07-07-2003, 02:21 PM
Lots of posters are opining that h should be sentenced to life in prison for rape.
Two things to note here:
First, we don't know the background of that conviction. He may have been given a lighter sentence due to a weaker case, etc.
Second, and most importantly --
It is ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL that in non-death-penalty states, rapists are NOT generally sentenced to life in prison.
That is, the penalty for rape must ALWAYS be less than the penalty for murder.
Why? Because otherwise the rapist loses nothing by simply killing his victim. When the penalty for rape is the same as the penalty for murder, the result is a lot of dead rape victims. The rapist has nothing to lose from killing the victim (same penalty), and a lot to gain (since the victim is the best witness against him).
China had this happen a few years back when they revised their criminal code. Both rape and murder were capital crimes, and the result was that rapists killed their victims. When they realized this result, they changed the criminal code.
Two things to note here:
First, we don't know the background of that conviction. He may have been given a lighter sentence due to a weaker case, etc.
Second, and most importantly --
It is ABSOLUTELY CRUCIAL that in non-death-penalty states, rapists are NOT generally sentenced to life in prison.
That is, the penalty for rape must ALWAYS be less than the penalty for murder.
Why? Because otherwise the rapist loses nothing by simply killing his victim. When the penalty for rape is the same as the penalty for murder, the result is a lot of dead rape victims. The rapist has nothing to lose from killing the victim (same penalty), and a lot to gain (since the victim is the best witness against him).
China had this happen a few years back when they revised their criminal code. Both rape and murder were capital crimes, and the result was that rapists killed their victims. When they realized this result, they changed the criminal code.