|
|
Forum: The Other Side
Thread (Discussion): Judge gives a 60 day sentence for a sex offender - IMO
Message 171084
What do you guys think of this?
Posted by guilty1
on Jan 13, 2006 12:26 AM | Also by guilty1
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: 30 - 39,
State: Vermont,
Country: United States |
I actually wanted to post this in the "In the news section" but apparently thats for mods only,,,I guess just read the story and tell me your views,,,it deals with a district court judge sentencing a man for 60 days to 10 years for sexually assaulting a girl from the time she was 6 til just rcently when she turned 10. The entire state is going ballistic on this and its made national media attention. I invite all the good folk here to participate,,,thanks
www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060112/NEWS01/601120316&theme=
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
Message 171208 (In Reply to Message 171084)
wrong
Posted by poetsdreamscape
on Jan 14, 2006 07:44 PM | Also by poetsdreamscape
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
Its wrong the 60 day sentence but at the same time the judge understood that he needs rehabilitation as well. The laws need to make mandatory therapy as part of any crime not just sex offenses. The states need to budget money for such before or after the sentence. In this case if I was the judge I would have delt the jail term and worry about the rehabilitation after the fact since this was not a one time event
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (171084)
Message 171242 (In Reply to Message 171084)
Posted by orolan
on Jan 15, 2006 04:08 AM | Also by orolan
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: N/A,
Country: United States |
I think the judge did the right thing. Vermont has decided that "low-risk" offenders don't deserve treatment while in prison. They determined "low-risk" to be synonomous with "first-time offender". In other words you don't get treatment until the second offense. Of course if treated the FIRST time then there is far less likelihood of there even being a second time. But in Vermont apparently the first time is all about punishment and the second time they decide maybe they shoud try rehabilitation. Am I the only person who sees this as totally backwards? I say rehabilitate them the first time around. If that doesn't work and the reoffend, lock them up for life and forget rehabilitation.
Cashman sees it that way, even though it doesn't really come across that way. Personally I applaud him for making a stand to force change. Odds are he will modify the sentence after today's motion by the prosecutor. But since the policy was changed simply by order of a department head Cashman may hold out on the premise that as soon as he changes the sentence they change the policy back and Hulett gets no treatment. It will take an act of the Legislature mandating treatment for ALL offenders to satisfy Cashman completely.
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (171084)
Message 171291 (In Reply to Message 171242)
IMO
Posted by guilty1
on Jan 15, 2006 05:06 PM | Also by guilty1
| Gender: Male,
Age Bracket: N/A,
State: Vermont,
Country: United States |
Being a Vermonter and an RSO, let me tell you a little of my experience. My offending occured over a 1 yr. span. This included my molesting my step-daughter from the ages of 8 to 9 and a friends daughter who was 11 one night when she was sleeping over. I was charged with 2 counts of Aggrevated Sexual Assault. One for the age of my step daughter and the second because it was a reoccuring crime and 1 count of L&L on the molestation on the 11 yr. old. On the ASA's I recieved 2/ 5-15 yr. sentences and a 4-5 on the L&L, all to be serve concurrently. I was a first time offender and back in 1998 was eligible for treatment inside as soon as possible. Which back then was when I was 2 and 1/2 yrs. to 3 from my minimum date of release. It took only 3 months from the date I was sentenced to the day I started treament inside. I spent the next 34 months in treatment and was released on my minimum of 5 yrs. which meant with good time I did a total of 37 months inside the walls. I then did an additional 30 months of treatment on the streets.
It seems to me this was the more sensible sentencing and treatment plan for a first time offender. I know it helped me because everything was still fresh to me. My feelings, thoughts and actions of what I was going through during my crimes. Also I wasn't inside long enough to let that pervasive "F" the system mentality get to me which seems to get most everyone after some amount of time. Why the D.O.C. in my state changed the treatment guidlines I have no clues. Back then it was just a 25 bed unit, now though it is 50 beds. Thats twice as many in treament now. But in my state as in many, the winds of change are blowing towards punishment and less towards treatment. All in all IMO, it's about political maneuvering, influences and pressure instead of any common sence approach, which is what is needed.
What is needed, again IMO, is more beds, more facilitators, more treatment. The more heinious the crime, the more of a minimum and the more time spent in treatment. What they need to do is look at those of us who have been through the system, those of us that have been successful and those that have failed. Then say well that worked, that was successful and that failed. So we need to stick with this and stop that. Instead we have people in power, both elected and appointed, who cave to political pressures and public outcrys. I will be interested to see if Judge Casman sticks to his guns or caves. Right now the Govenor is asking for his resignation all because of the controversy this has raised. Why not instead look into why the offenders of this state are not getting the treatment they NEED? Oh ya I know why, political maneuvering, influences and pressure and public outcrys. After all he was elected,,,,,
Hmmm, I'd be more than willing to sit on any panel to discuss and plan these issues. Laugh you may but who better knows what is needed then a successful RSO, who is not embittered by the system.
Peace
Forum Home
| Top of Thread | Jump To Parent (171242)
Thread
171084, guilty1, Jan 13, 2006 12:26 AM [What do you guys think of this?]
171208, poetsdreamscape, Jan 14, 2006 07:44 PM [wrong]
171242, orolan, Jan 15, 2006 04:08 AM
171291, guilty1, Jan 15, 2006 05:06 PM [IMO]
Forum Home
| Top of Thread
|
|
|
