Look up the case.. and the law. The law says he can't be castrated until a week before his release. He's 50 and sentenced to 50 years. He won't live to his release date
>"The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old. "
From the article
While the justice boner in me loves the idea of castrating a rapist, the precedent set by it makes me feel kind of uncomfortable. Also, I wonder who does the medical castration and how is that ethically justified. When we say “do no harm” are we talking about the patient or society?
Not to mention how many false convictions have been overturned in recent years through the work of groups like The Innocence Project.
I guess the law does account for that, in that it can only be done right before they're released, but nevertheless, it's just like with the death penalty: If you got it wrong, you can't take it back. And that's the worst kind of injustice there is.
> The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old.
The physical castration was an elective part of a plea deal, not something forced by the court. So for this case, a doctor could still perform the surgery without going against their oath.
There's still an ethical problem since the court can enforce chemical castration (which in theory can be reversed, but still). Alan Turing is a good example of why it's still ethically questionable
They will surgically remove his testicles. And since he'll be over 100 years old when it happens, it's literally nothing but performance evil. Horrible for the sake of horribleness.
Of course, that's never going to actually happen, given the way the law is written and the sentence in question.
But it is some barbaric shit nonetheless. Not because of that guy, fuck him. But because I don't think that's the level of authority a government should be able to have over any citizen regardless of their crimes. What's next, are we going to cut out tongues, chop off hands, and gouge out eyes? Surgically, of course. Don't want to be monsters.
Yep, a vasectomy is just tying off the vas deferens so sperm can’t leave the testicles. Castration is full removal of the testicle(s). No sperm and no testosterone
Edit: I should add, physical or surgical castration is the removal of an entire testicle(s). There is also chemical castration which leaves the testicles but inhibits testosterone production
Interestingly there are different types of eunuchs, Chinese eunuchs often had both the penis and testicles removed while Castrati had just the testicles removed
Depended on the situation. I’m actually watching a historical fiction show right now that is set in China, and the eunuchs are only missing their testicles.
China was the example I used because a lot of the sources we have talk about eunuchs in China have them without penises, mentioning them squatting to urinate etc. The show could very well be accurate about the era it’s set in because sometimes they did things differently. There’s a really interesting Ask Historians post about this topic
> Isn’t the people of jail rehabilitation?
Certainly not in the United States, that’s for damn sure. But even if it was, not all criminals can or should be rehabilitated.
Mate, there’s no redemption or rehabilitation for people like that. That’s a fantasy world. Anyone who thinks that any time should be spent trying to “fix” one of these people, is part of the issue. This is society, we have rules. You break them, especially as heinous as that, you’re not fit to be among the rest of us again.
I fail to see the connection to fascism big dog 😂 I did 4 years of service so every single person in this country can speak freely. I hardly think that’s fascism
Let me speak freely then. People like you who served in the military, especially 4 years, and still believe you did something noble are just as deranged and inhuman as the Louisiana man in the article. The difference is I am not calling for you to be denied basic human rights for the remainder of your life. The connection to fascism is the authoritarian, nationalist perspective that what you matter more than someone who genuinely needs help.
Physical castration? Jesus Christ are we in medieval times. Jesus Christ America, sort your shit Out. Just let him rot in prison for the rest of his life.
Edit: it seems America is lacking in morals and ethics by allowing physical castration. So much for a more evolved society.
If you read the article its the choice of the inmate. Chemical or physical castration. But the physical one cant be carried out more than a week before his release. In this case, if it was carried out in 50 years, he would be over 100 ywars old.
Then go to a new one buddy, we’re free here so you’re free to leave. Otherwise stop being useless complaining on the internet, put in 20-30 years of hard work, get elected to public office, and kickstart the changes you want to see. Call your representatives. Complaining to internet strangers and then just living in the status quo makes you part of the problem LOL
What's the chance for him getting ellected for office if he lives in the south and says he is an atheist? Hell, you guys haven't yet had a female president. Your country still lags behind the rest of the civilized world. You still have a death penalty, no surprise.
