What the child rapist, saved today by Supreme Court liberals, did to his 8-year-old stepdaughter
Anthony Kennedy and the leftists on the Supreme Court ruled this morning that what child rapist Patrick Kennedy did to his 8-year-old stepdaughter is a crime that should not be punishable by death.
The MSM will tiptoe around what child rapist Patrick Kennedy actually did.
I’m reprinting the full description of the crime from Kennedy’s ruling below in the interest of fully informing you all (warning – explicit). Is the death penalty “not a proportional punishment” to this crime? You decide. And the next time liberals wave the “For the children” banner, ask them about L.H.
***
From Kennedy’s majority opinion in Kennedy v. Louisiana, decided June 25, 2008:
…Petitioner’s crime was one that cannot be recounted in these pages in a way sufficient to capture in full the hurt and horror inflicted on his victim or to convey the revulsion society, and the jury that represents it, sought to express by sentencing petitioner to death. At 9:18 a.m. on March 2, 1998, petitioner called 911 to report that his stepdaughter, referred to here as L. H., had been raped.
He told the 911 operator that L. H. had been in the garage while he readied his son for school. Upon hearing loud screaming, petitioner said, he ran outside and found L. H. in the side yard. Two neighborhood boys, petitioner told the operator, had dragged L. H. from the garage to the yard, pushed her down, and raped her. Petitioner claimed he saw one of the boys riding away on a blue 10-speed bicycle.
When police arrived at petitioner’s home between 9:20 and 9:30 a.m., they found L. H. on her bed, wearing a T-shirt and wrapped in a bloody blanket. She was bleeding profusely from the vaginal area. Petitioner told police he had carried her from the yard to the bathtub and then to the bed. Consistent with this explanation, police found a thin line of blood drops in the garage on the way to the house and then up the stairs. Once in the bedroom, petitioner had used a basin of water and a cloth to wipe blood from the victim. This later prevented medical personnel from collecting a reliable DNA sample.
L. H. was transported to the Children’s Hospital. An expert in pediatric forensic medicine testified that L. H.’s injuries were the most severe he had seen from a sexual assault in his four years of practice. A laceration to the left wall of the vagina had separated her cervix from the back of her vagina, causing her rectum to protrude into the vaginal structure. Her entire perineum was torn from the posterior fourchette to the anus. The injuries required emergency surgery.
At the scene of the crime, at the hospital, and in the first weeks that followed, both L. H. and petitioner maintained in their accounts to investigators that L. H. had been raped by two neighborhood boys. One of L. H.’s doctors testified at trial that L. H. told all hospital personnel the same version of the rape, although she reportedly told one family member that petitioner raped her. L. H. was interviewed several days after the rape by a psychologist. The interview was videotaped, lasted three hours over two days, and was introduced into evidence at trial. On the tape one can see that L. H. had difficulty discussing the subject of the rape. She spoke haltingly and with long pauses and frequent movement. Early in the interview, L. H. expressed reservations about the questions being asked:
“I’m going to tell the same story. They just want me to change it. . . . They want me to say my Dad did it. . . . I don’t want to say it. . . . I tell them the same, same story.” Def. Exh. D–7, 01:29:07–:36.
She told the psychologist that she had been playing in the garage when a boy came over and asked her about Girl Scout cookies she was selling; and that the boy “pulled [her by the legs to] the backyard,” id., at 01:47:41–:52, where he placed his hand over her mouth, “pulled down [her] shorts,” Def. Exh. D–8, 00:03:11–:12, and raped her, id., at 00:14:39–:40.
Eight days after the crime, and despite L. H.’s insistence that petitioner was not the offender, petitioner was arrested for the rape. The State’s investigation had drawn the accuracy of petitioner and L. H.’s story into question. Though the defense at trial proffered alternative explanations, the case for the prosecution, credited by the jury, was based upon the following evidence: An inspection of the side yard immediately after the assault was inconsistent with a rape having occurred there, the grass having been found mostly undisturbed but for a small patch of coagulated blood. Petitioner said that one of the perpetrators fled the crime scene on a blue 10-speed bicycle but gave inconsistent descriptions of the bicycle’s features, such as its handlebars. Investigators found a bicycle matching petitioner and L. H.’s description in tall grass behind a nearby apartment, and petitioner identified it as the bicycle one of the perpetrators was riding. Yet its tires were flat, it did not have gears, and it was covered in spider webs. In addition police found blood on the underside of L. H.’s mattress. This convinced them the rape took place in her bedroom, not outside the house.
