Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That we let sex offenders out despite the likelihood that they will go one to attack other women is just a sign of how little we value women’s lives in this country. Why does a rapist’s right to prove himself reformed trump women’s rights not to be attacked and to feel safe?

I've never understood how we treat sex crimes (against women, men and children) so lightly. And the recidivism rate is extraordinary. But, yay Charles Allen..thanks once again!

The RCCA increases penalties for sexual assaults. My apologies for any confusion this may cause your simplistic worldview.

Anonymous wrote:That we let sex offenders out despite the likelihood that they will go one to attack other women is just a sign of how little we value women’s lives in this country. Why does a rapist’s right to prove himself reformed trump women’s rights not to be attacked and to feel safe?

I've never understood how we treat sex crimes (against women, men and children) so lightly. And the recidivism rate is extraordinary. But, yay Charles Allen..thanks once again!

That we let sex offenders out despite the likelihood that they will go one to attack other women is just a sign of how little we value women’s lives in this country. Why does a rapist’s right to prove himself reformed trump women’s rights not to be attacked and to feel safe?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These kinds of things need to be predicated on, "You stipulate that you are rehabilitated. That means, if you so much as step an inch out of line you will immediately be returned to prison, for life."

And if they step "a yard" out of line and rape again, what about the poor victim?

This is 2023: the rapist is the victim.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These kinds of things need to be predicated on, "You stipulate that you are rehabilitated. That means, if you so much as step an inch out of line you will immediately be returned to prison, for life."

And if they step "a yard" out of line and rape again, what about the poor victim?

This. The article said 16 of the 135 people who’ve ben granted these petitions have been re-arrested. That’s too many. If there’s even a 1% chance letting him go will result in another rape, he should stay where he is.

These women are serving life sentences, why shouldn’t he? Should these women really have to spend the rest of their lives not only being survivors of this horrific crime, but now wondering where this man is and will they run into him on the street?

The people who voted for this law should be put in prison with the monsters they’re proposing be released.

Anonymous wrote:Just because a sex offender claims he's changed doesn't make it so. Last I read, about 1 in 4 released rapists become reoffenders. I know that also means that the majority don't reoffend, but we need to err on the side of protecting society. This was a very, very brutal and repeated crime.

I think of the female jogger who was abducted, raped, and murdered in Memphis last fall. The man arrested for the crime had previously served time in a juvenile detention center for rape and, in a separate case, had served time as an adult for kidnapping.

The recidivism rate for sexual predators isn't really known. The majority of rapists are not reported, put on trial or convicted.

Just because a sex offender claims he's changed doesn't make it so. Last I read, about 1 in 4 released rapists become reoffenders. I know that also means that the majority don't reoffend, but we need to err on the side of protecting society. This was a very, very brutal and repeated crime.

I think of the female jogger who was abducted, raped, and murdered in Memphis last fall. The man arrested for the crime had previously served time in a juvenile detention center for rape and, in a separate case, had served time as an adult for kidnapping.

Anonymous wrote:I just read this article and my blood is boiling. I'm sorry that the rapist had a rough childhood, but there is no way he should be released. My heart goes out to the two brave women who survived his heinous actions.

+1

Anonymous wrote:These kinds of things need to be predicated on, "You stipulate that you are rehabilitated. That means, if you so much as step an inch out of line you will immediately be returned to prison, for life."

And if they step "a yard" out of line and rape again, what about the poor victim?

These kinds of things need to be predicated on, "You stipulate that you are rehabilitated. That means, if you so much as step an inch out of line you will immediately be returned to prison, for life."

The Washington Post reported on this yesterday and today. It it horrific what these women endured. I can't imagine. I also can't imagine what kind of home life these 16 year old kids had that led them to do this. 30 years in jail and at least one of the perpetrators seems truly sorry and has tried to turn his life around, in jail. I don't think there is an easy answer here So many lives destroyed.

I just read this article and my blood is boiling. I'm sorry that the rapist had a rough childhood, but there is no way he should be released. My heart goes out to the two brave women who survived his heinous actions.

I hope people will read the article you linked, OP. It's moving and frightening. What a horrific violation those two women endured, and it went on and on for what must have been eternity to them. I cannot see why either of the rapists should be allowed to walk. The fact that this rule can allow release "despite the brutality" of any offense is sickening especially when one reads the details of that crime and the impact it continues to have on the victims. Brutality should count. I do believe people can become rehabilitated morally and mentally but that does not mean they should be granted freedom when they took away someone's entire life. Murder is not the only way to end a person's future, as the testimony of the one victim so tragically shows.

It’s important to note that one of the victims was willing to go on record to oppose the petition and that even if the DC judge allows it, this would also require a MD judge to do the same.

The rapist appears to have reformed while in prison, but even if released, faces 30 years to life in Maryland on a separate case. While the victims were forced to dig their graves after their rapes, they were let go.

I did not know that with the recent expansion of the IRAA, judges are now required to grant the petitions “ despite the brutality or cold, blooded nature of any particular offense.” If that’s the case, seems like the offender will have a strong case.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/02/02/rapist-sentence-reduction-dc-judge/