Chaotek Thoughts

The Supreme Court just banned the death penalty for child rape cases, on a 5 to 4 vote. I can’t disagree more with this decision. Perhaps the questionable circumstances of this case had some influence, as I admit that the victim’s testimony in this case is questionable as it took 20 months for the victim to identify the convict even though he was arrested within weeks of the event. However I don’t think that this should remove the possibility of the death penalty entirely. In fact, I would support expanding the death penalty to more non-homicide crimes.

For example, bank robbery has historically had a very steep penalty compared to similar robbery charges because in the past robbing a bank could destroy the lives of thousands. Since banks are insured by the Federal bank, this isn’t the case anymore, but the punishment is just as severe. I would go as far as to say that others who ruin many lives or destroy the life of someone without killing them should be eligible for execution. Consider cases in Africa where a man throws battery acid on the face of a woman, or in Europe where a person was held as a sex slave for years. These sound like cases where a person’s life is ruined even if they are still alive. Or consider a case where the attempted murder resulted in paralysis, blindness, or even severe emotional damage. In some ways, isn’t that a fate worse than death?

Considering the circumstances, I think I would not have supported the death penalty in this case, and perhaps even would have voted not-guilty if I was on the jury since the eye witness testimony allows for some doubt. I don’t like the death penalty in cases where the only evidence is eyewitness testimony, especially that of a child, given how unreliable it is. However that shouldn’t destroy the ability to sentence the death penalty in non-homicide cases.