Well, in fairness, I recall some judges (particularly in Texas) giving huge sentences for marijuana possession to "send a message" to other law-breakers.

Were the huge sentences within the law?

And I guess, more importantly, was the 60 day sentence within the law?

"Prosecutors argued that confessed child-rapist Mark Hulett, 34, of Williston deserved at least eight years"

Emphasis on "at least". The bastard deserved to have his balls cut off with a rusty knife.

What do you call a lawyer with an IQ of 40?

Your Honor

Rehabilitation over punishment? Child molestors are one of the least reformable of criminals. Their recividism rate is extraordinarily high. That's why they have those sex offender pages and alerts whenever they move into your neighborhood. A child molestor's almost guaranteed to molest again.

What do you think the prison term would have been if this creep raped the judges wife... I mean significant other... I mean domestic partner.

Is there any legal or statutory procedure in Vermont for removing a sitting judge?

He says he "no longer believes in punishment." He should step down from the bench, then. Bet he won't.

But Judge Edward Cashman disagreed explaining that he no longer believes that punishment works.

Fine, Judge Asshole. We'll just put him in rehab and let him visit your grandkids on the weekends, that ok with you?

Ugh. I'll point out, however, that there are plenty of judges who give out ridiculously and illegally high sentences to people like drug dealers and gang-bangers. We tend to hear less about those because, well, as a wise man once put it:

Screw 'em. -- Thomas Jefferson.

"Prosecutors argued that confessed child-rapist Mark Hulett, 34, of Williston deserved at least eight years"

Sounds like the prosecutor needs to get fired, too.

Sounds like the prosecutor needs to get fired, too.

You'd be surprised how little time you can get for most crimes. Arguing for at least an 8 to 20 year sentence for a kiddie-rapist with no prior convictions is actually pretty aggressive in many states.

Also, when the judge is about to hand down a 60-day sentence, you don't generally get positive results from asking for the sun and the moon.

What do you think the prison term would have been if this creep raped the judges wife... I mean significant other... I mean domestic partner.

Reminds me of when Massachusetts Miracle Mike Dukakis was running for President (damn that sounds dumb even now). He was asked during the debates with Bush I if he would support capital punishment if a guy raped and killed his wife Kitty. He demured, saying he could never justify capital punishment. His own wife!! End of election. End of political career.

The story bothered me for several reasons besides the obvious. For instance, the mother is quoted as saying, "do what he did in my house." So her child was raped repeatedly over four years in her house? Where was she?

This is obviously a judge who is firmly in the "we can't win, so why try?" school of jurisprudence.

I've always said that pederasts and serial killers are two classes of people who are completely incapable of being rehabilitated, and consequently should either be put to death or incarcerated for the duration of their lives regardless of the sentencing guidelines.

I wonder: could this sicko be re-tried in that state, or would it be considered double jeopardy? If he goes free and molests some other poor kid, this fucking judge is going to have that on his conscience.

I have almost as much problem with the fact that Vermont would not classify this guy as "likely to re-offend", which is indirectly the reason the judge gave the shorter sentence...only by giving him the shorter sentence would this guy be eligible for sex-offender treatment.

A guy who rapes little girls is diseased and likely to re-offend. period.

Recidivism rates among sex offenders is comparatively low, especially when counseling is included. Counseling is also much cheaper than incarceration.

Anyone ever notice that it's only the liberal judges who arrogate this sort of power to themselves?

The Rehnquist Court overturned more federal laws than any other Court.

First, punishment and rehabilitation aside, there is the issue of protecting the public, i.e., prison.

Second, where in the hell did you come up with: Recidivism rates among sex offenders is comparatively low, especially when counseling is included?

Recidivism rates among sex offenders is comparatively low, especially when counseling is included.

I'm calling absolute, 100% bullshit on that. Post a link. Every single study I've ever read shows that sex offenders in general, and pederasts in particular, are as much as 85-90% likely to offend again given a chance.

And I can post links to the various studies if you're too lazy to google for them yourself.

In contrast, Lynndie England is serving a three-year sentence and Charles Graner is serving a ten-year sentence for mistreating prisoners of war at Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq.

I think our priorities are all wrong when it comes to pederasts. Punishment is not a priority for me. The most important thing is to protect society against repeat offenses.

