CHEMICAL CASTRATION

TALLAHASSEE -- Florida is the third state in the USA to chemically castrate sex offenders who repeat their crimes. Gov. Lawton Chiles, a Democrat, allowed the chemical castration legislation to become law without his signature. The law takes effect Oct. 1, 1997.  Men convicted of sex crimes for a second time would be ordered by a judge to receive injections of a drug called Depo-Provera.

That drug commonly is used as a birth control for women, but in men, it acts to reduce sexual impulses, some studies have shown. Rep. Mark Ogles, a Bradenton Republican who co-wrote the law with Sen. Anna Cowin, R-Leesburg, said the new law will be a deterrent for many would-be sex offenders. ``Starting in October, they'll know that if they commit one of these crimes, they won't just go to prison -- they won't be able to have sex after they get out,'' Ogles said. Also, the law could stop many sex offenders from repeating their crimes.

Studies in Denmark show that men were 80 percent less likely to repeat their offenses when given regular injections of Depo-Provera, Ogles said. In order for the drug to work, a shot has to be administered every seven to 10 days. Some sex offenders will not benefit from the drug because their crimes were committed as a result of violence and not a sexual impulse. The law has brought criticism from the American Civil Liberties Union, which considers it cruel and unusual punishment. The ACLU worries that the drug will be used inappropriately to injure people convicted of sex crimes.

During legislative debates, Ogles and Cowin were able to deflect criticism by requiring tight controls over who gets the injections and who doesn't. Ogles said the chemicals shouldn't be used as a form of revenge against the people who commit the crimes, but instead be used as a way to reform the prisoners. In the law, psychiatrists and medical professionals would have to deem the injections appropriate on a case-by-case basis. Ogles said by bringing in medical professionals to assure the integrity of the treatments, the law will hold up to court challenges that likely will result when the drug is first used.  People convicted of a sex crime would have the injections mandated as part of their sentencing. The shots of Depo-Provera would not begin until after their release from prison and could last only as long as they are on parole or until a date the court determines during sentencing. First-time sex offenders also could be subject to the injections, upon a judge's decision. First-time or repeat offenders convicted of a sex crime could opt to have a physical castration instead of the chemical procedure. Ogles said many sex offenders realize they have a problem and want castrations to protect themselves from urges they don't feel they can control. On September 18, 1996, AB 3339 became law, amending section 645 of the Penal Code.

The amended statute provides that any person guilty of a first conviction of specified sex offenses, where the victim is under 13 years of age, may be required to receive medroxy progesterone acetate treatment upon parole, and any person convicted of two such offenses must receive the treatment during parole. This medication is administered by injection and has the effect of lowering the testosterone level, blunting the sex drive. The parolee begins the treatments prior to his release on parole and the treatments continue until the Department of Corrections demonstrates to the Board of Prison Terms that this treatment is no longer necessary.

Click here for more medical information

SEXUAL REGISTER

Britain Boy, 11, on sex offenders' list

An 11-year-old boy from Edinburgh has been put on the Sex Offenders' Register after admitting a sex attack on a two-year-old girl. The boy pleaded guilty at Newcastle Crown Court on in September, 1999, to one charge of indecent assault, carried out at a house in the Gateshead area of Tyneside last August.  No action was taken over further charges of indecent assault and attempted rape.

The hearing was adjourned for reports and to assess the risk the boy could pose in the future. He was granted bail until 27 March, 2000.The length of time he must stay on the Sex Offenders' Register will only be determined after he is sentenced. The judge, David Hodgson, warned the boy that he could face a period of detention. He said: "You must understand that the court is not promising how you will be dealt with by ordering these reports. You must appreciate everything will be open to the court and that includes being sent away. There are no promises at all." Edinburgh City Council has set up measures to support the boy, who is a pupil at one of its primary schools. 

