New topic
Printable| Author | Message |
Teen with 47 IQ gets 100 years in sex abuse case Did he deserve it? Comments? Texas is no damned joke... 
Case stems from charges involving the fondling of a 6-year-old neighbor updated 6:06 p.m. CT, Wed., June 10, 2009 PARIS, Texas - A teenager who has profound mental disabilities was sentenced to 100 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges in a sex abuse case involving his 6-year-old neighbor.
Aaron Hart, 18, of Paris, was arrested and charged after a neighbor found him fondling her stepson in September. The teen pleaded guilty to five counts, including aggravated sexual assault and indecency by contact, and a jury decided his punishment. Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford decided to stack the sentences against Hart after jurors settled on two five-year terms and three 30-year terms, The Dallas Morning News reported Wednesday. The judge said neither he nor jurors liked the idea of prison for Hart but they felt there was no other option. "In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," Clifford said. Diagnosed as mentally disabled Hart has an IQ of 47 and was diagnosed as mentally disabled as a child. He never learned to read or write and speaks unsteadily. Despite being a target of bullies, he was courteous, well-behaved and earned money by doing chores for neighbors, supporters said. His parents say he'd never acted out sexually. "He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years — it was terror, pure terror, to me." Jurors said they sent the judge notes during deliberations in February, asking about alternatives to prison, but didn't get a clear answer. They believed the judge would order concurrent sentences, jurors said. District Attorney Gary Young said he sympathized with Hart's situation but stands by his decision to prosecute on five counts. Prosecutors commonly pursue several charges for a single incident to see which the jury will support. Diversion program not an option Young said a diversion program was not an option since the law doesn't allow that for serious felonies. "I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," he said. Hart's appellate attorney, David Pearson, said the court-appointed doctor did the bare minimum to assess competency and ran tests geared for mental illness, not mental retardation. He said an appeal will be filed. http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31213058/ "Let love be your perfect weapon..." ~~Andy Biersack | |
- E-mail - orgNote -  Report post to moderator |
Is this kid black? If so, he didn't stand a chance in East Texas.  Hopefully, this will get turned over on appeal cuz this is some bullshit. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
"Let love be your perfect weapon..." ~~Andy Biersack | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
100 years after pleading guilty?
What exactly did he do? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
coolcat said: 100 years after pleading guilty?
What exactly did he do? something he couldn't have known was wrong You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: coolcat said: 100 years after pleading guilty?
What exactly did he do? something he couldn't have known was wrong Did he even know what he was pleading guilty to? | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
coolcat said: ehuffnsd said: something he couldn't have known was wrong Did he even know what he was pleading guilty to? probabaly not. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: coolcat said: 100 years after pleading guilty?
What exactly did he do? something he couldn't have known was wrong And for just fondling??? Sure, it's wrong but fondling is not raping. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
USTIN – When an 18-year-old with profound mental disabilities performed sexual acts on a 6-year-old neighbor, the small town of Paris, Texas, was unforgiving. But Aaron Hart's punishment – 100 years in prison for a single incident – has stunned veteran disability rights advocates, who believed counseling, probation or even placement in a group home would have sufficed for a first-time offender with the mental maturity of a second-grader. Aaron Hart "Aaron is 18, never committed a felony, had no violent record. He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years – it was terror, pure terror to me." The sentence raises serious questions about how people with profound disabilities are prosecuted in Texas, at a time when both state lawmakers and the U.S. Supreme Court are considering the appropriate punishment for people who are young, mentally disabled, or both. Repeat child molesters and rapists routinely receive lesser sentences than Hart's. Also at issue is Hart's trial. His defense attorney hardly questioned his client's competency to stand trial, his appellate lawyer said. And though both the judge and jurors say they would have preferred not to send Hart to prison, state care facilities and group homes for disabled offenders were never presented as options. "It's not just abnormal. It's absurd. I wouldn't think a sentence would go above a few years in a situation like this," said Daniel Benson, a Texas