States Weigh Punishing Child Rapists With Death

[RedGlitter]

States Weigh Punishing Child Rapists With Death

Wednesday, June 13, 2007

By Liza Porteus



WASHINGTON — Lynda Marie Kirby sexually abused her young son in ways more horrible than anyone could imagine, and she should have had to pay a steep price for her crimes.

Kirby was orginally sentenced to 125 years in prison and was supposed to remain in prison for half that time — 62 1/2 years — before she became eligible for parole.

But the case was reversed on appeal; the prosecution couldn't retry the case because it couldn't expose the child to testifying against his mother a second time. Kirby ended up getting only two years in prison in return for a guilty plea. She will have to register as a sex offender for the rest of her life.



But there are many in Texas who think crimes of Kirby's nature deserve a greater punishment than imprisonment, and now the state is on its way toward approving the death penalty for child rapists.

Texas is the latest state to pass a form of "Jessica’s Law" — named after 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford of Florida, who was abducted, abused, buried alive and left to die in a dirt hole by a known sex offender who lived nearby — that includes the death penalty.

The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape children under age 6 at least twice, or children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of a deadly weapon, alcohol or drugs, death threats, bodily injury, kidnapping or gang rape. Texas Gov. Rick Perry is expected to sign the bill into law.

But in 80 to 90 percent of child rapes, the victims know their attacker, and in many cases the rapist is a relative. Critics of the bill say the knowledge that he or she could be responsible for a relative's execution could do more psychological damage to a child than the rapes themselves.

Terry Kirby doesn’t think people like his child’s mother deserve to die for their crimes.

"I think the death penalty is not the answer. I feel like restorative justice is more in order, and time — not just time behind bars but counseling and some type of program," Kirby said.

"Abuse is such a wide category and it’s despicable and it’s real hard on victims. But I tell you, I think there’s a lot of place — I do agree with the death penalty in certain cases, but not for molestation of a child."

Even in some of the most heinous abuse cases, many think the damage done to a child’s psyche knowing he or she could be responsible for sentencing a relative to death is worse than letting their attackers live.

"My son was sexually abused by his biological mother and the penalty could be the death sentence ... to me it seems that’s a reason for a child to not outcry. And really the thing is, kids need to be listened to, they need to be believed," Kirby said.

"You want kids talking and they need to feel safe about it and I think that this is pushing things in the wrong direction, to keep kids from opening up."

Jody Plauche, who was abducted in 1984 by his karate instructor and abused for more than one year, agrees.

"I can understand why people would want to put to death these repeat sex offenders," Plauche said. "But I think in the long run what you're going to see, you're going to see the reluctance of people to come forwards because the perpetrators are usually someone known to the family.

"It’s going to keep their victims quiet because they know Uncle Bill's going to be killed."

John Bradley, a Texas district attorney, has testified in the state legislature against death penalty sentences for child rapists.

"It has taken a lot of work over several decades for government to develop an understanding of how to approach a victim … to give them the confidence to come forward and testify with the security they'll be protected," he said.

"Now I think we've sort of turned that apple cart over by beginning with the proposition that the very child's testimony not only determines the child's own personal security but the potential death of the defendant."

But the death penalty option does have popular support. Some Houston Chronicle readers, for example, posted online comments about that state's possible new law. "It's about time! Sex crimes against kids is about as bad as it gets," "WorriedCitizen" wrote.

"Why wait till the second time ... isn't once enough?!!" added "ladygrant."

Death penalty aside, Bradley noted that the difficulty faced on the Kirby case retrial shows even more why some form of Jessica's Law is needed in Texas: It includes a new offense of continuous sexual abuse, which he says would have done a better job of accommodating the child's testimony and probably would have avoided a reversal on direct appeal.

Is Any Non-Homicide Crime More Deserving?

