Prosecutor: Boy, 6, begged his killers to stop

[Wild Redhead]

http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world...-6-150882.html

Edenfield said he and his wife watched while his son forced the boy to have sex.
Edenfield later admitted touching Christopher himself after Glynn County police detective Raymond Sarro showed him photographs of the boy's dead body. He said the child had been crying and pleading for them to stop.

This breaks my heart.

The Edenfields moved into the mobile home park where the boy lived just a few months before his death. The family had been forced to move because George Edenfield was a convicted child molester.

I am beginning to think all child molesters should recieve life without possibility of parole. I don't care what the odds are of them reoffending, if it saves just one child then it is worth it to keep them all locked up.

Maybe it is time for someone to think of the children.

[Wintermute]

Originally Posted by Wild Redhead

I don't care what the odds are of them reoffending, if it saves just one child then it is worth it to keep them all locked up.

They have one of the highest recidivism rates of any crime. According to my text book i am reading right now for a criminal justice course they are 4 times a likely to be rearrested compared to the average criminal.

[Malruhn]

I'd like to see where your text cites as the source for that info.

Everything that I've read says that recidivism rates for child abuse and child sexual abuse is roughly the same for everything else.

[Wintermute]

Originally Posted by Malruhn

I'd like to see where your text cites as the source for that info.

Everything that I've read says that recidivism rates for child abuse and child sexual abuse is roughly the same for everything else.

Not sure if you consider the DOJ a valid source or not, but here you go.

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/crimoff.htm

Sex offenders were about four times more likely than non-sex offenders to be arrested for another sex crime after their discharge from prison –– 5.3 percent of sex offenders versus 1.3 percent of non-sex offenders.

Another report.

http://www.doc.state.mn.us/publicati...Recidivism.pdf


[/quote]
Nevertheless, sex offenders are, compared to other offenders, approximately four times more likely to recidivate with a sex crime (Langan and Levin, 2002).
[/quote]

The problem is the term recidivism and how it is used in the criminal justice system. Recidivism is the person doing any crime. Sex offenders are more likely to do other sex crimes while a criminal may do many types of crimes.It is interesting to note that in the second study they say a decrease has been caused by the monitoring of these people better.

[Johnny Slick]

I am beginning to think all thieves should recieve life without possibility of parole. I don't care what the odds are of them reoffending, if it saves just one child then it is worth it to keep them all locked up.

Maybe it is time for someone to think of the children.

[Wild Redhead]

Originally Posted by Wintermute

They have one of the highest recidivism rates of any crime. According to my text book i am reading right now for a criminal justice course they are 4 times a likely to be rearrested compared to the average criminal.

What really gets me is that the figures reflect the repeat offenses of those that get caught. I am pretty sure majority of Child Rapists figure out how not to get caught after the first time.

[Troberg]

Originally Posted by Wild Redhead

What really gets me is that the figures reflect the repeat offenses of those that get caught. I am pretty sure majority of Child Rapists figure out how not to get caught after the first time.

Well, the police is pretty good at getting them if they do it again. Remember, there are not that many of them, so whenever there is a case, the police more or less just checks out all previous offenders in the area. This might skew the numbers, as they are more likely to get caught. It's also a high profile case, that's likely to get more police attention.

[Wintermute]

Originally Posted by Wild Redhead

What really gets me is that the figures reflect the repeat offenses of those that get caught. I am pretty sure majority of Child Rapists figure out how not to get caught after the first time.

Another thing to note is you can watch someone steal a car. It is very hard to find a child molester since they work in secrecy. One again it is easier to find other crimes in my opinion because it is more out in the open. I think the reason drugs are arrested for at such a high rate is because the evidence is out in the open. You normally see the person walking around high, and that gives you a chance to talk to them.

[Malruhn]

WM - thank you VERY much. I don't mind being proven wrong when there is good data to back it up.

[DoubleNaughtSaleen]

This happened while I was at FLETC two years ago, the trailer park is right next to the base.

I say, line them all up, let the new officers have target practice.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by Wintermute

The problem is the term recidivism and how it is used in the criminal justice system. Recidivism is the person doing any crime. Sex offenders are more likely to do other sex crimes while a criminal may do many types of crimes.It is interesting to note that in the second study they say a decrease has been caused by the monitoring of these people better.

