Court: Sexually dangerous can be kept in prison

[Liability]

You need to be aware that, in California at least and I think in most states these days, the sentences for sex crimes are DRACONIAN. The typical sentencing scheme provides for the filing of a separate count for each, distinct act during the comminssion of the crime. Touch here - Count 1. Touch there - Count 2, etc. etc. Further, sentencing on the various counts must run consecutively and (I think) there is no requirement that consequtive sentences not exceed 1/3 the midterm, i.e., they can be full term.

It is not at all uncommon for a defendant to end up with over 200 years in state prison (I have seen a sentence in excess of 400 years) over ONE incident involving sex with a minor.

"Namby pamby judges who are afraid to impose real sentences" is a constant cry on this board. In reality, it is just the opposite.

Oh come on.

Judges alone are not the problem, but the system itself does reward plea bargaining. It requires plea bargaining. And given plea bargaining, the pedophiles tend to get fairly lenient sentences until and unless they go to trial and get their asses kicked.

Say what you will about drug crimes, etc. We could fairly debate appropriate sentencing as to some crimes, not agree and yet not be unreasonable on either side! But when it comes to pedophiles, since there is no cure, the best protection society has is very zealous prosecution, strict plea bargain limitations and mandatory sentencing. "Throw away the key," in their case, is not necessarily a bad idea.

I don't totally disagree with you here - and I must admit, that I do not (and never have) handle the more serious sex crimes. I had one about ten years ago. This jewel had been doing his niece from age 13 to age 17 when they finally caught him. This was really a kind of innocuous case, as child molestations go - yet he was offered 16 years, turned it down, went to trial and got 40.

I don't call that being soft on a pedophile.

I hate pedophiles as much as anyone, but I am not quite ready to enter into a "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mode. You had it right - it's figuring out how to properly handle the life-long segregation part of it that's the issue.

So, in that case you mentioned, the guy got banged HARD after going to trial and getting his ass kicked. That is pretty much what I had suggested.

Again, though, the real point is that there is no cure for pedophilia. I realize that we have an obligation to protect the rights of the accused -- including the presumption of innocence. But once the bastard has been validly convicted of a crime like pedophilia for which there is no cure, I say that society has every right to also consider its own safety (in this case, the safety of its children).

Castration (chemical or otherwise) doesn't work, by the way, The void in the life of those fuckers is not actually sexual. The void is one of a need to dominate. They can do that without erections and satisfy their perverse desires all the same.

We'd be safer still if they got executed. But short of that, it's not all that clear why we can't determine that no pedophile, once convicted, will ever be permitted to be in a position to endanger any of our children again in his lifetime.

 

[editec]

BAD CRIMES are not a good excuse for BAD LAWS, folks.

So many of you fear your government has too much power, but then a case like this comes to the fire and you're all for giving it still MORE POWER?

And you and I know perfectly well that once you give the government power to incarcerate POTENTIAL child molestors, we're a hop skip and jump away from incarcerating people for all sorts of other POTENTIAL crimes.

This is another of those paving stone laws supported by people who have the best intentions, but who are roadmapping this nation into hell.

 

[George Costanza]

Oh come on.

Judges alone are not the problem, but the system itself does reward plea bargaining. It requires plea bargaining. And given plea bargaining, the pedophiles tend to get fairly lenient sentences until and unless they go to trial and get their asses kicked.

Say what you will about drug crimes, etc. We could fairly debate appropriate sentencing as to some crimes, not agree and yet not be unreasonable on either side! But when it comes to pedophiles, since there is no cure, the best protection society has is very zealous prosecution, strict plea bargain limitations and mandatory sentencing. "Throw away the key," in their case, is not necessarily a bad idea.

I don't totally disagree with you here - and I must admit, that I do not (and never have) handle the more serious sex crimes. I had one about ten years ago. This jewel had been doing his niece from age 13 to age 17 when they finally caught him. This was really a kind of innocuous case, as child molestations go - yet he was offered 16 years, turned it down, went to trial and got 40.

I don't call that being soft on a pedophile.

I hate pedophiles as much as anyone, but I am not quite ready to enter into a "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mode. You had it right - it's figuring out how to properly handle the life-long segregation part of it that's the issue.

So, in that case you mentioned, the guy got banged HARD after going to trial and getting his ass kicked. That is pretty much what I had suggested.

You are overlooking the original offer which he rejected - 16 years. 16 years is getting banged pretty good at the outset.

Agree with everything else you have to say here.

