Court rejects death penalty for raping children

WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court has struck down a Louisiana law that allows the execution of people convicted of a raping a child.

In a 5-4 vote, the court says the law allowing the death penalty to be imposed in cases of child rape violates the Constitution's ban on cruel and unusual punishment.

"The death penalty is not a proportional punishment for the rape of a child," Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote in his majority opinion. His four liberal colleagues joined him, while the four more conservative justices dissented.

There has not been an execution in the United States for a crime that did not also involve the death of the victim in 44 years.

The Supreme Court on Wednesday also cut the $2.5 billion punitive damages award in the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster to $500 million.

The court ruled that victims of the worst oil spill in U.S. history may collect punitive damages from Exxon Mobil Corp., but not as much as a federal appeals court determined.

Justice David Souter wrote for the court that punitive damages may not exceed what the company already paid to compensate victims for economic losses, about $500 million compensation.

Exxon asked the high court to reject the punitive damages judgment, saying it already has spent $3.4 billion in response to the accident that fouled 1,200 miles of Alaska coastline.

A jury decided Exxon should pay $5 billion in punitive damages. A federal appeals court cut that verdict in half.

Comments

[andyboy]

02:35 PM on 06/26/2008

Fry the scum. All of 'em. From any serious assault like rape or violence resulting in bodily injury up to murder.

Animals don't care if they go to prison.

[rcozad]

03:30 PM on 06/26/2008

Odd juxtaposition of decisions, No death penalty as that would be a disproportionate response to rape, but yes to housing a gun to kill some one to protect property! What a country!

[Boris]

01:41 PM on 06/26/2008

Ah, so we are all in favor of the death penalty for a child rapist....here after known as the
'kill the children' law. Man, there are some stupid people out there. This is one of the few recent SCOTUS decision I can live with. It is illogical to think that the death penalty for child rape will save one child from a brutal murder.

[Mort]

01:32 PM on 06/26/2008

They should ask the parents of the victimized child whether or not capital punishment is appropriate.

[bgregs]

02:21 PM on 06/26/2008

No, because they are going to not be in their right minds! I know that I wasn't, and would have asked for the death penalty (or tried to kill the men with my bare hands) and I would have been WRONG to do so!!

[JohnShank]

04:25 PM on 06/26/2008

Your choice bgregs, but it was WRONG of the son of a bitch to do it to you or anyone in the first place. Those who do this should be killed!

[broilinginhouston]

03:07 PM on 06/26/2008

Or maybe they should ask the victims, twenty years later, once their views on capital punishment have matured. By executing the rapist, you pretty much remove "forgiveness" from the victim's options for psychological progress. While I'd concede this isn't important for most victims, it would be for some, especially when the rapist is a relative.

[CEDobson]

01:10 PM on 06/26/2008

Wanted to make a point - This is the gist of a story I just read on on CNN today:

"An inmate at the Tomoka Correctional Institution was quickly transferred to the Florida State Prison on Thursday after officials said he raped and killed a prison guard."

This is what happens to rapists who go to prison. Their animalistic instincts as non-human perverts still prevail and we just lost a guard doing his duty. If that man had been put to death for the crime he had committed of sexual battery and kidnapping, that man would be at home with his wife and kids right now enjoying life.

So doing life in prison doesn't stop these animals either.

[rcozad]

03:41 PM on 06/26/2008

If he was a priest they would transfer him to a new parish

[CEDobson]

04:13 PM on 06/26/2008

LOLOLOL - in an absolutely too true for words, sick kinda laugh

[mommamia526]

12:42 PM on 06/26/2008

One could reason in different ways. What is a person? Is it the body, or is it the soul and spirit? After all, body is just matter. So, if a person is not just matter, but soul and spirit what would rape of an innocent child do to the soul and spirit of the child? Would it be death of this child's soul and spirit? In that case would it, indeed, be murder? So, if capital punishment only applies to murder, would we have a case then? Why is this offender allowed more leeway than the victim? Why do we need to protect men sothat they will continue their ugly deeds? We have not one victim, we have now a society where children are being used in trafficking. I think the Supreme Court missed the boat here.

[jhamm1]

11:36 AM on 06/27/2008

Maybe. Unforuntately, until we can establish a tangible criteria for evaluating the effects of one's soul and spirit, it will remain a subjective phenomenon which is no basis for determining the severity of a crime.

[UnknownSoldier]

12:21 PM on 06/26/2008

And McCain and Bush want Drill for Oil off the California, New Jersey, and Florida Coast. Imagine what happens to the economies in those states if a 1200 mile Exxon Oil spill occurs. The people in those states have already spoken they do not want Drilling off their coast, but if Bush and McCain are so sure they want that, then put it on a voter refrendum.

[Redrover666]

01:21 PM on 06/26/2008

What in the hell does this have to do with the story here?

[JohnShank]

04:25 PM on 06/26/2008

Well I guess it means that Bush shouldn't drill in Alaska or Calif. and pedophiles shouldn't drill little kids.

[gonavy]

02:26 PM on 06/26/2008

I live in CA, and I want drilling NOW.