Louisiana is one of only five states that allow capital punishment in child-rape cases that don’t result in the victim’s death. Patrick Kennedy is on death row for the rape of his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

"Execution of child rapists will serve the goals of deterrence and retribution just as well as execution of first-degree murderers would," Associate Justice Jeffrey Victory wrote for the majority in the court’s opinion that Kennedy should be executed.

"Short of a first-degree murderer, we can think of no other non-homicide crime more deserving."

Emergency workers found Kennedy’s victim wrapped in a bloody cargo blanket and bleeding profusely. She was sexually abused so violently that a surgeon was called in to repair the damage. The victim first told the same story as her stepfather — that two boys from the neighborhood had raped her. The girl eventually told police that her stepfather was her attacker.

Plauche, who has no problem with death sentences for rapists who also murder children, is concerned that if more abusers know they could be sentenced to death based on a child victim’s testimony, "it's going to end up getting kids killed because there's not going to be a witness to testify against them."

Even though Louisiana is alone in allowing first-time offenders to be executed, Judy Benitez, executive director of the Louisiana Foundation Against Sexual Assault, said how many times an offender has struck should not be the issue.

"Not very many rapists or child rapists are first-time offenders — it may be the first time they're caught and prosecuted," Benitez said. "I think there's some value to the law (first-term offenders getting the death penalty) in terms of leverage for prosecutors … [but] being sentenced to death doesn't do anything more than the other option right now."

Whereas a prison sentence is a definitive punishment for an abuser, Benitez said the appeals process in a death penalty case can drag out for years and the victims can never get closure.

Kennedy’s lawyers plan to appeal his death sentence in state court and, if that doesn’t work, take it all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

At issue is a 1977 U.S. Supreme Court ruling banning the application of the death penalty for the rape of a 16-year-old. That case, Coker v. Georgia, stressed that capital punishment should be used only for a capital crime like murder.

Since then, many states stopped applying the death penalty to cases involving children, but Louisiana just amended its laws to specify that punishment for the rape of a child, not an adult, could include the death penalty.

"The issue before the United States Supreme Court is whether the 8th Amendment prohibits the death penalty for those circumstances," Bradley said. "This idea that we could withdraw an entire offense or offenses because the offense itself didn't result in the death of the victim is an interesting one, because it gets into the value of life and the value of quality of life.

"Destroying a child's personality and to have an enjoyment of future life is just as powerful an impact as say, ending a child's life by killing them."

But Bradley is worried about one case that could turn these "Jessica’s Laws" on their head.

In November 1998, the body of an infant dubbed "Baby Hope" was found inside a trash bag with duct tape over his mouth in a dumpster in Beaumont, Texas. His arms were taped across his chest with tape, as well.

The case remained unsolved until the summer of 2003, when it was determined that Kenisha Eronda Berry was the mother; her DNA and fingerprints were found on the duct tape. Berry was then in prison awaiting trial for abandoning another newborn, Paris, who was found June 6, 2003, beside the road in a remote part of Jefferson County, her eyes swollen shut from ant bites.

Berry was sentenced to death, but her sentence was overturned and she received life in prison.

"The evidence indicates that appellant has been dangerous only toward those of her own children whose existence she wanted to hide from her favored mate, that there is a very low probability that, if sentenced to life in prison, she will have any more children, and that therefore it is unlikely that she would be a danger in the future," the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals said in a 5-4 decision.

Click here to read the opinion.

Bradley thinks this ruling could send the wrong message to child molesters who deserve the death penalty for killing their victims.

"I guarantee you, lawyers who represent child molesters ... are going to take that case and ram it down all of our throats. They'll say 'well, this guy is a pedophile, he hurts only children,'" Bradley said.

"I'm very concerned about this opinion, a 5-4 vote; it's a fairly narrow decision and nobody's talking about it. It is going to kill the availability of the death penalty before anyone can even put it into law."



What Do You Think??

[neffy]

Well i do think they should pay for the crime,to take a childs life is gutter level and maybe lower than that.

I dont think councelling would do any good,i do beleive for a murder of a child or really any murder should result in death,i am sorry to say that but over the years and seeing the awful crime rate go up on child abuse and resulting in murder i am now a firm beleiver in an eye for an eye.

