Here’s a ruling that likely will generate some controversy
By Steve McClure on Wed, Jun 25, 2008
Controversy is almost inevitable when the U.S. Supreme Court issues one of its divided rulings.
Today’s decision on the death penalty, here, won’t be much different.
As The AP reported,
The Supreme Court on Wednesday outlawed executions of people convicted of raping a child.
In a 5-4 vote, the court said the Louisiana law allowing the death penalty to be imposed in such cases violates the Constitution’s ban on cruel and unusual punishment.
“The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child,” Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion. His four liberal colleagues joined him, while the four more conservative justices dissented.
There has not been an execution in the United States for a crime that did not also involve the death of the victim in 44 years.
As we’ve seen here on the Palouse, sentencing people for crimes usually brings up a lot of emotions — from the families of the victim and the accused. Crimes involving children seem to take those emotions to an even higher level and have a way of bringing out the protective forces of adults everywhere.
What do you think of this ruling?
Tags: Notes On News
June 30th, 2008 at 6:18 pm
I support the ruling 100%. Do people really think a little girl should have it on her conscience that her daddy/uncle/brother was executed because of her testimony? In my opinion, if the death penalty was the punishment for rape of a child, I think not only would less children testify, but more children would be murdered since the rapist would have nothing to lose.
This 52 year old survivor, says no. Life in prison, no parole, kept with the general population.
July 1st, 2008 at 4:19 pm
“Survivor”
I appreciate your comments. One of the areas that’s come up in our Editorial Board debates was the integrity of a prison sentence. Rarely, it seems, do those convicted of sex offenses serve the full term of their sentence in prison. You can see this with the story out of southern Idaho with the Boy Scout leader. Not only was he paroled, but the family of the victims wasn’t notified so it could testify at the parole hearing.
Sentences always seem to raise the passion of people. For instance, the comments related to our story on Zach Fredrickson demonstrate that people fall on all points of the sentencing spectrum.
Steve
November 20th, 2008 at 8:13 pm
52 y/o survivor makes an excellent point. If I would have commented first I could have easily ranted on how child rapists are scum of the earth. I appreciate the perspective. The issue I find contreversial in with this case is the Supreme Court taking circumstances of a specific case and setting judicial precedence that affect the nation. I find it hard to believe that an average American (much less or friends from the bayou) would consider sending a child rapist to death as cruel or unusual. I would say its quite natural and functional. If one of my children were rapped I can easily see myself commiting premeditated murder, which I could be recieve a death sentance. Now that’s cruel.
November 29th, 2008 at 8:46 pm
First of all, let me say that I believe rape of a child is one of the most despicable and dehumanizing acts that can be done to a child. The emotional scars from having to deal with that kind of act (usually from someone a child is supposed to be able to trust) are never completely healed.
I have a member of my family who raped his own daughters, both of whom were under 12 at the time of the crime. Originally, when I believed his stories about why he was accused, I felt his 7-years-to-life sentence was overkill. But now, knowing some of the details, I feel it is very deserving.
I used to feel that a death sentence was appropriate for this type of crime. However, I now know that most times the therapy and reforms actually help the offender to see the course they have taken in their life that allowed them to get into the mental state they were in. This is why I now feel that his sentence is ideal.
He was released from prison after the initial seven year term and after completing his treatment. He is now in a group therapy program weekly. If he commits a misdemeanor of any kind, he will be back in prison. He undergoes polygraph testing monthly, and reports to his parole officer weekly. Any time they feel he is being deceitful, they can send him back to prison. This is all part of the “life” portion of his sentence.
My opinion now is that the death penalty should be given to repeat offenders who have undergone treatment and still re-offended, and to those who have shown predatory type behavior (seeking out their victims at parks, schools, etc). Those who are considered to be of very little risk to reoffend should get 7-to-life. Those who are considered to be somewhat likely to reoffend should get life-without-parole.