What am I missing?
July 8, 2008
Having a single appearance in traffic court (guilty with an explanation)as the sum of my judicial experience, it’s altogether unlikely I will have an opportunity to press Justice Kennedy on a critical line of reasoning in the Kennedy (no relation) v. Louisiana opinion.
The Court limited the death penalty to those crimes of violence against individuals that result in the death of the victim. The Kennedy (no relation) case was simply a run of the mill horrific act of rape causing grievous injury to an eight-year old girl.
The estimable Justice maintains that for all its terrible and tragic aspects, the rape in question, in fact all rapes that don’t result in death fail to achieve the moral depravity and irrevocability required by the Eighth Amendment to merit possible execution.
Is it not curious then, that in matters of self defense “ a defender can lawfully use deadly force to prevent death, rape, kidnapping or bodily injury serious enough to cause long term loss or impairment” ( Prof. Paul Robinson).
It would appear that a predator confronts a greater risk (potentially) attempting a rape than having consummated one.
In other words, I can kill a man to prevent a rape that if consummated isn’t punishable by death. Does the deed become less onerous upon completion?
I would suggest that before the Court concern itself with evolving standards of decency it master traditional standards of logic.