Tech law professor and author of textbooks on criminal offenders with mental illness. "That's not helpful to society or the offender." Lamar County and District Attorney Gary Young said that while he sympathizes with Hart's "mental health challenges," he stands by his decision to prosecute Hart on five counts related to the incident. It's common for prosecutors to pursue several charges in a case involving one incident, not knowing which charge the jury will support. "I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," Young said. David Pearson, Hart's appellate attorney, said he's never seen a worse miscarriage of justice. Appointed attorney Pearson blames Hart's trial attorney, who had the burden of explaining Hart's disability to the judge and jury. That attorney, appointed by the court because Hart's family couldn't afford counsel, did not ask for special accommodations, such as a liaison who could help the defendant understand what was happening in court. Nor did he try to call witnesses who could testify to Hart's mental condition, Pearson said. And he didn't get a second opinion after a court-appointed doctor found Hart competent to stand trial. That meant Hart no longer qualified for prison diversion options, like group homes and institutional settings for disabled offenders. The original trial attorney, Ben Massar, did not return repeated phone calls to his office. Faced with a five-count guilty plea signed in wobbly block letters, a jury convicted Hart in February and sentenced him to three 30-year prison terms and two five-year terms – one for each class of offense. Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford, who made the decision to stack the sentences into one 100-year prison term, said neither he nor the jury loved the idea of prison for Hart, but felt there was no other option. "In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," said Clifford, who rejected Hart's first request for a new trial. Jurors tell a different story. They say that during deliberations, they repeatedly sent notes to the judge asking if there were alternatives to prison, which they said the judge didn't answer clearly. They said they were sure Hart would serve a concurrent sentence and were flabbergasted when Clifford stacked the sentences. Lawmakers are working out the final kinks on a bill that would require law enforcement officials who take someone with obvious mental disabilities into custody to let a court magistrate know within 72 hours. The court magistrate would have to order a local mental health or mental retardation expert to assess the individual immediately and would allow that assessment to be considered during the trial's punishment phase. IQ of 47 Hart, who has an IQ of 47, was found to be mentally retarded as a child and placed in a special school curriculum. He never learned to read or write. His speech is unsteady. His disabilities made him a target of bullies who stole his bikes and his shoes, his father said. But his parents never considered putting him in an institution or a group home. They loved having him at home, and despite the teasing, they said, he was gentle, courteous and well-behaved. After graduation, Hart, who doesn't have the capacity to work, was a constant presence in the neighborhood. He made friends with some younger boys, playing video games and doing household chores to make money. His parents say until the September incident, he never once acted out sexually or gave any inkling that he was a threat to children. On the eve of his arrest, he was excited about a fair coming to town and asked a neighbor if he could mow her lawn to make a few dollars. She found him in the back shed fondling her 6-year-old stepson. When the police arrived, they read Hart his rights, and he confessed to what he'd done. As they transported him to jail, he asked repeatedly whether he'd get paid for mowing the lawn. Young, the prosecutor, said that once a psychologist found Hart competent to stand trial, it was obvious the 18-year-old "knew right from wrong." He said choosing diversion over prison was not an option. Under the law, those convicted of serious felonies such as sexual assault of a child are not eligible for diversion programs. "Mr. Hart is not severely mentally retarded to the point he doesn't understand what's taking place around him," said Allan Hubbard, a victim's advocate for the district attorney. Errors cited Hart's family flatly disagrees. "I've been around this kid since the day he was born, and I know better than anyone what he's capable of understanding," his father said. Pearson, the appellate attorney, and disability rights groups say the trial was riddled with errors from start to finish. Hart was read his Miranda rights, but not a special version designed for people with disabilities, and he confessed to five felony counts without an attorney present. The special Miranda rights aren't constitutionally required but are considered a best practice, advocates say. Pearson said the court-appointed doctor who evaluated Hart did the bare minimum to determine competency; he didn't talk to any of Hart's teachers and ran tests geared toward mental illness, not mental retardation. Meanwhile, Hart's defense