I know maybe alot of you think that what i said is wrong but i know i would want to kill if anybody who murded my daughter and i would be quite happy to be put to death for it.

[gmc]

neffy;693886 wrote: Well i do think they should pay for the crime,to take a childs life is gutter level and maybe lower than that.

I dont think councelling would do any good,i do beleive for a murder of a child or really any murder should result in death,i am sorry to say that but over the years and seeing the awful crime rate go up on child abuse and resulting in murder i am now a firm beleiver in an eye for an eye.

I know maybe alot of you think that what i said is wrong but i know i would want to kill if anybody who murded my daughter and i would be quite happy to be put to death for it.


I don't think the rate has gone up but what has changed is people's attitude to it. whereas before no one would believe a child making such an accusation-(a priest wouldn't do such a thing for instance-) now it is taken seriously. just look at all those now in their thirties and forties now coming forward and bringing cases against their past abusers that could do nothing before because no one was prepared to believe them. I don't agree with the death penalty but our courts are too soft on these kind of crimes.

[Indian Princess]

Well, as long as they know that the individual in question is 100% guilty, I say and eye for an eye, turn him lose on a mob. No mercy!!!!!!!

Bring back drawn and quartered

[RedGlitter]

I have to say that I vote for death for any rapist, whether they violate a child or an adult. You can't get back what they've taken. As for "rehab" forget it. What a freaking joke. Rehab's for drug addicts and boozers, not for heinous devil spawn who steal your soul. IMO.

[Indian Princess]

Ditto-what she said

[Elvira]

I'm afraid I have to disagree. Although this is a heinous crime against anyone, I really think that some of these people are sick rather than evil. There have been many examples of child abusers who have been seriously abused as a child themselves. These are of course the minority, but I'm not wholly convinced that our judicial system is equipped to correctly distinguish these cases.

I personally think that the only solution to this is chemical castration. This would remove the sexual motivation, regardless of where it stems from. Remove the hormonal impulses, and they won't be able to reoffend.

[spot]

RedGlitter;694182 wrote: I have to say that I vote for death for any rapist, whether they violate a child or an adult. You can't get back what they've taken. As for "rehab" forget it. What a freaking joke. Rehab's for drug addicts and boozers, not for heinous devil spawn who steal your soul. IMO.


So, let me sketch a scene. You have an 18 year old girl who's been friends for years with the young boy next door, he's now 13, they hang out for the afternoon on their own, they raid the drink cupboard for a few shots of Jack Daniels and get amorous and end up on the bed having sex for the first time, totally happy with each other but - in the legal setting of Texas - going too far.

The Texas bill is going to authorize the death penalty for this girl? "The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape ... children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of ... alcohol or drugs". It's automatically statutory rape because the boy can't legally give informed consent (despite the plain simple fact that he obviously was informed and did consent) and alcohol was involved, so now you can kill her for it?

This is Taliban Amerika, not any Western civilized nation I ever heard of.

[cars]

spot;694217 wrote: So, let me sketch a scene. You have an 18 year old girl who's been friends for years with the young boy next door, he's now 13, they hang out for the afternoon on their own, they raid the drink cupboard for a few shots of Jack Daniels and get amorous and end up on the bed having sex for the first time, totally happy with each other but - in the legal setting of Texas - going too far.



The Texas bill is going to authorize the death penalty for this girl? "The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape ... children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of ... alcohol or drugs". It's automatically statutory rape because the boy can't legally give informed consent (despite the plain simple fact that he obviously was informed and did consent) and alcohol was involved, so now you can kill her for it?



This is Taliban Amerika, not any Western civilized nation I ever heard of.


Say the young boy was your son, what say you then?

