<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div><br>I'm torn, frankly. Kevin Coe seems to be the worst kind of predator and a danger to the community. Still, he served his 25-year sentence, and I'm concerned about the idea of "civil commitment" and its application in other situations. The civil libertarian in me says that he's served his crime and ought not be incarcerated for what he might do, no matter how likely it is that he will commit another attack. The public-safety concerns about unrepentant, untreated, defiant rapists out on the street, though, give me a measure of comfort in his commitment, even though it seems not to represent the very best of American jurisprudence.</div>
</blockquote><div><br>So long as the confinement is:<br><br>(1) Based on the independent medical judgment of professionals not fully beholden to the state, and;<br>(2) Not punitive confinement, which is to say: designed for treatment and harm reduction, rather than to discourage future negative conduct, and;<br>
(3) Has provisions for periodic reassessment of the incarcerated person's rehabilitation, <br><br>I'm perfectly willing to support civil commitment. However, there's good evidence that the civil commitment process is just a way to sneak life sentences for rape in through the back door with a lower standard of evidence -- and to effectively extend sentences that have already been handed down. I'd be far more willing to support this sort of thing if life sentences for rape were more common.<br>
<br>-- ACS<br></div></div><br></div>