New Civil Right: Child Rape

Discussion in 'Law and Justice System' started by William Joyce, Apr 14, 2008.

  1. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    Who knew?

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/04/13/ST2008041302758.html?hpid=topnews

    Even if imposing the death penalty for child rapists were ruled constitutional, he said, Louisiana's law is so broad that it fails the Supreme Court's test of narrowing classifications of offenders to the worst of the worst. For instance, while other states require previous convictions before a convict is eligible for the death penalty, Louisiana does not. Anyone convicted of raping a child younger than 13 is eligible for the death penalty, even though the typical murderer would not be.

    The NAACP Legal Defense Fund and the American Civil Liberties Union reminded the court of the "scourge of racial bias" that accompanied the execution of rapists during the middle part of the 20th century; nearly 90 percent of those executed were black.
     
  2. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    I'm not sure why you think the rapist would be getting a new civil right. He's not going free; the other punishment is life without parole.

    Given the manner in which other convicts will treat the disgusting perv, that means either life in isolation or a life of routine beatings. He might prefer the needle after a few years of either.

    The child rape law was passed in 1995. That's 19 years after the rules for inflicting capital punishment were outlined by the Supreme Court. A state can't let a jury make arbitrary decisions as to who lives and who dies; the state has to have clear rules that help the jury identify the worst offenders alone for the ultimate punishment.

    If the sentence is reduced to LWOP, don't blame the court. Blame the morons in the legislature who ignored a clear set of rules.
     
  3. William Joyce
    Offline

    William Joyce Chemotherapy for PC

    Joined:
    Jan 23, 2004
    Messages:
    9,693
    Thanks Received:
    1,135
    Trophy Points:
    190
    Location:
    Caucasiastan
    Ratings:
    +1,349
    A lesser punishment for black criminals is in fact a goal of the 'civil rights' movement, as the bolded part of the story shows. The concern of the NAACP isn't punishing child rapists of all races, it's protected child rapists who are black. Do you find that disgusting? You know, one might say that advocating for blacks would mean CUTTING LOOSE the criminals and joining in calls for their ostracism, but no... and the larger point is that the 'civil rights' movement isn't about good for us all, but good FOR BLACKS, no matter the level of misbehavior they engage in.
     
  4. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    No, they have never said that blacks should be punished less that whites for the same crime, they said both should be treated the same.

    As noted, "90 percent of those executed were black" when the death penalty was in place for rape. I don't know the percentage of rapes committed by blacks at that time, but it was never anywhere near 90%. A 1997 report on rape and sexual-based crime stated "that of the crimes surveyed, 56% of arrestees were White, 42% were Black, . . ."

    So if whites commit over half of all rapes, and constitute 1 in 10 of those condemned to die, and blacks commit less than half of all rapes, yet constitute 9 in 10 of those condemned to die, that means blacks are roughly 10 times more likely to get executed for the same crime.

    How does that seem fair to you?
     
  5. Swamp Fox
    Offline

    Swamp Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +59
    You cannot apply statistics to the criminal justice system. For your statistics to be meaningful, every case considered would have to be the same case. Since no two cases are exactly alike, your statistics are worthless.

    Each case gets tried on its merits and the totality of the circumstances. A far more in depth study would have to be conducted in order to prove racial bias in the system.
     
  6. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    I just did. You mean I should not do it.

    It takes an entire treatise to discuss this, so I'll hit the highlights. I wouldn't resolve an individual case without accounting for all variables, but the numbers are not worthless because the discrepancy is so huge.

    William Joyce claimed that NAACP wanted blacks to get less punishment than whites. That allegation was unsupported, and makes sense only if you think the system treats defendants fairly.

    The story included statistics that show a gap so large it seemed unlikely that factors other than race could create it, so I wanted Joyce to defend that system, since he brought the matter up.

    That's why I didn't say the system was unfair; I don't know that to be the case. I asked him to explain how the system seemed fair to him.

    Until the 70's, the execution rate for blacks was about 10 or 11 times greater than it was for whites. The Supreme Court decided that states must give the jury factors that fairly separated murderers who got death from those who got life. The jury could no longer decide for themselves which killers were the worst; they had to vote on aggravating circumstances.

    When the states did that, execution rates for blacks dropped substantially. The rate was closer to the percentage of blacks among all killers, but still higher for blacks. Once you factored for neutral circumstances, the remaining discrepancy was small.

    Execution rates for whites dropped a little. Thus it appears that when no limit or focus is placed on juries, and they can vote on any ground that suits them, prejudice surfaces, and more blacks are condemned. Make them come up with valid reasons, and the rates are fairly distributed.

    The Louisana law for child rapists mirrors the old laws for murder - there are no factors that separate the bad from the worst. As noted in the story, it has been applied in the past more heavily against blacks (and at roughly the same rates as the unconstitutional murder statutes before the 70s). Given the change produced in execution rates after the reform of capital punishment laws for murder, it seems clear that a similar change will occur once the rape law is amended to comply with Supreme Court requirements, and whim is removed from the capital punishment decision.
     
  7. Swamp Fox
    Offline

    Swamp Fox Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 1, 2008
    Messages:
    807
    Thanks Received:
    59
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Ratings:
    +59
    Puppy Dog,
    The criminal justice system is what it is. It is neither fair nor unfair. Everything depends on such a multitude of factors ranging from the seriousness of the crime to which part of the election cycle to the personal beliefs held by the prosecution, judge and juries used in the system.

    A typical case is going to have at least two police officers, a prosecutor, a victim, the victim's family, the suspect, the suspect's family, a defense attorney, a clerk, a bailiff, and a judge involved. Larger cases will add in the press, the public, more lawyers, etc. Each person involved has their own beliefs and agendas. All of this effects how each case is handled. Factor that into your numbers and see what happens.
     
  8. RetiredGySgt
    Online

    RetiredGySgt Platinum Member

    Joined:
    May 6, 2007
    Messages:
    39,502
    Thanks Received:
    5,897
    Trophy Points:
    1,140
    Location:
    North Carolina
    Ratings:
    +8,918
    Hate to agree, but prior to reforms blacks were more likely to die then whites in similar circumstances. Note though that I am not saying the blacks did not commit the crimes.

    However the argument that because more blacks percentage wise per population are in jail or break laws is proof of racism is bull. And the NAACP DOES make that claim, directly sometimes and indirectly sometimes. As do liberal talking headsand Hollywood elitists.
     
  9. Dogger
    Offline

    Dogger Active Member

    Joined:
    Apr 16, 2008
    Messages:
    979
    Thanks Received:
    58
    Trophy Points:
    28
    Location:
    Dixie
    Ratings:
    +58
    Something we agree on, with a little tweaking. Racism does play an indirect part. More blacks are convicted, but factor for poverty and the discrepancy almost vanishes.

    Still, you have cases where store clerks watch blacks more closely and thus catch more shoplifters, or cops pull over blacks more frequently, and thus detect other crimes.

    But thanks for backing me up on the central point. Racism still exists. Without procedures in place to reduce its impact, it will affect jury decisions.
     

Share This Page