Mother Talkers

The Death Penalty for Child Rape

by Elisa

Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:00:32 PM PDT

The U.S. Supreme Court will listen to a case this week whether the death penalty should be applied to heinous criminals who do not commit murder, or in this case, child rapists, according to Newsweek.

Patrick Kennedy was convicted in 2004 for the rape of a child, his 8-year-old stepdaughter, and the state of Louisiana contends that his crime is tantamount to murder and worthy of death. Nobody in this country has actually been executed for anything other than murder since 1964, although five states, including Louisiana, have laws on their books permitting capital punishment for the rape of young children. Several others are considering broadening their laws to do the same. So the court must determine, in Kennedy v. Louisiana, whether the Eighth Amendment's prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment bars the execution of someone who didn't commit a murder, but did violate a young child.

The article went on to say that executions are on the decline, hitting a 10-year low of 52 in 2006. In a Gallup poll, two-thirds of Americans said they support the death penalty for murderers, but slightly more supported life imprisonment for these criminals rather than capital punishment. Confidence in state executions have been shaken due to 127 exonerations and "pervasive evidence that racism still taints the capital-sentencing system," according to Newsweek's Dahlia Lithwick.

Lithwick contended the Supreme Court ruling could either extend the death penalty to rapists or help it see its  "last gasps."

I certainly hope it is the latter as there is no evidence that capital punishment deters crime, makes us safer, and there is always the small chance of executing the wrong person. That's not where I want my tax dollars spent, although I could certainly understand why the victim's family would want to mete out such revenge.

  • ::

Tags: death penalty, child rape, Newsweek, U, S, Supreme Court (all tags)

Permalink | 37 comments

  • no (0 / 0)

    i think that the worst possible punishment would be to put a child rapist into the general population of a maximum security prison. from what i understand, even regular murderers, rapists, etc, do NOT look kindly upon those who rape or molest children. i suspect that that would be the livingest hell someone like that could have to go through.

    of course, the mother in me says, in total opposition to my moral and political beliefs, execute him. but thankfully in reality there is time to logic in between my gut and my heart and my head. were i this kid's mother, i am not sure the guy would still be alive. makes me sick.

    We cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. - E.R. Murrow

    by lorin on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:10:43 PM PDT

    • agreed (0 / 0)

      My brother is a prison guard and has told me about this.  A child rapist is the lowest of the low and will be forever on the receiving end of a form of prison justice that - depending on your point of view - is either fitting or cruel and unusual punishment.

      I oppose the death penalty in all cases, even though deep in my heart I'd like to see it used for certain crimes.

      by lyn on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:03:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • adamantly anti-death penalty (0 / 0)

    precisely because my heart cries out for this guy to roast. But we can't allow society to be governed by revenge. We are all cheapened by the death penalty.

    FWIW, I agree with lorin that this guy ain't got much of a chance in prison, anyway.

    by Rachel on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:27:09 PM PDT

  • No (0 / 0)

    I would never be for the death penalty for rape -- any rape.  Yes, I am against the death penalty for ANY crime -- even murder -- but it is more than that.

    Why are most of those so FOR the death penalty religious?  I hear all the time, "An eye for an eye."  ("Christians" often go back and forth between the Old and New Testaments, depending on their point of view.)  OK, so forget Jesus's teachings of "turn the other cheek."  Go with Eye for an Eye.  Murder is DEATH.  Rape is not.  Even child rape.  With proper understanding and, if needed, mental health help, the child's life is not ruined.  And it makes me mad beyond belief to hear people describe a child's life as OVER if they have been raped.  Get OVER yourself -- think of the child.

    And don't you dare say I don't care about children -- I do.  I have 3 of my own and hope one day to have grandchildren.  That makes no difference.  PERSONALLY, if one of my children were raped, I would want to kill the rapist myself, BUT I also would want many other criminals dead, if they violated my children, or any other person close to me.  There is a reason why judges, juries, and executioners are not family members.

    And, as Lorin said, if you want hell for the rapist -- life in prison would be worse than death, from what I hear.

    by Shell on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:27:50 PM PDT

    • Justice not murder (0 / 0)

      is what my fundie neighbor tells me to defend the death penalty. WTF? One more way of cherry picking the bible to suit their needs.

      by GiGi on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 03:40:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    • Exactly (0 / 0)

      of course we might want to kill with our bare hands a person who did this to our child. You are exactly right in that this is one reason that the victims are not the ones to determine punishment.

