Q. Do you not believe that you can expect something of a prisoner that goes beyond his actual sentence if at the same time people outside prison are subject to such burdens?
A. No. Those ideas were given up many years ago in the science and study of penology. The primary objective of penology today is reformative, not punitive, not expiative.
Q. Witness, is that the recognized theory of penology throughout the whole world today?
A. It may not be the recognized theory throughout the whole world today, but it is the prevailing theory in the United States. There is one other aspect that is quite large and essential, and that is the protective aspect of imprisonment to protect society from a habitual criminal.
Q. Witness, if a soldier at the front is exposed to an epidemic and can be almost certain that he will catch typhus and deserts and hides behind the protecting walls of a prison, would you not consider it justifiable if he is persuaded to volunteer for an experiment that concerns itself with typhus?
A. Will you read the question again?
Q. If a soldier deserts from the front where typhus is raging for fear that he too will contract typhus and prefers to be imprisoned in order thus to save himself, do you think it is right for him to be persuaded while he is serving his sentence to subject himself to a typhus experiment?
A. As a volunteer? Yes.
Q. I see. And would you not take a step further, if this prisoner says, “No, I refuse, because if I do this there wouldn’t have been any point in my deserting; I deserted in order to save myself. My buddies may die but I would just prefer not to.”
A. The answer to that question is no.