I sumbit that it's best to think of pedophilia is an incurable mental disease. Until we understand it better and can effectively cure it, these people need to be locked up. In cases that are genuinely low-risk, they should be allowed on a provisional out-patient program, subject to monitoring and being locked up again at an expert's discretion. Treating it like a regular crime gives sex offenders too much legal protection.

This crime is far too common. We are failing our children.

ergastularius look at my thumb

boy you sure are dumb

whack!

If he goes free and molests some other poor kid, this fucking judge is going to have that on his conscience.

Monty,

Most likely, the judge won't have that on his conscience. But he will be held accountable for it. Eventually.

A liberal judge reducing a sentence is worse than a conservative judge giving a extra-long one, because the long sentence can be fixed in the system by commuting the sentence, or even pardoning. A too short sentence cannot be increased later becuase of double jeapordy. So we have to wait for the rapist to be caught again to do what should have been done in the first place.

You believe in rehabilitation? Let him do it in prison. If he ever does get rehabilitated, he will agree that keeping him in jail is the right thing to do, because of what he had done. If he doesn't, that's proof that he is the same rapist and just wants another chance.

When the judicial system fails to protect society from crime, it is our duty to protect ourselves and those around us. If we continue to rely on a broken justice system, we are partially guilty of the harm that results.

I would have no problem killing this child rapist, and will most definitely do so if such a thing happens to those I love.

In cases like this, there really only should be two options for the offender:

1. Chemical castration this very day, followed by intense therapy in a child-free environment. You will never, ever be allowed to be alone with a child again -- any further offense is a mandatory death sentence.

2. Life in jail, no parole, ever. You die there.

Take your pick.

Hopefully the rapist will be murdered in jail. As for the judge, good God, there has to be a way to get him off the bench, even in Vermount.

Chemical castration my ass. They have to keep taking their medication for that to work. As we can see with the mentally ill, this has a dismal chance of success.

Physical castration, however...

Let him go free. I could never justify putting a man in prison for such a misdemeanor.

The "law & order type conservative judge" in Ghostbusters II tried to do this and ended up negatively charging the slime that was Exhibit A, which released the Scolari brothers and caused a big mess.

A liberal judge reducing a sentence is worse than a conservative judge giving a extra-long one, because the long sentence can be fixed in the system by commuting the sentence, or even pardoning. A too short sentence cannot be increased later becuase of double jeapordy. So we have to wait for the rapist to be caught again to do what should have been done in the first place.

Fortunately, this isn't true. In many states, prosecutors can appeal an overly-lenient sentence without implicating double jeopardy.

Double jeopardy is mainly (although not exclusively) concerned with being retried after an acquittal. This guy was found guilty. Double jeopardy also comes into play if you're being sentenced twice for the same crime (the Blockburger standard), but it doesn't sound like that's applicable here.

It's notoriously difficult to overturn a bad sentence, because courts generally give great discretion to the decisions of the trial judge (he was in the best place to see the evidence and the defendant's remorse). Here, however, where the judge basically said that he didn't believe in one of the four principle purposes of criminal justice (retribution), an appeal might well be successful.

So that traffic ticket I pled guilty to on the form 10 years ago can be turned into a life imprisonment after the fact?

I better not piss off any prosecutors then.

In both 1982 (?-could be 1983) and 1994 The Bureau of Justice Statistics report on sex offender recidivism shows quite low rates for reoffenses.

Oh: found it: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/rsorp94.htm

Also, as I recall, and I know this from a colleague who does the research, there is much consensus among mental health folks counseling is preferrable, and cheaper.

monty

you should probably think before you talk. just a suggestion.

btw...the bit about "4 tiomes more likely..." conflicts with other recidivism rates:

Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%). (bjs)

much higher rates than for sex offenders

Come on Ace. Haven't you learned anything from liberals. You're supposed to end that post with, "Not that there's anything wrong with it." It's all about moral relativism baby.

I suggest that ergastularius take in this poor, misundferstood child rapist. Have himbabysit for your loved ones, it will show your tolerance. It worked for me!!!

Damn these taxpayer-funded computers! How is a death-row inmate supposed to spell properly on these pieces of trash??? Maybe the keyboard is sticky from all that internet porn.

Dale

"moral relativism" has nothing to do with it.

one day, y'all have to tell me what a "liberal" is. that'll be fun.

john

has nothing to do with the argument either.

have I wandered into a room of autistics? can you stay focussed, john?

ergastularius: you shd probably just stfu. just a suggestion.

http://www.csom.org/pubs/recidsexof.html

Highlights:

Child molesters have a 52% recidivist rate when tracked over 25 years. And this still may be excessively low.

