Posted on 05/31/2005 5:05:41 PM PDT by kingattax
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. (AP) -- As horrible details about 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford's murder emerged and a man with history of sex crimes was charged in the slaying, calls for swift and severe punishment began.
Few penalties seemed too harsh. One word often heard as people talked about what to do with sex criminals was "castration."
But lawmakers have already tried something like that - and so far it's done almost no good at all.
In 1997 lawmakers passed a bill requiring that judges order some types of sex criminals to take a drug that dramatically lowers testosterone production in men erasing their sex drive, known colloquially, as "chemical castration."
Eight years later, it has almost never been used.
The law says men convicted of their second sexual battery must be ordered to take the drug.
But while more than 100 men have been convicted of a second sexual battery since the law went into effect, only three were sentenced to chemical castration, state officials say.
The law also gives judges the discretion to use the penalty when a man is convicted of his first sexual battery, or rape. State officials say that's not being used either, even though experts say the treatment is proven to lower sex drive.
Although there have been nearly 2,300 sexual battery convictions since the law went into effect in late 1997, the penalty has been ordered in only six cases - the three mandatory cases and three where it was discretionary.
"We have an issue here where the courts are blatantly disregarding the law," said Sen. Victor Crist, a tough-on-crime Tampa Republican who is asking legislative staff to study the issue over the summer. "We're going to take a look at why it's not being implemented. What do we need to do to make it usable?"
Corrections Department lawyer Susan Maher told Crist and other members of the Senate Justice Appropriations Committee earlier this year that it's not clear why judges aren't using the provision.
Corrections officials say there are several possibilities: the biggest is the lack of doctors willing to administer the hormone treatment.
Maher also said the fact that many of the men will be in prison a long time may account for judges not using the drug requirement - men behind bars for life can't commit new rapes and don't need the treatment, the thinking goes.
There also may be a lack of awareness of the particular law, prison officials say.
A number of judges contacted for this story didn't respond to requests to comment on why they don't use the chemical castration provision more often.
But others in the field have some ideas. Some judges believe specific treatment decisions should be left up to professionals, said Dr. Walter Meyer, a psychiatry professor at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston who has treated patients with chemical castration and written about the procedure.
"Judges don't want to practice medicine," Meyer said.
In many cases, that's a good thing, he said, because not all sex criminals are good candidates for the drug, which can have side effects, most notably increased risk of developing gallstones and osteoporosis.
And many rapists are acting out of violence, not sexual urges, so the drug may not have the desired result. Even those who stay on the drug reoffend in about 20 percent of cases, Meyer said.
Judges should order sex offenders to get treatment, but "they should be as vague about that treatment program as possible and then allow the therapist to determine the most appropriate" course, Meyer said.
Some judges also don't like the connotation. "Castration" has a ring of cruel punishment from another era, said Dr. Fred Berlin, a psychiatry professor who founded the sexual disorders clinic at the Johns Hopkins University medical school in Baltimore.
"People are intimidated by this notion of chemical castration," Berlin said. "I've (instead) called it a sexual appetite suppressant."
Even when the drug regimen is ordered by a judge, it still isn't being used. None of the six men ordered to submit to the treatment under Florida's 1997 law are taking the drug, presumably because all are currently in prison.
One had the order thrown out on appeal, and four are in prison for life so they'll likely never need to take it. The other, Neftali Camacho, isn't scheduled for release until 2020, so he may take it then.
Six other men have either agreed to get the treatment - or to take a similar drug - as part of a plea deal or been ordered to do so by a judge even though they didn't meet the requirements in the law. All of them are out in the community on probation or under some other type of supervision.
For example, Shannon Coleman agreed to do it to avoid a prison term for a sex crime that doesn't fall under the chemical castration law.
Coleman's lawyer says the drug has worked for his client, who is now under supervision in Virginia. Coleman, who said he was a pedophile, was convicted of fondling or having sex with two young girls on different occasions. But he hasn't had any problems since he started taking the hormone, said his lawyer, Jack Orsley of West Palm Beach.