Police also found that petitioner made two telephone calls on the morning of the rape. Sometime before 6:15 a.m., petitioner called his employer and left a message that he was unavailable to work that day. Petitioner called back between 6:30 and 7:30 a.m. to ask a colleague how to get blood out of a white carpet because his daughter had “ ‘just become a young lady.’ ” Brief for Respondent 12.
At 7:37 a.m., petitioner called B & B Carpet Cleaning and requested urgent assistance in removing bloodstains from a carpet. Petitioner did not call 911 until about an hour and a half later.
About a month after petitioner’s arrest L. H. was removed from the custody of her mother, who had maintained until that point that petitioner was not involved in the rape. On June 22, 1998, L. H. was returned home and told her mother for the first time that petitioner had raped her. And on December 16, 1999, about 21 months after the rape, L. H. recorded her accusation in a videotaped interview with the Child Advocacy Center.
The State charged petitioner with aggravated rape of a child under La. Stat. Ann. §14:42 (West 1997 and Supp. 1998) and sought the death penalty. At all times relevant to petitioner’s case, the statute provided:
“A. Aggravated rape is a rape committed . . . where the anal or vaginal sexual intercourse is deemed to be without lawful consent of the victim because it is committed under any one or more of the following circumstances:
. . . . .
“(4) When the victim is under the age of twelve years. Lack of knowledge of the victim’s age shall not be a defense.
. . . . .
“D. Whoever commits the crime of aggravated rape shall be punished by life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
“(1) However, if the victim was under the age of twelve years, as provided by Paragraph A(4) of this Section:
“(a) And if the district attorney seeks a capital verdict, the offender shall be punished by death or life imprisonment at hard labor without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence, in accordance with the determination of the jury.”
(Since petitioner was convicted and sentenced, the statute has been amended to include oral intercourse within the definition of aggravated rape and to increase the age of the victim from 12 to 13. See La. Stat. Ann. §14:42 (West Supp. 2007).)
Aggravating circumstances are set forth in La. Code Crim. Proc. Ann., Art. 905.4 (West 1997 Supp.). In pertinent part and at all times relevant to petitioner’s case, the provision stated:
“A. The following shall be considered aggravating circumstances:
“(1) The offender was engaged in the perpetration or attempted perpetration of aggravated rape, forcible rape, aggravated kidnapping, second degree kidnapping, aggravated burglary, aggravated arson, aggravated escape, assault by drive-by shooting, armed robbery, first degree robbery, or simple robbery.
. . . . .
“(10) The victim was under the age of twelve years or sixty-five years of age or older.”
The trial began in August 2003. L. H. was then 13 years old. She testified that she “ ‘woke up one morning and Patrick was on top of [her].’ ” She remembered petitioner bringing her “[a] cup of orange juice and pills chopped up in it” after the rape and overhearing him on the telephone saying she had become a “young lady.” 2005–1981, pp. 12, 15, 16 (La. 5/22/07), 957 So. 2d 757, 767, 769, 770. L. H. acknowledged that she had accused two neighborhood boys but testified petitioner told her to say this and that it was untrue. Id., at 769.
The jury having found petitioner guilty of aggravated rape, the penalty phase ensued. The State presented the testimony of S. L., who is the cousin and goddaughter of petitioner’s ex-wife. S. L. testified that petitioner sexually
abused her three times when she was eight years old and that the last time involved sexual intercourse. Id., at 772. She did not tell anyone until two years later and did not pursue legal action.
The jury unanimously determined that petitioner should be sentenced to death…
***
Reax from Andrew McCarthy:
Even if you agree with their bottom line, do Justice Kennedy and the justices in Kennedy v. Louisiana have a clue about how offensive it is to write this line in rationalizing why a man who has savagely raped his eight-year-old step-daughter should not be executed by the humane process of lethal objection:
“Evolving standards of decency must embrace and express respect for the dignity of the person[.]”
And as for their “proportional” punishment argue, I think it’s silly on its face — read the almost unreadable (because it’s so excruciating) account of the rape and ask yourself whether it is really “disproportionate” to administer lethal-objection execution to a man who committed this type of barbaric a sexual assault on a child.
