u rape a child, u die

[PatsFanCT]

Just to clarify, for those talking about teens falsely accusing their older boyfriends of rape, this is strictly for child rapists. Children 12 and under. It is much easier to prove rape of a child, than a promiscuous teen.

[dmarc117]

In your example, how many times was the guy beaten and denied his request for counsel before he confessed?

 

 

here we go

[McBoog]

I also think we have to look at this in real terms. The article talks about the rape of an eight year old child.

 

We often talk about Child Pornography as a media that pedos are attracted to. The term now used in law enforcement is Child Exploitation. It may seem a subtle difference, but “pornography” implies a willingness of participation. Would it be pornography if I got a woman drunk, slip her a rufi and then tape a bunch of guys raping her? Nope! Children cannot be considered willing participants in the production of any of this material.

 

We as a society and the press have come to use the word “Pedophilia” as an all inclusive term for sexual attraction to anyone under the legal age of consent.

 

There are three categories that are pertinent to the discussion:

 

Nepiophilia - (also called infantophilia), is a sexual preference for toddlers and infants ages 0–3

 

Pedophilia – is a sexual preference for children (ages 4-12)

 

Ephebophilia - also called Hebephilia) has been defined as a sexual preference for adolescents (ages 13-19)

 

The reality is that there are some ephebophiliacs that find the practice of pedophilia and nepiophilia as revolting as "normal people" and do not have any concept that they are suffering from a similar affliction. The problem with this category is the extremes of the age group itself. There are many 14-15 year olds in this country that can easily be mistaken physically for the upper limits of this preference. Depending on the age of consent from state to state, this could be very hard to prove that a person was “intentionally predating a child or minor”. (Not making excuses, just pointing out what I encounter at work every day). Many of the men that are in this category are the ones that keep divorcing and then marrying women younger and younger. The need for their sexual attraction outweighs the need for a stable relationship based on communication and love.

 

Pedophilia and Ephebophilia speak for themselves. The clinical psychologists that we work closely with say that there is no cure for the attraction. There are some therapies that can deter recidivism (though not very successful), but the sexual urge or desire to have sex with children never goes away.

 

In the case of ephebophilia, the cases are pretty clear and the evidence stands on its own. It is also usually hard to detect because of the limited communication abilities of the victims. Death or physical injury requiring medical attention is often the first sign that it has been occurring.

 

Victims of pedophilia have their own unique obstacles for the investigator. It is very dicey to properly interview a child. Children so often want to gain the approval of an adult, that hey can be led into saying and believing almost anything. Once again, physical evidence (DNA, media, eye witness) is the most solid evidence that is needed to move forward with this type of investigation. Well credentialed, highly trained interviewers are the only way to get a reliable statement from child victims.

 

Having been in law enforcement for 20+ years, I have trouble saying that felons have a “code” (this to me implies honor and duty), but there are certain standards of conduct that are accepted in jail. Despite the perversions and warped micro-culture that is created behind bars amongst adults, abusers of children and women are non-grata from day one. I don’t see why they get to have any special treatment and should be placed into the general population with the rest of the scum (this goes for corrupt/convicted cops as well).

 

I have been associated with Child Exploitation issues now for the last 6 years (fully involved now for about three). When we go on “raids” (search warrants) of these sickos, we are always reminded to maintain the highest level of weapon security. There have been many instances of these whack jobs grabbing a cops gun and capping themselves during the operation.

 

Yeah, I’m in favor of killing these El Guapos with the appropriate level of proof. I go home "hurting inside" at least twice a week and am fortunate to have the wife I do so that I can turn to her instead of the bottle. I also do see some of the problems and frustrations that the prosecutors have in approaching these cases. I don't know how many more years I can do this, but it is important and rewarding work. Sure, getting these people off the streets feels good, but the greatest reward is when we actually save a child.

 

Well, I could go on for pages with stories and opinions, but to the chagrin of some of you, I’m sure that this has gone too long (again). But I do want to add one last thing. Pedophiles do not usually just go out and rape a child. There is very little randomness to their actions and a very complex “grooming” process is involved. It can be anything from grooming the individual child to grooming the single mother of minor children as a bridge to gain her trust to get close to her children. True child predators will often be grooming more than one child or family at a time. Often, the grooming is so complete and "artfully" done, that the victims feel that it is their fault and violations go unreported. The internet has only aided and emboldened these people. The level of sadism in these crimes has also increased tremendously over the last 20 years and it is thought that the internet is involved in this increase as well.

[yo mama]

here we go

So you're willing to sacrifice due process of law in order to satisfy a lust of revenge?

[Azazello1313]

question for death penalty opponents.........

 

if there is 0 doubt the person is guilty per confession or evidence, should he/she be put to death?