So combining this with the DOJ cite which says:

Sex offenders were less likely than non-sex offenders to be rearrested for any offense –– 43 percent of sex offenders versus 68 percent of non-sex offenders.

wouldn't sex offenders have a lower recidivism rate? The quotes you chose just show that sex offenders are more likely than, say, bank robbers to recidivate specifically with a sex crime. And that's a different thing from recidivating in general.

[A Turtle Named Mack]

Originally Posted by Steve

So combining this with the DOJ cite which says: wouldn't sex offenders have a lower recidivism rate? The quotes you chose just show that sex offenders are more likely than, say, bank robbers to recidivate specifically with a sex crime. And that's a different thing from recidivating in general.

Yes, taking the broad view of recidivism that is true, and probably not surprising. But we do take personal crimes more seriously than property crimes. It's a rotten thing when a person steals a car, takes hard illegal drugs, shoplifts, passes bad checks, steals copper wiring or plumbing, or makes book. But it is a horrendous thing when s/he commits rape, mayhem, murder, assault (sexual or otherwise), etc. against people. And the law reflects this. Most of us find it particularly offensive when children are harmed, so when a group that harms children only tends to repeat their child-harming ways, we find it particularly frustrating. And while they may not have quite as high recidivism in the general sense, the fact that when they repeat it is that same heinous sort of crime almost always makes that particular more-narrowly-defined recidivism of special concern.

[Nana M]

Anecdotal, but of interest. When I was working for a Youth Detention centre in BC, I visited a sex offender rehabilitation centre. The director told me, very proudly, that it was 'the best program out there!' I asked him how that was measured and he showed me the test materials used to 'monitor urges'. I then asked him what the rate of re-offending was and he told me they didn't follow up since the youth were adults once they left the centre. I pointed out that he really had no way of knowing how well the centre did in that case and he became very huffy, telling me that all the inmates did VERY well on the monitoring tests.

Ah, the joys of hidebound beauracracy.

[Steve]

Originally Posted by A Turtle Named Mack

Yes, taking the broad view of recidivism that is true, and probably not surprising. But we do take personal crimes more seriously than property crimes. It's a rotten thing when a person steals a car, takes hard illegal drugs, shoplifts, passes bad checks, steals copper wiring or plumbing, or makes book. But it is a horrendous thing when s/he commits rape, mayhem, murder, assault (sexual or otherwise), etc. against people. And the law reflects this. Most of us find it particularly offensive when children are harmed, so when a group that harms children only tends to repeat their child-harming ways, we find it particularly frustrating. And while they may not have quite as high recidivism in the general sense, the fact that when they repeat it is that same heinous sort of crime almost always makes that particular more-narrowly-defined recidivism of special concern.

Yeah, I certainly agree with you that the crime in the OP article is worse than most other sort of crimes, and of course I don't have a problem with sentencing for such crimes accordingly.

But if the claim is made that sex offenders have a higher recidivism rate than most other criminals, and the stats don't show that, then our feelings about sex crimes are irrelevant. Finding out if the claim is true or false is jsut a matter of comparing statistics, and in the case the statistics don't seem to back up the claim.

[UJest]

Originally Posted by Johnny Slick

I am beginning to think all thieves should recieve life without possibility of parole. I don't care what the odds are of them reoffending, if it saves just one child then it is worth it to keep them all locked up.

Maybe it is time for someone to think of the children.

I think I detect the snark in this, but what, exactly, are you trying to say?

[bjohn13]

Originally Posted by Wild Redhead

I am beginning to think all child molesters should recieve life without possibility of parole. I don't care what the odds are of them reoffending, if it saves just one child then it is worth it to keep them all locked up.

Maybe it is time for someone to think of the children.

The interesting thing is, the biggest obstacle we have in our fight with childhood abuse is disclosure. When you consider that over 90% of all abusers are family or close friends of the abused, you have a situation where it is very difficult for a child to disclose abuse because of the fact that the child is actually worried about what will happen to that close friend or family member. My belief is that automatically throwing the book at all abusers will end up reducing the number of children who disclose, and disclosure is the most important step. I firmly believe that the younger a child is when he/she discloses his/her abuse, the more likely that child is to benefit from psychological help that the child should receive.

Another interesting little tidbit...and the part that breaks my heart the most....poor Christopher Barrios was a victim of the very laws that were supposed to protect him. Had the Edenfields not been forced to move accross the street from Christopher, Christopher would still be alive today.