Editorial: Judging a heinous crime

Wednesday, April 4, 2007 | 7:18 a.m.

Carson City District Judge Bill Maddox stunningly declared last week that crimes such as child pornography and having sex with an underage child are not necessarily morally wrong but offenses of "impulse control."

"When I say that, it's my understanding that most men are sexually attracted to young women," Maddox said, according to a transcript of a sentencing hearing posted online by the Nevada Appeal, Carson City's newspaper. "When I say young women, I don't just mean women that ... you should be attracted to. I mean women from the time they're 1 all the way up until they're 100."

That is outrageous and, given the context, particularly frightening. The man he sentenced, 36-year-old Jason Excell, had more than 800 hard-core photos of underage children, some as young as 5.

Maddox brushed off the belief that these crimes are morally wrong, instead defining them by the legal term malum prohibitium, meaning the offense is merely something deemed illegal by society, such as speeding. He said it is illegal to have sexual contact with a child younger than 16, "which flies in the face of our, I guess for lack of a better description, our normal impulses." He based that argument on his finding that "in some societies it's acceptable to be engaging in sexual conduct with women that are 11, 12, 13 years old."

In his statement Maddox blazed a wide, reckless and completely ludicrous path. He defames "most men" by saying they are attracted to young girls, and he minimized sexual crime by saying 11-, 12- and 13-year-old girls are women. Does calling them women make this crime any less morally repugnant?

Victimizing children, whether through the actual act or by promoting their continued violation by buying child pornography, is morally wrong, as are all sexual crimes. Impulse control has nothing to do with it.

Ironically, in giving Excell a sentence of up to 18 years in prison under which he will be eligible for parole in two, Maddox said he wanted to send a message to anyone thinking about buying child pornography. He said there were consequences to pay and "if you get caught possessing them you're going to go to prison in Carson City."

The message that came through, however, was that perpetrators have excuses for such heinous crimes, and that is simply an unacceptable argument from a District Court judge.