Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
So..."not his fault because she wandered into the garage" ?
Totally sick..and this is our legal system ....
Yep, his little 3 year old relative wandered into the garage...he got excited, locked the door, covered her mouth and molested her. I wonder if he is a DREAMer?
Well it is not that odd, because as I already stated, people are completely irrational when it comes to children. I think you need to have children to fully understand this, and I think this irrationality comes from a strong basic need to ensure the survival of the species, and harming children is messing with this, which makes people, including me go crazy. Although, with me, I at least understand that it is totally crazy to hate pedophiles more than murders.
You keep referring to parents who want to protect their children from harm as "irrational". Most all animals strive to protect their young, just as sane parents do. Your statements, IMO, are irrational and make no sense whatsoever.
But you are entitled to them.
That's only true if the lenient sentence was entirely lawful to begin with. In this case, there seems to be a statutory minimum sentence for such child sex crimes, which the judge did not apply because s/he thought it constituted cruel and unusual punishment under the constitution. Here, the district attorney can absolutely appeal with the hope of having the judge's constitutional ruling reversed, forcing the judge to impose the statutory minimum. We see such appeals all the time.
Wasn't their a case in Minnesota where the judge accuses the victim of bringing her rape on herself and lowered the sentence of the rapist. The victim committed suicide. There was a recall effort on that judge, as well. Am I completely remembering wrong ?
“Although serious and despicable, this does not compare to a situation where
a pedophilic child predator preys on an innocent child,†Superior Court Judge M.
Marc Kelly said, according to a City News Service article posted by the Orange County
Register. “There was no violence or callous disregard for (the
victim’s) well-being.â€
No violence... I had to check the definition of "sodomize" to understand how he could say that. And sure enough, it doesn't necessarily mean what I thought it meant.
Wasn't their a case in Minnesota where the judge accuses the victim of bringing her rape on herself and lowered the sentence of the rapist. The victim committed suicide. There was a recall effort on that judge, as well. Am I completely remembering wrong ?
Right, the infamous Montana rape case. In that case (which was exactly the case I was thinking of when I wrote my initial response!) the judge sentenced the rapist to 30-31 days in jail, even though the law called for a minimum of 2-4 years in jail.
Because the trial judge's sentencing was outside of the law, the prosecution appealed the lower court's ruling, and the Montana Supreme Court issued an order requiring a lower court to re-sentence the rapist in accordance with the law.
I'm not personally aware of any recall effort, though, but that doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
Just heard a news report that the prosecution plans to appeal the sentence. If 25 years was a "minimum mandatory," I don't see how he could have diverted from it--I don't know if Judges in California can do that, but apparently it is being challenged. The Judge is being asked by Orange County to resign or face a recall effort.
I wonder if anyone has filed a complaint of misconduct with the California Commission on Judicial Performance or any other board that investigates judicial actions to determine if they are misconduct.
Or maybe he knows more about the case than random people on the Internet do. Let's face it, it's not like he's getting away with it. American prisons are not the cushy resorts vengeful right wingers imagine them to be, they are more akin to a hard labor camp in North Korea. I think ten years of extreme suffering is proportionate to his crime especially considering all of the hatred and shunning he'll receive for the rest of his life even inside prison. 25 to life would be appropriate if he was a murderer.
Your response is simply too sensible and grounded. Prepare to be attacked for it (and me, too).
It's a good bet the guy might actually get maimed - or even killed - in prison before the 10 years are up anyway. Most convicts don't respond well to child abusers of any sort, ironically.
Nevermind the fact he'll likely never get a job or have a life if he does survive and get out. He'll be a pariah, and likely end up homeless.
Just heard a news report that the prosecution plans to appeal the sentence. If 25 years was a "minimum mandatory," I don't see how he could have diverted from it--I don't know if Judges in California can do that, but apparently it is being challenged. The Judge is being asked by Orange County to resign or face a recall effort.
I wonder if anyone has filed a complaint of misconduct with the California Commission on Judicial Performance or any other board that investigates judicial actions to determine if they are misconduct.
The modified sentence will be overturned, I'm positive of that- and here's why:
In the California Penal Code, "shall" means NO judicial discretion. In order to avoid the 25 years he would have had to plea to a different charge and that would have had to have been approved by the District Attorney.
The California Penal code section for sodomy of a child under 10 is 288.7. (a) and states: "288.7. (a) Any person 18 years of age or older who engages in
sexual intercourse or sodomy with a child who is 10 years of age or
younger is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment
in the state prison for a term of 25 years to life."
There is no provision in California law for a Judge to legislate from the bench which is what he did, I can just about guarantee you that he will be sanctioned (probably removed from the bench) and the original sentence imposed.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
