Are you just pulling ideas out of your ass? (no offence) or can you support your assertions as to the possible effects.
Also, I may have been unclear - I'm not really suggesting that my argument should in any way be about the punishment for this sickening crime, unless you believe punishment should be based (totally or partially) on the consequences/harm of the action. (which is not unreasonable).
Errm, I think I made it pretty clear that unless you wait until whoever they harm's lives finish, you can't know the consequences at all, ever. They need to be in jail now, we won't know if the kids remember or are effected by it in any way for decades, you can't ever punish more or less badly based on the eventual effect to the victim because, shockingly we can't see the future.
The only thing you can punish, is the crime, nothing more or less.
You're first post was dedicated to the idea maybe its not as bad a crime because they won't remember. This is just flat out wrong, the crime is the same, the eventual life long consequences to the victims may prove to be less severe than if the crime was commited against a 10 or 50 yr old, however we don't and can't know that.
Hence we punish the crime, and sometimes the consequences that happen shortly after that can be known before the trial. IE if a rape victim killed themselves before the persons trial came up, it could certainly effect the outcome. But the possibility a victim MIGHT commit suicide as a direct result of the rape at a later date that hasn't happened yet, isn't taken into account.