|Supreme Court Judges |
Stoking Public Hysteria & Mob Rule
The Supreme Court was looking for ways to justify harsh sentencing in these often tragic sex battery cases and child pornography cases because at the time they were high profile criminal acts engulfed with significant public hysteria. Rather than serve as a bulwark against the mob's rush for brutal, harsh and unfair sentencing our Supreme Court yielded to the rabble's ugliest desires by framing its ruling with unproven, non-scientific evidence. Justification for severe sentences in these cases as in other cases must be found from more than the mere charged offense, but as in other crimes no matter how heinous based on the collisions of facts, circumstances, defendant's prior record, possibilities for defendant rehabilitation and victim input for each individual case.
All too often in these sexual offender cases there's actually less evidence needed to win convictions because of the nature of the case such as proving child pornography without proof of outlawed images. Yet this court joined the mob mentality. And like a mob's base decision to act first and act fast with fact to be found later, the Supreme Court's sentencing justification weakens with time. American courts and American law should never bend to the public's changing moods. As the morality of our culture further deteriorates will our Supreme Court simply hobble with the crowd on important issues of sentencing fairness by giving tough sentences when the crowd screams for more and light ones as the crowd no longer cares?
The Supreme Court and the other courts that followed need to come clean and correct the myth of sex offender recidivism that they falsely helped create and perpetuate.