Du Pont heir dodged prison for raping 3-year-old daughter after judge ruled he 'would not fare well'

[Ninjamedic]

I love threads like this. Gives people a chance to come out and get their big moral stiffy and sense of self satisfaction for the day.

Shine on you crazy diamonds.

Now we play the Game of Conscience.

Count how many people express concern for the victims.

Then compare to the people waiting for mob justice and the end to these "sub-humans". Because it worked with the SA right?

 

[SonOfVoorhees]

Atleast out of prison he wont fair to well either. If he is heir to du pont then he will be an easy man to find. But this case is not justice, seems their is one rule for the rich and one for the poor. An where criminals are treating better than their victims. Poor girl i hope she gets all the help she needs and the scum that did it get what he deserves.

 

[omega 616]

snip

So what? I am pretty sure I wouldn't do well in prison, do you know how I deal with that? I DON'T COMMIT CRIMES! The fuck happened to "if you can't do the time, don't do the crime"?

Everybody knows, you hurt a kid and you go to jail ... you're fucked, like 9th circle of hell kind of fucked! So "he will be raped/killed in jail" just isn't a good reason to let him go on probation ... if he is ok to go on probation, why aren't all the others put on probation? You know, for their safety.

 

[Kopikatsu]

Oh my

Well, it seems that the justice for all concept seems to be out-dated for the elite...

But what on Earth is fourth-degree rape? .-.

Rape in the forth degree has numerous meanings, although in this particular case it simply means the victim is under 16. Provided this happened in the US, anyway. I didn't pay much attention.

 

[rcs619]

Guys, I'm pretty sure the phrase "Wouldn't do well" isn't referring to him being uncomfortable due to the shitty living conditions, I think it's referring to him being raped and murdered by other inmates. The judge just didn't want to give him a death sentence.

This has exactly shit to do with his money, and it REALLY has nothing to do with "affulenza".

To be fair, he repeatedly raped a girl as young as three, who was also his own daughter (and his son too, if I read correctly). You can't fix someone that sick, you can't rehab them. The best you can do is get them out of society so that they can't do it again. There's not a lot of people I'd be alright with just throwing to the wolves, but he'd definitely qualify. Lock him away, let God and his cell-mates sort him out. Worst comes to worst, it isn't like anything of value was lost.

There are a lot of issues with current US sex-crime laws. A lot of gray areas when people get tossed in jail or ruined for life because of technicalities (18-20 year olds being with 16 year olds they've been friends or peers with most of their lives, and such), but this is not one of them. This is a straight-up pedophile who preyed on his own flesh and blood multiple times. The fact that the mandatory sentence for this sort of act *isn't* life in prison appalls me. I'm all for rehabilitation, and reforming our prison system to be something other than a modern dungeon that breeds worse criminals... but not for something like this.

 

[rutger5000]

As much as this infuriates me, the judge was probably right.

There's that saying about what happens to child rapists in prison...

I hope the civil case ruins him until he's forced to take his chances on the street.

I'm a humanist, and I think that punishment should be dished out with the idea of either rehabilitation, or the most humane way of isolation affordable. Revenge should not be a factor in determining punishment. That being said, individuals such as the above mentioned can never be allowed back into society, and should be locked down for life. For this man to be able to re enter society he needs to grasp the full weight of his crime, and no sane man could bear such weight. So the only morally responsible option left is lifetime isolation. The most humane should by definition be a normal prison, as we can't afford to treat this man any better as normal criminals. (Though I suppose could be made for a psychiatric prison). That this man will likely die in prison is regrettable (but only so as it means that people get killed in prisons), but not societies responsibility.
That being said, I believe the most human way of dealing with this individual is the termination of his life. We rightfully put rabbit dogs to sleep, that's the morally correct choice. I do not see how this is any different.

 

[rutger5000]

There are few morals that are shared by most of humanity, but one absolute is commonly shared. YOU DO NOT MESS WITH CHILDREN. Those who do can never under any circumstance be allowed to partake in society ever again. They need to be permanently isolated from society. If that results in the premature death of such an individual, than that shows there's something wrong with societies methods of isolation. But there's no alternative to isolation. Not being able to guarantee the safety of an individual in isolation, does not excuse said individual from isolation.
That being said, this man is sick and I can't imagine anything more cruel than curing him. If this man is cured from his diseased mind, than he'll realize the full horror of what he has done. I don't wish that fate on anyone. Should society truly be that cruel and let this poor life? Put him in a cell, feed him till he goes to sleep, and than gas him. That's the kindest thing you could do for this man, and the best solution to the problem he poses.