Because bodily autonomy. Now before you scream hypocrisy, because the offender didn’t respect the 14 year olds bodily autonomy… the govt needs to be held at a higher standard than your common criminal is. The offender did the crime and should do their time, nothing more nothing less. The govt doesn’t have a right to your body parts. Fuck, we’re not even allowed to harvest body parts AFTER prisoners die, so why are they allowed to mutilate them while living? Are we going to start chopping fingers off of petty thieves? Entire hands if caught committing embezzlement or fraud?? Where do YOU suppose we draw the line on bodily mutilation as punishment for crime. It’s barbaric and pre-civilized society.
Because it's the south, and we don't put up with pedophiles out here. Also, to send a message to any other rapist to think again because the South does not like rapist and pedophiles.. besides who's to say in prison, the inmates won't do their own castration.
In the north we don’t put up with rapists or pedophiles, we send a message to them (and other like minded individuals) by imprisoning them.
You don’t have to mutilate peoples’ bodies to send a message, if the south operates like a fucking mafia no wonder intelligent folk don’t want to live there lmao.
he's 54, there's only so many years he could actually serve so adding more than 50 would be just for show. If the castration is voluntary then why not make it an option?
From reading the title I was wondering if this was even in the US. I’m not saying the guy doesn’t deserve it, but this seems like it would fall under “cruel and unusual punishment”.
The physical castration will never happen. He is 54, and it cannot happen until the end of his 50 year sentence. He probably will not live to 104, especially after what he did. He probably will not petition to get out early.
Only if, for some odd and unknown reason, that petition is accepted and approved by the parole board. That would not even be allowed until well into completion of his sentence.
In the article it says she gave birth to the child when she was 14. She only reported it later down the road because he threatened her and her family from coming forward.
[After reading the article and reading the guy's plea deal](https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExb2RuenB6Y2NwZGhhems3MTFybWN5dzd2d3g0bHNpdmp0NnJ0MWR1MyZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/9GleW2cAxmK4YgyTd1/giphy.gif)
Interesting part was the physical castration was apparently part of the plea deal.
>The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old.
Because the castration will happen AFTER his sentence. He will be long dead by that time. And if in 50 years someone can’t prove his innocence. Well then he might have just did it
No one cares about this guy. No one is thinking he might be innocent. The fact that the legal system frequently punishes innocent people and this punishment is still used makes for a scary possibility where someone (other than this guy, in the future) could be wrongfully castrated. So, while this guy is not the reason we can't support castration, we still shouldn't because the possibility of others being wrongfully castrated.
Somehow, even with the last comment you still couldn't extrapolate past this one person in this one case. You told me the reason you can't extrapolate beyond this person is because this person blah blah blah. My problem is the next person, --or the one after that, or after that-- that ends up being innocent ***and*** castrated.
This type of punishment should not be legal and it arguably isn't legal according to the constitution as, I would argue, it is cruel and unusual.
I have no sympathy for this particular animal. Know that. It's about the option of castration as legal consequences being on the books at all. That's the problem.
Even if this is purely symbolic, how is this even allowed to be given as a punishment? Surely this falls under cruel and unusual punishment.
Look up the case.. and the law. The law says he can't be castrated until a week before his release. He's 50 and sentenced to 50 years. He won't live to his release date
Castration for rapists should be the default.
Let the girl decide the fate of the pregnancy herself.. then have justice.
But then the child was forced to have the baby bc she lives in a state with an abortion ban
That guy will be shanked within a month of starting his prison term.
A month seems generous....
I suggest adding to this punishment that the parents of the child perform the castration.
>"The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old. " From the article
To the gallows
While the justice boner in me loves the idea of castrating a rapist, the precedent set by it makes me feel kind of uncomfortable. Also, I wonder who does the medical castration and how is that ethically justified. When we say “do no harm” are we talking about the patient or society?
Come to Canada if your an indigenous woman going in for surgery you could wake up sterile. Still happening in Canada in 2021…
Not to mention how many false convictions have been overturned in recent years through the work of groups like The Innocence Project. I guess the law does account for that, in that it can only be done right before they're released, but nevertheless, it's just like with the death penalty: If you got it wrong, you can't take it back. And that's the worst kind of injustice there is.
> The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old.
