Release on parole or a shortening of a prison sentence are both highly complex issues that need to be viewed from both a legal as well as humanitarian standpoint. While ‘imminent danger to society’ is an integral component in determining if parole should be granted to any convict, I believe that when the crime relates to sex offences, even more care and precaution is necessary. The option of early release should only come in question if and when there are very explicit mitigating circumstances, such as the criminal being afflicted by a mental disease that prompted the action, and has now been fully cured of it. Otherwise, I am completely against allowing sex offenders to return to society on parole, particularly if the crimes involved minors. While many so called humanitarian activists argue that all people deserve a chance of being assimilated back into society after they have served time and are repentant, the question I would like to put forth is: ‘Who assumes the responsibility for the next kidnapping, molestation, torture, rape and murder that a convict on parole commits?’
If parole or an early release has to be granted at all then the decision should be accompanied by stringent checks and balances on the daily routine and activities of sex offenders. The parole officers on their case should be assigned after careful deliberations and assessment. I believe that prior experience in dealing with sex offenders is a valuable asset to have for any law enforcement official. Since you have interacted with people similar to them before, it is easier to read them, know when they are lying and also when the time is right to have them brought back in again. Also, instances of parole violations in their case should be met with immediate revocation. This will not only deter other sexual offenders to be careful not to repeat their crimes once they are out of prison, it will also ensure that sex criminals do not fall back into old habits and patterns. Ignoring their parole transgressions I believe is all the encouragement they need to feel that even if they loiter near schools or in parks where females are the most vulnerable, they will not be caught. It is this confidence that eventually lures them back into their world of ruining the life of innocent victims, even if they do no murder them .
This is exactly why Rodney James Alcala’s victim list grew from one eight-year old to include five more. The fact that his initial death sentence was overturned on the grounds of a biased jury is what I find to be the most disturbing element of his story. Once the verdict was revoked, Alcala was a free member of society, and in which capacity he kidnapped, raped, killed and dismembered more women, one of whom was a child aged only twelve. His death sentence for the rape and murder of five girls is completely justified and warranted. Alcala was a repeat sexual offender; this in itself is an indication of his frame of mind and intent when he committed the first sex offence (the rape and murder of Tali Shapiro in 1968). Since there was no repentance on his part, once released, he instantly returned to his old behaviour patterns. Given that the police found DNA evidence that linked him to all five girls, as well as the fact that one of his victims was a minor, a death sentence is the only possible punishment that can be handed out to an individual with a history of committing heinous acts .
I am not at all a supporter of taking the death penalty off the table for a repeat sex offender. The only instance in which any leniency should be offered in the form of a plea bargain is if the life and well-being of a person is contingent on the criminal’s cooperation and information. Or if the conviction depends on the criminals’ confession or evidence provided by him/her without which it will be difficult to make a case. In Gardner’s case neither of these two conditions were present. The crimes committed by him were not in question; the prosecution had solid evidence to convict Gardner for the rape and murders of Amber DuBois and Chelsea King. Furthermore, both girls were already dead so there was no question of timely information resulting in their recovery and being returned to their families. This is why I disagree with the prosecutor’s decision of scaling down Gardner’s punishment from the death penalty to life without parole .
There are several similarities between Rodney James Alcala, John Albert Gardner, Franc Cano and Steven Dean Gordon. All four were convicted sex offenders and serial killers of young female minors and adults. Like Gardner, Cano was also required to wear a tracking anklet, while all four convicts had been found guilty of sex crimes and had been released on parole. It was during their respective parole periods that they went on to kidnap, assault, molest, rape, kill and dismember their victims. What is alarming is also the fact that despite the fact that Cano and Gardner were registered sex offenders in their respective counties, yet the police was still unable to link them to the disappearance of the young girls initially. Apart from a similar start to their rape and killing sprees, there is also an overlap in the violent nature of the crimes committed by all four convicts. Their targets were mostly young girls, even as small as eight-years old, and after raping their victims, all four proceeded to murder them with a lot of brutality as well. This only adds to the fact that all four, in my opinion, are thoroughly deserving of the death penalty, for inflicting unimaginable pain on the victims as well as lasting torture for their families .
This brings us to the question of whether the prosecutor made the right call in deciding to drop the death penalty for Gardner for the King and DuBois murders. One may argue the humanitarian perspective; that is, the information Gardner provided as part of his plea deal resulted in the recovery of the remains of Amber DuBois, which would have offered some comfort to her family who could put her to rest and find some sort of closure from the painful ordeal. However, what remains unclear is the extent to which the victim’s family influenced the prosecutor’s decision. Was his leniency an act of kindness for the family, or a legal strategy to close a high-profile case, return the girl’s remains to her family in a grandiose gesture of PR, and notch up an important win for his record? If the prosecutor’s actions were indeed to reduce the pain inflicted on Amber’s parents, then it is a step I can appreciate. However, if ulterior motives of legal prominence were the root cause, then maybe the legal system needs to take into account the wishes of a victim’s family before handing out a plea bargain.
Simply because Christopher Evans Hubbart has not yet murdered any one of his approximately forty rape victims is no logical reason why he should be granted parole or an early release of any kind. Just a cursory look over his record reveals a consistent, unchanging and almost obsessive pattern of raping women. Since the time of his first conviction in 1972 and his first parole in 1983, every time Hubbart has been out of jail, he has continued raping women. Allowing such a dangerous, and I believe mentally unstable man, to live in any neighbourhood that has women and children is putting the entire society at risk. He may not be a murderer, but the negative physical, emotional and psychological consequences of being violently raped should not be ignored either. Whatever treatment Hubbart was receiving at the Coalinga State Mental Health Hospital in Central California has clearly failed to cure him of whatever mental disorder the doctors had diagnosed him with. The risks of him repeating his crimes is enormous, and any such individual should be kept incarcerated or under treatment at a medical facility, but certainly not where other children and families are at risk .
Works Cited
Coker, Matt. "Steven Dean Gordon Confessed He and Franc Cano Slayed 5 Prostitutes: Grand Jury Report." OC Weekly 25 November 2014: 1-3. Online.
Harris, Kamala D. Sexual Predators and Sentencing. California: Megan's Law Registry, 2015. Print.
Sanders, Doug. "Christopher Evans Hubbart, Confessed Serial Rapist, Granted Release From Prison." Huffington Post 9 September 2013: 1-3. Online.
