Dichotomy of Justice

This week we were witness to two very distinct and divergent views of what constitutes justice. Two cases that involve sexual misconduct, one admittedly more severe than the other, but sexual misconduct none the less. The differences in these cases show us how far apart we are as a nation in regards to our views on rehabilitation, retribution, and justice for the victims and society.

In the state of Louisiana a man convicted of child rape of his 8 year old step daughter is awaiting his appeals of his death sentence. Patrick Kennedy is currently the only person in the country awaiting the death penalty for a crime other than murder. The US Supreme court which ruled some 42 years ago that you could not put someone to death for rape will hear arguments this week to determine if putting someone to death for a crime other than murder is cruel and unusual. Louisiana takes the unusual view that the the courts original ruling referred to the rape of adults and that child rape is a crime that is especially heinous and deserving of the death penalty. Nineteen years after the Supreme Court ruling Louisiana Legislature passed a law allow for the use of the death penalty for those who commit rape of a child under 12. The family of the child who's identity is still unknown to this day is especially committed to seeing the case through. They believe that the punishment is justified due to the lifetime of mental anguish, fear, and suspicion that the victims have to live with. "It's going to be justice," said Lynn Ray, the victim's cousin. "It's going to be that she can look forwards and not backwards, and not have to look over your shoulders, and one day see him. Or see him coming after her."

(For more on this case: http://edition.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/04/15/rape.execution/)


Meanwhile, in the state of New York, we see the case of a man convicted 52 times, 29 of which involved sexual misconduct. Freddie Johnson, still under electronic monitoring was apprehended a 53rd time. He was witnessed and caught in the act of rubbing himself against a Hunter College co-ed. Johnson was charged with persistent sexual abuse and forcible touching. While Johnson certainly hasn't committed an act so depraved as child rape, the repetitiveness and his inability to change his behavior leads on to question the state of New York's actions in this man's case. Think of the number of women who have been molested and accosted because New York failed to act responsibly in this instance. While I'm not advocating the death penalty for Mr. Johnson, we have to wonder why after several times being charged and convicted of these lower level sexual assaults that Mr. Johnson was not locked away with a lost key.

(For more on this case: http://www.nydailynews.com/ny_local/2008/04/10/2008-04-10_a_53time_loser_paroled_pervs_molest_try_.html)

These two cases present a very different opinion on the ability to rehabilitate, as well as, questions about the consequences of ones actions. Can someone who commits an act of sexual misconduct be rehabilitated? What constitutes appropriate punishment when one violates another in a sexual manner (no matter how slight)? Can the victims ever feel safe again?

Rehabilitation, is impossible for sex offenders, or so claims Andrew Vachss. In an article originally published in 1993 Vachss claims that rehabilitation is thwarted by, "the need for offenders to seek higher and higher levels of stimulation. There is no observable waning of their desires over time: sexual predators do not outgrow their behavior. Thus, while most sadistic sex offenders are not first arrested for homicide, they may well try to murder someone in the future." (http://www.vachss.com/av_dispatches/disp_9301_a.html) Additionally, he goes on to state, "If we don't intend to execute sexual predators, and we have no treatment, what is our final line of defense?"

From the stance of the state of Louisiana the answer to that question is that for childred at least, based on the severity of the act of child rape, the only retribution that can be had is to put the offender to death. In the case of the state of New York, the act of groping a woman is so non-consequential that one can perpetrate it 53 times before we decide that it might be appropriate to incarcerate the person for life.

The Supreme Court has to decide if Louisiana's approach is correct and legal in terms of the cruel and unusual sections of the Constitution. The citizens of New York have to decide if their approach is correct and if not, push law makers in Albany to reform the NYS Penal Code. The Supreme Court could also be called on to decide if imprisonment based on probable conduct is legal, even if the probable conduct is based on 52 prior committed acts.

The only thing that is certain is that if the perpetrators of these acts are allowed back out on the streets the victims will never be safe, be it life imprisonment or death, one of those two options are the only way to allow victims to begin to gain some semblence of security back in their lives.