The underreporting of sexual assault contributes to the underreporting of recidivism.

Several studies and interviews of sex offenders support the claim that sex offender recidivism is highly underreported, with imprisoned perpetrators having many times more victims than the official criminal reports record.

ergastularius, that study shows that 3.3% of the child molesters released in the US in this time period abused another child within 3 years of their release. It doesn't track them for any longer than that.

Here is a more in-depth discussion of the issue:
http://www.wsipp.wa.gov/rptfiles/Soff_recid.pdf

Released prisoners with the highest rearrest rates were robbers (70.2%), burglars (74.0%), larcenists (74.6%), motor vehicle thieves (78.8%), those in prison for possessing or selling stolen property (77.4%), and those in prison for possessing, using, or selling illegal weapons (70.2%). (bjs)

With the possible exception of using an illegal weapon and I emphasize possible, are you honestly saying that any of the crimes you listed are even close to repeatedly raping a 7 year old child? How about you compare recidivism rates with similar crimes like murder, kidnapping and the like. Larceny? Are you joking?

Erga said:

Also, as I recall, and I know this from a colleague who does the research, there is much consensus among mental health folks counseling is preferrable, and cheaper.

---------

The people who provide the counselling think that couselling perps is a good idea? Who'd have thunk it??

Also, the bit condemning "arrogation" of authority by "liberal" judges is quaint given the "arrogation" of power (or, should we say, "constitutional deconstruction of democracy") by the Bush administration.

goddamn contradictions.

I just put up a post on how confusing it must be to be a student in the US these days - like, say, the student in Vermont who was expelled from high school for having a legally-owned and unloaded target rifle in his car. Or the ones who are suspended for taking Midol, or having plastic butter knives on them.

My guess is that most students living under "zero tolerance" rules would be confused to hear that "punishment doesn't work" when the crime is child rape.

Is it OK to have the trial before the crime? I was thinking of assassinating this guy, but I want to be tried in his court.

Yeah, I'm going to have to go with anonymous and SJKevin, here. Whether child rape recidivism is 10% or 80% for child rape, that's really not low enough for child rape. I hope you see where I'm going with this. cough child rape cough cough.

As to erg's question about 'what is a liberal', I'd say defending child rapeis certainly one of the common signs.

Hypocrisy is the tribute vice pays to virtue. Also, STFU. -- Duc de la Rouchefocauld

There was outrage Wednesday when a Vermont judge handed out a 60-day jail sentence to a man who raped a little girl many,many times over a four-year span starting when she was seven.

Many, many times over a 4 year span. Guess his recidivism rate was 100%. But hey, as long as he gets counseling its all good right? Do liberals have any sense of punishment? Paying a debt for a crime not just getting counseling as if they are troubled children? I'm serious. Don't give me the blather about whats good for society by returning a "healed" soul. What price does this sick fuck pay in your world if any?

I don't defend sex offenders. That's what "liberals" apparently do.

In any case, the need to find "100%" recidivism rate was crucial for some here to vindicate the fantasy rehabilitation is impossible. Glad we got over that hump (no pun intended).

The next, more important bit: rehabilitation/counseling is positive for sex offenders. Therefore: more counseling is better than incarceration.

And, no, I don't want them living nbext door to me.

ergastularius, that study shows that 3.3% of the child molesters released in the US in this time period abused another child within 3 years of their release.

It was also a study of *violent* sex offenders.

adolfo velasquez

for fuck's sake. can't you see I'm not defending child rapists. I'm defending inzestual coprophilic necrophagia. That's plain as day.

Keep your eyes on the shiny beast of thought, adolfo.

I'm outraged, btw, the filter here won't let me sneak through i-n-c-e-s-t, but coporophile, hey! no prob.

crucial for some here to vindicate the fantasy rehabilitation is impossible.

Impossible? Certainly not. In fact, with intensive therapy, I'd say that significantly more than half of them can manage their problem. (And make no mistake; the psychologists who work with them don't believe that most cases can be cured, the way a phobia can be cured. They manage the problem.)

Nobody is disputing this fact. It's just that we care more about the children who will be victimized by those who do re-offend. Their protection is our first priority.