[G#Gill]

Just to add my four pennyworth. Elvira, as far as I can remember it was found that even if you castrate these 'people' it does not take away the basic urge to rape. Mostly, it is also found, that 'people' who commit rape do so to gratify their innermost need to have power over their victim. There seems to be no way that any surgery, counselling etc. can remove such basic desires within these 'people', and I'm afraid talking through and trying to find reasons behind these acts, is and would be totally fruitless.

In my opinion therefore, the only way to minimise such dreadful crimes, is to install a dreadful deterrent. The death penalty.

At least SOME 'people' will think twice and be put off committing such terrible crimes if they realised they would be put to death for them.

Technology is so advanced these days that absolute certainty of guilt is not as hit and miss as it used to be, yes there may be some cases where there could be doubts about guilt, therefore in those cases the death penalty should not be invoked.

Just imagine if it was your child who had been through such a terrible experience - what would you feel like doing to the perpetrator when they were found guilty ? Would you, in your heart of hearts, be happy in the knowledge that the fiend would be allowed to live, and in the course of time, be allowed to walk free to enjoy their lives and no doubt to re-offend ? Make no mistake about it, it is very rare that such a fiend can have that basic evil need totally eradicated. Oh they can be put on drugs to curb that basic evil need, but who would be there to make sure that medication is always taken ?

There are too many people prepared to be sympathetic towards these evil savages - "There must be a reason why he/she is like that - fetch a psychiatrist"

I say bring in the deterrent - the death penalty.

[sunny104]

spot;694217 wrote: So, let me sketch a scene. You have an 18 year old girl who's been friends for years with the young boy next door, he's now 13, they hang out for the afternoon on their own, they raid the drink cupboard for a few shots of Jack Daniels and get amorous and end up on the bed having sex for the first time, totally happy with each other but - in the legal setting of Texas - going too far.

The Texas bill is going to authorize the death penalty for this girl? "The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape ... children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of ... alcohol or drugs". It's automatically statutory rape because the boy can't legally give informed consent (despite the plain simple fact that he obviously was informed and did consent) and alcohol was involved, so now you can kill her for it?

This is Taliban Amerika, not any Western civilized nation I ever heard of.


common sense is alive and well in the US, thankyouverymuch!

no judge or jury (if it got that far) would sentence a person in that scenario to death.

[sunny104]

G#Gill;694236 wrote: Just to add my four pennyworth. Elvira, as far as I can remember it was found that even if you castrate these 'people' it does not take away the basic urge to rape. Mostly, it is also found, that 'people' who commit rape do so to gratify their innermost need to have power over their victim. There seems to be no way that any surgery, counselling etc. can remove such basic desires within these 'people', and I'm afraid talking through and trying to find reasons behind these acts, is and would be totally fruitless.

In my opinion therefore, the only way to minimise such dreadful crimes, is to install a dreadful deterrent. The death penalty.

At least SOME 'people' will think twice and be put off committing such terrible crimes if they realised they would be put to death for them.

Technology is so advanced these days that absolute certainty of guilt is not as hit and miss as it used to be, yes there may be some cases where there could be doubts about guilt, therefore in those cases the death penalty should not be invoked.

Just imagine if it was your child who had been through such a terrible experience - what would you feel like doing to the perpetrator when they were found guilty ? Would you, in your heart of hearts, be happy in the knowledge that the fiend would be allowed to live, and in the course of time, be allowed to walk free to enjoy their lives and no doubt to re-offend ? Make no mistake about it, it is very rare that such a fiend can have that basic evil need totally eradicated. Oh they can be put on drugs to curb that basic evil need, but who would be there to make sure that medication is always taken ?

There are too many people prepared to be sympathetic towards these evil savages - "There must be a reason why he/she is like that - fetch a psychiatrist"

I say bring in the deterrent - the death penalty.


totally agree! :-6

[RedGlitter]

spot;694217 wrote: So, let me sketch a scene. You have an 18 year old girl who's been friends for years with the young boy next door, he's now 13, they hang out for the afternoon on their own, they raid the drink cupboard for a few shots of Jack Daniels and get amorous and end up on the bed having sex for the first time, totally happy with each other but - in the legal setting of Texas - going too far.

