You didnt mention that most of the attackers were juveniles (so Im guessing under 16). So you would kill or castrate them?And if they don't hang then they could at least castrate them. Like you said the justice system is a joke, here in Australia 10 guys just walked on gang rape charge against a 10 year old.
And supposedly the girl was a willing participant and there was no violence or threat. And while I agree a 10 year old is too young to give consent and that this is a rape, its a lot different to just lumping it in with most other rapes.
Prosecutor in child rape case stood aside - National - smh.com.au
The attackers were all found guilty, the under age ones had no conviction, a couple of older ones had suspended sentances.
And I agree the case was badly handled and it looks like the prosecutor will be in trouble and possibly loose their job. Id say the magistrate will also be in trouble.
And to put this into perspective - from the carefully worded news reports I gather this involved aborignals (with guidelines on reporting none of the news reports Ive read said they were aboriginal, but other comments like "Cape York indigenous communities").
There has been a lot of problems with aboriginals dying in police custody (some from being beaten, most from suicide) and there has been a push to not gaol them for minor offenses. I could easily see in this case that a magistrate might have leaned towards not putting 16 years old in goal and risk them dying.
These sorts of things are never black and white. Its a hard balance between guilt, punishment, protection of the community, deterrence and rehabilitation. Simplistic comments like "hang them" or "castrate them" is nice for a quick one line post but its never going to be a solution you can just blanket apply.
Certainly I dont think anyone would suggest that this is a case for a punishment as harsh as death or castrating.