The next, more important bit: rehabilitation/counseling is positive for sex offenders. Therefore: more counseling is better than incarceration.
And, no, I don't want them living nbext door to me.
Posted by ergastularius at January 5, 2006 06:06 PM

And, who's to stop them from living next door to you? Certainly not liberals. That, among many other reasons, is why conservatives control both houses of Congress, the White House, and soon, the Supreme Court.

We'll let the liberals be in charge of finger-painting gay performance art and, if they don't screw that up, charities involving endangered animals.

And, no, I don't want them living nbext door to me.

Of course not. But do you know who they probably will end up living next door to? Poor people. They'll probably end up in government subsidized inner city housing. So don't worry. You probably won't have to live next door to them.

geoff...hmmm...well, they need to get some crack researchers to track non-violent pederasty.

As I said, I just put up a post (while the commenting software here lost my info).

inzestual coprophilic necrophagia. That's plain as day.
Posted by ergowhatsimus at January 5, 2006 06:12 PM

We're not talking about recidivism for shit eating cannibal corpse lovers, we're talking about child rape. The only shit eating cannibal corpse lovers I'm aware of were Albert Fish, and Jeffrey Dahmer -- both dead and unable to reoffend.

I'm outraged, btw, the filter here won't let me sneak through i-n-c-e-s-t, but coporophile, hey! no prob.

Must be a good day. The filter giveth and the filter taketh away.

As far as non-violent and violent sex offender statistics - the study made the distinction, so it may be important.

Keep your eyes on the shiny beast of thought, adolfo.
Posted by ergoblahblah at January 5, 2006 06:12 PM

Am I sensing that trademark odor of liberal intellectual condescension coming from your post? I think so.

>"The one message I want to get through is that anger doesn't solve anything. It just corrodes your soul," said Judge Edward Cashman speaking to a packed Burlington courtroom.

Hmmm....it might be fun to type this up, tape it to a brick, and chuck it through Judge Cashman's car windshield each and every day for the rest of the year.

Or, for a less destructive solution, maybe every merchant in town could refuse him service, instead handing the judge this typewritten quote whenever he attempts to make a purchase.

This pos hack posing as a judge is the best demonstration I have seen since the starving of Terri Schiavo as to just why I like electing state judges.
If this was in Texas, the Judge involved would know he could jsut pack up his robe hit the friggin' road.
As to the claim that sex offenders are low in repeat offense stats: Pure bunk.
the link is to a study published by bs social workers and conflicts with basically every study ever made of pedophiles.

I'm sure the data in that study was correct. It's just that the study doesn't actually show what ergastularius seems to think it shows, as the links I and Anonymous provided demonstrate.

I'm not really sure what point Ergastularius is trying to make here. But if he's trying to convince us that liberals don't care about protecting our kids, he could be doing a worse job.

Just doing some cost-benefit analysis.

The judge's response isn't irrational based on the research, it seems. If sex offenders' behaviors are "managed" well, then counseling/supervision may be preferrable to incarceration.

Perhaps the judge may have considered how prison reproduces sexual violence. maybe sending 2 million adults off to prison only increases such violence. Also, maybe she believed the shift to more counseling would provide a better way to assess threats of such violence and contribute to prevention.

maybe, as many begin to know, the judge has begun to say: oh fuck it! incarceration makes things worse. prisons do not "protect us" or are children.

Come down and get me outtta here! I can't rape any kids because I'm in prison!!!

The new guard is treating me like Jake Glyndenhaal, make it stop!

Put a fucking bullet through his brain. Name one reason why this shit is still using my goddamn oxygen. Give me one redeeming quality that offsets the repeated rape of a 7-year old kid.

And judge, it's time for you to retire from the bench. It takes a special kind of person to gaze into the abyss of human evil on a daily basis, and you don't have what it takes. Step down and let those who have the ability do the job.

"The recidivism rate among child rapists is 0 percent after they die."- Danny Zuko

Based on the research, the sentence is irrational. Sex offenders behaviors are very difficult to manage. They are the most manipulative people you will ever meet. If they truly want to change and do so by intensive therapy, they can receive it in prison. It doesn't have to be prison or therapy, just therapy while in prison. As far as the costs of imprisonement of child molesters, most people feel it is well worth it.

prisons do not "protect us" or are children.
Posted by ergastularius at January 5, 2006 07:15 PM

Rather than write some long, drawn-out, considered post, let me just say: "Yes, yes they do."