The Texas bill is going to authorize the death penalty for this girl? "The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape ... children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of ... alcohol or drugs". It's automatically statutory rape because the boy can't legally give informed consent (despite the plain simple fact that he obviously was informed and did consent) and alcohol was involved, so now you can kill her for it?

This is Taliban Amerika, not any Western civilized nation I ever heard of.


Since you're asking me, Spot, I don't believe in the concept of statutory rape, nor would I ever consider the scene you presented to BE rape, even if it were the boy who were 18 and the girl 13. These are just teenaged kids trying something out IMO. I understand that may be the law but I don't personally care what the law dictates to my common sense. That is not to sound smug, but that is my honest feeling on the matter.

Now an adult man or woman and an 11 year old is a different matter, would you not agree? And certainly a stranger taking a woman down behind a dumpster against her will is rape. Even a husband taking his wife when she says no is rape. This should be obvious stuff and when I say rapists should be killed, these are the twerps I am thinking of. Certainly not two kids trying to grow up.

[SuzyB]

G#Gill;694236 wrote: Just to add my four pennyworth. Elvira, as far as I can remember it was found that even if you castrate these 'people' it does not take away the basic urge to rape. Mostly, it is also found, that 'people' who commit rape do so to gratify their innermost need to have power over their victim. There seems to be no way that any surgery, counselling etc. can remove such basic desires within these 'people', and I'm afraid talking through and trying to find reasons behind these acts, is and would be totally fruitless.

In my opinion therefore, the only way to minimise such dreadful crimes, is to install a dreadful deterrent. The death penalty.

At least SOME 'people' will think twice and be put off committing such terrible crimes if they realised they would be put to death for them.

Technology is so advanced these days that absolute certainty of guilt is not as hit and miss as it used to be, yes there may be some cases where there could be doubts about guilt, therefore in those cases the death penalty should not be invoked.

Just imagine if it was your child who had been through such a terrible experience - what would you feel like doing to the perpetrator when they were found guilty ? Would you, in your heart of hearts, be happy in the knowledge that the fiend would be allowed to live, and in the course of time, be allowed to walk free to enjoy their lives and no doubt to re-offend ? Make no mistake about it, it is very rare that such a fiend can have that basic evil need totally eradicated. Oh they can be put on drugs to curb that basic evil need, but who would be there to make sure that medication is always taken ?

There are too many people prepared to be sympathetic towards these evil savages - "There must be a reason why he/she is like that - fetch a psychiatrist"

I say bring in the deterrent - the death penalty.


I wholeheartedly agree with you Gill.

[RedGlitter]

cars;694222 wrote: Say the young boy was your son, what say you then?


Some would call him "lucky b*st*rd" to be crass about it. :rolleyes:

I think you were asking Spot personally, but if it were me, I would feel the same as I replied to Spot. My views on sex and how it fits into life do not necessarily coincide with what society or the law agree with. If these two individuals were both willing then whether I approved of it or not, I wouldn't be calling it rape. That's a huge disservice to all involved.

[RedGlitter]

Elvira;694209 wrote: I'm afraid I have to disagree. Although this is a heinous crime against anyone, I really think that some of these people are sick rather than evil. There have been many examples of child abusers who have been seriously abused as a child themselves. These are of course the minority, but I'm not wholly convinced that our judicial system is equipped to correctly distinguish these cases.

I personally think that the only solution to this is chemical castration. This would remove the sexual motivation, regardless of where it stems from. Remove the hormonal impulses, and they won't be able to reoffend.


I can't agree with that.

I say take them out and they won't reoffend. I don't believe rapists are necessarily sick, but rather sociopathological soulless individuals devoid of conscience. And some are just plain evil. Some will say no such thing exists but to me it does.

Sad that a rapist may have been abused as a child but lots of people have been there and manage to live their lives without "acting out" what was done to them. Free will still exists. Right still exists from wrong.

