Should Gerturde Baniszewski have been paroled?

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Google the basics of the case if you haven't heard of it, but be warned that it's one of the grisliest things I've ever read about; Greater Atlas is not a community that generally requires or asks for trigger warnings, but I've provided them on Discord and I'll provide them here: it's incredibly disturbing even to read dry factual information about what Baniszewski did to a sixteen-year-old girl in her care, and encouraged others to do, including other minors.

The murder took place in 1965 and she was paroled in 1985. She had been a model prisoner and a mentor to a lot of younger female prisoners in Indiana during the intervening twenty years, and after her release she never reoffended, yet her crime was perhaps one of the most morally evil (on a sheer interpersonal level) ever committed, nobody has ever been able to find a coherent motive for it (other than her insanity defense at trial, which failed), she roped in and ruined the lives of numerous other people besides her victim, and she never expressed clear responsibility and remorse.

Which set of considerations does the C&L board care about more in this case? Personally I would have strongly opposed paroling Baniszewski, and I say this as someone who usually favors the restorative justice/"soft on crime" approach.

[Stand With Israel. Crush Hamas]

No, and I would have made the argument that given her preference for preying on children, there is absolutely no argument that she is not a danger to society. If there is one group vulnerable to an old lady sociopath on the loose, it's children.

[Torie]

Given the fact that she was released and has not been a problem since, makes the question somewhat unfair. If it were 1985, and without knowing what was in her mind when she committed her heinous acts, and her apparently being closed mouth about it, either to authorities or a therapist, right out of the box there is a lack of confidence as to what her behavior would be after release. So no.

If one had confidence that she was a changed woman, perhaps I would consider a program where she can provide services to others, while returning to prison at night. It could be a low security prison. There is something to be said, that for one who has been thoroughly rehabilitated, with the hormones having waned, to keep them locked up solely for punishment, is cruel and unusual. That however would be a set of unusual facts.
 
Yeah, I know I sound like I have devolved in a useless bleeding heart liberal. Where have all the flowers gone? But there is some hope for me yet. I still favor the death penalty in unusual circumstances, where to do otherwise means the act is penalty free. For example, if there is no death penalty, after you do first degree murder on one person, why not murder again? There is no additional penalty. Or you are in prison for life with no prospect for parole, why not murder anyone who annoys you while in prison? It is a "free" kill.

[(no subject)]

Sylvia has been targeted again in death, simply because the cisgender Miss Likens was played in a film by someone who... has turned out not to be cisgender.

[(no subject)]

I should clarify that its internet trolls not me who needle Elliott Page about having played Sylvia.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Okay, but this thread is not for posters to score easy lay-ups on The Trans Issue in. She was a real person who got tortured to death, for goodness' sake. Please take that level of lazy non-posting to USGD where it belongs.

[The Dowager Mod]

Okay, but this thread is not for posters to score easy lay-ups on The Trans Issue in. She was a real person who got tortured to death, for goodness' sake. Please take that level of lazy non-posting to USGD where it belongs.

Hey now!

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

Okay, but this thread is not for posters to score easy lay-ups on The Trans Issue in. She was a real person who got tortured to death, for goodness' sake. Please take that level of lazy non-posting to USGD where it belongs.

Hey now!

Okay yeah, you don't deserve that.

Jolly Slugg, take it to Twitter and make it Elon Musk's problem.

Any more takers on the actual subject of the thread?

[Antonio the Sixth]

I didn't know about this case and haven't looked it up in light of the content warnings, but just going off OP, this does strike me as a very interesting case. My reading of the arguments for and against is that they illustrate a difference between the utilitarian and virtue-ethical understandings of rehabilitation, which normally never comes up in these discussions.

A utilitarian would only be concerned about future behavior, so from that perspective, paroling her was the right decision and the fact that she never offended again is all the vindication we need. She was "rehabilitated" in that sense. But from a virtue-ethical perspective, the fact that she never showed any remorse clearly indicates that she hadn't internalized her guilt in any meaningful way, which precludes rehabilitation. What matters isn't behavior, but the content of one's character - and of course we can only evaluate it through external signs, but the signs here point to someone who got caught and decided she didn't want to get caught again, not to someone who had a change of heart.

So, as an adherent of virtue ethics, I can't condone paroling her in this case. I rarely take the "tough on crime" stance, and in particular I have an extremely high burden for keeping people locked up for multiple decades, but from what I can see she does in fact meet that burden.

[Fuzzy Bear]

If someone was paroled in 1985 and hasn't reoffended, that's a successful parole by definition.  The decision appears to be correct in retrospect.

Parole is offered and granted for a number of reasons.  The positive reasons are (A) to motivate the incarcerated to follow rules while incarcerated and (B) to give inmates incentives for genuine self-improvement.  There is always the real concern of paroling someone who can behave in prison, but not at large, and there are, indeed, people that should never be paroled.  It's hard to say that this woman is one of those, however, if she lived out her life without reoffending.

[It’s so Joever]

No because she should have been publicly executed earlier anyways.

She should not have been given a chance to live in prison, with clear evidence and due to the severity of the crime, I would support a swift execution by beheading. She would be shown an act of mercy as unsatisfying as it is by being given such a clean execution rather than the damage she inflicted onto others.

I am more torn on how the children should be handled to be honest. They were complicit but they are minors so I don’t support the death penalty for obvious reasons. Maybe letting them live knowing what they enabled as they grow older is punishment enough beyond the charges actually pressed.

I wonder if some of the people commenting on here have read the full details of the case, trying to make this about a trans issue is nuts.

I won’t say this is the worst case of child abuse I have heard of but it certainly is up there, it reminds me of the case of Genie to be honest. Similar instances of a foster parent being extremely abusive.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

If someone was paroled in 1985 and hasn't reoffended, that's a successful parole by definition.  The decision appears to be correct in retrospect.

For context, Baniszewski died in 1990, so if she'd lived longer she might have reoffended again eventually. But that's of course unknowable now and thus shouldn't and can't be taken into account.

[(no subject)]

Baniszewski was a heavy smoker. She was lucky to not die from the cancer that killed her in 1990 whilst still in prison.

Jenny Likens, Sylvia's sister who had to witness what happened to her, died in 2004, a couple pf days after having a major heart attack. She'd struggled with alcohol and obesity issues throughout her adult life.

[dead0man]

she should have been taken behind the courthouse and shot

[freepcrusher]

Not after 20 years, but maybe if she had done more time. It pisses me off that she gets out in 20 while Beausoleil Van Houten and Davis keep getting rejected by the governor.

[RussFeingoldWasRobbed]

All I'll say is this. If she were a man, she would have gotten the needle