      I am completely opposed to the death penalty in all circumstances. Would Jesus support the death penalty?  No one can convince me it is a Christian thing to do. And that aside since we have separation of church and state in this country [hanging on by a thread, but still] -- it is barbaric, not effective, and I would be willing to bet the chances of executing an innocent person are much higher than we'd like to believe.

      by Lisa in Austin on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 05:25:52 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • Speaking of .... (0 / 0)

        ... [hanging on by a thread], what is with Antonin Scalia????  He is (supposedly) a Roman Catholic, but he is one of the least Christian people I have ever seen.  The S.C. just ruled that the Death Penalty was not "cruel or  unusual."  Huh?  If DEATH isn't cruel, what is?

        by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:04:04 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      • You know, I had a conversation with a fundie.. (0 / 0)

        ..who claimed that the "let he who is without sin cast the first stone," bit was a getout because the Jews were not legally able to administer justice under the Romans, and so had he said "throw away, kill that adulteress," everyone would have paid.

        Me: "So you're seriously saying that had the Romans not been there, Jesus would have said, 'cast away! Stone her to death!'?"
        Him: "Yes, that was the law."

        Wow. I mean, that was a couple of years ago, and thinking about it I still find my jaw dropping to the floor. Talk about missing the point of the message.

        "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

        by Expat Briton on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 08:00:41 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    • Pedophile priests (0 / 0)

      I'd like to know whether public support for the death penalty for child rapists would change if it were applied to priests who molested children.  I can't imagine a juror would be too keen on sentencing a man of the cloth, no matter what he has done, to lethal injection.

      by coobert on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:03:57 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • I have heard many crime experts (0 / 0)

    say that the death peanlty for child rape will increase the chances that a child is raped and murdered. The rapist has a strong incentive then to silence the only witness to the crime.

    by Suzanne77 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 04:10:05 PM PDT

  • For me this falls in the category of (0 / 0)

    you should try to make up your mind before you are ever (God-forbid) in the situation yourself. I am against the death penalty. No matter what happens to anyone I love. And if something bad does happen, I hope the reasonable part of my mind can cling to this and remember that it's what I believe.

    I think instead of focusing so much of our energy and resources on looking at these kind of gruesome high-profile crimes, we should be looking at why such a high percentage of our population (particularly African American men) are incarcerated and what we can do to decrease that rate.

    by mpg on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:08:04 PM PDT

    • The problem .... (0 / 0)

      ... at least in California, is that they WANT more and more in prison.  It has become quite a money-making scam.  And yes, waaaaay more African-Americans are in jail/prison than whites.  (Well, percentage-wise.)  And you can NEVER convince me that AAs are more law-breaking than whites.

      You would be shocked at how many are in jail/prison (in CA at least) for drug crimes.  More and more every year.  Here, they are building new prison at a mad rate.  What do they know that WE don't know?  Hmmmm, I wonder.

      And they make a LOT of money.  (Prison and jail workers, that is.)  I know I have said this before, but it makes me mad.  $100K for a 30-something HS-educated female.  Does that seem ... high?  Does to me!

      by Shell on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 06:31:22 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • yes, actually - much too high (0 / 0)

        I'm not sure I'm reading your post correctly.  $100K - are there regions or situations where that is a guard's salary?  That's not typical.  My brother works at the most difficult level of his prison system - one level below 23 hr lockdown, which means violent but not locked up - he has seniority, supervisory and training responsibilities, and is on the rapid response team.  But he doesn't make anything near this.

        by lyn on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:16:30 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • Are you in CA? (0 / 0)

          And, if so, what part?  I live in Sacramento, and I know they are VERY high here.  I had a neighbor, some years ago, who was bogged down in low-level jobs, and decided to become a prison guard.  She took the tests, passed, and became a prison guard.  She worked at Folsom prison, in the easiest part -- where the prisoners were short-timers, or those close to getting out.  You know, the ones who worked in the "gardens" or whatever you called them, growing food.  She told us she pretty much just sat under a shade tree and watched them work.   She said the number escaping was VERY low, because they knew they were about to get out anyway.

          But the ones I was talking about above came from all over the state.  (I can't remember where the woman I talked to was from -- sorry).  I was astonished at how much she made!  (The only reason I knew how much she made was because we were outside - smoking - at the same time quite often, and she was quite vocal.  LOL  It stunned me, and I always remembered it, because I was going nuts trying to keep my own children in clothes, food, babysitters, etc., being a single-mother tech writer.  She actually complained, saying, "I know!  I only have ONE child, and it's a good thing my mother babysits for free, because I couldn't survive on $100K a year!"  (This was 1985.  And $100K wasn't her BASE salary, but she got that much from working overtime, or so she said.)  I don't remember exactly where she lived, but as I recall, it wasn't a high Cost-of-Living city like LA, SF, SD, etc.