 

[JoJo]

Always a bit worrying when people start calling someone like this an animal or whatever. Yes, what he did was inexcusable, but there are plenty more like him. It's nice to break it down between "us" and "monsters", but society isn't that simple.

Also...people like to say that rape is a crime that "we" all agree is totally wrong and unforgiveable, but this is only true of a given value of "we". The judge came down on the rapist's side (for whatever reason), and the judge the only person to do stuff like this.

I agree. I'm always a little suspicious of people who claim that rapists and / or murderers are somehow 'monsters' and 'not human', such attitudes aren't just inaccurate but also most likely harmful to combating rape and abuse. It's well documented how people will often go into denial if they find out a family member or close friend has been committed one of those crimes, making up pathetic excuses like 'she must have been leading him on, she's a slut anyway' or 'he just made a mistake, he's very sorry and won't ever do it again', or 'she's a nice girl, she'd never do anything like that to a child!'. Separating abusers as the other risks us becoming blind to those who we know committing those crimes, because the hard truth is that most rapists are otherwise little different from you or I.

OT: The sentence seems a little lenient but ultimately unlike the judge none of us were at the trial, perhaps the article is leaving out important information relevant to the sentence, no doubt because it's intention is to incite moral indignation.

 

[rutger5000]

I love threads like this. Gives people a chance to come out and get their big moral stiffy and sense of self satisfaction for the day.

Shine on you crazy diamonds.

Now we play the Game of Conscience.

Count how many people express concern for the victims.

Then compare to the people waiting for mob justice and the end to these "sub-humans". Because it worked with the SA right?

All I can say is touché. My concern where with the issue of what to do with this man, the thought on how to deal with the victims had yet to cross my mind. You've shown me that I've issues.

 

[Wereduck]

I have brought Friedrich Nietzsche to this Forum already a number of times but it seems I have to do so again:

"But thus I counsel you, my friends: Mistrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful. They are people of a low sort and stock; the hangman and the bloodhound look out of their faces. Mistrust all who talk much of their justice! Verily, their souls lack more than honey. And when they call themselves the good and the just, do not forget that they would be pharisees, if only they had ? power."

I'm glad someone mentioned this because I wholly agree with FN's sentiment but I don't see what it has to do with this situation.
Just because you want to impose sadistic punishment on a man who violates his own daughter does not make you a sadist. Just because you eat a big meal does not make you a glutton. Violence is a temporary solution to a permanent problem but in some cases it is neccessary and in others - such as this - it is richly deserved.
I don't doubt that many of the crusaders who call for this filth's head are nothing more than angry people, eager to find a target for their hatred that they can attack with impunity. I also do not doubt that just as many are nothing more than people with empathy.
Those of us with children in our lives know that to call the thing that did this an animal is an insult to animals.

 

[rutger5000]

This ruling makes no sense "he wouldn't fare well"

Uhh correct me if I'm wrong judge but isn't that kind of the WHOLE POINT OF SENDING SOMEONE TO JAIL?

Also as far as the whole "getting raped/murdered by other inmates" Yes I'll agree that is not good, but people tend to over exaggerate how common that sort of thing is, as prison is pretty regulated by policemen and inmates were kept in separate cells depending on their crime to protect against that sort of thing (at least last I checked) sure it will happen every once in awhile but again prison isn't supposed to be a nice place

He sexually assaulted his daughter... that to me just makes me sick...

I'm not going to pretend like the stuff in prison DOESN'T happen because I know for a fact it does happen, but I think its really over exaggerated how often it happens...

*sigh* maybe if prison time was actually a serious punishment as opposed to just being stuck in a cheap apartment for a few years then people would not commit crimes as much...

Hell, I recently heard inmates are complaining they don't get satellite TV and PS3's instead they get stuck with cable...

MY GOSH SOMEONE HELP THEM

*sigh* Look I don't want to piss anyone off, and I am not going to pretend like nothing bad in prison ever happens, but its prison, ITS SUPPOSED TO BE A HORRIBLE PLACE TO GO

Also at this point... I'm sorry anyone that commits this disgusting of a crime knowing full well the consequences...

I barely consider people like that human, you can agree or disagree with me on this. but fact of the matter is Prison should be prison, not a cheap apartment that you are forced to stay in

The idea that prison should be a horrible place is medieval, and shown to be extremely counter-productive. It harms society much much more than it does good. Prisons should be a secured place for rehabilitation and/or isolation. This man can't be rehabilitated and I fail to see the point of isolation. Simply put this man to sleep, that's the kindest thing to do.