To be clear, I am talking about actual rapists- the ones who deserve that title. Not the concept of two teenaged people doing the deed or a matter of a couple years between willing people.

[minks]

throw the offender to the lions... to hell with protective custody, toss them in with those hard core criminals and let them pull "Jeffery Dahlmer" on the sicko. Justice to all.

[spot]

sunny104;694242 wrote: common sense is alive and well in the US, thankyouverymuch!

no judge or jury (if it got that far) would sentence a person in that scenario to death.I'm aware that a court has discretion in the matter. My point was not that the girl would be killed but that the law would allow her to be killed. This Texas bill would authorize the death penalty for this girl. It's the law which reflects a Taliban level intolerance and fundamentalism, not the court or jury. Not yet, anyway.

Once a law like that exists, people like that girl die once public opinion sways in favor of acting on it. There has to be some minority support already for killing her or why is a law being put forward which would make it possible?

The proposed Texas bill would authorize the death penalty for this girl and nobody is protesting at such a thing? That's awful.

[spot]

cars;694222 wrote: Say the young boy was your son, what say you then?


Serious question?

Okay, serious answer - that the young boy's opinion should be taken into consideration when deciding whether to prosecute. The law's framed to make that impossible.

[RedGlitter]

spot;694493 wrote: There has to be some minority support already for killing her or why is a law being put forward which would make it possible?

The proposed Texas bill would authorize the death penalty for this girl and nobody is protesting at such a thing? That's awful.


To me, it seems like this would have to do more with peoples' (rather, parents and some other adults') prevailing puritanical/double standard attitudes toward sexuality. We're not taught in the US generally, that we are born as sexual beings yet this is a natural fact. That is denied us as kids, we're told from the beginning not to even enjoy ourselves, so the concept of enjoying anyone else is "for when you're older/for when you're married." This blows. It's ignorant and unrealistic at best and causes too much harm. Ok, I'm digressing into American views on sexuality, and I apologize for sidetracking, but my point is the same men and women who make stupid jokes about their daughters not dating till they're 33 and about greeting potential boyfriends at the door with a .38 are the same ones who are not protesting, Spot. We're the nation who canned Jocelyn Elders for promoting masturbation to kids as a healthy way to avoid pregnancy. What the hell's wrong with us?!

[booradley]

Elvira;694209 wrote: I'm afraid I have to disagree. Although this is a heinous crime against anyone, I really think that some of these people are sick rather than evil. There have been many examples of child abusers who have been seriously abused as a child themselves. These are of course the minority, but I'm not wholly convinced that our judicial system is equipped to correctly distinguish these cases.

I personally think that the only solution to this is chemical castration. This would remove the sexual motivation, regardless of where it stems from. Remove the hormonal impulses, and they won't be able to reoffend.


and so the circle of abuse goes on and multiplies. Mandatory chemical castration for a first offence and if that doesn't work then the death penalty seems fair to me. I'd like to suggest cutting their thumbs off, tattooing a P or R on their head and shipping them out to to a purpose built concrete island with food supplies dropped once a week. I don't suppose the bleeding hearts would go for that..but put it to a referendum and see what happens

[KB.]

spot;694217 wrote: So, let me sketch a scene. You have an 18 year old girl who's been friends for years with the young boy next door, he's now 13, they hang out for the afternoon on their own, they raid the drink cupboard for a few shots of Jack Daniels and get amorous and end up on the bed having sex for the first time, totally happy with each other but - in the legal setting of Texas - going too far.

The Texas bill is going to authorize the death penalty for this girl? "The Texas bill reserves the death penalty for people who rape ... children younger than 14 if the crime also involves the use of ... alcohol or drugs". It's automatically statutory rape because the boy can't legally give informed consent (despite the plain simple fact that he obviously was informed and did consent) and alcohol was involved, so now you can kill her for it?

This is Taliban Amerika, not any Western civilized nation I ever heard of.


Hell spot you can't discuss logic with a mob.

[booradley]

rape and paedophilia isn't in any way logical