But let’s give him that one for argument’s sake. The Eighth Amendment talks about punishment that is cruel. First, punishment does not become cruel just because it’s disproportionate. And second, are we really striving here for proportionality? If a crime is cruel — as it clearly was in this case — wouldn’t a proportionate punishment also have to be cruel, and thus in violation of the Eighth Amendment?
Allahpundit sheds light on the liberal majority’s charade of Divining the National Ethos.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Macsmind
- Supreme Court Legislates Ban on Executions for Child Rapist | OpenMarket.org
- Supreme Court Legislates Ban on Executions for Child Rapist | OpenMarket.org
- Right Voices » Blog Archive » SCOTUS: The Supreme Court has struck down a Louisiana law that allows the execution of people convicted of a raping a child
- Yet Another Candidate For Pancreatic Cancer « The Urban Grind
- How does this POS not deseve the death penalty? | I'm Surrounded By Idiots
- SCOTUS: Child Rapists are Protected from the Death Penalty « Axis of Right
- Rhymes With Right
- What sort of man grows up to be a Democrat? Why this sort of man! Rep. James H. Fagan of the Massachusetts House of Representatives. Declares he will rip apart under age Rape Victims…Great News! Apocalypse just around the corner! | Pierre Legrand's
- Webloggin - Blog Archive » SCOTUS Agenda vs Deserving of Execution
- Balloon Juice
- Supreme Court: No Death Penalty for Child Rape : Stop The ACLU
- Sister Toldjah
- Martini Revolution » Only a stark raving mad lunatic or
- UrbanGrounds » Blog Archive » Open Thread for Death Penatly Comments
- Supreme Court overrules on Kennedy c. Louisiana; rules that death penalty cannot be applied for rape of a child. (See update.) « HoodaThunk?
- Pro Cynic
- Ironic Surrealism II
- Ace of Spades HQ
- Supreme Court: "Death Too Harsh for Child Rapists" | The Daily Conservative
- Ravalli County News » Blog Archive » The Supreme Court Protects Child Rapists from the Death Penalty
- It’s days like this I’m sorry I don’t believe in Hell « Buttle’s World
- Why John McCain Must Win, and the Senate Must at Least Shift Towards Republicans « One Guy’s Opinion
- links for 2008-06-26 | FullosseousFlap's Dental Blog
- Blue Crab Boulevard » Protection For Monsters
- Villainous Company
- American Elephant » Blog Archive » The Second Amendment Lives!
- Tel-Chai Nation
- Kennedy v. Louisiana: Justice Kennedy « This Modern Age
- Author of Oklahoma’s Law Giving Death Penalty to Child Rapists Reacts to « Green Country Values
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Supreme Court
Legal Insurrection
» Freedom So Willingly Relinquished
Sister Toldjah
» Today’s House schedule – Do the Dems have 216 votes?Stop The ACLU
» Democrats Predict Historic House Vote On Health DestructionRiehl World View
» There's A Big Queer March Going On In DC TodayRiehl World View
» To Stupak Block: They Aren't Pro-Life, And They Aren't Pro-HealthRiehl World View
» The Hill: Stupak Talking Deal, Again
fixed it for ya…
Really? You’d better check the other quotes from ‘god’:
An Eye For An Eye
Deuteronomy 19:21 “And thine eye shall not pity; but life shall go for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot.”
And:
Ecclesiastes (ch. III, v. 1-8
To every thing there is a season, and a time to every purpose under the heaven:
A time to be born, and a time to die; a time to plant, and a time to pluck up that which is planted; A time to kill…
There’s more where that came from.
Thanks.
On June 25th, 2008 at 11:02 pm, Jim M. said:
Agreed!
I think Ethel and Julius Rosenberg would concur.
I think Michelle and a majority of the posters here maintain a pro-life and anti abortion stance and I see their advocacy of the death penalty a huge hypocrisy. the Supreme Court did not overturn the conviction, did not release the pervert, it simply removed the death penalty as a punishment. How is this “liberal” support of child endangerment?
A life term without the possibility of parole is the most just form of punishment the state can to this sicko…. killing him easy the easy way out. Plus he will be experiencing prison justice for quite some time
So the SCOTUS ruled that it’s unconstitutional to execute someone who rapes a child, but left open the possibility of the death penalty for murderers and crimes against the state, i.e. treason?
