are not amenable to treatment. However, successful sex offender treatment programs have been shown to reduce the risk of re-offending.

In terms of treatment, the most highly regarded approach employs a cognitive behavioral model employing relapse prevention in high risk situations.11 This model fits with the Correctional Service of Canada’s (CSC) assessment and treatment of sex offenders. CSC focuses on identifying the nature and pattern of the offender’s behaviour and providing the offender with the coping strategies that will reduce the risk of recidivism. This approach emphasizes the need for offenders to take responsibility for their actions, recognize their cycle of offending and identify their high risk situations, and helps them develop strategies to avoid relapse.12

Program intensity is linked to offender needs. Moderate to high needs will be met in medium or maximum security settings where programs are longer and more intensive. Offenders who are identified as low risk/needs will be matched with low intensity, short duration programs in minimum security settings, and in the community.

The majority of treatment programs usually include an education component emphasizing attitudes towards sexuality and relationships, empathy enhancement, anger management, victim awareness, techniques to reduce or control deviant arousal and relapse prevention skills. Emphasis is placed on reducing the risk of sexual offending through a combination of self-management and external control.

Future Directions

The public’s fear of sex offender recidivism is legitimate. The effects of sexual offending are felt by victims, families and communities for years following the offence.

Over the past few years, Canada has changed both law and practice in dealing with sexual offenders. The following are some of the new initiatives:

The Corrections and Conditional Release Act allows judges to set parole eligibility at one-half of the sentence

Sex offenders can be detained until the end of their sentence

Police are authorized to notify specific individuals or the community at large of the release of sex offender deemed high risk to reoffend

Police can ask the courts to apply a peace bond to sex offenders in the community to restrict their movements, require reporting to police or reside at a particular location

Sex offenders can be declared a Long Term Offender at time of sentencing, meaning that the offender can receive up to 10 years community supervision following imprisonment for at least 2 years

Sex offenders can be declared a Dangerous Offender at time of sentencing, meaning that the offender can be held in prison indefinitely

Criminal records of pardoned sex offenders who apply for positions of trust with children can be revealed upon approval by the Solicitor General

The number of these provisions are relatively new and we need to give them time to work. Together, they make a fairly comprehensive set of protections for the community. Some of them can be used more effectively, and we can continue to build on what we know about treating sex offenders. The success of offenders in the community can be improved through appropriate treatment while in custody, intense relapse prevention programs during conditional release supervision, and long-term follow-up and support for sex offenders on an “as needed” basis at no cost to the offender.

The best protection we can offer any community is the prevention of crime in the first place. The John Howard Society believes that the most effective method of preventing sexual offending is to break the cycle of sexual abuse and violence in homes and families. We know that 50% of men in federal prisons were victims of child abuse or witnessed family violence. Our child welfare workers see kids who, with early intervention and treatment of problems, might not go on to become adult sex offenders. The earlier we work intensively with kids and youths who show sexual deviance, the more successful we are at preventing the creation of an adult sex offender. We know what needs to be done. We just need to make it a priority.

The John Howard Society of Alberta
2nd Floor, 10523 - 100 Avenue
Edmonton, AB T5J 0A8
(780) 423-4878 Fax (780) 425-0008

info@johnhoward.ab.ca
www.johnhoward.ab.ca
1999

Endnotes
Hanson, R.K. (1997). “Predictors of sex offence recidivism.” Research Summary. Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada. http://www.sgc.gc.ca/epub/corr/e199779/e199779.htm

Hanson, R.K. (1996). “Child molester recidivism.” Research Summary. Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada. http://www.sgc.gc.ca/epub/corr/e199670/e199670.htm

Hanson, R.K. (1996). “Child molester recidivism.” Research Summary. Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada. http://www.sgc.gc.ca/epub/corr/e199670/e199670.htm

Hanson, R.K. & Bussiere, M.T. (1996). Predictors of sexual offender recidivism: A meta-analysis. (User Report: Catalogue No. JS4-/1996-4E). Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada.

Quinsey, V.L., Rice, M.E. & Harris, G.T. (1995). “Actuarial prediction of sexual recidivism.” The Journal of Interpersonal Violence. 10,85-105.

Motiuk, L.L. & Brown, S.L. (1996). Factors related to recidivism among released federal sex offenders. Paper presented at the XXVI International Congress of Psychology. Montreal, Canada.

Hanson, R.K. & Harris, A. (1998). Dynamic predictors of sexual recidivism. (User Report No. 1998-01). Ottawa: Solicitor General Canada.

Motiuk, L., & Brown, S. (1994). Sex offenders and their survival time on conditional release. Forum on Corrections Research, 6(3), 11-13.

Correctional Services of Canada. (1997) Basic facts about corrections in Canada (1997 ed.). Ottawa, Ontario: Public Works and Government Services Canada.

Granger, L., McKibben, A., Oimet, M., Perreault, C., Proulx, J., & St-Yves, M. (1996). Improving prediction of sex offender recidivism: A proposed study. Forum on Corrections Research, 8(2), 13-14.