 

[bodecea]

This thread reminds me of something that happened a few years ago. In a small town in Arkansas, a registered child molester moved into an apartment complex after getting out of prison. The apartment building had a large Hispanic population living there at the time, and as most people know, family is very important to Hispanics and they are very protective. Anyway, the "registered child molester" started taking an interest in a few of the young kids at the complex. The parents found out what he had done in his past and one day the guy was found dead in the parking lot from a gunshot wound. The police took a few statements, an ambulance carried away the body and that was that. Nobody was arrested and nobody asked any questions after that. Case closed.

While I do not mourn the death of a true child molestor....let us also remember the case a few years ago about a mother telling her husband that some neighbor had molested their child...the husband goes over and shoots the neighbor dead and then finds out that the wife made it up because she was angry about something.

 

[Reidlr]

If you actually read the U.S.C, Title 18, Part III, Chapter 313, Section 4248 - Civil Commitment of a Sexually Dangerous Person; you will see that sex offenders have been classified as having a mental disease or defect. This is the reason an individual convicted of a sexual offense can be held indef. Its a bold tactic, but not illegal. According to Section 4247, a judge can order a psychiatric or psychological examination under section 4248. If the examiner agrees that the defendant is found to be a "sexually dangerous person" then the defendant is subject to the law under section 4248, upon conviction. With the examination, if the examiner finds that the defendant is not a "sexually dangerous person" then 4248 doesn't apply and there would be no continued confinement after he/she serves the prescribed sentence.

I have not read the official SCOTUS transcript, but IMHO, it would be hard for an abuse of power to result from this ruling. Its simply a matter of law and SCOTUS upheld the current standing law regarding persons that have been found to be "sexually dangerous".

Here are the U.S.C.s regarding sexual offenders:
United States Code: Title 18,4248. Civil commitment of a sexually dangerous person | LII / Legal Information Institute
United States Code: Title 18,4247. General provisions for chapter | LII / Legal Information Institute

 

[strollingbones]

so a quick point on my lunch break...at what point is it just as easy and as advantagous to just kill the child....if the terms of sentence are the same?

 

[Liability]

I don't totally disagree with you here - and I must admit, that I do not (and never have) handle the more serious sex crimes. I had one about ten years ago. This jewel had been doing his niece from age 13 to age 17 when they finally caught him. This was really a kind of innocuous case, as child molestations go - yet he was offered 16 years, turned it down, went to trial and got 40.

I don't call that being soft on a pedophile.

I hate pedophiles as much as anyone, but I am not quite ready to enter into a "lock 'em up and throw away the key" mode. You had it right - it's figuring out how to properly handle the life-long segregation part of it that's the issue.

So, in that case you mentioned, the guy got banged HARD after going to trial and getting his ass kicked. That is pretty much what I had suggested.

You are overlooking the original offer which he rejected - 16 years. 16 years is getting banged pretty good at the outset.

Agree with everything else you have to say here.

16 years is no minor punishment. I do not disagree with you on that either. All I'm saying is that even 16 years doesn't ultimately serve the full PURPOSE I have been addressing which is: the right of society to protect its children from predators who cannot be cured.

 

[Liability]

so a quick point on my lunch break...at what point is it just as easy and as advantagous to just kill the child....if the terms of sentence are the same?

I THINK what you are asking is whether the predator/pedophile who abuses or rapes or sodomizes a child might not be inclined to kill the kid to get rid of the witness in order to avoid a life sentence -- figuring that even if he is caught and convicted of murder, he still only gets a life sentence....

It's kind of a perverse question, but I agree it's a reasonable one to have to confront.

If we don't have something even more frightening to hold over the head of these predators, then their callous calculations MIGHT lead to killing the witness.

This turns out to be a strong argument FOR a death penalty for murder.

 

[Biggles]

Great news. Sexual deviants never get better.

 

[Biggles]

Why does it only apply to those who are "sexually dangerous"??

- Why not someone prone to murder?
- Gang leaders and mafia leaders?
- Someone with violent anger issues?

Aren't they more dangerous than sexual predators?

No.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

 

[George Costanza]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

 

[BolshevikHunter]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

Not for sex with a minor. Meaning not if an 18 year old slept with a sixteen year old ect. I think 12 and younger validates child molestation.

Why you ask? Because it's sick and it destroys the rest of that Childs Life. Children have to be protected bro. I assure you there would be much less violators. ~BH

 

[Sheldon]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

I know you weren't asking me, but here's my unsolicited thoughts.

Child molestation is a result of pedophilia, a fucked up mental disease. It's not a stretch for me to imagine that someone who could rape a child is also someone who could kill a child.

So if the mandatory sentence for child molestation is capital punishment, then what incentive is there for the molester to leave the victim, which is a witness, alive? If you're committing a capital offense anyways via molestation, might as well go that extra step and commit another capital offense to get rid of the witness.