[rzan1]

12:09 PM on 06/26/2008

These people are sadly afflicted. They neede to be chemically castrated and separated from the rest of society permanently,.

[UnknownSoldier]

11:53 AM on 06/26/2008

Children are any societies most defenseless citizens, and it is my opinon that the Rape of Child is a defenseless crime and warrants an extreme punishment. If children grow up in a society where they are not safe from Sexual Predators then that society will not have normal children whom will in turn become abnormal adults fostering in an abnormal society. The best way to deal with SERIOUS problems and this is a SERIOUS problem is to get rid of it, not sweep it under the rug (Life in Prison).

For those who are opposed to the death penalty under any circumstances please come up with an alternative other than Life in Prison. What type of society produces people that have to be imprisoned for LIFE

[Brooklynindy]

12:05 PM on 06/26/2008

EVERY society produces people that have to be imprisoned for life.

[RoloTomassi]

12:08 PM on 06/26/2008

"What type of society produces people that have to be imprisoned for LIFE"

Answer: HUMAN SOCIETY, across the board, in every nation [unless they insist on taking them out back and shooting them].

So, by your logic, all of BushCo [Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Rice, etc.] should be facing the death penalty for the deaths of a multitude of innocent children in Iraq?

If not, then why not?

Is the murder of children by the act of WAR less deserving of a death sentence than raping a child?

[Boris]

11:29 AM on 06/26/2008

There are only two reasons for extreme penalties for a criminal action.

The first is the belief that the more draconian the punishment, the more likely some people will be deterred from the crime. The second is to extract societal revenge upon the convicted perpetrator.

Ask any criminologist if the severity of punishment deters the criminal and they will say that it doesnt. The only deterrent to crime is the certainty of being caught and certainty of being found guilty.

That being said, I have been reading Huff Post since its beginning and I have come to a really unpleasant conclusion. You people are generally as unsophisticated and stupid as Rush Limbaugh fans. Very few bloggers today have mentioned the victim of the crime of child rape, concentrating, instead, on vengeance on the perpetrator. Assigning a death penalty for child rape is giving a death sentence to the victim. If you cannot see that, your blind desire for revenge has overtaken your logic.

[GeorgeSalt]

04:32 PM on 06/26/2008

"You people are generally as unsophisticated and stupid as Rush Limbaugh fans"

Hear! HEAR!

Then again, what makes you think the two groups are mutually exclusive? I am both amused and bemused by some of the comments I read on this supposedly liberal and progressive blog.

[GeoNorth]

09:52 AM on 06/26/2008

To paraphrase singer song writer Steve Earle, the government works for me. I would not kill anyone for any reason other than self defense. When the government kills someone who is imprisoned and no harm to society, it hurts my spirit. It's not about the criminal, it's about us.

[meanguy]

10:08 AM on 06/26/2008

tell your spirit to take two aspirin and call the doc in the morning...funny, you've mentioned the criminla, society, 'us', the government, steve earle, and yourself...i guess your compassion is spread too thing to spare any for the victim...after all, kids are resilient, right?

[RoloTomassi]

11:01 AM on 06/26/2008

Your argument is a sham; you tie your very real desire for revenge to false claim of compassion for the child, but all you are really looking for is self-gratification.

Any real concern for the child would be to take care that the child actually survives the attack; your desire is to see the rapist dead, and what happens to the child is the parents concern rather than yours--your desire for revenge has been sated, so all is right with the world.

Oh, and if the rapist killed the child, well, that only goes to support your rational that he should have been executed, right?

[bgregs]

01:07 PM on 06/26/2008

meanguy,

You are talking about revenge, which is a perfectly natural response to a wrong done to us. However, revenge is almost always WRONG. Thus I'm glad that when my own daughter was raped by two strangers that I never saw them later. I *WOULD* have killed them with my bare hands, and that would have been just as wrong as for me to ask the state to kill them for me!!!

[talldrink]

01:04 PM on 06/26/2008

"I would not kill anyone for any reason other than self defense."

I take it you are a GROWN adult? I don't know that there is such a thing as self defense when you're a child. Are there many 8 year-olds that keep guns under their pillow in case their stepdad decides to rip apart their insides tonight?

An 8 year-old child cannot defend against a 300 lb man. So just because they cannot fight back, their rapist should live? Had the step-father broken into a neighbor's home and raped a full-grown woman who then shot him to death in self-defense, it seems you would have no qualms.

This judgement had nothing to do with adults getting raped, but only helpless children and those who cause internal injuries to them.

[Phil123]

09:49 AM on 06/26/2008

Some crimes warrant death. This is one of them.

[Boris]

11:11 AM on 06/26/2008

This is the dumbest logic in the world. The death penalty for child rape will only ensure that the rapist murders the child. Whether the crime deserves the death penalty or not is NOT the problem here. The problem is that a death penalty for a non capital crime just encourages the perpetrator to get rid of the only witness.

Our society's desire for vengeance will have the effect of a death sentence on the victim. Use your heads, people. If the penalty is death, you may as well kill the victim.
This was tried 60 years ago in California for kidnapping. Guess what? No living kidnap victims.

