Putting Molesters in Jail Won't Fix Them

I've written on this subject before, but it is so important to our society that, with your leave, I'll tackle it again. The subject is sexual predators and what to do with them.

There has been much publicity recently about sex predators being released from prison, and the cry from Daphne Bramham of the Vancouver Sun, amongst others, is that sentences should be longer. Indeed, in the Sun on July 28 there was a warning about two dangerous sex offenders on the loose. I'm going to tell you how this problem can be all but eliminated. It's up to us whether or not we have the common sense and political guts to do it.

The problem is that longer jail sentences don't help. As long as the predator is going to get out, longer jail terms at best simply postpone the problem and probably make it worse, because he emerges untreated and bitter.

First we must understand the problem we're dealing with. It's an illness every bit as much as cancer is an illness. Men don't wake up one day and decide to be a child molester. They are compelled to do so because, to use the vernacular, that's how their brains are wired. Frequently they know they have a problem and know what they're doing is wrong, very wrong, but they can't stop themselves, just as the cancer patient can't holler "cancer be gone" and do any good by it.

We've been trying to cope with this problem for years using the law as the solution. It isn't the solution and never has been. It's because we the voters don't understand, or understand but are afraid to do something about the fact that we have sexual predators getting out of jail with good behaviour credits, only to wander the streets and school grounds again.

On hanging rapists

Let me give you an example of how the law has failed us.

When I was a young lawyer, men convicted of rape were hanged. This, it was thought, would provide a huge disincentive to offend. To the contrary, many rapists killed their victims, since if you're going to be hanged for rape you might as well get rid of the principal witness.

In many ways, society has begun to understand mental illness. But we're a long way from accepting it as a real disease.

Let me give you an example from my own experience.

I am clinically depressed and have been treated for nearly 25 years. When I get into an anxiety attack -- which I sometimes do even though I take medicine -- just as the sexual predator knows he is doing wrong, I know that my terrible gripping anxiety, which will bring me to sweating and crying, has no basis in fact, but it still won't go away.

The law has found a system for dealing with most crimes where the convicted person is found "not guilty by reason of diminished capacity." Being not guilty in law doesn't mean that the person goes free -- quite the opposite. They are detained at "Her Majesty's Pleasure" which is to say until cured or forever if they aren't. They do get treatment, and if the day comes that the doctors can say "he is no more likely to offend than any other citizen," he is released but under strict controls.

I served for five years on the B.C. Cabinet Committee to pass final judgment in these cases and can tell you that the standards for release are extremely high. Over that five year period we reviewed, I suppose, 25 of these cases, and released them all based upon overwhelming psychological evidence. Some of these cases were horrific -- I especially remember the man who burned his house down with his wife and children inside. There was no problem with any of them.

Dealing with 'sickos'

When we learn of an attack on children we immediately say that the guy who did it is a "sicko." And we're right -- the man is desperately sick. Why, then, do we think that putting him in jail for five years, to be released in three, safeguards the public and their children?

The procedure I'm going to suggest is inspired by one concern only -- how do we avoid putting repeat predators back in the schoolyard or playground near you? If we don't adopt this procedure, I tell you frankly, we're responsible for our kids being in harm's way. We're not responsible for the act, of course, but directly responsible for not protecting our children from the terrifying hazard.

First, the accused is tried in the usual way. If the accused is found guilty, the judge then, either on request of counsel or on his own volition, holds a second hearing to determine if the convicted man is a sexual predator. If he is, the judge finds him "not guilty by reason of diminished capacity" and he is detained at the "Queen's Pleasure," not to be released until he has received treatment and been pronounced as no more a threat to society than is the ordinary citizen.

Amongst other things, the predator will unquestionably be in custody longer than if he was simply sent to jail. Indeed, he may never get out.

This procedure has two huge advantages -- a sick person gets treated and it keeps sexual predators out of the community.

We have a federal government with a "hang 'em high" philosophy, which results in substantial increase of harm simply because the predator is back on the street with inadequate treatment or none at all.

Before you call me soft

Prisons are supposed to rehabilitate prisoners where in fact the very opposite is what happens. When a sexual predator comes out he is no better, and most likely worse off, than when he went in, and his resolve will not be how he can behave better but how he can offend without being caught. That often results in the victim being killed.

People will say that this is mollycoddling sex criminals.

How can anyone say that? Put yourself in the prisoner's box; you have the choice of five years in prison with time off for good behaviour, or an indeterminate detention until medical evidence is overwhelming that you are cured -- you'll take prison every time.

If we truly want to keep our children safe from repeat offenders, we must recognize the truth -- the offender is sick, and it's overwhelmingly obvious that the public is best served when he is treated accordingly.

If the object is to keep repeat offenders away from playgrounds and schools, we must change our thinking dramatically and insist that our federal government makes the forgoing suggestions the law of the land.