Orsley noted that not everyone is a willing participant like Coleman - "the kid wanted treatment," he said. But those who get it can resist urges, he thinks.
"I would know if he did anything to violate his probation, and he hasn't," Orsley said of Coleman, who will be on probation until 2064, when he is 90 years old.
He is under treatment by a clinic run by Berlin, the Johns Hopkins expert.
Berlin can't talk about Coleman's case, but says studies have clearly shown lower recidivism rates among rapists and other sex criminals whose testosterone production is lowered.
"It's not zero - I'm not saying this is a panacea - but it's one of the many things that can be done," Berlin said.
Like Coleman, others have agreed to take the drug as a condition of probation, but unlike Coleman the others have all stopped taking it.
Chemical castration isn't really castration, which involves physically removing the testes. The chemical therapy is completely reversible if someone stops taking the drug.
Some of the men who were eligible to be sentenced to chemical castration and weren't are back on the street, including seven repeat offenders who should have been required to take the drug, according to the state Department of Corrections.
Instead, those seven men are on probation, including Dallas E. Pierce, who is now considered a fugitive after authorities lost track of him.
Florida was one of the earliest states to enact legislation calling for use of arousal suppressing drugs, following the lead of California. Since then, dozens of other states have done so or debated it. Minnesota considered the issue this year, but lawmakers adjourned without passing it.
A Florida judge just this month ordered the use of the drug, although it is contingent on a medical evaluation. Circuit Judge Jack Cook in Palm Beach County ordered Phu Tran, accused of two separate 2003 sexual batteries, to undergo the treatment.
While judges only can order chemical castration, surgical castration is also an option in Florida for men who ask for it to deter sexual behavior, although it's not clear how many men, if any, have volunteered.
Many of those types get murdered early in prison anyway.
That's an understatement. Rape, molestation, the whole bag of goodies is not due to "sexual" urges. It's due to mental illness. Hells bells, no one has more sexual urges than 15 year old boys, and there is no epidemic of rape & molestation among that group.
The problem is in the head, not the nads (you know what I mean). Society is unwilling to do what is necessary to keep these men from victimizing repeatedly. Plain and simple, ANY kind of castration is a cop out. Used or not.
A very good argument for the surgical option.
I understand it is a very effective prescription and a potent deterent.
For those who opine this is cruel and unusual punishment, I remind you that taxpayers are paying for this procedure everyday when your basic transexual surrenders his gonads to the sharp edge of the surgical knife.
The problem is in the head, not the nads (you know what I mean)
I think they should just release all these people into the general population with notice to the prison.
They should last 48 hours tops.
The problem is in the head, not the nads (you know what I mean) So we decapitate them!
and then sentence them to 'old Sparky'...
I think once he's been beheaded, Ol'Sparky would be a bit redundant!
;-D
Better yet, how about some gravy and a rottweiler?
"Better yet, how about some gravy and a rottweiler?"
Be great pay-per-view.
Let's open with Jacko.
go south with the beheading before cutting the neck.
no 'chemical' needed...
Ah!
I see.
I don't care much...dead is dead.
And in the case of these guys, dead is a Good Thing/- end Martha Stewart
I agree, but at least the 'victims' get some feeling of revenge with their justice... lol
I abhor the term "Chemical castration."
It was undoubtedly coined by defense attorneys and others who wanted to sell the juries, judges, and society that it was as final, effective and punitive as surgical castration.
The only real effect chemical castration has is on the minds of decent people in society. It blunts their understanding and their drive for exposing the awful truth of the crime and demanding appropriate justise and punishment for it.
Typical poor thinking. They can and do rape other prisoners behind bars.
I'm a little old fashioned. What's wrong with physical castration?
In this instance, you are being moronic. Ever been raped?
Regardless of your answer to my last, perhaps reply by FReepmail is best...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.