Barbaree, H., Malcolm, B., Peacock, E., Serin, R., & Seto, M. (1997). A model for a clinically-informed risk assessment strategy for sex offenders.

Correctional Services of Canada. (1995). Basic facts about corrections in Canada (1994 ed.). Ottawa, Ontario: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.

Registries give a false sense of security:

Nearly 2 million Texans were sexually assaulted in 2002. A quarter of a million children are sexually assaulted every year in Texas (National Crime Victims Research and Treatment, 2000). In 2003, there were only 45,000 sex offenders on the Texas Department of Public Safety’s Database. … These statistics demonstrate the disparity between “official” sexual assault statistics and the reality of the epidemic. The disturbing reality is that the majority of individuals who abuse sexually will not end up in the criminal justice system and sex offenders on community supervision or on the public registries represent only a small portion of the actual sex offenders living in our communities.

We have often heard that the recidivism rate for sex offenders is 4 times higher than for non-sex related crimes. What we don’t hear is that the recidivism rate for non-sex related crimes is a mere 1.3 percent, so four times that is still only about 5 percent. Is a recidivism rate of only 5 percent sufficient grounds for forcing hundreds of thousands of sex offenders to register for life, often putting their own lives in jeopardy in the process?: “Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison—5.3% of sex offenders vs. 1.3% of non-sex offenders.”

We have also often heard that adults who were victims of child molestation are likely to become molesters. However, while it is true that offenders that molest children have a higher rate of had being molested than non-child abusers have, most people who sexually abuse were not molested as children themselves: Violent child-victimizers were substantially more likely than those with adult victims to have been physically or sexually abused when they were children, though the majority of violent offenders, regardless of victim age, did not have a history of such abuse.

We have often heard that Megan’s Law protects children from a child molester that moves into the area where they live. However, the vast majority of molestation occurs at the hands of a relative or acquaintance.
“For the vast majority of child victimizers in State prison, the victim was someone they knew before the crime. A third had committed their crime against their own child, about half had a relationship with the victim as a friend, acquaintance, or relative other than offspring. About 1 in 7 reported the victim to have been a stranger to them.”

Posted by: napajohn at June 27, 2008 10:10 AM

Glenn
How do ya say ‘Sorry’ to a child that’s been raped by a repeat offender? Specially when the state had power to keep the scumbag from ever being able to to it again but didn’t?
Have ya ever had to live with a child that was raped? I have. Considering the hell a raped child goes through torture is still to good for these scumbags. Maybe it’s a good thing I don’t make the laws.

David
Do ya think that a parent that beats the crap out their kids for something a small as a spilled glass of milk deserves to be able to keep their youngins? Any parent that has that little control over their emotions aint fit to have youngins. Who knows though, maybe a does of their own medicine might straighten them out. But I somehow doubt it.
Having raised 6 youngins I know how thin they can wear your emotions. But that’s no excuse to lose control and beat them. There’s a line between discipline and abuse. A parent needs to keep enough control not to cross that line.
Believe me, I know that I’ve expressed some feeling here that run contrary to Christian beliefs. I reckon having a daughter that was raped when she was 8 years old makes this a very touchy subject for me.

googlumpugus
Knowing how they come up with recidivism rates I don’t set much store by them. But even if 10% is right that’s 10% to many. 1% is to high. I just don’t see what’s so wrong with making sure these scumbags never get the chance to hurt another youngin. If it takes putting them in prison for the rest of their worthless lives or putting them to death they should never have the chance to harm another child. Specially if the youngin is related to them in any way. Them plies of dog dung are the lowest there is. If there’s any adults a child should be able to feel safe around it’s the ones related to them.
Recidivism rates are set by the number of criminals returning to prison in the same state for the exact same crime. A criminal might go to another state and commit the same crime and go to prison for it but not get counted in the recidivism rate because he’s never been to prison in that state for that crime.
Also a child molester might serve time for raping a 9 year old girl. And go back to prison in the same state for raping a 10 year old boy. He’s not counted in the recidivism rate because the while the crime is still rape the sex of victim is different. And very few that rape a boy are actually charged with rape. It’s usually deviated sex assault. A different crime.
Not a very good way of keeping track of recidivism rates.

Posted by: Ron Brown at June 27, 2008 12:39 PM

I repeat, the nature of the crime is irrelevant. Once you’ve executed someone, you can’t reverse it if the accuser or witness was lying, if the police and D.A. were showboating to get someone anyone convicted, or if the judge was a worthless sack of garbage like Antonin Scalia, all more than just probabilities in our system.

Posted by: ohrealy at June 27, 2008 12:53 PM

Ron -

You - like everyone else who is for torture - are avoiding the question of how do you say “sorry” to an innocent person who has been tortured and ostracized from society for a crime they did not commit?