[Phil123]

11:39 AM on 06/26/2008

You could make the exact same argument about a jail sentence.

Using your logic then, we should impose NO punnishment; perhaps just an afternoon in Anger Management Class.

Who's logic is the dumbest?

[talldrink]

01:10 PM on 06/26/2008

This makes no sense. Life in prison isn't a reason to "kill your witness" but the death penalty is? If perpetrators thought they would get caught and punished, they wouldn't offend in the first place. these people are NOT considering their sentence when they do these awful things...
hmmm i would like to rape my step-daughter, but no - that would get me death penalty. OH WAIT they overturned that ruling - i'll only get life in prison! sa-weet!
give me a break. anti-death penalty people should disclose this in the beginning of their post; rather than try and argue for no capital punishment, only discuss the issue at hand: whether or not child rape should be a capital crime in addition to murder.

[Chris]

09:43 AM on 06/26/2008

If a person has so little respect for human life that they would committ murder or rape them why should society have respect for the perps life?

[mh01]

09:37 AM on 06/26/2008

5 (unelected lifetime) judges deciding to overturn laws legally enacted by representatives of the people. Terrible.

I heard someone say today that these 5 justices are a new Constitutional Convention every time they sit down to decide cases, creating rights that never existed, and striking down rights that always have

I actually agree that the death penalty is not the answer, I just don't like the way it came about.

I hear we will see what this court does with gun rights in a few hours.......

I'll give you 2-1 odds they will try to start take your guns.

[Brooklynindy]

09:36 AM on 06/26/2008

This country should not be putting anyone to death for any reason. I was extremely disappointed and disillusioned to learn this morning that not only does Sen. Obama support the death penalty, but that he does not support the Supreme Court's decision. I side with the Supreme Court and believe that the death penalty is disproportionate punishment in this case. Further, I believe that the death penalty is in itself a heinous, barbaric crime, and that is totally ineffective as a crime deterrent.

Given his previous statements on the death penalty, I believe that Sen. Obama does not in fact support the death penalty, let alone when applied disproportionately. He is pandering. Statements like this will drive voters to candidates like Nader. At least Nader says what he believes. There is such thing as a "wasted vote." A vote for Nader, for example, is a protest vote; a declaration that none of the major candidates sufficiently represents one's principles.

What Change will Obama bring if he's not willing to support abolition of the death penalty? If he's not willing to speak out for Gun Control wherever he is, whenever the issue comes up? If he's not willing to strip immunity from companies that sound like so many Germans after WWII when they claim that they were merely taking orders?

Sen. Obama needs to stop pandering or he will lose my support and my vote. I'm shaken by what I'm hearing, and I'm quite sure I'm not the only one.

[steamboat]

09:58 AM on 06/26/2008

I happen to agree with Obama on this..........BTW, I'm from Chicago. All I have to say is the more you really know about Obama, the more you will learn he is a TYPICAL Chicago/Cook County political machine hack and not this idealist of change.

The fact he's flip-flopped on bringing the troops home as soon as possible, public campaign funding, and having many townhall debates, aren't you starting to get the hint yet?

[Bluebayou101]

10:00 AM on 06/26/2008

Would you rather that McCain becomes President? Can you stand four more years of Bush policy? Do you honestly want the Supreme Court to be packed with more Republicans? A fat lot of good the "protest vote for Nader" did for the USA in 2000 [sarcasm].

[Brooklynindy]

10:29 AM on 06/26/2008

Well, let's see: McCain Supports the Death Penalty, and...Obama does too. McCain supports unauthorized spying on Americans, and....so does Obama. McCain panders to the gun industry, and...so does Obama.

For the record, I would hate to see McCain win. And you'll note that I stated, "or he will lose my support," and not "he has lost my support". But if he morphs into a quasi-Republican from now to November, then yes, he will lose my support.

It's important to not support any candidate blindly, and it's legitimate to call out a candidate when he panders. If you're going to acquiesce and worship Obama's every word, then you need to start calling him "Dear Leader" just like they do in North Korea.

[CEDobson]

08:53 AM on 06/26/2008

If the Supreme Court decision would have gone through with the decision to allow the death penalty for child rapists, what makes you think that the decision means all child rapists are put to death in that state? What this means is that this particular state would have the ability to issue the death penalty if the crime warranted and a jury of his/her peers deemed that penalty appropriate. One of the great things about our judicial system is that it always allows for variables, hence, first, second, third degree, etc. There are hundreds, if not thousands of cases where there is absolutely no doubt a crime was committed and by whom, i.e., DNA, confession without coercion, evidence out the wazoo, etc. Jessica Lunsford's case comes to mind, where I would have no problem "pulling the switch" on that monster. But again, there are variables and doubts in other cases where that fine line cannot be crossed.

Capital punishment, abortion and religion are touchy subjects for sure. I've been on Huffpo for a while and definitely proved to myself, on this issue in particular, after conducting myself all other times with dignity and restraint that I am not above losing it on some topics.

If I have offended anyone or went overboard regarding my beliefs on this issue, I certainly apologize, as that was not my intent.