Keep in mind that giving out the highest possible sentences to crimes that could be worse (like murder) essentially gives someone that’s committing the lesser crime (rape in this case) free range to commit any worse crimes because the sentence can’t be worse anyway.

If someone is fucked up enough to rape someone, chances are that they will see it as a positive that they can kill the victim and leave behind no living witnesses and without risking a worse punishment.

Even if rapists won’t kill anyone, they might still be less likely to restrain themselves to cause additional harm to the victim.

I get what you mean, but I disagree.

I have two reasons.

1. False rape accusations, are you willing to sentence someone who falsely accuse another of rape to get the same punishment?

A credible, but false, accusation of rape can also destroy a life, so is it fair that an accuser can go around accusing people of rape, leading to them loosing friends, family and their job?

And with that punishment on both sides we get to:

2. You would need to pass a very high bar to convict someone of rape if it brought about immediate life in prison, it is especially difficult depending on how rape is defined, what constitutes consent, and how is it granted and withdrawn?

If you think that rape victims have a tough time being believed today (they absolutely do), it would be even worse if a law like this was passed.

I will not pretend that I have the answer to dealing with rapists, I don’t, I just see too many issues with your suggestion.

EDIT:

I wrote this as a response to you comment before I read the article and realized the extent of this bastards crimes, he should burn, preferably in a fire lit by his victims.

I stand by my above comment though, as I answered the comment as it was written in response to a comment about a general (I feel horrible writing that) rape case, a single misunderstanding should not warrant the most extreme punishment.