The second biggie Supreme Court decision concerned the death penalty for child rape; the court said that child rapists could not be put to death because that constituted “cruel and unusual punishment” and was therefore unconstitutional.
The court maintained that if a crime did not result in death of the victim, the perpetrator could not be put to death; kind of an eye for an eye type ruling.
The reaction to the ruling was immediate and visceral. Hurt a child and we will rip you apart – I think we all, especially parents, will agree to that and I think the judges knew what was coming.
Death penalty note: I have been a life-long supporter of the death penalty based mainly on my perceived view that the thirst for revenge by the victim’s family must be satisfied. I held no delusions that the death penalty somehow was a deterrent to murder.
My views started changing when I discovered that many men on death row were actually innocent (DNA as proof of innocence). And the reason they were innocent but condemned was because prosecutors had no and, I maintain, still do not have any sense of justice; they just want a conviction and a closed case so they can run for governor of the state.
I started backing away from the death penalty because I perceived that there was no way of being absolutely sure of guilt or innocence in our current judicial system but if there was a way of insuring absolute guilt – back to the death penalty.
I have not considered before today, the issue of what crime(s) should result in the death penalty. Every state has its own laws about that but I guess I just assumed that murder deserved capital punishment. I have not thought about capital punishment for crimes that did not result in the death of the victim, until today…
At the water cooler at work the unanimous view was that child rapists should actually be tortured before being put to a horrible death and I can absolutely understand those sentiments.
The court was divided along the usual lines with Kennedy as the swing vote but in this case, not with the four conservatives but with the liberals – what power!
I am well aware that Europe and other parts of the world consider the death penalty a part of the past and in today’s world, uncivilized. I have not taken that side but was aware (my wife) of that position.
I was also aware that more and more challenges were being made in the name of the Constitutional prohibition against “cruel and unusual punishment” which our Founding Fathers meant what the British did to the rebellious American patriots. The last was an objection to “lethal injection” as a cruel and unusual punishment for putting people to death; the court rejected that argument.
Both presidential candidates objected to the Court’s ruling as they should – politically expedient – but I will have to stand with the Court’s decision as a brave decision in the face of public scorn and a right decision based on the Constitution because a line has to be drawn somewhere.
As abhorrent as child rape is, the death penalty is an ultimate penalty, reserved for taking the life of an innocent human being even though there are circumstances where, in our eyes, the death penalty is called for even though the victim did not die, we are asking for the Wisdom of Solomon which our judicial system is incapable of.
I may have second thoughts on this issue especially when extra heinous crimes occur against children but I think the liberal / moderate part of the court gave this matter serious consideration, looking at all factors and not just allowing their emotions to rule the day.
On the other hand, the four conservative Supremes have shown me that they do not sit above the influence of the masses and dispense unprejudiced justice based on learned wisdom but are base humans driven by political prejudice and ideology and rooted in their controlled and deliberate upbringing that has not been tempered by age and experience – some old ones remain stupid till they die.
No comments:
Post a Comment