I have a problem with a person convicted of a victimless crime. The case which comes to mind is that of a former president of a prominent charity who was charged with having child pornography (three pictures as stated in the STL Post Dispatch) on a personal computer. This was a person who had done a lot of good in her life. She made a huge mistake, yes. And now this person is being sentenced to jail for a maximum penalty of 10 years and a $250,000 fine when a convicted rapist/murderer was recently sentenced to 100 years in prison with possible parole in 10 years. Technically, the child porn person and rapist/murderer could be going into jail and getting out at the same time. Something is wrong with this picture.
Don't get me wrong. I do not condone child pornography and think something is probably amiss with the person who enjoys spending time on the computer viewing such material. But in this case, this person did not do anything to hurt anyone other than encouraging the sicko that put the porn on the site in the first place. And yet, this person has ruined her life, will spend some time in prison and have to pay a stiff fine. On the other hand, here is a convicted U.S. soldier serving in Iraq who, along with fellow soldiers, decided to gang rape a 14-year old, kill her and her family and could possibly be out on parole in 10 years.
There has to be a better way to make the crime fit the punishment.
Published by Ellie Miller
Ellie is a developmental therapist working with birth to three year olds and their families in the Early Intervention Program in Illinois. She had previously taught special education and regular education c... View profile
Texas Man Spends 10 Years in Prison for Rape and a NameJames Curtis Giles spent 10 years in prison for rape. In the end, his name is what gave him a prison sentence.- Impact of the Black Death on the Medieval EconomyHow did the Black Death influence the medieval economy? Was it all bad?
- Review of Movie, Death SentenceNow, bear in mind that this film is directed by James Wan, who also directed Saw, so abject vegeance and violence ensue when Nick, besieged with grief, realizes that the punishment does not always fit the crime.
- Confessions of a Bad MotherWe women need to stick together. As long as we're at each other's throats, wewill never be able to break free of the stereotypes that have for so long held us back.
Racial Bias: Helping Your Children UnderstandAlthough my husband and I claim to be tolerant and not racist, is it possible that my own prejudicial upbringing seeped in and influences certain behavior on my part.
- Should Capital Punishment Be Justified?
- The Death Penalty
- Gentle Discipline: Alternatives to Spanking in the First Few Years
- How Parents Can Make Their Child's Punishment Fit the "Crime"
- Gerabill - the Last Dragon
- Capital Punishment: The Death Penalty History and Arguments
- State and Federal Laws: Comparing Local and Federal Punishments


4 Comments
Post a CommentThat's what there in the army for. To protect and serve. That 14 year old girl didn't deserve to be raped and her whole family murdered just because some soldier needed to let of some steam. This is a blatant wake up call for all soldiers around the world and to the USA in particular. They invaded Iraq to help the people. So what's this whole rape and murder issue? i don't classify it as helping. Just because they have a gun, they believe they can just go in and do whatever they please. I don't know if he had a conscious, but a family of innocent people died because of him and his mates.
It's no excuse to blame it on their mental state. They should know what it will be like. No one wants to go to war, read the history books, people do terrible things.
Hi There!
I'm doing an essay on whether crime should fit the offender or the actual crime itself. Initially, i just thought that the punishment should fit the crime itself. I figured that if the punishment itself was harsh enough, it would deter the offender from reoffending. Also, it serves as zero tolerance. Once you do the crime, you have to pay for it. No getting out of it.
However, after doing a bit of research, i realised that crime to fit the punishment may not be the best situation. I think that in some cases, maybe re-offenders who don't really deserve a second chance should be subjected to this sort of ruling. But the fact is, if we allowed discretion to rule and allow punishments to be altered subjectively, it wouldn't be fair at all.
Also, in my own opinion (and no offence to Kristina Jones) i'm sure these soldiers have a lot of pressure on the battlefield, but this USA soldier had a duty of responsibility to ensure that no innocent civilian lives were taken. Tha
We have no idea what these guys have gone through nor what they have seen out there. It can put enormous pressures on them causing them to act out of character. I am sure the judge presiding over the court martials took their state of mind into account and other circumstances at the time of sentencing. I will say that 95% of all punishments do fit the crime in our society.
I would have to disagree with your example of child pornography as a victimless crime. There are victims involved with this crime. There is always a victim in nearly all crimes committed. Just because a person did not directly hurt someone, does not mean the crime has no victims. I believe there are crimes where the punishment is too severe, and child pornography is not one of the crimes I view as having a too severe punishment. It is just as bad as molesting a child. Just because the child has not been molested by the person in custody of the pictures, does not mean that person is innocent of having a role in a crime against a child.
Your other example of the group of soldiers is a different situation. As a former soldier and a wife of a soldier, there is a lot of stress out on the battle field. Now I know this does not mean they should go around raping and killing others, but they suffer a lot due to not enough psychiatric help between deployments. We have no idea what these guys