 

[chinangel]

Well, one of the whole problems is that the focus on our prison system is too much on rehabilitation as opposed to punishment.

I wanted to comment on this part imparticular. You see, originally prison systems were exclusively on punishment, as harsh a punishment as could be doled out: human rights be damned.

The end result? Criminals came out more dangerous, more hardened, more amoral. By focusing on rehab you can prevent a criminal from re-offending, or at least that is the theory.

Besides, they already have been locked up: how much worse can it get? Daily beatings? Torture? Tazering?

The reason prisoners are provided internet, video games and other distractions is because sitting in a cell with nothing drives people literally insane and you get a person with violent tendencies alone with nothing but his thoughts and well...

Criminology, psychology and the like are why our jail system exists as it does, but hey on the other hand there are prisons almost exclusively punishment based.

Here in Canada a story broke in the last year or so about a prison where the prisoners were forced into fight clubs by the guards and warden. If they refused to participate or complained then their food was pissed on, they were beaten and attacked by the guards.

I also heard a story about prison in california that is so over-populated that they dont' have room. Cells are loaded until it's standing room only, prisoners locked in cages hanging from the ceiling (not cells, CAGES) and some just shackled to the ground in a hall because there isn't enough room for them.

Which one of these sounds like it will stop crime and which one sounds like it will promote it?

 

[JoJo]

The idea that prison should be a horrible place is medieval, and shown to be extremely counter-productive. It harms society much much more than it does good. Prisons should be a secured place for rehabilitation and/or isolation. This man can't be rehabilitated and I fail to see the point of isolation. Simply put this man to sleep, that's the kindest thing to do.

Citation needed on the man being unable to be rehabilitated, despite the urban myths sex offenders have the second lowest recidivism rates of any type of criminal at just 2.5% reoffending in three years after release and statistically, those who abuse in the family are less likely to reoffend than those who target children outside their family. Those seem like fairly good odds to me, especially compared with the average recidivism rate for all prisoners which is 60% in the US and 50% in the UK respectively.

 

[martyrdrebel27]

As much as this infuriates me, the judge was probably right.

There's that saying about what happens to child rapists in prison...

I hope the civil case ruins him until he's forced to take his chances on the street.

yeah, that saying is "they get exactly what the fuck they deserve." and even so, this has nothing to do with what would happen to him in prison, as people are put in prison EVERY DAY for this kinda shit, the difference here is his fucking money, it makes me sick.

 

[Dragonbums]

As much as this infuriates me, the judge was probably right.

There's that saying about what happens to child rapists in prison...

I hope the civil case ruins him until he's forced to take his chances on the street.

And all rapists in general, but they still go to jail.

Why exactly is he exempt from jail time because he "may not fare well" but all the others convicts get the ticket. I'm not saying they should let those people go, but you gotta understand that letting one guy off the hook because of his financial status is bullshit and a clear bias for the rich. Him being poor is no trade off for me. He needs to go behind bars. Period.

 

[rutger5000]

The idea that prison should be a horrible place is medieval, and shown to be extremely counter-productive. It harms society much much more than it does good. Prisons should be a secured place for rehabilitation and/or isolation. This man can't be rehabilitated and I fail to see the point of isolation. Simply put this man to sleep, that's the kindest thing to do.

Citation needed on the man being unable to be rehabilitated, despite the urban myths sex offenders have the second lowest recidivism rates of any type of criminal at just 2.5% reoffending in three years after release and statistically, those who abuse in the family are less likely to reoffend than those who target children outside their family. Those seem like fairly good odds to me, especially compared with the average recidivism rate for all prisoners which is 60% in the US and 50% in the UK respectively.

I base the mentioned notion on my understanding of the human mind, of which I am no qualified expert, yet still dare to make a few statements regarding to. I reason that for this man to rehabilitate he'd need to grasp the full horror of what he did, I wouldn't trust anyone who could still function in society after that. Any sane man who had done something so horrible as this would scratch out his own eyes in horror, the trauma it'd cause is to great for any sane man to bear.
I fail to see how this man could be safely be reintroduced in society if he fails to grasp the full horror of his actions, and than comes to terms with it. And I think it's a contradiction for both steps to succeed. That is: Either he successfully grasps the full horror of his actions, which makes it impossible for him to come to terms with them. Or he comes to terms with his actions, which would require he does not grasps the full horror of them.
Perhaps I stated this notion too strongly as fact, as I indeed lack sources or qualification to back them up. Yet I have confidence in them, more so than I have in statics that themselves come without source. You'll have to give me those sources, so I can check them on relevance and reliability.