If it’s still optional for crimes against the state, Bill Clinton and Al Gore should have been executed after giving classified technology to Chinese and Indonesian intelligence agents and arms merchants. I guess that particular aspect of treason is subject to interpretation.
For the leftwingnuts sitting on the Supreme Court, such a cruel, depraved atrocity doesn’t warrant taking this waste of skin to the place he earned on death row.
What makes this all the more sickening is Anthony Kennedy’s assertion that these sorts of rape ‘cannot be compared to murder in their severity and irrevocability’. After all the damage that was done to that child, her death would have been the only mitigating factor in the mind of this crap-for-brains Justice?
Patrick Kennedy, the child raping scumbag in this case, should have been taken out behind the courthouse, castrated, and put to a slow, agonizing, painful death.
THAT would be justice.
Supersean;
What is Prison Justice?
There is no hypocrisy in supporting the innocent and condemning the guilty. Abortion and euthanasia both take an innocent life, one that is not guilty of anything other than having been conceived or born. The death penalty is a recognition that some human acts cannot be redeemed by man but only by God.
If this guy were executed, it would cost the state a small fraction of what it will to keep him in prison for life. Liberals are always crying about how Iraq is costing billions, yet they never once complain about a waste of money like this.
One could also make the argument that by putting the perp to death would give closure to the victim. They are secure in the knowledge that never again will that animal harm them or anyone else.
I like those who equate a life without parole term to something worse than death. I would ask how they explain the statistics that show that an execution prevents other murders. I would also point out that a life term without parole is not really a life term. I previously noted the case of McDuff in Texas but right now one of the Manson murderers is about to be released because she is terminally ill and compassion has trumped the sentence. There are many, many other examples of life sentences that have been commuted by judges who blame overcrowded prisons or use the liberalization of life sentence criteria.
There are really very few certain life without parole sentences. An execution, on the other hand, is certain to prevent the release of a murderer into society.
#382 It is not our place to determine who is and who is not worthy of Gods justice. We should be true to our belief in the value of life. This value does not support, justify or provide shelter for crimes it simply prevents another from occurring.
#383 Some time it is better to spend the money to do the right thing.
#384 Prison is not a pretty place and spending the rest of your life is to me the ultimate punishment. Anyone convicted of wrongly taking the life of another for any reason should be given a life without parole sentence.
Our prison system should be divided into 2 sections one for those who will eventually be reintroducted to society and focus on rehabilitation and providing skills so the convict does not re offend. The second should be for those convicted of murder and be a dark musky hole where the convict has no benefits no television baloney and cheese sandwiches for all 3 meals no organized sports no library no gym no correspondence or contact with the outside world. This is not club med this is a place where you are to be punished and serve until they die
Death is the easy way out because the convict does not have to think long and hard about what they done they have no choice they have nothing else to do.
Life without parole should mean just that there should be no release for compassion and no way out of the hole other that material proof that the convict is not guilty
I omitted in my post # 385 that rape of a minor, should also qualify for life in prison without the possibility of parole
The prison system in America did at one time segregate all felons in isolation. This, however, produced insanity and the liberals of that time decided that a punishment that led to insanity was too cruel. There is no certain way to prevent liberals from re-inventing life without parole to mean something else. That is why the death penalty is needed – life without parole is not a certainty.
#387 I am sorry but your argument is without reason. Kill them because lighter legislation might be passed in the future? How do you deal with wrongfully convicted if they are already dead?
Which law(s)were repealed by the “liberals” to end the separation of convicts with life terms from general population?
Hmmm….that is interesting. Along with the poster who mentioned that the threat of the death penalty may cause rapists to more readily kill their victims, does it seem realistic to think that a victim, raped by a family member would be less willing to testify if it meant possibly sending that family member to their death, and thus be counter-productive to bringing these disgusting people to justice?
The argument that we should limit the penalty of a crime so that the victim is not “responsible” for the criminals punishment has got to be the sickest thing I have heard in a long time.
Many here lump those in opposition together and throw around the label “liberal” against me because my position is different than theres. My argument in opposition to capital punishment is based upon my morals and the teachings of my faith and is not to let criminals get off easy.
Ditto and ditto.
Great point which I never considered.
