Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: WEDNESDAY, June 2, 1993 TAG: 9306020276
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-6 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE:
DATELINE: LENGTH: Medium
Divina Genao, 7 years old, was introduced to violence, rape and death this year. The more hypersensitive among us might consider this timing a bit premature. But, if I am to be sophisticated, it shouldn't bother me. I ought to take this in stride.
Divina . . . divine? Is there an irony stalking this story somewhere?
The citizen responsible for her death was first arrested in 1971 and has a long criminal history. But, I am not a penologist. When I detect the possibility of a trend of lawlessness here, I must be wrong; otherwise, why was he on the streets?
Apparently he was on the street because he was paroled after serving 2 1/2 years of a five-year sentence. His crime in 1990? Abducting a young girl at knife point. He was apparently paroled for good behavior; evidently, he neither raped nor murdered any little girls while in prison. Certainly, this should be taken as convincing testimony of his moral fitness. But I'm just guessing and am probably wrong.
After the parole board's decision was made to grant his freedom, did the formality of that gathering give way to tearful joy at his rehabilitation? Were hankies moist and spirits borne aloft with gratitude that his debt had been paid? Did the board hug him joyously and invite him over for dinner the next night?
And when a crime is sufficiently brutal and heinous, we punish it with criminal procedures that occasionally include a trial (and civil procedures that often include movie contracts, book royalties and appearances on Oprah).
Has the word "speedy," as in "speedy trial," always been measured in years? And when did a 10-year sentence come to mean three years, and three years become no years? Has it always been this way? And if it hasn't, who made it change? Was it Republicans, Democrats, liberals, conservatives, the American Civil Liberties Union or the American Association of Retired Persons?
The option of choice for most of society today seems to be to promote individual rights, regardless of consequences (put repeat offenders back on the street). Or, we may choose to endorse inhumane and over-crowded jails (keep all of them in jail for their full sentence). Who was it that decided that these are my only choices?
If these changes were brought about by some group of like-minded social architects, are they stubborn in their cause and blind to their outcome; persuaded that they should be judged only by the purity or correctness of their intentions and not the poverty of the consequences? Do they say, "We, who are so wise, are going to do what we know is right for society and let there be the devil to pay"?
Well, the devil didn't pay. Divina did.
But, if I am to be sophisticated, I ought to take this in stride. I guess I'm not very sophisticated. CONNIE D. FOWLER SALEM
by CNB