A council spokesman said: "Officers from the education and social work departments have been working very closely with the police and a full multi-risk assessment has been carried out. As a council we can not reiterate enough that the needs and safety of all pupils, the school and wider community remain our chief concern. The boy, whose identity along with that of his victim are protected by a court order, is believed to be among the youngest to be put on the Sex Offenders' Register. -  BBC Online  

*   USA - Checking the Background of Persons Who Work or Volunteer with Children, Elderly and Disabled Persons

------------------------------------------------------------------------

The USA state of Florida (s.943.0542, FLORIDA STATUTES) now provides organizations in Florida that have employees or volunteers who work with children, elderly or disabled persons with the ability to obtain state and national criminal history information to determine if these persons have arrests and/or convictions in Florida or in other states. By learning about the criminal history of the employee or volunteer, the organization can screen out those persons who have demonstrated that they are not suitable for contact with vulnerable individuals. The law can be viewed on the Florida Legislature's Web Site. Call 091(850) 410-7963 for more information.

Click here for more information on police investigation

COMPENSATION

BRITAIN

March 25, 1999 Published at 23:00 GMT   -  Rape victims are set to get more compensation

People infected by HIV as a result of sex attacks could receive up to £25,000 as part of an overhaul of the way victims of crime are compensated. Changes to the Criminal Injuries Compensation Scheme would also introduce payments for rape victims infected with other sexually-transmitted diseases or left pregnant by the attack.
The Home Office is proposing the maximum payments for male or female rape victims infected with HIV, while victims permanently affected by another sexually transmitted disease could claim up to £15,000. Those temporarily affected would be eligible for up to £10,000.

Under the current scheme now under review, such victims would be entitled to payments of between £1,000 and £20,000, depending on how long the illness lasted.  The proposals also include a £12,500 sum for women made pregnant by a rapist.

The changes are among several amendments being suggested by the government in the wake of controversy over the amounts of compensation paid to victims of crime.  Home Secretary Jack Straw said the £200m-a-year scheme could never make up for people's experiences and stressed he was not proposing to free up more cash for the scheme.
But he said changes by lowering some awards, raising others, adding new categories or allowing for inflation could produce a better deal for victims.
The present scheme was introduced in 1990. -  BBC Online 

CANADA:

Roy Gjelstad reports for CBC TV -  Sat Oct 9 22:38:49 1999

FREDERICTON - A second wave of compensation for victims of abuse, which took place at three government institutions in New Brunswick, will be paid out next month but some people worry not all the victims will be found by then.

The years of sexual abuse of children in the province's care at three institutions, including the King's Clear Reformatory were uncovered five years ago. The investigation and trial lead to the conviction of former guard, Karl Toft, on 34 sex-related charges.

The province also launched a six month public inquiry into the abuse which spanned three decades. The inquiry recommended compensation for the victims and the former Liberal government set up a process to do that in 1995. A year later, it cut off applications, with about 90 people saying they were left out in the cold.
The conservative government re-opened the compensation process.

"It was the compassionate thing and the right thing to do," said new premier, Bernard Lord. So far 82 new claims have been registered but there may be many more. The first compensation process settled 250 claims with packages including counseling, training and $120,000 for each victim. As the new compensation claims are being made, RCMP in the province say they plan to re-open the case and file new criminal charges.

Copyright c 1999 CBC All Rights Reserved  

Click here for more information issues surrounding rape

CAUTIONARY RULE

Discredited rape rule moves a step closer to being ditched

The Namibian (Windhoek)
October 6, 1999
By Werner Menges

Windhoek - The widely discredited legal rule that courts have to treat rape complainants' testimony with special caution came closer to being consigned to the dustbin when two opposing lawyers agreed in the Supreme Court that the rule is unconstitutional.

The "cautionary rule", which effectively means a rape victim's court testimony has to be treated with  suspicion, took centre stage as Public Prosecutor Annemarie Lategan argued that the acquittal of a man accused of abducting and raping an 11-year-old girl had to be overturned. 

