To think this child rapist should have got life?

[pogojojo]

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-39749153

He raped a 5 year old for fucks sake, I'll never understand the sentencing for sex crimes, that girl's life is ruined, and do they really think he won't reoffend?

I agree that violence in prison shouldn't be condoned. I think the reason many do is they feel that the punishment doesn't fit the crime, and the threat of violence from other prisoners helps address that.

As for my view on castration. If a rapist is deemed to be a threat to children, he shouldn't be released. However, if castration is a way of ensuring he isn't a threat, then maybe after a very, very long time (30 years +) he may be considered for release if he consents to it.

There are a number of posters on this thread that have no understanding of chemical castration and it's effectiveness. It is HUGELY effective in reducing re-offense rates. Of course it is not a complete solution.

The results vary somewhat by time, by different methods, etc.
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3565125/

Quote: Surgical castration reportedly produces definitive results, even in repeat pedophilic offenders, by reducing recidivism rates to 2% to 5% compared with expected rates of 50%.

There is a lot of debate in the medical community about the various cocktails and contributing factors. There are several studies/experiments currently underway that attempt to balance effectiveness with medical impact.

I received a PM with respect the medical impact...and it's better to post reply here.

As an example, if you take cyproterone acetate, the effective amount for a person may vary from 10mg per week up to a dose of 200mg per day.

Some of the cocktails can have significant side effects, which vary by does, for example medroxyprogesterone acetate, can result in migraines, and sometimes allergic reactions.

xmaspost How is it monitored that someone is taking it?

Quote: Surgical castration reportedly produces definitive results, even in repeat pedophilic offenders, by reducing recidivism rates to 2% to 5% compared with expected rates of 50%.

Barbaric? Possibly... but castrating a rapist is surely less barbaric than a small child being raped. Why increase the risk (yes, I accept there may still be a risk - but if so he shouldn't be released) that a small child may be violated simply because you want to protect child rapist's right to have an erection? You would need to be twisted a million times over to do so!

In controlled studies the administration is supervised by medical staff, and blood tests for monitoring. However, as with any medical treatment, it depends on the person to ensure they participate.

So to implement anything like this on a large scale requires the cost of the drug, and medical support. Obviously there are ethical concerns then when a person has completed a custodial sentence, and may no longer be obligated to participate.

Maybe the judge, who knew all the details and the sentencing guidelines and has years of experience, actually thought, for longer than any of the posters here, about the sentence before imposing it.

Maybe the judge, who knew all the details and the sentencing guidelines and has years of experience, actually thought, for longer than any of the posters here, about the sentence before imposing it.

I disagree... I fully recognise that a judge will hear more facts and see more evidence than we will ever hear or see, but I can't even conceive of any possible mitigating circumstances that would justify this sentence. I'd be interested if you could... if not, you're spouting nonsense.

Ethylred

I've spent a huge portion of my teenage years and adult life thinking about appropriate sentences for people who commit offences such as these actually. I'd say that's far longer than one judge on one case. So perhaps don't assume people who have posted on this thread haven't given such cases much have. Those of us affected by sentences like the one being discussed will have agonised over it time and time again.

Ceto I have no wish to restore the death penalty. I was merely pointing out that for a good part of the 19th century rape was a capital crime.

Threads such as this bring out some of the best and worst in mumsnet, The best is those who are having a calm and rational discussion about the issue. The absolute worst is the pitchfork-waving mob who first descended on this thread and who now seem to have lost interest. What an absolute shower of arseholes they are. To the rest of you, advocating sensibly, do carry on. I find that part of the discussion fascinating.

Those of us affected by sentences like the one being discussed will have agonised over it time and time again.

Then you should go into politics and try to get sentencing reform through. Because that's the reality of it. The judge has very little control. They can't pass what would be considered, in comparison with other similar cases, an "excessive" sentence or the person will have greater grounds on appeal. It's not as simple as saying, "Oh yes, the harshest sentence for you!" and wiping your hands of it.

superbeagle

I have never asked for an excessive sentence to be passed - have you even read my posts in this thread? I think you will find I have offered other suggestions for how to deal with CSA offenders and said that the pitch fork mentality wasn't helpful for various reasons. I have not once said anything, or alluded anything, about the judge in this case, other than to say that I actually have spent a considerable amount of time thinking about these things.

I don't think violence in those situations should be accepted user but I do think it's understandable.

I guess I just like everyone else want a child to be protected.

I want the person who done it to be punished by having.only basic needs met but no luxuries.

I would ideally want them to be disgusted in themselves.

But ultimately I just want it not to happen in the first place.

A 25 year old who is raped will undoubtably be deeply scarred but hopefully will have prior knowledge of men and therefore will hopefully be able to have appropriate relationships with men again.

However, a 5 year old who is raped may become terrified of men completely. Or she may act over sexualised. She'll have no natural basis or norm she's used to - so you've most likely got a future adult who will struggle massively with intimacy.

I just think that although yes it's great to look at it logically, it's very difficult to not have a knee jerk reaction.

I want the person who done it to be punished by having.only basic needs met but no luxuries.

Why do you want the punishment for someone who has repeatedly raped a child then terrified her in silence to be so light?

"I guess I just like everyone else want a child to be protected.

I want the person who done it to be punished by having.only basic needs met but no luxuries.

I would ideally want them to be disgusted in themselves.

But ultimately I just want it not to happen in the first place."

Yes, yes to all this. Agree completely. The system we have at the moment just does not work, particularly when supporting the victim.

Coconutella I don't think that is a light punishment necessarily - I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that we were taking custodial sentences without privileges like iphones, TVs and nintendo etc.

The thing is, I don't have my basic needs met by the state.... I earn money to do that. Even when prisoners aren't living in luxury, and recognising be incarcerated isn't something someone would generally choose, earning money which not only pays for my basics but also (through taxes) pay for a child rapist's too grates somewhat!

Coconutella - I think all prisoners should be earning money through manufacturing etc. This is one of my gripes with the system.

I think I speak for many when I say harsh as prison life might be, it isn't sufficient punishment for a child rapist... I'm not advocating torture, just that simply the 'deprivation of liberty' that seems to be the liberal consensus isn't sufficient.

Hard labour (and I don't mean working literally to death like a japanese pow camp) would help. I think it's people's frustration over the leniency of punishment for heinous crimes that leads them to support violence by other prisoners (which I don't condone).

I've spent a huge portion of my teenage years and adult life thinking about appropriate sentences for people who commit offences such as these actually. I'd say that's far longer than one judge on one case.

But that is completely irrelevant in relation to the sentence in any given case, unless you have seen the same papers as the judge, and been present in court throughout the hearing in the same way as him or her.

Ceto Yes, on a case by case basis - not on the whole system is failing basis, no (though I guess there may be some judges that think that), but I didn't comment on the actually length of sentence in this case - I didn't pass judgement on it.

I think I speak for many when I say harsh as prison life might be, it isn't sufficient punishment for a child rapist... I'm not advocating torture, just that simply the 'deprivation of liberty' that seems to be the liberal consensus isn't sufficient.

You clearly have no idea what prison life is like.