          As for your brother, does he work in California?  When I worked in Folsom (20+ years ago), when it was FIRST getting built up, the city of Folsom did a "get acquainted" deal with the new businesses and we would swap going to visit.  So -- when it was time to go to Folsom Prison, only about 10 wanted to go.  Of course, I wanted to!  The toughest place in there was SCARY!  It was even scary when you knew there were bars (and one story) between you and the prisoners.  They screamed at you (as a visitor), threw orange peels, and anything else they could.  Plus making comments about everyone's looks.  But the absolute scariest was the License Plate Factory.  Those prisoners weren't the worst, because they were allowed to work, that is, be out of their cells.  But they STARED right through you.  

          I loved that trip, but it was scary as hell.  I would say, in 2008, $100K would be not enough money for me to do that, in the horrible area, but way too much for the first area.

          by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:31:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          • I'm in CA (0 / 0)

            But my brother's not.  I imagine MA is probably on the higher end - the cost of living isn't nearly as bad as here but it's pretty high for the east coast.  It's true that overtime is where a guard makes his salary, and there are never enough guards so it's really easy to get a ton of overtime, but $100K is still very hard for me to fathom.  Without knowing the specifics of your acquaintance's story I can't even speculate but it just doesn't sound at all right.

            FWIW, after many years in high security my brother recently transferred to a lower paid but safer position.  He thinks the "cost efficiencies" have gone further than he's comfortable with. You won't find a harsher critic of the prison system (and the criminal justice system) anywhere.  

            by lyn on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 08:54:56 AM PDT

            [ Parent ]

            • Well .... (0 / 0)

              I don't know ANY of this, first-hand -- it is all anecdotal.  I have never worked in a prison.  But why would she lie?  $100K 15 years ago is like $125K today.  That is a lot of money.

              I would GUESS that salaries are higher in CA, even though the cost of living is the same or lower.  Why?  Because Californians seem to be much more obsessed with prisons than saner Mass. is.  But -- I don't know for sure.  Is Mass. building prisons hand over fist?  Does Mass. use speeding tickets as a major money-making game?

              It is a damn shame that California is doing this.  And it never gets really discussed or looked into, because no one wants to be seen as "soft on crime."  America has been extremely dumbed down.  It has nothing to do with being soft on crime.

              by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 11:57:00 AM PDT

              [ Parent ]

              • google is my friend (0 / 0)

                Looks like CA is tops in the nation for guard salaries.  Of course we're also #1 in cost of living, so CA tends to be high for just about any job you look up.

                Correctional officer salaries, annual mean wage:
                #1 California, $61,000
                #2 New Jersey, $56,960
                #3 Massachusetts, $53,090

                By the way, prison guards are Teamsters, at least in MA.  Pay scales are probably carved in stone and based on seniority (teamsters do not mess with seniority!) and level of responsibility.

                by lyn on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:22:50 PM PDT

                [ Parent ]

                • I believe you (0 / 0)

                  Or, I believe the google numbers, but, if that is the case, why would ANYONE do that?  Work as a prison guard if it paid so low?  And that IS low in California.  Yes, you don't need a degree to do it, but it can be dangerous.  Boring, whatever.  A "mean" salary is "average."  So -- you would have to work 10 or so years to get that?  Wow.

                  I wonder if the pay used to be highed 15 years ago.  If not, that one woman was lying through her teeth to me.  She wasn't old at all, and had a baby.  (I am sure she lied to impress me -- a super-high-paid tech writer!  LOLOL)

                  by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:10:07 PM PDT

                  [ Parent ]

                  • A co-worker's son (0 / 0)

                    was thinking about moving to CA to become a cop, w/ prison guard as his "fall back on" plan. I believe starting pay is in the 60-70K range, but given the availability of overtime, 100K is not unthinkable.  Their union is pretty powerful and yields a lot of political influence.  I remember reading somewhere (talkleft blog maybe) that Gov. Arnold tied guard salaries to highway patrol salaries or something like that...

                    by TeachPeace on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 04:07:25 PM PDT

                    [ Parent ]

  • I am against the death penalty. (0 / 0)

    And in the case of someone charged with child molestation?  Well, its another of those slippery slopes we so often talk about.  Ok...say we give the maximum punishment to someone caught in the act.  A 50 year old man with a 6 year old child.  Everyone agrees this is heinous behavior, right?  Well, we're right to be disgusted, but over the years, we've seen people caught up in charges of molestation that are far, far different than this hypothetical.  For instance, do we have wanted to see the young man from Georgia so sentenced?  The young man who was imprisoned for having sex with a 16 year old girl at a party?  Because, if we start meting out death penalty sentences, we'll get there before long.

    And as uncomfortable as it is to bring up, there are an awful lot of people accused of molestation.  Remember all the accusations levied at daycare centers back in the 80's?  Today, most of the children who made these accusations have recanted, but if the death penalty had been imposed, well, what then?