 

[JoJo]

The idea that prison should be a horrible place is medieval, and shown to be extremely counter-productive. It harms society much much more than it does good. Prisons should be a secured place for rehabilitation and/or isolation. This man can't be rehabilitated and I fail to see the point of isolation. Simply put this man to sleep, that's the kindest thing to do.

Citation needed on the man being unable to be rehabilitated, despite the urban myths sex offenders have the second lowest recidivism rates of any type of criminal at just 2.5% reoffending in three years after release and statistically, those who abuse in the family are less likely to reoffend than those who target children outside their family. Those seem like fairly good odds to me, especially compared with the average recidivism rate for all prisoners which is 60% in the US and 50% in the UK respectively.

I base the mentioned notion on my understanding of the human mind, of which I am no qualified expert, yet still dare to make a few statements regarding to. I reason that for this man to rehabilitate he'd need to grasp the full horror of what he did, I wouldn't trust anyone who could still function in society after that. Any sane man who had done something so horrible as this would scratch out his own eyes in horror, the trauma it'd cause is to great for any sane man to bear.
I fail to see how this man could be safely be reintroduced in society if he fails to grasp the full horror of his actions, and than comes to terms with it. And I think it's a contradiction for both steps to succeed. That is: Either he successfully grasps the full horror of his actions, which makes it impossible for him to come to terms with them. Or he comes to terms with his actions, which would require he does not grasps the full horror of them.
Perhaps I stated this notion too strongly as fact, as I indeed lack sources or qualification to back them up. Yet I have confidence in them, more so than I have in statics that themselves come without source. You'll have to give me those sources, so I can check them on relevance and reliability.

This is a good start, it's not hard data to find to be honest: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recidivism#Recidivism_rates . And yes, I know it's Wiki but it has links to several actual studies there if you want to look at primary sources.

Hm, not going to lie, most of what you've wrote just sounds like conjecture rather than anything with factual basis. People are surprisingly resilient, I don't think you or I can say what anyone aside from ourselves could cope with, and calling for someone's death based on pure theory when the statistics go against you doesn't seem particularly just. Believe what you want about the human mind, but if you're arguing about life and death you better bring some hard facts to the table, just saying.

 

[ShadowsofHope]

Well, one of the whole problems is that the focus on our prison system is too much on rehabilitation as opposed to punishment.

I wanted to comment on this part imparticular. You see, originally prison systems were exclusively on punishment, as harsh a punishment as could be doled out: human rights be damned.

The end result? Criminals came out more dangerous, more hardened, more amoral. By focusing on rehab you can prevent a criminal from re-offending, or at least that is the theory.

Besides, they already have been locked up: how much worse can it get? Daily beatings? Torture? Tazering?

The reason prisoners are provided internet, video games and other distractions is because sitting in a cell with nothing drives people literally insane and you get a person with violent tendencies alone with nothing but his thoughts and well...

Criminology, psychology and the like are why our jail system exists as it does, but hey on the other hand there are prisons almost exclusively punishment based.

Here in Canada a story broke in the last year or so about a prison where the prisoners were forced into fight clubs by the guards and warden. If they refused to participate or complained then their food was pissed on, they were beaten and attacked by the guards.

I also heard a story about prison in california that is so over-populated that they dont' have room. Cells are loaded until it's standing room only, prisoners locked in cages hanging from the ceiling (not cells, CAGES) and some just shackled to the ground in a hall because there isn't enough room for them.

Which one of these sounds like it will stop crime and which one sounds like it will promote it?

I was going to respond to watergamer about this, but thank you for putting it so well for me! Completely agreed.

The laughable thing about Theuromancers statement is that the American Prison system is in the minority when it comes to genuine attempts at rehabilitative prison options, and there is much political and economic pressures from "tough on crime" politicians and private prison entrepreneurs to maintain a heavily punishment based prison environment. Not to mention that the U.S. has one of the highest, if not highest recidivism rates in the world alongside the largest prison population in the world. I wonder why?

Sadly, despite even Texas telling Stephen Harper here in Canada that such an archaic approach to prison's doesn't work, "tough on crime" is easier to sell politically and emotionally to voters than any productive system of rehabilitation and reform.

OT: While I am angered at the influence of money once again in regards to how legal proceedings play out, or what this man has done, I can't say I disagree with the judge's decision not to place this man in the general prison population. This man is not a monster, and he is not inhuman and it is very easy to shout for blood when the target is dehumanized like this. Segregate him in prison when the law finally catches up with him, but even the worst of offenders deserves whatever chance we can offer at rehabilitation and reform before more serious and harsh methods are approached. At least, that's my opinion.