attorney never presented his own evidence or expert witnesses to testify about Hart's mental capacity, assuming, Pearson said, that Hart would only get probation. Pearson said Massar was ruled an ineffective counsel in a 2007 case the Sixth Court of Appeals in Texarkana overturned. That court is expected to hear Hart's appeal later this year. Officials with the district attorney's office say that police carefully read Hart his Miranda rights and that he told officers he understood them. They say the doctor who evaluated Hart has years of experience. And they note that the defense asked for no special accommodations during the trial. Young says he took Hart's mental condition into account after sentencing, flagging him for the "Mentally Retarded Offender Program," a special Texas prison unit that houses 930 inmates with mental disabilities. Hart arrived there this month. Hart's father, Robert, said that while his son may look like a man, mentally, he's as young as his victim. He said the one silver lining in this case is that his son doesn't understand how dire his situation is. "He keeps saying he'll be out soon, he'll be home with us, that maybe he'll get probation," he said. "It's the hardest thing I've ever had to hear." You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
many rapists don't even get that much. unlucky7 reincarnated | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said:
USTIN – When an 18-year-old with profound mental disabilities performed sexual acts on a 6-year-old neighbor, the small town of Paris, Texas, was unforgiving. But Aaron Hart's punishment – 100 years in prison for a single incident – has stunned veteran disability rights advocates, who believed counseling, probation or even placement in a group home would have sufficed for a first-time offender with the mental maturity of a second-grader. Aaron Hart "Aaron is 18, never committed a felony, had no violent record. He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years – it was terror, pure terror to me." The sentence raises serious questions about how people with profound disabilities are prosecuted in Texas, at a time when both state lawmakers and the U.S. Supreme Court are considering the appropriate punishment for people who are young, mentally disabled, or both. Repeat child molesters and rapists routinely receive lesser sentences than Hart's. Also at issue is Hart's trial. His defense attorney hardly questioned his client's competency to stand trial, his appellate lawyer said. And though both the judge and jurors say they would have preferred not to send Hart to prison, state care facilities and group homes for disabled offenders were never presented as options. "It's not just abnormal. It's absurd. I wouldn't think a sentence would go above a few years in a situation like this," said Daniel Benson, a Texas Tech law professor and author of textbooks on criminal offenders with mental illness. "That's not helpful to society or the offender." Lamar County and District Attorney Gary Young said that while he sympathizes with Hart's "mental health challenges," he stands by his decision to prosecute Hart on five counts related to the incident. It's common for prosecutors to pursue several charges in a case involving one incident, not knowing which charge the jury will support. "I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," Young said. David Pearson, Hart's appellate attorney, said he's never seen a worse miscarriage of justice. Appointed attorney Pearson blames Hart's trial attorney, who had the burden of explaining Hart's disability to the judge and jury. That attorney, appointed by the court because Hart's family couldn't afford counsel, did not ask for special accommodations, such as a liaison who could help the defendant understand what was happening in court. Nor did he try to call witnesses who could testify to Hart's mental condition, Pearson said. And he didn't get a second opinion after a court-appointed doctor found Hart competent to stand trial. That meant Hart no longer qualified for prison diversion options, like group homes and institutional settings for disabled offenders. The original trial attorney, Ben Massar, did not return repeated phone calls to his office. Faced with a five-count guilty plea signed in wobbly block letters, a jury convicted Hart in February and sentenced him to three 30-year prison terms and two five-year terms – one for each class of offense. Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford, who made the decision to stack the sentences into one 100-year prison term, said neither he nor the jury loved the idea of prison for Hart, but felt there was no other option. "In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," said Clifford, who rejected Hart's first request for a new trial. Jurors tell a different story. They say that during deliberations, they repeatedly sent notes to the judge asking if there were alternatives to prison, which they said the judge didn't answer clearly. They said they were sure Hart would serve a concurrent sentence and were flabbergasted when Clifford stacked the sentences. Lawmakers are working out the final kinks on a bill that would require law enforcement officials who take someone with obvious mental disabilities into custody to let a court magistrate know within 72 hours. The court magistrate would have to order a local mental health or mental retardation expert to assess the individual immediately and would allow that assessment to be considered during the trial's punishment phase. IQ of 47 Hart, who has an IQ of 47, was found to be mentally retarded as a child and placed in a special school curriculum. He never learned to read or write. His speech is unsteady. His disabilities made him a target of bullies who stole his bikes and his shoes, his father said. But his parents never considered putting him in an institution or a group home. They loved having him at home, and despite the teasing, they said, he was gentle, courteous and well-behaved. After graduation, Hart, who doesn't have the capacity to work, was a constant presence in the neighborhood. He made friends with some younger boys, playing video games and doing household chores to make money. His parents say until the September incident, he never once acted out sexually or gave any inkling that he was a threat to children. On the eve of his arrest, he was excited about a fair coming to town and asked a neighbor if he could mow her lawn to make a few dollars. She found him in the back shed fondling her 6-year-old stepson. When the police arrived, they read Hart his rights, and he confessed to what he'd done. As they transported him to jail, he asked repeatedly whether he'd get paid for mowing the lawn. Young, the prosecutor, said that once a psychologist found Hart competent to stand trial, it was obvious the 18-year-old "knew right from wrong." He said choosing diversion over prison was not an option. Under the law, those convicted of serious felonies such as sexual assault of a child are not eligible for diversion programs. "Mr. Hart is not severely mentally retarded to the point he doesn't understand what's taking place around him," said Allan Hubbard, a victim's advocate for the district attorney. Errors cited Hart's family flatly disagrees. "I've been around this kid since the day he was born, and I know better than anyone what he's capable of understanding," his father said. Pearson, the appellate attorney, and disability rights groups say the trial was riddled with errors from start to finish. Hart was read his Miranda rights, but not a special version designed for people with disabilities, and he confessed to five felony counts without an attorney present. The special Miranda rights aren't constitutionally required but are considered a best practice, advocates say. Pearson said the court-appointed doctor who evaluated Hart did the bare minimum to determine competency; he didn't talk to any of Hart's teachers and ran tests geared toward mental illness, not mental retardation. Meanwhile, Hart's defense attorney never presented his own evidence or expert witnesses to testify about Hart's mental capacity, assuming, Pearson said, that Hart would only get probation. Pearson said Massar was ruled an ineffective counsel in a 2007 case the Sixth Court of Appeals in Texarkana overturned. That court is expected to hear Hart's appeal later this year. Officials with the district attorney's office say that police carefully read Hart his Miranda rights and that he told officers he understood them. They say the doctor who evaluated Hart has years of experience. And they note that the defense asked for no special accommodations during the trial. Young says he took Hart's mental condition into account after sentencing, flagging him for the "Mentally Retarded Offender Program," a special Texas prison unit that houses 930 inmates with mental disabilities. Hart arrived there this month. Hart's father, Robert, said that while his son may look like a man, mentally, he's as young as his victim. He said the one silver lining in this case is that his son doesn't understand how dire his situation is. "He keeps saying he'll be out soon, he'll be home with us, that maybe he'll get probation," he said. "It's the hardest thing I've ever had to hear." This is ATROCIOUS!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Wow, that's really sad. With a very special thank you to Tina: Is hammer already absolute, how much some people verändern...ICH hope is never so I will be! And if, then I hope that I would then have wen in my environment who joins me in the A.... | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said:
USTIN – When an 18-year-old with profound mental disabilities performed sexual acts on a 6-year-old neighbor, the small town of Paris, Texas, was unforgiving. But Aaron Hart's punishment – 100 years in prison for a single incident – has stunned veteran disability rights advocates, who believed counseling, probation or even placement in a group home would have sufficed for a first-time offender with the mental maturity of a second-grader. Aaron Hart "Aaron is 18, never committed a felony, had no violent record. He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years – it was terror, pure terror to me." The sentence raises serious questions about how people with profound disabilities are prosecuted in Texas, at a time when both state lawmakers and the U.S. Supreme Court are considering the appropriate punishment for people who are young, mentally disabled, or both. Repeat child molesters and rapists routinely receive lesser sentences than Hart's. Also at issue is Hart's trial. His defense attorney hardly questioned his client's competency to stand trial, his appellate lawyer said. And though both the judge and jurors say they would have preferred not to send Hart to prison, state care facilities and group homes for disabled offenders were never presented as options. "It's not just abnormal. It's absurd. I wouldn't think a sentence would go above a few years in a situation like this," said Daniel Benson, a Texas Tech law professor and author of textbooks on criminal offenders with mental illness. "That's not helpful to society or the offender." Lamar County and District Attorney Gary Young said that while he sympathizes with Hart's "mental health challenges," he stands by his decision to prosecute Hart on five counts related to the incident. It's common for prosecutors to pursue several charges in a case involving one incident, not knowing which charge the jury will support. "I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," Young said. David Pearson, Hart's appellate attorney, said he's never seen a worse miscarriage of justice. Appointed attorney Pearson blames Hart's trial attorney, who had the burden of explaining Hart's disability to the judge and jury. That attorney, appointed by the court because Hart's family couldn't afford counsel, did not ask for special accommodations, such as a liaison who could help the defendant understand what was happening in court. Nor did he try to call witnesses who could testify to Hart's mental condition, Pearson said. And he didn't get a second opinion after a court-appointed doctor found Hart competent to stand trial. That meant Hart no longer qualified for prison diversion options, like group homes and institutional settings for disabled offenders. The original trial attorney, Ben Massar, did not return repeated phone calls to his office. Faced with a five-count guilty plea signed in wobbly block letters, a jury convicted Hart in February and sentenced him to three 30-year prison terms and two five-year terms – one for each class of offense. Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford, who made the decision to stack the sentences into one 100-year prison term, said neither he nor the jury loved the idea of prison for Hart, but felt there was no other option. "In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," said Clifford, who rejected Hart's first request for a new trial. Jurors tell a different story. They say that during deliberations, they repeatedly sent notes to the judge asking if there were alternatives to prison, which they said the judge didn't answer clearly. They said they were sure Hart would serve a concurrent sentence and were flabbergasted when Clifford stacked the sentences. Lawmakers are working out the final kinks on a bill that would require law enforcement officials who take someone with obvious mental disabilities into custody to let a court magistrate know within 72 hours. The court magistrate would have to order a local mental health or mental retardation expert to assess the individual immediately and would allow that assessment to be considered during the trial's punishment phase. IQ of 47 Hart, who has an IQ of 47, was found to be mentally retarded as a child and placed in a special school curriculum. He never learned to read or write. His speech is unsteady. His disabilities made him a target of bullies who stole his bikes and his shoes, his father said. But his parents never considered putting him in an institution or a group home. They loved having him at home, and despite the teasing, they said, he was gentle, courteous and well-behaved. After graduation, Hart, who doesn't have the capacity to work, was a constant presence in the neighborhood. He made friends with some younger boys, playing video games and doing household chores to make money. His parents say until the September incident, he never once acted out sexually or gave any inkling that he was a threat to children. On the eve of his arrest, he was excited about a fair coming to town and asked a neighbor if he could mow her lawn to make a few dollars. She found him in the back shed fondling her 6-year-old stepson. When the police arrived, they read Hart his rights, and he confessed to what he'd done. As they transported him to jail, he asked repeatedly whether he'd get paid for mowing the lawn. Young, the prosecutor, said that once a psychologist found Hart competent to stand trial, it was obvious the 18-year-old "knew right from wrong." He said choosing diversion over prison was not an option. Under the law, those convicted of serious felonies such as sexual assault of a child are not eligible for diversion programs. "Mr. Hart is not severely mentally retarded to the point he doesn't understand what's taking place around him," said Allan Hubbard, a victim's advocate for the district attorney. Errors cited Hart's family flatly disagrees. "I've been around this kid since the day he was born, and I know better than anyone what