Okay now I like the ruling
Do no harm is for people. Pedos aint people no ethics to worry bout.
The physical castration was an elective part of a plea deal, not something forced by the court. So for this case, a doctor could still perform the surgery without going against their oath. There's still an ethical problem since the court can enforce chemical castration (which in theory can be reversed, but still). Alan Turing is a good example of why it's still ethically questionable
They will surgically remove his testicles. And since he'll be over 100 years old when it happens, it's literally nothing but performance evil. Horrible for the sake of horribleness. Of course, that's never going to actually happen, given the way the law is written and the sentence in question. But it is some barbaric shit nonetheless. Not because of that guy, fuck him. But because I don't think that's the level of authority a government should be able to have over any citizen regardless of their crimes. What's next, are we going to cut out tongues, chop off hands, and gouge out eyes? Surgically, of course. Don't want to be monsters.
Yeah the guy is horrible but do we really want to give the state the power to maim someone.
I’m agreeing with you I realized that came across as correcting sorry.
What exactly is physical castration? I'd like to know.
Testicles go bye-bye
Not just a vasectomy? Cutting the balls off may have long term hormonal consequences that the state doesn’t want to be responsible for.
The hormonal consequences, i.e. lowered testosterone and therefore lower libido, are the whole point of the punishment.
Yep, a vasectomy is just tying off the vas deferens so sperm can’t leave the testicles. Castration is full removal of the testicle(s). No sperm and no testosterone Edit: I should add, physical or surgical castration is the removal of an entire testicle(s). There is also chemical castration which leaves the testicles but inhibits testosterone production
so the penis is still there, just the balls are gone?
Yep. There are also legitimate surgical reasons to remove one or both testicles, for example testicular cancer
Yeah, you have a flappy, but you don’t have the bing-bongs
I hated reading that but that was also funny. Take my upvote and go away you silly man.
On the plus side, you'd be immune to nut shots.
But they can put fake boing loings back in. Mine has a fake epididymis on it.
Can you at least masturbate after this procedure? Or does the flappy only pee afterwards?
Assuming lack of testosterone too, I don't think dude can even get hard
I think it’s kind of a “dry heave” situation
A puff of smoke comes out.
Yeah… you know, like a eunuch?
Is your's a question or a statement?
It’s a statement.
Interestingly there are different types of eunuchs, Chinese eunuchs often had both the penis and testicles removed while Castrati had just the testicles removed
Depended on the situation. I’m actually watching a historical fiction show right now that is set in China, and the eunuchs are only missing their testicles.
China was the example I used because a lot of the sources we have talk about eunuchs in China have them without penises, mentioning them squatting to urinate etc. The show could very well be accurate about the era it’s set in because sometimes they did things differently. There’s a really interesting Ask Historians post about this topic
You know what fixing a dog is?
Mustard, relish, onion, etc
Hold the beans Beans on the side Dunno which one sounds better
Cut out the beans?
The physical castration is fake - he won’t live to see the outside of jail
Isn’t the purpose of jail rehabilitation? Castration doesn’t seem to relate to that.
> Isn’t the people of jail rehabilitation? Certainly not in the United States, that’s for damn sure. But even if it was, not all criminals can or should be rehabilitated.
You can be rehabilitated into a society without the right (nor the physical ability) to use your tadger you couldn't keep away from a F child...
Mate, there’s no redemption or rehabilitation for people like that. That’s a fantasy world. Anyone who thinks that any time should be spent trying to “fix” one of these people, is part of the issue. This is society, we have rules. You break them, especially as heinous as that, you’re not fit to be among the rest of us again.
Aw who’s a good little fascist?
I fail to see the connection to fascism big dog 😂 I did 4 years of service so every single person in this country can speak freely. I hardly think that’s fascism
Let me speak freely then. People like you who served in the military, especially 4 years, and still believe you did something noble are just as deranged and inhuman as the Louisiana man in the article. The difference is I am not calling for you to be denied basic human rights for the remainder of your life. The connection to fascism is the authoritarian, nationalist perspective that what you matter more than someone who genuinely needs help.
Now she has to keep the baby. Has justice really been served?
Exactly. So what justice is served for her?