    Again, I don't support the death penalty in any case.  Quite frankly, it makes us look barbaric in the eyes of the rest of the civilized world.  However, I certainly would strongly caution those who do to steer clear of murky waters.

    by tjb22 on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 07:11:27 PM PDT

  • NO (0 / 0)

    The crime does not fit the punishment.  No one should play God and take a life. Especially in the "name of Justice". Baloney.

    by summer day on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 08:49:14 PM PDT

  • Hmmm... (0 / 0)

    I have to say, were I to support the death penalty, this would be the one type of crime I think is worthy of it.

    I guess what scares me is that unless someone is given life (is this ever given to child rapists?) in prison, they are going to get out. From what I have heard/read, these people cannot be rehabilitated. So, the chance that a criminal of this sort getting out because of "good behavior" or over crowding...makes my stomach turn.

    by jenna on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 09:10:28 PM PDT

    • It is interesting .... (0 / 0)

      ... that you mentioned they can't be rehabilitated.  I've heard that, too.  (Well, pedophiles, not rapists, per se.)  But there is this man -- and I have seen him on several news shows -- probably MSNBC -- who is a pedophile.  Served his sentence and got out.  He says it is true -- you can never be rehabilitated, as in not having that feeling.  He claims to have learned (through lots of counseling) to not give in.  And also staying away from children, when at all possible.  (And never being alone with children.)  I guess it worked, since he is still out ....

      by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 02:38:34 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • I actually have a friend.. (0 / 0)

        ..who's a clinical psychiatrist at Scotland's maximum security mental institution, and he's adamant they can be rehabilitated, if they want to be. That's the kicker. You can only help someone who wants to be helped, and many of them don't want to be helped. But many do.

        It's interesting, the only program I've ever heard of that was successful in reducing the rate of child molestation was a Canadian one. They began offering completely confidential and anonymous counseling to anyone who asked who had sexual feelings toward children or was worried they would sexually abuse children. It worked - people got better, because it was "nipped in the bud" before it became a problem for them. But the public outcry that free counseling was being offered to men who wanted to have sex with children meant the program was canceled. Really depressing.

        "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

        by Expat Briton on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 08:19:44 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • It really IS depressing (0 / 0)

          When you look at so many things Americans (and apparently in other countries, too) get outraged about, it is sickening.  So -- you are upset because future (or current) pedophiles get counseling?  For free.  Who cares that it saves a child from a crime against him?  It's all $$$$$.

          And yet, these same imbeciles don't even blink an eye when BILLIONS are wasted in a war.  Hmmm -- let's see!  "We will spend BILLIONS because The Terrorists Might GIT Us!  Yet, we will bitch about spending a few million on a program that will save our children from being raped."

          by Shell on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 12:05:07 PM PDT

          [ Parent ]

  • I must admit (0 / 0)

    that although I am anti-death penalty I recently found myself questioning that position. I had some experience with a child rape case very recently. It took almost all the will power I could muster to resist strangling the perpetrator with my bare hands.

    I hate to acknowledge the part of myself that finds some small measure of relief that this person will receive justice in prison. I feel ashamed for feeling this way, like I should be above it but I guess I’m not.

    by hardlyaclue on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 05:12:25 AM PDT

  • I don't believe the state has the right.. (0 / 0)

    ..to murder its citizens. Under any circumstances.

    All that said, I highly doubt this law will be overturned, because if execution isn't cruel and unusual punishment (and it seems it isn't in the eyes of this court, and honestly I agree with them), then I don't think it's reasonable to say that it can be used as punishment for some crimes, and not for others. Either a punishment is a reasonable one, or it isn't, and it's for lawmakers to decide when and where each punishment should be applied. I don't think this is a question for the courts, I think it's a question for lawmakers.

    "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

    by Expat Briton on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 08:23:07 AM PDT

    • shining beacon in NJ (0 / 0)

      Hey, I crack on my homestate, but at least NJ passed an anti-death penalty law. Sometimes having a rich man who uses his wealth to fund his political aspirations isn't a bad thing, you know?!

      by Rachel on Tue Apr 22, 2008 at 03:49:50 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • Oh, definitely. (0 / 0)

        I'd kind of been hoping that we'd get bad candidates from the Republicans and Dems this year so Bloomberg would throw his hat into the ring for President, but with a McCain/Obama or McCain/Clinton matchup, I don't think that's likely - they'll all be running for the (perception of) the middle ground.
        It's kind of sad that it takes ridiculous wealth to gain independence, though.

        I know Sister Q still reads NJ Supreme Court opinions because they're so great - makes her proud to be from NJ.

        "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

        by Expat Briton on Wed Apr 23, 2008 at 08:28:59 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Permalink | 37 comments