he's capable of understanding," his father said. Pearson, the appellate attorney, and disability rights groups say the trial was riddled with errors from start to finish. Hart was read his Miranda rights, but not a special version designed for people with disabilities, and he confessed to five felony counts without an attorney present. The special Miranda rights aren't constitutionally required but are considered a best practice, advocates say. Pearson said the court-appointed doctor who evaluated Hart did the bare minimum to determine competency; he didn't talk to any of Hart's teachers and ran tests geared toward mental illness, not mental retardation. Meanwhile, Hart's defense attorney never presented his own evidence or expert witnesses to testify about Hart's mental capacity, assuming, Pearson said, that Hart would only get probation. Pearson said Massar was ruled an ineffective counsel in a 2007 case the Sixth Court of Appeals in Texarkana overturned. That court is expected to hear Hart's appeal later this year. Officials with the district attorney's office say that police carefully read Hart his Miranda rights and that he told officers he understood them. They say the doctor who evaluated Hart has years of experience. And they note that the defense asked for no special accommodations during the trial. Young says he took Hart's mental condition into account after sentencing, flagging him for the "Mentally Retarded Offender Program," a special Texas prison unit that houses 930 inmates with mental disabilities. Hart arrived there this month. Hart's father, Robert, said that while his son may look like a man, mentally, he's as young as his victim. He said the one silver lining in this case is that his son doesn't understand how dire his situation is. "He keeps saying he'll be out soon, he'll be home with us, that maybe he'll get probation," he said. "It's the hardest thing I've ever had to hear." really, really disgusting through and through | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
what he did was horrible and inexcusable but if he had a past of having a mental disability, then he should have gotten services and advocacy, but the system doesn't help everyone I guess. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
and a man and a woman who raped a 12 week old baby get 6-8 years 
I don't get it | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
| |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ZombieKitten said: and a man and a woman who raped a 12 week old baby get 6-8 years
I don't get it I don't get it either..they need to fix their justice system...cuz it's crap. unlucky7 reincarnated | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
How can someone this impaired even understand the court process? How could he enter a plea or assist in his defense? I understand that the state is under an obligation to put him somewhere, but this sentence seems just as criminal.
What if the sentence was 5 or 6 years? Won't he still have to register as a sex-offender when he gets out? How can he handle that? There's something wrong in TX... "Let love be your perfect weapon..." ~~Andy Biersack | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
|
what the hell is going on with the court system in Texas? "We may deify or demonize them but not ignore them. And we call them genius, because they are the people who change the world." |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ZombieKitten said: and a man and a woman who raped a 12 week old baby get 6-8 years
I don't get it  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Well we send kids to jail for all kinds of violent crimes so if he really violated and ruined that lil 6 year old then he deserved a long prison sentence. but let's be real, he won't live long enough to fulfill the sentence. they will have to keep him separated from the general population due to his mental disability.
I'm not for people getting off the hook for violent crimes because they are retarded. I believe most violent criminals have some degree of retardation which is why they get caught in the first place. I think IQs of 78 and under are considered retarded. In any case, he got a sham of a trial and a whack ass attorney; his parents were dumb for not being involved and getting him another attorney when they saw what was going on. I can't believe they didn't see this coming. I'm sure the news reporters were talking about the likelihood of a stiff sentence. another thing. his parents should get the ACLU involved b/c they are good at exposing and combating legal abuses that involve civil rights violations and his civil rights were violated because he didn't have an attorney present when interviewed or a specialist to help with interpretation. his parents need to act quickly [Edited 6/15/09 21:33pm] | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DesireeNevermind said: Well we send kids to jail for all kinds of violent crimes so if he really violated and ruined that lil 6 year old then he deserved a long prison sentence. but let's be real, he won't live long enough to fulfill the sentence. they will have to keep him separated from the general population due to his mental disability.