 

I guess I don't have a major reservation against it, but that is a moot question. there is no such thing as zero doubt, and even if there was, the standard in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt and I've never seen any proposal to change that or to impose different sentences based on different levels of doubt with regard to guilt.

[dmarc117]

So you're willing to sacrifice due process of law in order to satisfy a lust of revenge?

 

 

please tell me what you understand the term '0 doubt' to mean...........

[dmarc117]

I guess I don't have a major reservation against it, but that is a moot question. there is no such thing as zero doubt, and even if there was, the standard in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt and I've never seen any proposal to change that or to impose different sentences based on different levels of doubt with regard to guilt.

 

 

i just took a dump in the toilet. there is 0 doubt that i did it. i took a dump.

[yo mama]

I guess I don't have a major reservation against it, but that is a moot question. there is no such thing as zero doubt, and even if there was, the standard in criminal cases is beyond reasonable doubt and I've never seen any proposal to change that or to impose different sentences based on different levels of doubt with regard to guilt.

I agree with Az. It's not that I have a reservation about the death penalty in circumstances where there is zero doubt. But zero doubt isn't the standard, and no one is proposing that be made the standard. My secondary concern is that criminal convictions for major crimes are overwhelmingly harsher for people without adequate means for a decent legal defense. And I have an ethical problem with a legal system that has the practical effect of reserving the death penalty for those who can't afford to defend themselves against capital offenses.

Edited April 17, 2008 by yo mama

[AtomicCEO]

I agree with you. There really is a double standard, because I don't think a woman could "rape" a non-willing participant.

 

Also, the difference is, at least with LeFave, is the kid wasnt raped. He willingly did it. Raping a child, molesting a child, those are completely different things from having sex with a 15 year old boy (or however old he was). Im not saying its ok, just stating there are big differences.

 

So if I can convince a 13 year old girl that she wants to have sex with me, it's not a crime?

What if she never consented, but I could prove that she was turned on a little?

 

It's clearly a double standard. Not that I have a problem with it. Double standards are common. It's why I don't hire women.

[untateve]

question for death penalty opponents.........

 

if there is 0 doubt the person is guilty per confession or evidence, should he/she be put to death?

 

i say yes for murder and child rape

 

No.

 

i just took a dump in the toilet. there is 0 doubt that i did it. i took a dump.

 

There is zero doubt in your mind. I, however, am not convinced.

[dmarc117]

I agree with Az. It's not that I have a reservation about the death penalty in circumstances where there is zero doubt. But zero doubt isn't the standard, and no one is proposing that be made the standard. My secondary concern is that criminal convictions for major crimes are overwhelmingly harsher for people without adequate means for a decent legal defense. And I have an ethical problem with a legal system that has the practical effect of reserving the death penalty for those who can't afford to defend themselves against capital offense.

 

 

your feelings are heard. i also have an ethical problem with someone wanting to defend a pos murderer. and to say there is never zero doubt is simple defense lawyer speak.

[dmarc117]

No.

 

 

 

There is zero doubt in your mind. I, however, am not convinced.

 

 

would u like evidence

[Pope Flick]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080416/ap_on_...otus_child_rape

 

 

 

yes

 

 

Nope.

 

No white man in the US has ever been killed for rape of a black person. Plenty of balck men have. It isn't a punishment that is handed out arbitrarily, but has its roots in the worst racist elements of our society: it's a law for killing black men who rape white women, and its' not even meted out in the opposite direction, even a little bit. If it became a punishment that could be fairly handed out, then that would be a step in the right direction.

Edited April 17, 2008 by Pope Flick

[yo mama]

your feelings are heard. i also have an ethical problem with someone wanting to defend a pos murderer. and to say there is never zero doubt is simple defense lawyer speak.

Once we take away ANYONES right to a fair trial (which includes an adequate defense) then EVERYONES' right to liberty and justice are at risk. I'm not defending a pos murderer: I'm defending constitutional principles of due process.

 

Who said there was never zero doubt?

[untateve]

We have beaten this discussion (or similar ones like it to death--ha ha).

 

My 11 yr old is picking on my 8yr old. He keeps hitting him for no reason. Should I beat my 11 yr old to teach him that hitting is wrong?

[dmarc117]

Once we take away ANYONES right to a fair trial (which includes an adequate defense) then EVERYONES' right to liberty and justice are at risk. I'm not defending a pos murderer: I'm defending constitutional principles of due process.

 

Who said there was never zero doubt?

 

 

you said you agreed with Az, he said there was no such thing as zero doubt.

[Azazello1313]

and to say there is never zero doubt is simple defense lawyer speak.

 

I know you are "challenged" and all, but can you understand that that we (and the USSC) are not talking about applying the death penalty in cases of "zero doubt", because that would be hypothetical make-believe fairy-tale bullchit. we/they are talking about imposing the dealth penalty for convictions of rape "proven beyond reasonable doubt", because that is the one and only standard in our criminal justice system. and it is a proven fact that this standard has seen innocent people convicted countless times.