To the a-holes who think that support for this decision means a person is unfamiliar with or uncaring about child-rape, go to hell. Unlike certain other posters, I don’t feel the need to explain all of the hardships myself and other loved ones have overcome, but I am VERY familiar with child-rape. My horror and disgust with the act doesn’t cloud my overall desires for fairness and justice, and a desire for my government to hold itself to a higher standard than our own base instincts for revenge.
Beyond that, I detailed my concerns in
206.
It is not “sick” to consider the real practical implications of a decision. And if it is the “sickest” thing you have heard in a long time then come back from Candyland and join the rest of us in a little thing we like to call “reality.”
Something tells me that when a victims advocacy group that works with over 80 rape crisis shelters says that there could be unintended consequences to the death penalty, we should probably at least listen.
#392
I disagree with your argument and will not stoop to your level and through insults.
Although they may work as an rape advocate that does not make them the authoritative figure on the legislation required to prevent and punish rape crimes. Even supporting the notion that the victim is responsible for the consequences imposed on a rapist is vile in my opinion and harms their cause (and credibility).
Perhaps not, but it makes them a lot more credible than you on the subject.
No one is saying the victims are “responsible” for the punishment of the perpetrator or blaming them in any way, but…real life fact here…prosecution of these folks almost always requires the cooperation of the victim. Anything that has the effect of discouraging such cooperation deserves some scrutiny. not saying it should be the first or last word, but it should be considered.
Anyway…kind of a moot point now. Can’t execute them in any case.
I respect your even-tempered viewpoints. But I don’t see this rape advocate position means that anyone should support a notion that a victim is reponsible for a punishment imposed on a rapist.
Rather, I think it reflects a reality for some, since rape is often within the family or close to the family, there are complications and added pressures of victims coming forward knowing that someone close to them, or close to their family will be put to death. These fears could hinder proscutions if the victims are more unwilling to come forward, which obviously makes society less safe.
It’s not fair that a victim should feel this burden, but that doesn’t mean that this possibility is something that shouldn’t be considered when formulating legislation. Heck, getting young victims to come forward is often difficult enough, but adding the cloud of capital punishment wouldn’t help…wrong and unfair as this may be.
#395 Perhaps you misunderstood the quote from your own post?
#396
I agree that the complexities of a rape case are beyond my comprehension but a group who speaks for the victims should be working to further empower the victims not in my opinion capitulate. In my opinion we need to send strength and support to the victims and a clear message that the victims have done nothing wrong. It is in their best interest to testify against their aggressor knowing that the criminal will be punished for their evil deeds.
Again, I am also against the death penalty so my argument is not against the end result it is against their reason.
AMEN
It is time that the liberals get it through their thick skull that people like this are evil that rape children. If a woman is raped, it’s called rape. If a child is messed with it’s called molesting. I call it child RAPE. We seem to be a lot more stricter on women rape but not on child rape. I wonder why. This is not date rape crap this is some sicko that can’t stop thinking of children’s private parts and wants to do something with them that they have no business doing.
Those are what I call predators and honestly, there is no rehabilitating them, hang them all that are found to be this sick like this bastard was. Get a ROPE!
#400 Concur 100% will you for this type of crime it should be 1 strike you are out of society forever. No second chances.
#399
The Supreme Court has the right and the duty to ensure that the laws of our country at every level are compliant with the constitution.
Revenge, in the form of the death penalty is justice; especially when it comes to scumbags like Kennedy. The death penalty is the last full measure of earthly punishment granted for heinous crimes that deserve no less. ‘Base instinct’ is not always a bad thing, so don’t even try to attach that connotation. If the death penalty makes you squeamish, just think about what that little girl went through.
“Liberal” Supreme Court judge Scalia with a truly sickening decision:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/06/25/dead.witness.ap/index.html
Now this is worthy of true outrage. If you kill the witness their testimony cannot be used against you. Expect to see more witness “tampering” after this judgment.
With the way things are going in the name of “Justice” and the latest DHS report on extremism. Folks who have any ethics or morals are labled extremists. I want to tell the government to back off. Quit labling Americans. I thought the Democratic party was made up of Peace Love and thy fellow man. The Dems are much more vile. They are treading on thin ice. If I support the laws on illegals immigration, ( the government wrote them but does not support them), then I am an Extremist? I will wear that badge proudly.The Government is a pack of liars. The SCOTUS is a farce. When did political alignment justify which side of justice do we follow? I am almost a man without a country. Welcome to the age of right is wrong and wrong is right!