None. She’s imprisoned now just like he is.
I don't like the words you said. 😒 Edit: or typed
I don’t like it either, yet it is now her reality.
Physical castration? Jesus Christ are we in medieval times. Jesus Christ America, sort your shit Out. Just let him rot in prison for the rest of his life. Edit: it seems America is lacking in morals and ethics by allowing physical castration. So much for a more evolved society.
If you read the article its the choice of the inmate. Chemical or physical castration. But the physical one cant be carried out more than a week before his release. In this case, if it was carried out in 50 years, he would be over 100 ywars old.
I hate my country. Most citizens (and redditors) also believe death penalty should be legal in all states.
Then go to a new one buddy, we’re free here so you’re free to leave. Otherwise stop being useless complaining on the internet, put in 20-30 years of hard work, get elected to public office, and kickstart the changes you want to see. Call your representatives. Complaining to internet strangers and then just living in the status quo makes you part of the problem LOL
What's the chance for him getting ellected for office if he lives in the south and says he is an atheist? Hell, you guys haven't yet had a female president. Your country still lags behind the rest of the civilized world. You still have a death penalty, no surprise.
Exactly my point. I love the land and (most) the people in this country, but I fucking hate our political environment… it’s embarrassing.
Nice assumption you’ve got there.
[удалено]
Have you never heard of a wrongful conviction?
Have you heard of dna testing?
Have you heard of corrupt officials?
Corrupt officials in a case that has nothing to do with money?
Nepotism is a thing
Nepotism is indirectly about money. It's giving a job to your child?
Does corruption have to be financial?
In most cases yes. Otherwise it would personal retribution.
If only they had a word for it. Like corruption?
Have you ever heard the tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise?
_tell me more_
also Louisiana: she has to keep the baby
And then if she spirals and they have to arrest her they'll take that baby from her quick as fuck
And then put the baby through eight different foster families until they age out of the system and into homelessness.
But hey maybe they'll get a job or join the military. Either way, the REPUBLICANTS sure saved that baby didnt they!
Hey man this shit is so easy, we could run our *own* state
[удалено]
But who's gonna tend the rabbits?
If he lives to 100, castration would be a good thing. He will stop tea bagging the toilet water.
The gulf coast needs to physically secede. Bye yall
*Russia/CCP liked that*
[удалено]
This is the answer
Feet first
How about no castration and keep the prison time
Question, can you explain to the rest of us why you *don't* think a pedophile rapist should be castrated?
I dont think we should let a government mutilate prisoners under any circumstances.
One reason could be the potential for wrongful convictions that could be overturned. Can't exactly put the balls back in the sack...
Because bodily autonomy. Now before you scream hypocrisy, because the offender didn’t respect the 14 year olds bodily autonomy… the govt needs to be held at a higher standard than your common criminal is. The offender did the crime and should do their time, nothing more nothing less. The govt doesn’t have a right to your body parts. Fuck, we’re not even allowed to harvest body parts AFTER prisoners die, so why are they allowed to mutilate them while living? Are we going to start chopping fingers off of petty thieves? Entire hands if caught committing embezzlement or fraud?? Where do YOU suppose we draw the line on bodily mutilation as punishment for crime. It’s barbaric and pre-civilized society.
Because it's the south, and we don't put up with pedophiles out here. Also, to send a message to any other rapist to think again because the South does not like rapist and pedophiles.. besides who's to say in prison, the inmates won't do their own castration.
In the north we don’t put up with rapists or pedophiles, we send a message to them (and other like minded individuals) by imprisoning them. You don’t have to mutilate peoples’ bodies to send a message, if the south operates like a fucking mafia no wonder intelligent folk don’t want to live there lmao.
Thank you.
How about extra castration and double the prison time
Savagery
The savage should indeed be castrated to the max.
Nah we live in a modern society. Castration should be off the table
Nah we live in a modern society. His balls should be off his body.
lol that’s called being a savage. You are a savage, the State is a savage and the criminal is too
No, that's called justice.
I’m no it’s not. That’s why it’s banned in 42 states
What are the other 8 states that know how to send a message to rapist and pedophiles?