[dmarc117]

I know you are "challenged" and all, but can you understand that that we (and the USSC) are not talking about applying the death penalty in cases of "zero doubt", because that would be hypothetical make-believe fairy-tale bullchit. we/they are talking about imposing the dealth penalty for convictions of rape "proven beyond reasonable doubt", because that is the one and only standard in our criminal justice system. and it is a proven fact that this standard has seen innocent people convicted countless times.

 

 

i asked the question IF there was a case of 0 doubt.....do you understand that?

Edited April 17, 2008 by dmarc117

[yo mama]

you said you agreed with Az, he said there was no such thing as zero doubt.

Hmmm. Well, then I mostly agree with Az. I believe there can be zero doubt.

[untateve]

i asked the question IF there was a case of 0 doubt.....do you understand that?

 

Even if there is zero doubt, I am against the death penalty.

[Azazello1313]

you said you agreed with Az, he said there was no such thing as zero doubt.

 

there isn't. you name any form of evidence, I will show you an example of how it can be wrong. DNA is pretty dam strong, but it isn't infallible. eyewitness and confessions are notoriously being subject to coercive and/or suggestive interrogation. photo and video are strong, but they can be doctored.

 

I mean, we can get very, very close to "zero doubt", but zero doubt is essentially an asymptote (I'll let you look that word up yourself). you can't ever quite get there.

 

and -- here is the important point, please follow closely -- even if you COULD theoretically attain "zero doubt", it is not, never has been, never will be the standard of doubt in any criminal case ever. it is simply not practical. our jails would be empty. no, the law out of practicality has to settle for a level of certainty significantly less than "zero doubt". so insisting on talking theoretically about zero doubt serves no point whatsoever.

[millerx]

there isn't. you name any form of evidence, I will show you an example of how it can be wrong. DNA is pretty dam strong, but it isn't infallible. eyewitness and confessions are notoriously being subject to coercive and/or suggestive interrogation. photo and video are strong, but they can be doctored.

 

I mean, we can get very, very close to "zero doubt", but zero doubt is essentially an asymptote (I'll let you look that word up yourself). you can't ever quite get there.

 

and -- here is the important point, please follow closely -- even if you COULD theoretically attain "zero doubt", it is not, never has been, never will be the standard of doubt in any criminal case ever. it is simply not practical. our jails would be empty. no, the law out of practicality has to settle for a level of certainty significantly less than "zero doubt". so insisting on talking theoretically about zero doubt serves no point whatsoever.

 

There is a murder case here in Atlanta that is about as 'asymptote' as you can get to zero doubt. The case deals with Brian Nichols who while on trial in the court house holding cell, overcame a detention bailiff, stole the gun, shot and killed sheriff deputies and a judge (while he was sitting on the actual bench), escaped the courthouse and while on the run killed two innocent civilians. He was caught a couple days later. Cameras were all over the courthouse watching his actions. His trial for this episode has created quite the controversy because everyone knows he did it, but it is costing the tax payers countless dollars because of defense attorneys 'dirty' tactics and delays.

 

This story really has no point other that to be able to use the word "asymtote". But it would be about as close to zero doubt as I can think of...

[Azazello1313]

There is a murder case here in Atlanta that is about as 'asymptote' as you can get to zero doubt. The case deals with Brian Nichols who while on trial in the court house holding cell, overcame a detention bailiff, stole the gun, shot and killed sheriff deputies and a judge (while he was sitting on the actual bench), escaped the courthouse and while on the run killed two innocent civilians. He was caught a couple days later. Cameras were all over the courthouse watching his actions. His trial for this episode has created quite the controversy because everyone knows he did it, but it is costing the tax payers countless dollars because of defense attorneys 'dirty' tactics and delays.

 

This story really has no point other that to be able to use the word "asymtote". But it would be about as close to zero doubt as I can think of...

 

yeah, but even if I go ahead and say, for all intents and purposes, that is a case with zero doubt, that sort of evidence is obviously the exception rather than the rule.

[dmarc117]

yeah, but even if I go ahead and say, for all intents and purposes, that is a case with zero doubt, that sort of evidence is obviously the exception rather than the rule.

 

 

caught on video is the exception to the rule nowadays?

 

i think with the more technology evolves we will have more and more cases of zero doubt.

Edited April 17, 2008 by dmarc117

[Azazello1313]

caught on video is the exception to the rule nowadays?

 

absolutely. the only crimes I can think of that routinely have video evidence of guilt are robberies of banks and convenience stores, drug deals (surveillance) and prison assaults. how many rape cases have you ever heard of where the smoking gun is a video tape? :rkelly: