Vt Judge decides 60 days is enough for child rapist

[1EZduzit]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Now this, my friends, is an activist judge. This guy doesn't respect the law or the legal system he is supposed to represent, instead using his position to preach his personal views. And I agree with most of what's been said here, maybe he shouldn't be shot, but he certainly shouldn't be a judge any more.

I think it's just as likely (and maybe even more likely) that this guy was politically pressured to go easy on the guy, because this just might cost him his job..... and it should!!!

Or maybe even less likely. Presumptions get you nowhere.

I just hope this Judge has fubar'ed his future, whatever his motivation was.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I have my doubts about the accuracy of psychological assessments, and therefore about the risk of reoffence, but I share the opinion of the judge that punishment is not terribly effective. I imagine if the convicted could have received treatment in prison, he would have been given a longer sentence.

Treatment?! What treatment? This guy is a rapist scumbag. He ought to be locked away for 15 years minimum.

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I have my doubts about the accuracy of psychological assessments, and therefore about the risk of reoffence, but I share the opinion of the judge that punishment is not terribly effective. I imagine if the convicted could have received treatment in prison, he would have been given a longer sentence.

"Not terribly effective" at what? The SOB repeatedly raped a child and should do at least 8 years in prison as punishment for his crimes. You, and this idiot judge, are wrong.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
absolutely SICK!

The judge should be fired, and the rapist should be shot.

The social-communist New England states are a very scary place to live... (and i'm from there!)

WTF are you talking about? The scariest place to live? Really.
1. The crime rate in Vermont is one of the lowest in the nation. 49th to be exact. 47th lowest murder rate. Maine has the 3rd lowest crime rate in the nation.

2. By all means, don't let the screen door hit you in the as*.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

Originally posted by: Rainsford
Now this, my friends, is an activist judge. This guy doesn't respect the law or the legal system he is supposed to represent, instead using his position to preach his personal views. And I agree with most of what's been said here, maybe he shouldn't be shot, but he certainly shouldn't be a judge any more.

I think it's just as likely (and maybe even more likely) that this guy was politically pressured to go easy on the guy, because this just might cost him his job..... and it should!!!

Or maybe even less likely. Presumptions get you nowhere.

I just hope this Judge has fubar'ed his future, whatever his motivation was.

I agree.

 

[shimsham]

i can see his point on punishment, but we arent talking about some theiving thug or crack head here. that sick bastard should get all the sentence the law allows.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: 1EZduzit

I just hope this Judge has fubar'ed his future, whatever his motivation was.

Burlington is a large enough community that they almost certainly have a Chief Judge and a number of trial judges. I imagine the Chief Judge will just avoid assigning this judge to any criminal matter more important than traffic court for the remainder of his tenure.

In response to some of the comments here, I think it's highly unlikely this very light sentence was caused by political patronage or other outside influence. If anything, this sentence, combined with his declaration that he no longer believes in the value of punishment, will almost certainly ensure that he won't be retained as a judge.

This case is just an abomination IMO, and it seems quite likely that the court will be held to answer in some form or fashion when this rapist re-offends. The blood of the next victims belongs squarely on the hands of this brain-dead judge.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Curiously enough, in this case, the Vermont Supreme Court reversed Judge Cashman for an excessively harsh sentence in a murder case.

 

[Proletariat]

No one thinks he has an interesting point?

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Proletariat
No one thinks he has an interesting point?

There's a difference between "interesting" and justified, reasonable, or socially beneficial.

I was once prosecuting an awful molestation case, and the accused's defense attorney, a female and a close friend of mine, asked me how society arrived at the age of consent, and why it was justified to set it at 18 (or, in the military and many states, 16), even though people are sexually mature years earlier. That, I thought, was an interesting issue to discuss, but that's not the same as advocating setting the age of consent at, say, 12.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: arsbanned

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I have my doubts about the accuracy of psychological assessments, and therefore about the risk of reoffence, but I share the opinion of the judge that punishment is not terribly effective. I imagine if the convicted could have received treatment in prison, he would have been given a longer sentence.

"Not terribly effective" at what? The SOB repeatedly raped a child and should do at least 8 years in prison as punishment for his crimes. You, and this idiot judge, are wrong.

Originally posted by: palehorse74
absolutely SICK!

The judge should be fired, and the rapist should be shot.

The social-communist New England states are a very scary place to live... (and i'm from there!)

WTF are you talking about? The scariest place to live? Really.
1. The crime rate in Vermont is one of the lowest in the nation. 49th to be exact. 47th lowest murder rate. Maine has the 3rd lowest crime rate in the nation.

2. By all means, don't let the screen door hit you in the as*.

well to me there is only one thing more frightening than insane criminals: insane liberals.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: palehorse74

well to me there is only one thing more frightening than insane criminals: insane liberals.

 

[sandorski]

Wow, bad sentence. Even if the guy was/is treatable, you can't just give him a pass, WTF?

 

[JackStorm]

60 days for REPEATEDLY raping a child? There's something seriously wrong with this Judge if he thinks that is enough after ruining a childs life like that...

That man has no business being a judge after allowing this travesty of juctice to occur.

 

[Looney]

Originally posted by: BlancoNino

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I have my doubts about the accuracy of psychological assessments, and therefore about the risk of reoffence, but I share the opinion of the judge that punishment is not terribly effective. I imagine if the convicted could have received treatment in prison, he would have been given a longer sentence.

Punishment is terribly effective. If you're a criminal nobody has to worry about doing bad things while you're in prison. That's about as simple as I can put it. Isn't civilian security from these people the most important issue?

Eventually he's going to get out, and then what?

The judge saw that if he was sentenced to the 8 years, he wouldn't be eligible for rehabilitation services, so when he comes out, nothing would have changed. But this way, at least he gets rehabilitation.

Personally, i think these sorts of sex crimes rehabilitation rate are extremely low. These type of people need years of counselling, and even then, it's always a battle for them. Castration is what these people need.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie
I have my doubts about the accuracy of psychological assessments, and therefore about the risk of reoffence, but I share the opinion of the judge that punishment is not terribly effective. I imagine if the convicted could have received treatment in prison, he would have been given a longer sentence.

Treatment?! What treatment? This guy is a rapist scumbag. He ought to be locked away for 15 years minimum.

And this would be highly likely to happen at all in a free market

More to the point, I think if the offender can be treated, he should be; note that despite what the judge said, what I'm reacting to is this: the offender was classified as low-risk, and because of this was ineligible for treatment in prison. If you don't subscribe to veangence-as-justice - and judges are not supposed to - then I think the judge's hand was forced by the prison system.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Looney

Eventually he's going to get out, and then what?

The judge saw that if he was sentenced to the 8 years, he wouldn't be eligible for rehabilitation services, so when he comes out, nothing would have changed. But this way, at least he gets rehabilitation.

Personally, i think these sorts of sex crimes rehabilitation rate are extremely low. These type of people need years of counselling, and even then, it's always a battle for them. Castration is what these people need.

Castration is not an effective means for stemming molestation. Even chemically-castrated offenders continue to molest. This is a learned behavior that is only partially related to sex drive.

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: DonVito
This is a learned behavior that is only partially related to sex drive.

Indeed. This is something I have noticed to be true of some of these offenders. One guy I talked to some years ago admitted to me that even after being chemically castrated the toughts still lingered.

I just don't understand how ANY Judge can take a chance like this with the lives of children for the sake of the offender. It just feels wrong no matter how you look at it.

 

[Perknose]

Judge Cashman also also revealed that he once handed down stiff sentences when he first got on the bench 25 years ago, but he no longer believes in punishment.

"I discovered it accomplishes nothing of value;it doesn't make anything better;it costs us a lot of money; we create a lot of expectation, and we feed on anger,"Cashman explained to the people in the court.

Whatever else, this man, this judge, who had now ruined his career and can expect death threats and extreme ostracization, has the courage of his convictions.

On that narrow point, I salute him.

 

[1prophet]

Judgements such as these bring about zero tolerance laws which tie the hands of future judges wanting to use their discretion when we most need it.

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: DonVito
Curiously enough, in this case, the Vermont Supreme Court reversed Judge Cashman for an excessively harsh sentence in a murder case.

I think you guys may all be missing the real story:

Read the link above - and let me quote:

Vt. high court slams sentencing law

December 24, 2005

By John Zicconi Vermont Press Bureau

MONTPELIER ? The Vermont Supreme Court on Friday changed a quadruple murderer's punishment and deemed a nearly 20-year-old Vermont sentencing law unconstitutional.

The ruling is expected to alter ? and in some cases shorten ? the prison terms of an unknown number of other murderers.

"It is unclear how widespread this decision may be," said Janet Murnane, a Vermont assistant attorney general. "I don't anticipate the floodgates opening wide. But we will be reviewing it."

The high court unanimously ruled that Douglas Provost, who murdered four people in Belvidere in 2001, was improperly sentenced to life without parole.
Judge Edward Cashman sentenced Provost to life without parole, instead of the statutory maximum of life with a minimum term of 35 years, for each person he killed.

The ruling complied with state law, but violated a 2000 U.S. Supreme Court decision that said any penalty beyond the statutory maximum must be submitted to a jury, and the citizen panel must conclude the aggravating factors are true beyond a reasonable doubt.

Cashman just had this sentance reversed in DECEMBER 2005 - just a few weeks before letting this rapist off lightly. I think it is likely that this wasn't about the rapist - this was about having his really tough murder sentance reversed - he doesn't "believe in punishment" because someone undid one that he had meted out, legally.

While you guys are hammering on Cashman for being a wimp, I think the opposite may well be true - that he is a tough judge who did this in protest of having his prior sentances reversed...it's his way of resigning with a slap in the face to the judicial establishment which reversed him.

Thanks for finding that Don.

Future Shock

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
While you guys are hammering on Cashman for being a wimp, I think the opposite may well be true - that he is a tough judge who did this in protest of having his prior sentances reversed...it's his way of resigning with a slap in the face to the judicial establishment which reversed him.

Well, he sure picked a fine moment to "slap the judicial establishment in the face", if that was his intention. The ass might have just put more children at risk as a result of his decision. Either way, he has no business being a Judge anymore.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
While you guys are hammering on Cashman for being a wimp, I think the opposite may well be true - that he is a tough judge who did this in protest of having his prior sentances reversed...it's his way of resigning with a slap in the face to the judicial establishment which reversed him.

Thanks for finding that Don.

Future Shock

If that's the case, he is so juvenile, unprincipled and short-sighted that he's not fit to serve as a dogcatcher, much less a judge.

 

[Future Shock]

As I said, it may well be his way of resigning. And as for the fallout for the rapist, I believe that he could expect to get it overturned...

Future Shock

 

[Cooler]

wtf was that juge thinking.

 

[daveymark]

Originally posted by: Cooler
wtf was that juge thinking.

He's preparing himself for the democratic nomination for '08