12 total posts
The 15k judge complained that he can only go by what the
prosecutor tells him. He had to go check the court records to see what he was told. I don't know if he ever said what he found. The judge apparently thought molesting kids was no big deal - he HAD to know what the charge was. You would think he would AT LEAST order him held until any prior history was investigated.
Somebody dropped the ball.
A lot of people, I think. His original 14 year sentence was far too light. It should have been life. It looks to me like tThe whole bail thing was a snafu on the part of the prosecutor and the judge. Cases involving sex offenders should raise a red flag. Bail should never be allowed in such cases.
I think we have to face the fact that these offenders are different from other criminals. They need to be treated differently and isolated from society. In certain violent cases, even if there has been no death of a victim, the death penalty should be allowed.
What really gets me ...
... is that he spent many months complaining on his blog about the hassle of being checked up on by the cops, etc. He apparently was ''known'' in this regard as he wrote the Chief of Police and posted the response on his blog. He could be making this crap up, but it seemed pretty real from the bits I've had the stomach to read through.
In any case, anyone picked up for a sexual assault on a child should be held while all databases are exhausted. He wasn't using an alias. He had a record. This should have come up in a cursory search of databases available to the public for crying out loud. I blame judge and prosecutor here, and a continuing ''something must be done'' but nothing ever seems to be attitude of the general public. We all need to pressure our elected officials to strengthen the laws for these animals.
I just feel awful for the family. Thank God at least Shasta survived. But she's going to have scars I can't even begin to imagine the mixed emotions the father must be going through.
And the irony, Paul, is that this maggot ran a web site
arguing that sentences for sex offenders should be lighter -- and his major income was apparently from donations to the site
-- Dave K, Speakeasy Moderator
click here to email firstname.lastname@example.org
The opinions expressed above are my own,
and do not necessarily reflect those of CNET!
and the good news is
his major income was apparently from donations to the site
maybe they can do a "Capone" on him, give him 30 years for tax evasion...
(NT) It's long past that point.
The better news would be....
....if they did a little checking on the donors and took more sex offenders off the street as a result.
I think we in North America may be on the verge of reaching
that tipping point now. For some unknown (to me anyway) reason, sentencing for offences against children, for rape, sodomy, and murder is less than it is for the same offences committed against adults. The sooner we say that offences against children are a special category and deserve harsher sentences the happier the majority of Americans and Canadians will be. God knows I'm a liberal, but not on this issue, not least because there is so little effort made at treating sex-offenders and so little success in the long run. There needs to be a special class of prison and special legislation which recognizes that this is a crime which has generational resonance through the population. If sex offenders could be removed from society and thir victims given intensive and extensive counselling, the cycle of offenders causing their victims to become offenders could be broken.
Some cant be rehabilitated
especially if that person is a sociopath. Wonder if they ever test for that? I think Id rather see people stay in prison for life than to see them out where theyre likely to do harm. I wonder if we actually do have the capacity to do more than lip service where counseling is concerned, when it is ordered by the court. These people can learn to say what they are supposed to say when they are supposed to say it, and all that, and after a couple of years in counseling, they are let go. Probably there is too much pressure on the system because of new criminals put in the system, anyway. That would be especially true for people put in prison for a few years. Another reason to put them in prison and throw the key away.
BTW, I wish they wouldnt treat priests as if they are a different category.
Slate article quotes a risk of reoffence of 50%, which is
significantly lower than I expected. If assessment can be improved to screen out a significant portion of the 50% who reoffend, there's a chance to actually make a difference to this tragedy. It's a different sort of crime, why not a better and more targetted punishment and treatment campaign?
If I do a search on recifivism
I get different numbers and what seems to be different assumptions which confuse the issue. There are rates based upon reconviction, and estimated rates based upon who knows what. Certainly the known numbers of offenses is not as high as the unknown offenses. Any offense is unacceptable to me.