Ut

So making the sentence for these crimes worse than the sentence for murder is the way to go? I haven't yet started to cover the issue of innocents getting wrongly convicted and punished.

Stephen Maturin

Yes, and Law breached that duty regularly and repeatedly. Bernie's conduct evidences moral bankruptcy on an unfathomably massive scale.

lunachick

No. That's not what I said. You said "life in prison without parole". Aside from places that have the death penalty, this is the sentence for murder. I said if the sentence was worse than, or equal to, the sentence for murder then wouldn't it make more sense for the rapist/molester to kill their victim if they thought it would increase their chances of not getting caught?

I would hate to see a person be sentenced for a crime they didn't commit - thorough investigation and a fair trial are imperative.

However, if a sex criminal is found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, he/she must pay a price. I would imagine that a sex offender with any sense of remorse would willingly have the desire to offend removed in some way or other if it meant they could return to the community to live a 'normal' life (at least as normal as is possible). Even if they had no remorse, this would be more desirable than a life long sentence of incarceration. Also, I'm not suggesting this as a way of escaping any prison time at all, which I believe they should still serve a few years, at least.
Whether they are 'of the cloth' or not.

lunachick

Yes, it does. I wholeheartedly agree.

And he should be punished to the full extent of the law. It is a just a shame the law is inadequate in these cases.

Something must change, in law, to help stop people like this getting away with it.

The Admiral

While I believe that the Catholic church is overwhelmingly culpable I also believe that there have been many false accusations.

The Admiral

Talulah

You can argue this all you want, but you can't prove it.

What I have heard OVER and OVER is that the children were told to respect the priest like they were God. This seems to be a pretty constant theme, the betrayal of trust, and the belief that priests aren't to be questioned. This sets the stage for the children to not question anything leading up to molestation and possibly the molestation itself. By the time it is obvious what is happening, they are so far into shame, guilt, confusion and denial that they can't see a way out to tell anyone. Any priest who would molest a young boy is also capable in my book of anything else, including threats for telling, manipulation, lies, etc to keep what he is doing a secret.

Ut

Oops. I should have been clearer. If the sexuality of a person has a such tight grip on them that they are willing to become a criminal in order to satisfy it, we can certainly conclude that they hold their sexuality in exceptionnaly high regard. They might see surrendering it through surgery as a worse fate than surrendering their liberty through incarceration. In that case too, it would make more sense for the offender to kill their victim in order to avoid getting caught.

Anyway, I'm not an expert in matters of criminology, but I think both you and I are attributing too much rationality to the criminal mind. I don't think most persons so inflammed by their instincts that they molests children for sexual pleasure would be able to carry such cold-blooded risk-benefit analysis. Some criminals do, but as far as I know, most don't.

I know a case of a male offender who willingly underwent chemical castration in order to return to living a normal life. (Though he has to regularly take medication for the "castration" to stay in effect). Of course, if someone is willing to make such a choice, I have no business second guessing them.

On second thought on the issue of innocents, if this sentence is only applied to repeat offenders, the possibilty of an innocent getting wrongly punished does not seem that great (though it is by no means zero). However, granting the government the right to force surgery on its citizens seems to me like a bad precedent to set. I just think I have less trust in the governement and judiciary system than you do. I'd rather keep them far away from potential abuses.

EDIT: I'm leaving now. See you tomorrow.

[ December 19, 2002: Message edited by: Ut ]</p>

abe smith

Uh... responding to AMOS's ^^^ defence of Cardinal OutLaw some posts previous : I'd like to amend, that "so far as we know as yet, Cardinal Law was not one of them" = clerical abusers of the young. Quite frankly, my dear Amos, seeing what keeps coming-out of the woodwork as time progresses, I'm reluctant to give ANY cleric a clean bill of health.... OF course this position of mine violates every
legal code of justice & fairplay in wh/ I profess to believe. (Oh tell me about it, Honeh.)

Wyz_sub10

They are not the same thing (biological) and would not have the same effect, so they really aren't comparable other than both being mutilation.

I would argue, however, that the reasons why people molest children often (not always) have less to do with sexual gratification, and more to do with power, dominance, behavioural expectations, control, revenge, etc.

Proxima Centauri

RIGHT ON, SULLSTER.