The appeal was heard by Chief Justice Johan Strydom and Acting Judges of Appeal Anel Silungwe and Bryan O'Linn. Lategan and Zagrys Grobler, who appeared on behalf of the acquitted suspect, Michael Katamba, agreed  that the cautionary rule be declared unconstitutional as it prevented complainants in rape cases from receiving equal treatment before the law. Katamba was charged with abducting the girl at Grootfontein on October 1 1995. She allegedly encountered Katamba while walking towards her school hostel. Using a knife and threatening her, he forced her to accompany him, it was claimed. Katamba allegedly assaulted the child by kicking and punching her, leaving her with black eyes. He allegedly raped her on the first day and forced her to go with him to a farm some 20 km from Grootfontein where they stayed for the next two days.

Only after that time did the girl raise the alarm. She told Katamba's sister he had assaulted her. When they arrived at the farm, Katamba had introduced the apparently petrified girl to his sister as her new sister-in-law. Katamba denied the charges. He claimed the girl approached him at Grootfontein, telling him she had been raped by four men and asking him to help her. Because he was under the influence of alcohol, he did not want to take her to the Police, he said. Judge Simpson Mtambanengwe, who presided at Katamba's trial in November 1996, said in his judgment that he still had to apply the cautionary rule. He expressed the opinion that a previous decision by a two-Judge bench of the High Court, in which then Judge Theo Frank stated that the rule had no rational basis and was "probably contrary to the provisions of the Namibian Constitution", was not a definitive ruling as it was made without proper, well-researched argument on the cautionary rule having been placed before the court. Judge Mtambanengwe acquitted Katamba, noting that the alleged victim, who repeatedly broke down and cried while testifying, could not answer several important questions under cross-examination.

This included a reason for not screaming for help when she and Katamba visited a house at Grootfontein and a reason for not pointing out to the Police the place where the rape took place, allegedly behind her school. Grobler argued that the question was not whether the girl was raped and assaulted, but whether Katamba was the culprit. The child was a single witness, whose testimony - both as a child and as a single witness - still had to be treated with caution, he said. While agreeing that the cautionary rule had to be declared unconstitutional, Grobler also argued that this change could not be made applicable to Katamba's 1996 case.  Katamba still had to receive the benefit of the doubt as his explanation of events was "reasonably possibly true", Grobler said. As there was no indication that Katamba had been notified that the appeal was to be heard on Monday, the case was postponed until further notice.  Copyright (c) 1999 The Namibian.  For information about the content or for permission to redistribute, publish or use for broadcast, contact the publisher.

Click here for more information on child rape

FEMALE GENITAL MUTILATION

Tempo (Lagos): October 6, 1999

Two female legislators in Benin relive genital mutilation experiences as the Edo House proposes a law against the practice,Victor Ofure Osehobo reports.Until last week, it was possible that the two women had little or no intimate knowledge about their common heritage. Yet, they were both victims of female genital mutilation. Mrs. Esohe Jacobs and Elizabeth Ighodaro, both mothers, are happily-married and are the only two female members of the Edo House of Assembly. At the second reading of the Bill against female genital mutilation, last week, the duo brought the House into a solemn mood when they narrated their individual experiences of the operation which has come under severe criticism by many women groups and international organisations. Esohe was circumcised at nine.

The scar left after the operation has deprived her of a lifetime sexual satisfaction. She said that her wailing and weeping during and after the painful operation kept the goats in her father compound bleating on end. Elizabeth was circumcised at sixteen. She recalled being woken up one morning, taken to the back of the house and forced to lie on fresh banana leaves. An aged man with a blunt knife stood over her and performed the dehumanising act in a matter of minutes. She said although she bled profusely, a black native soap was used to wash the area thoroughly. The two lawmakers along with three of their male colleagues are co-sponsoring the Bill, which if passed into law, will be the first of its kind in the country.  The women said the practice destroyed a woman's sensitivity during sex and has led to severe bleeding and deaths of helpless victims. Mrs. Jacobs said that although one of the reasons given for the practice was to beautify the area, she wondered at the cruel nature of the exercise.