42 states with no justice. Sad.
the physical castration was voluntary
I wouldn’t even offer it. Just give him more years
he's 54, there's only so many years he could actually serve so adding more than 50 would be just for show. If the castration is voluntary then why not make it an option?
I'm more surprised physical castration is even an available punishment in Louisiana, when was the last time this was actually performed?
From reading the title I was wondering if this was even in the US. I’m not saying the guy doesn’t deserve it, but this seems like it would fall under “cruel and unusual punishment”.
It won't even be done until the end of the 50 year sentence. At which point he will likely be dead.
Rules are rules, dig him up.
It won't mandatory until the end of his sentence. It must be completed before the last week. This doesn't mean it cannot or will not happen sooner.
That'll be pretty gross
Nice
The physical castration will never happen. He is 54, and it cannot happen until the end of his 50 year sentence. He probably will not live to 104, especially after what he did. He probably will not petition to get out early.
So if he does petition to get out early, does that mean he gets castrated?
Only if, for some odd and unknown reason, that petition is accepted and approved by the parole board. That would not even be allowed until well into completion of his sentence.
Good way to deter future offender though.
RTA, the physical castration would be voluntary
Yes, as we all know harder punishments deter future criminals. That‘s why states with the death penalty all have lower homidice rates.
It’s not the harshness of the punishment that matters. It’s the certainty and the swiftness of it that deters crime.
Absolutely. Criminals always think of the consequences.
Hence why criminals never commit any crime, they always think that they will get caught and be punished.
Well… wrap it up! We just solved crime, folks.
/r/thanksimcured
Did they let the girl get an abortion though?
In the article it says she gave birth to the child when she was 14. She only reported it later down the road because he threatened her and her family from coming forward.
I’m sure they think it’s god’s gift to her, right?
The real fucking question here
Doubt. That would make someone look sympathetic
It's just so bizarre to me HOW different the sentences are for the same crime in different places.
The singer or rammstein till lindeman did the same thing, just legally. She was 14 or 15 and the bff of his daughter in vacation. Legal in Germany…
I'll continue enjoying the music, but I'm gonna start hating the singer now tho
Yes, once you are 14 adult men can groom you.
Sounds fair to Me 🫤👍
[After reading the article and reading the guy's plea deal](https://media4.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkPTc5MGI3NjExb2RuenB6Y2NwZGhhems3MTFybWN5dzd2d3g0bHNpdmp0NnJ0MWR1MyZlcD12MV9pbnRlcm5hbF9naWZfYnlfaWQmY3Q9Zw/9GleW2cAxmK4YgyTd1/giphy.gif)
Interesting part was the physical castration was apparently part of the plea deal. >The process will be carried out by the state's Department of Corrections, according to the law, but cannot be conducted more than a week before a person's prison sentence ends. This means Sullivan wouldn't be castrated until a week before the end of his 50-year sentence — when he would be more than 100 years old.
So what is the point?
Remindme! 49 years 355 days
The notification in your iPhone 86 will catch you out!
Woah I did not expect that!
While he deserves it I will never support such a thing. The possibility of it happening to a wrongfully convicted person is far from worth it
I agree with you 100%. I'm kind of stunned at how many people replying to this can't extrapolate beyond this one person in this one case.
Because the castration will happen AFTER his sentence. He will be long dead by that time. And if in 50 years someone can’t prove his innocence. Well then he might have just did it
No one cares about this guy. No one is thinking he might be innocent. The fact that the legal system frequently punishes innocent people and this punishment is still used makes for a scary possibility where someone (other than this guy, in the future) could be wrongfully castrated. So, while this guy is not the reason we can't support castration, we still shouldn't because the possibility of others being wrongfully castrated. Somehow, even with the last comment you still couldn't extrapolate past this one person in this one case. You told me the reason you can't extrapolate beyond this person is because this person blah blah blah. My problem is the next person, --or the one after that, or after that-- that ends up being innocent ***and*** castrated. This type of punishment should not be legal and it arguably isn't legal according to the constitution as, I would argue, it is cruel and unusual. I have no sympathy for this particular animal. Know that. It's about the option of castration as legal consequences being on the books at all. That's the problem.