Over the years, thousands of people have been wrongfully convicted of rape. Back in the eighties, a child took police through an eastern Washington city neighborhood and pointed out several houses saying, “yes, that family rapes their child.”

Never mind that the child made most of it up and the families’ lives were turned upside down by the whimsical accusation of a child.

We have to do BOTH, Ron. We must not only punish the guilty, but we MUST prevent the wrongful convictions of the innocent…

…and given that wrongful convictions are FAR too common in rape cases, how can you possibly justify torture of the convicted when some of those tortured WILL be INNOCENT?

Posted by: Glenn Contrarian at June 27, 2008 01:50 PM

Ron Brown, one of the great benefits of our Constitution is that passions normally do not rule the day. If they did, this would have been a totalitarian police state many, many decades ago.

The Red Scare, Civil Rights, the Gay movement all failed to generate the kind of police state totalitarian response you seek for criminals and parents who harm children. It is such a slippery slope, that could end with the imprisonment and death sentence for air traffic controllers who err causing children to die in a plane crash.

Proportionality is a fundamental cornerstone of our society that has saved this nation from violent revolution since the close of the Civil War. I know how you feel. I have the same feelings. But, when it comes to law, there are more factors to be considered than just the emotions of resentment, retribution, and hate.

I am reminded of one of the basic philosophical measures I learned in College that came from Kant and his followers: A good rule must stand the following test: If everyone exercised it, would it still be good? Killing people for retribution utterly fails this test. And accounts for why America has among the highest per capita murder rates in the world. America kills people for retribution, and if its good for America, it is good for its citizens.

This is not hyperbole or speculation. People actually rationalize murder and killing this way. I can’t remember the statistics now, but, a study found that mental or psychological impairment was found in a very high number of recidivist criminals. IQ’s below 80, brain trauma caused by physical insult or disease earlier in their lives, or chemical imbalances in their metabolism, (very high testosterone or sleep deprivation from too high epinehprine output), manic-depressive illness, etc.)

Which raises the moral and ethical questions central to the story Of Mice And Men. Emotions cannot be allowed to define justice. 3 different parents of raped children may recommend 3 different punishments born of their emotions, 1 may ask for death of the perp, a second may ask for castration, and 3rd may ask the perp be set free for fear of retribution upon their child after the perp serves their time. Such a system that metes out justice by emotion, can lead to gross undermining of the principles within our Constitution, such as equal application of the law for all (which is already under attack by the likes of Bush, Cheney, wealthy special interests, etc).

Ohrealy makes a valid point, that the law too often errs against innocent people making them victims. But, in the absence of the death penalty, the law can rectify its errors. With the death penalty, it cannot.

napajohn, however, points out that our current system is failing in oh so many ways. Failing to rehabilitate, failing to shed laws proscribing victimless crimes, and failure to shape and foster communities of neighbor interaction with the advent of industrialization and technology that divides and separates individuals from the community experience.

These are very huge issues and factors at play, and killing and torturing people legally is not the answer to the problems our nation and people face.

Posted by: David R. Remer at June 27, 2008 02:15 PM

Glenn
I’d a whole heap rather have to apologize to an adult that was falsely convicted than have to apologize to a child that was raped because some scumbag that’s already raped children in the past is free to do it again. And every time a child is victimized by a repeat offender society owes that youngin a very big apology.
With DNA I doubt very much that very many if any rapist are falsely convicted these days. Maybe a few, and very few were wrongly convicted in the past, but the vast majority were justly convicted. And while being falsely convicted of a crime like that can be very traumatic and society owes the poor folks that are falsely convicted an apology. And I do feel for them. I care more about the youngins that are victimized by repeat offenders because they were set free to prey on them.

David
We are a country of laws. And it’s a good thing that emotions don’t rule the day. But I fail to see where wanting to protect our children from sexual predators is emotional. It’s just plain common sense.
As I’ve said every time this subject comes up. Children are our most precious resource. They are the most innocent of our society. And are also the most defenseless of our society.
Anyone that harms them deserves to be severely punished. I don’t care if they harm them sexually or otherwise. The scumbag needs to taken out of society permanently.
I’m not talking about something that’s accidental. Unfortuantly that does happen and the person usually has a very hard time living with that. I have nothing but sympathy for these poor folks. I’d hate to have to live with something like that.
I’m talking about things like sexual molestation, hooking them on drugs, physical abuse, etc. The scumbag piles of whale crap that do these things don’t deserve to be given another chance at doing it again.

Posted by: Ron Brown at June 28, 2008 12:23 AM

Ron Brown wrote: Anyone that harms them deserves to be severely punished. I don’t care if they harm them sexually or otherwise. The scumbag needs to taken out of society permanently.

Ron Brown, It’s often a disease, for which there may be no cure. Until the recidivism rates are much better, you are right to question the wisdom of releasing molesters (especially the repeat offenders, for which the threat of punishment and imprisonment is little (if any) deterrent).

Posted by: d.a.n at June 29, 2008 03:02 PM