I just read an account of the rape in question at Michelle Malkin’s blog.

What the child rapist, saved today by Supreme Court liberals, did to his 8-year-old stepdaughter.

It was so horrible I felt faint from reading it.

Here’s the thing:
Just as in the Guantanamo ruling, the Justices have an utterly surreal notion of what the issues are. What this “Patrick Kennedy” did to his stepdaughter amounted to attempted murder; she likely would have died had he not called 911 (at which time — and for some time thereafter, he lied about being the rapist). Whether this warrants the death penalty may still be argued, but it wasn’t just about rape in the usual sense of these kinds of crimes against children. I am increasingly appalled by the clinically limpid standards that judges — right up to the Supreme Court — apply to horrible crimes. Is this what Kennedy means by “evolving standards of decency?” Isn’t he the same twit who thinks we should be influenced by Western European jurisprudence?