If this guy raped a full grown woman, ONCE, not over and over for years, there is no way in FUCKING HELL he wouldn't have been properly punished.

Recidivism rates, counseling success rates are beside the point, as these concerns come after primary punishment.

For a judge to jump the process this way, essentially go straight to mainstreaming the guy back into society, is disastrous overreaching on his part and a shameful disrespect of the laws enacted by the people of his state.

And any talk about how the recidivism rate on child-rapists isn't so high is perversely inappropriate:

Someone may kill one person, and not be caught, and never kill again for the rest of their lives; yet the law still says that if they are caught, even if its 50 years later, they be tried and punished if found guilty.

In other words, you could prove that one killer's personal recidivism rate was 0%; yet the state will still insist on punishing him.

I hope this sparks a legislative backlash to remove some sentencing latitude from the Vermont judiciary.

Yes, prisons DO protect us and our children.

Its where we put the bad people.

In fact, so many bad people were put away when I lived in Hartford, I could walk up my own street by myself without being afraid, for the first time in over ten years.

The bad people were locked up, and I was safer because of it.

I don't know how much more simply I can put it for you, if you insist on making shit up or talking in ridiculous abstracts about real bad people.

Still treating child molesters with kid gloves he should he getting 60 years rather then four years the judge should lose their job right away or if in four years he rapes another child i say the judge should get 60 years and the rapist as well

Cool. If this judge no longer believes in punishment, I can walk up to him and bitchslap him 10 times a day. What's he gonna do, cry on me? He certainly won't send me to jail.

Fuckhead.

Oh, and to the brain donor claiming that therapy is more effective than inprisonment for pederasts... you know, I was going to waste some brain cells on this turd, but why bother? Let him go ask his counselor friends what CAN't be cured with therapy. No conflict of interest there, of course.

Hey, maybe I can get this effing mole removed without resorting to surgery!

Oh I dunno, 60 days of getting butt-slammed several times a day isn't going to be too terribly much fun... That said, it's not enough.

ergast: Let me suggest some effective cost management for child molesters and rapos. It becomes, in fact, very cost effective so it satisfies useless oxygen-takers, and it effectively takes that ilk away from society, satisfying the more conservative of us.

First, auger a hole 96" in diameter by 60 feet deep. When the pervert is convicted (yes, we still believe in trials), put him/her in that augered hole. Supply the basics, food and water, and make sure there is enough heat to keep the person reasonably comfortable. No toilet, no running water, no clothes. Everything has to be lowered to the person.

When that person has filled that 8' x 60' hellhole with his/her own excrement, they may go free. This is a just punishment, because that's exactly the kind of life they have sentenced without trial their victims to.

I don't even think it would fall under the "cruel and unusual" prohibition, unless being interpreted by some judge who's going back to his armed home in his gated and patrolled community. There's a reason judges can make decisions like the Vermont oxygen-waster did. They don't generally have to worry about the people they release early 'cause they prey on common folk, not intellectual studs like him.

Counseling costs less than prison? What's the going price on being seven years old and raped repeatedly? I want to know the cost/benefit ratio on that, you fucking genius. - Thomas Jefferson

BTW, ergast, since when has it come to be that "cost effective" is more important than "You did the crime, you do the time..."

There are way too many Simpsons and Blakes walking around giving judges the idea that the worse the crime the better the criminal will be if only nudged on the wrist.

Just doing some cost-benefit analysis

Me too.

a .45 round, ball, nothing special, just to get the job done.

2.5 cents.

oops. make that .40 cents.

I'll chip in the 37 and a half.. call it a gesture of my good will

Why waste a bullet? Nail the SOB to a cross and be done with it. Simple, neat, and no possibility of him ever raping another child, which is more than you can say about counseling.

OK, even if he doesn't believe in punishment for crimes, how about prevention? As in, if this sick bastard is in jail for 20 years, he is prevented from raping any more children. And I have no problem with him getting counseling during that time in stir.

This pos hack posing as a judge is the best demonstration I have seen since the starving of Terri Schiavo as to just why I like electing state judges.

FTR, state judges are elected in Florida.

That judge had a LOT of empathy for the child rapist.
I think the judge himself must have the same tendencies to have been so light and understanding of him.

I think that judge must think child molesting is not so bad.
4 years of a terrified small child and sexual gradification for the pervert and the judge says "thats okay" "that's not so bad" "60 days in jail"

The judge HAS TO BE a pervert himself