Maybe not the best argument, but it was my first thought on that.

 

[BolshevikHunter]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

I know you weren't asking me, but here's my unsolicited thoughts.

Child molestation is a result of pedophilia, a fucked up mental disease. It's not a stretch for me to imagine that someone who could rape a child is also someone who could kill a child.

So if the mandatory sentence for child molestation is capital punishment, then what incentive is there for the molester to leave the victim, which is a witness, alive? If you're committing a capital offense anyways via molestation, might as well go that extra step and commit another capital offense to get rid of the witness.

Maybe not the best argument, but it was my first thought on that.

Yeah I have heard that arguement before, and it's a good one I must say. However I feel that the good outweighs the bad in the scenario. ~BH

 

[George Costanza]

If you molest a child you should die. This Law doesn't go far enough. ~BH

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

Not for sex with a minor. Meaning not if an 18 year old slept with a sixteen year old ect. I think 12 and younger validates child molestation.

Why you ask? Because it's sick and it destroys the rest of that Childs Life. Children have to be protected bro. I assure you there would be much less violators. ~BH

All right - but there are plenty of other crimes that destroy the rest of a person's life, child or older, and in far worse ways than a child's life is affected by molestation at an early age.

Why the death penalty for this particular crime?

Why do I ask? You aren't going to like the answer. I ask, because I see a particular tendency on the part of many politically conservative folks, to come down hard on people they perceive as different than themselves. Certainly, child molestors are quite different than most of us. But so are gay people. And underpriviledged people.

So I suspect, that when many politically conservative people clamor for the death penalty for child molestors, their true motivation for doing so (their hidden agenda, if you will), is nothing more than a perverse desire to come down extra hard on someone who is different. Sure, child molestors affect the lives of the children they molest. But suppose an otherwise normal, straight, white, adult male got drunk and hit a car driven by a very pretty young woman, smashing her face in and ruining her good looks for the rest of her life. Death penalty for him?

Possibly not the best example I could come up with, but I think it conveys my point.

Can you honestly say that your feeling that the death penalty for child molestors is motivated entirely by concern for the welfare of the child involved? None of that feeling has to do with your feelings about child molestors in general, separate and apart from any harm to the child inolved?

 

[syrenn]

The way I understand it, is that child molesters get an eye for and eye in prison. I may be wrong but this is what I have been told.

So no the death sentence is far to good. Death penalty prisoners are segregated from the general population of prisoners. I would prefer child molesters spend a good long time in regular jail general population and hopefully they get back some of their own.

 

[Sheldon]

Yes. Child molesters and pedophiles are at the bottom of the prison totem pole.

 

[syrenn]

GOOD! So keeping them in prison is a better option then death! And I hope their sentence is a daily hell!

 

[BolshevikHunter]

Why do you feel this way? What is the basis for your thinking that child molestors should get the death penalty - have you ever thought about that?

Think about it now, and tell me - why is it you would impose the death penalty for child molestation?

Not for sex with a minor. Meaning not if an 18 year old slept with a sixteen year old ect. I think 12 and younger validates child molestation.

Why you ask? Because it's sick and it destroys the rest of that Childs Life. Children have to be protected bro. I assure you there would be much less violators. ~BH

All right - but there are plenty of other crimes that destroy the rest of a person's life, child or older, and in far worse ways than a child's life is affected by molestation at an early age.

Why the death penalty for this particular crime?

Why do I ask? You aren't going to like the answer. I ask, because I see a particular tendency on the part of many politically conservative folks, to come down hard on people they perceive as different than themselves. Certainly, child molestors are quite different than most of us. But so are gay people. And underpriviledged people.

So I suspect, that when many politically conservative people clamor for the death penalty for child molestors, their true motivation for doing so (their hidden agenda, if you will), is nothing more than a perverse desire to come down extra hard on someone who is different. Sure, child molestors affect the lives of the children they molest. But suppose an otherwise normal, straight, white, adult male got drunk and hit a car driven by a very pretty young woman, smashing her face in and ruining her good looks for the rest of her life. Death penalty for him?

Possibly not the best example I could come up with, but I think it conveys my point.

Can you honestly say that your feeling that the death penalty for child molestors is motivated entirely by concern for the welfare of the child involved? None of that feeling has to do with your feelings about child molestors in general, separate and apart from any harm to the child inolved?

That is very bad example George. You are absolutely incorrect to assume that it is Political or personal. I have children and those are my honest feelings. I also have a brother who is gay. By the way, Being Gay has nothing to do with perverted child predators. Nice deflection though bro. ~BH