A Louisiana man has been sentenced to decades in prison and physical castration after pleading guilty to raping a teenager, according to a news release from the region’s district attorney.
Glenn Sullivan Sr., 54, pled guilty to four counts of second-degree rape on April 17. Authorities began investigating Sullivan in July 2022, when a young woman told the Livingston Parish Sheriff’s Office that Sullivan had assaulted her multiple times when she was 14. The assaults resulted in pregnancy, and a DNA test confirmed that Sullivan was the father of the child, the district attorney’s office said. Sullivan had also groomed the victim and threatened her and her family to prevent her from coming forward.
Physical, and chemical castration is a violation of the 8th Amendment’s ban on ‘Cruel and Unusual Punishment’. I’ll have to look further into it, but this is definitely one of those things that will not/should not be well-received in the courts.
The crime this man has committed against his juvenile victim is unspeakable, but so too is the stipulation that those convicted be castrated. Involuntary alterations to one’s person is, and should always be, regarded as a step too far, especially those which are irreversible. Absolutely putrid.
7 Likes
Additionally, I don’t think there is any proof that it prevents future assaults. Sex is in the brain as well as the balls. It also seems pointless if he is going to be in prison for what appears to be the rest of his life.
6 Likes
The evidence that it actually prevents risk is very questionable and inconclusive. Physical castration is outright barbaric and has no place in a civilized society. It’s on the same level as public lashing, or using rape as a criminal punishment, which is something that some societies used to practice as a way to keep women from getting into heaven in the afterlife.
6 Likes
My chief concerns over using castration (especially physical) as criminal punishment (aside from indeed being cruel, unusual, barbaric, savage, etc.) are A. the double standard regarding the implementation of such a penalty (I doubt female perpetrators would be subjected to forced oophorectomy) and B. how this could be used to justify cutting off thieves’ hands and the like. If dismemberment is a legitimate method of crime-stopping, why don’t we just amputate the arms/legs and/or remove the eyes of other violent criminals?
And I know people will argue “that’s completely different, castrating somebody doesn’t prevent them from being able to take care of themselves”, but the fact is that lopping off hands of thieves was/is a legal consequence for thievery. Historically and contemporarily, severe mutilations and cripplings were/are used as punishments and crime prevention across multiple societies.
Mutilation is/should NOT be deemed an acceptable penalty for crime in a modern civilized society. The Deep South is NOT civilization.
3 Likes
“Sex is in the brain as well as in the balls”. This should be a new slogan.
3 Likes
Watch now as I alienate myself here as well.
Firstly, my brain twitches at “decades”, when it’s half a century, but I guess normies like plural than singular.
Secondly, for this physical abuse, with DNA evidence, multiple occurrences, threats to stay quiet, I don’t think castration is too much (and I wholeheartedly agree this should be treated as a special category, and not start cutting hands off thieves), chemical preferably but reading the article he opted for physical or it was a stipulation in his plea (that sucks if it wasn’t his choice but the other side’s, but you know there’s an irony there).
Reading the article though, you will see he will not be castrated more than a week before his release from prison, which seems fair, it reinforces the point it’s to protect society, which while he’s locked up is unnecessary (long as the prison has a good track record in no escapes of course), however if serving his whole sentence, which he should, he’ll be over 100 years old, which besides being unlikely he’s still alive, no doubt his attorney could mount a defence it would kill him and given his age and frailty he is unlikely to be anymore a danger with or without being castrated, maybe reduce it to chemical only if at all.
I think it’s just a society safety measure, should he somehow be released early.
It all makes perfect sense to me, and while I would be concerned that this punishment scope could creep, protecting society from real world harm, the damage and impact he’s had on that girl and her family cannot be allowed to happen again and should serve as a deterrent to others.
I can believe these people should get the punishment they deserve, while equally not wanting people who only read Manga or look at AI images to be treated the same.
1 Like