You have got to be f-ing kidding me.

[Miss P]

Too small means likely to suffer extrajudicial killing/maiming etc. The State should provide safe prison environment, and, failing that, the proper thing to do is to seek a solution outside of prison.

i concede the point, but given that sex offenders are more likely to be murdered in prison in general, maybe we should just have a separate facility for them altogether.

I'm not sure sex offenders are that much less likely to be the ones killing other sex offenders in prison, though.  Maybe, seems plausible enough -- I just haven't seen any research on it.

We really should be working to make prisons safer in general.  And to advocate for alternatives to incarceration in non-violent crimes.  It's appalling that an environment that is supposed to represent the pinnacle of control is usually so depraved.  I really can't understand why we tolerate this. 

And hi Julie!  I've missed you!

[Miss P]

I really can't understand why we tolerate this. 

because the people who are in prison are usually those considered marginal to society.

i mean, you knew that, but i felt like playing captain obvious for a bit.

i will now return the role to red.

I have already told you, sir, there is room for only one captain in my life.  Or he doesn't like it when I talk to other captains.  Something.

Anyway, yes, I know.  But I still can't imagine feeling so little compassion toward other human beings, especially ones who are mentally ill or retarded or who have committed non-violent crimes.  I have to believe that some people also aren't aware of how bad things are. 

[Miss P]

You just bummed me out.  I wish you would have responded to the part about Spaulding instead.  Oh, well.  I guess it does give me an excuse for constantly bringing up prison abuse (and prison conditions issues more generally) around here.

[Miss P]

If it is as bad as people say it is in prison for sex offenders, it may actually be preferable for a sex offender likely to be too weak to survive prison to kill his victim to get the more humane state-administered death penalty.  Wouldn't want to create this incentive, but I really don't know how valid the initial assumption is.

Alec., I feel as if I can always count on you to make me think. 

A couple of initial thoughts on this:

1. I think sex offenders do face a grave risk of injury or death in prison, and one particular to sex offenders.  That said, it is certainly nowhere near the level of certainty that someone on death row faces (a level of certainty that it is also fairly low).  Thus, I think that it is about living in fear of your life and having a marginal risk of death more than it is about having a very high risk of actually being killed.

2. I don't think most people plan on getting caught, so these rational calculations (assuming they are rational for the purpose of this short point, but not otherwise) never work.

3. I imagine most people -- and I would guess even sex offenders -- would have a very hard time killing someone else based on this kind of abstract reasoning.

4. People on death row, while usually separated from the general population, live for years in prison and face violence there as well.  Depending on the state, it could be 20 years before your death warrant issues.

5. I believe, of course, that we should not be executing people, either by judicial or extrajudicial means.  I'm sure a lot of people around here would disagree, but I couldn't respond to this post without at least registering my feelings about it.

[SCgrad]

i have a question.  if I am a 6'8" killing machine capable of quickly ending someone's life with my bare hands, would I be found to be too dangerous for prison by this judge?  not saying that I am, but it seems to follow the same logic, doesn't it? 


Edit: Let's also say that it is well known that I hate child molesters

[Julie Fern]

want talk about it?

[Miss P]

i have a question.  if I am a 6'8" killing machine capable of quickly ending someone's life with my bare hands, would I be found to be too dangerous for prison by this judge?  not saying that I am, but it seems to follow the same logic, doesn't it? 


Edit: Let's also say that it is well known that I hate child molesters

SC, you know how I feel about hands, right?  Well!

I bet you'd be put in an isolation unit.  I haven't read enough about this case to know that there were any isolation units available.  But if there were, I think you could explain (not justify) the disparate treatment based on perceptions of the killing machine's future dangerousness and the sex offender's weakness.

[aerynn]

There is a constitutional basis for protection against "cruel and unusual punishment" (like getting sodimized against your will). Sending someone to jail could constitute cruel and unusual punishment, ergo, find an alternate method to prevent him from harming others and exacting punishment.

There is no basis for setting someone free because they might create a cruel and unusual environment for others.  That is the reason we lock them up.

[Miss P]

There is a constitutional basis for protection against "cruel and unusual punishment" (like getting sodimized against your will). Sending someone to jail could constitute cruel and unusual punishment, ergo, find an alternate method to prevent him from harming others and exacting punishment.

There is no basis for setting someone free because they might create a cruel and unusual environment for others.  That is the reason we lock them up.

Yes, aerynn, you're totally right.  But aside from the killing machine's 8th Am. rights, might the pragmatic jurist also consider the rights of the other inmates to be free of cruel and unusual punishment?  I think both of these questions (how to sentence an especially dangerous defendant and how to sentence an especially vulnerable one) point to concern about prison conditions.  We need to find a way to manage prison violence better.

[aerynn]

I totally agree, Miss P. 

Not being a lawyer, or even a law student yet, I really don't know how it all works, but for a judge to make a ruling that is less likely for it to get overturned on appeal, having a logic such as "I have X, Y, and Z evidence that the suggested sentence would violate the Defendant's constitutional rights.  Therefore, I am sentencing him to W punishment" would hold up pretty well.  Whereas the logic that sentencing the Juggernaught to prison violates the rights of other prisoners doesn't have the same sort of neatness to it. 

It seems like it is easier for a judge or warden to highlight Juggernaught's dangerousness and afford him extra containment, rather than the Flea's vulnerability and afford him extra containment to protect him from the rest of the population.  Giving Flea solitary confinement not because of what he has done or would do, but for his own protection seems like grounds for his defense attorney to argue that the punishment wasn't fair or equal to the punishment of other molestors committing the same crime.  Therefore, Flea should be released, if the State can't keep him safe without overpunishing him.

I might be totally off base though.