Mr Friday Itulah, the chief sponsor of the Bill, described female genital mutilation as man's inhumanity to women. The practice, he said was archaic. He said the very crude tools used for the operation, the unhygienic environment and the heartless manner the operation is carried out called for its abrogation. "We now know that female genial mutilation does not prevent promiscuity among women neither does it guarantee safer delivery of babies. The only reason why the obnoxious practice has survived this long is the absence of a law against it," Itulah argued. Other legislators spoke in favour of the law, if only to save women from psychological and health hazards and continued abuse of their fundamental human and reproductive rights. The reading of the bill attracted several women groups to the House of Assembly. Girls Power Initiative (GPI), International Reproductive Rights Research Action group (IRRRAG), International Federation of Women Lawyers (FIDA), Women Health and Action Research Centre (WHARC) were strongly represented. Grace Osakue, the South-West coordinator of the GPI, a voluntary organisation that specialises in the empowerment of teen-age girls about their reproductive health and rights, said that FGM was evil. She described the practice as the total or partial removal of the female genitalia such as vulva, the two labia minora and majora, the clitoris, the clitoral prepuce, the vaginal orifice and the urinary meatus. She said the practice was common in Edo State and several parts of Nigeria.

She intimated that the operation was often performed with or without the consent of parents, by untrained traditional birth attendants or aged male barbers who used blunt unsterilised knives, razors, sharp stones and even their fingers. She listed complications arising from the exercise to include painful menstruation, painful intercourse, vesico or rectal vagina fistulae and death. Others are growths of dermatoid cysts and keloid scars which could prevent women from walking with ease. She likened the removal of the female clitoris to the chopping off of the male reproductive organ. The proposed law makes it a criminal offence to circumcise, cut or mutilate the female genitalia in Edo State. It lists principal offenders as the girl who may volunteer herself for the operation, any person who coerces, entices or induces a girl to go for FGM, parents/guardians who allow their children/wards to partake in the operation and the person who performs the act. Offenders can be arrested by the Police, health and local council officials or individuals. They shall be arraigned before a magistrate court. Upon conviction, offenders will pay a fine of N3,000 or go to jail for three years.

There is also a penalty of N2,000 fine or twelve months imprisonment for anyone who obstructs officers in the course of arrest. Mrs. Jane Osagie, the South-West co-ordinator of IRRRAG-Nigeria is, however, worried at the inclusion of the female-child as an offender when she is the victim. She said the law should distinguish between the child and the female-adult, some of whom offered themselves for the practice before their wedding. Both Mrs. Osakue and Osagie agree that the N3,000 fine is too small considering the irreversible damage done to the victim. A fine of N20,000 or seven years imprisonment would be more like it, they said. They also agree that the law should seek to protect the girl who is forced to undergo the exercise, else its essence will be defeated. Copyright (c) 1999 Tempo.

Click here for more information on female mutilation

------------------------------------------------------------------------ 

FORCED MARRIAGE

April 5, 1999 - Egypt gets tough on rapists (BBC ONLINE)

Egyptian ministers have voted to repeal a controversial law which exempts a rapist from punishment if he marries his victim. Rape victims sometimes agree to wed their attackers because they do not want to disgrace their families.  The custom has been strongly criticised by religious leaders and women's activists. The Justice Minister, Faruq Seif al-Nasr, was quoted in the local press saying that the law encouraged rapists and was bad for women's security. The move, which has the backing of President Hosni Mubarak, still has to be approved by the Egyptian Parliament, but is not expected to meet much resistance. In many Middle Eastern countries, a woman who loses her virginity out of wedlock brings shame to her family, even if she has been raped. By marrying her attacker, the woman at least gets a certificate of marriage although it is often followed by divorce. In January, a senior Egyptian Sheikh, the Mufti of Egypt, declared such marriages were against Islam and that any marriage between a rapist and his victim was "null and void". He said the legislation permitting the practice had been adopted during the colonial period for the convenience of foreigners living in Egypt. In December, prosecutors freed three rape suspects after one of them offered to marry the victim and she accepted, prompting outrage among women's groups. Under Egyptian law, a rapist may be executed. On Sunday a 27-year-old man was sentenced to death for kidnapping and raping a three-year-old girl.  

Click here for more information on media and events

© Speak Out Terms of use