I'm not for people getting off the hook for violent crimes because they are retarded. I believe most violent criminals have some degree of retardation which is why they get caught in the first place. I think IQs of 78 and under are considered retarded. In any case, he got a sham of a trial and a whack ass attorney; his parents were dumb for not being involved and getting him another attorney when they saw what was going on. I can't believe they didn't see this coming. I'm sure the news reporters were talking about the likelihood of a stiff sentence. another thing. his parents should get the ACLU involved b/c they are good at exposing and combating legal abuses that involve civil rights violations and his civil rights were violated because he didn't have an attorney present when interviewed or a specialist to help with interpretation. his parents need to act quickly [Edited 6/15/09 21:33pm] the family can't afford a lawyer. You CANNOT use the name of God, or religion, to justify acts of violence, to hurt, to hate, to discriminate- Madonna
authentic power is service- Pope Francis | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
ehuffnsd said: DesireeNevermind said: Well we send kids to jail for all kinds of violent crimes so if he really violated and ruined that lil 6 year old then he deserved a long prison sentence. but let's be real, he won't live long enough to fulfill the sentence. they will have to keep him separated from the general population due to his mental disability.
I'm not for people getting off the hook for violent crimes because they are retarded. I believe most violent criminals have some degree of retardation which is why they get caught in the first place. I think IQs of 78 and under are considered retarded. In any case, he got a sham of a trial and a whack ass attorney; his parents were dumb for not being involved and getting him another attorney when they saw what was going on. I can't believe they didn't see this coming. I'm sure the news reporters were talking about the likelihood of a stiff sentence. another thing. his parents should get the ACLU involved b/c they are good at exposing and combating legal abuses that involve civil rights violations and his civil rights were violated because he didn't have an attorney present when interviewed or a specialist to help with interpretation. his parents need to act quickly [Edited 6/15/09 21:33pm] the family can't afford a lawyer. they have pro bono lawyers I'm sure. somebody has to take sympathy on this dude and get his sentence reduced or at least get him a new trial based on bias of the judge and incompetence of the defense attorney. but oh well, it's Texas. That state sucks when it comes to the law!!!! | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I'm not going to justify what this young man did but at the same time it's not right to put someone in jail for 100 years for fondling a 6 year old (I'm not saying it's right it wrong very wrong) especially if they're mentally retarded.
This why I hate laws sometimes, too many contradictions involved. I mean at least put the young man in an asylum. Great this just ridiculous, first Mike Vick goes to jail for over a year and is not allowed to play in the NFL all because of some dog (Don't get me wrong I love animals and believe they have rights too and I myself have a pet, but still.....that was little too much) now this. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
DesireeNevermind said: ehuffnsd said: the family can't afford a lawyer. they have pro bono lawyers I'm sure. somebody has to take sympathy on this dude and get his sentence reduced or at least get him a new trial based on bias of the judge and incompetence of the defense attorney. but oh well, it's Texas. That state sucks when it comes to the law!!!! Yeah probono lawyers that SLEEP during your hearing. Hundreds of people have been convicted like that in Texas, including dozens of death row inmates. Oh yeah, that's "justice" for ya. Even tho' the jury and judge in this case agreed that jail time would not be appropiate they gave him hundred years! Why? Because they didn't see an alternative punishment for him! Hundred years for a retard cuddling a minor because you are too blind to see what he needs, is retarded itself. His verdict should be repealed and the judge in this case should be fired for accepting a testimony in which a retarded person admits to crimes without an attorney present, and for not directing the jury to sentence in accordance with the nature of the crime. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
This was quite interesting to read...and very sad. Sad for the victim and sad for the young man with the mental disability. I am very torn after reading this...it seems like the young man did get the shaft when it came to his defense attorney, and sadly I feel his parents should have been more involved and pushed for a second opinion when it came to the Dr. It just seems like his case was handled badly period. His parents should look into another attorney, and see if he can't get his sentence reduced.
But....I have to ask this...this young man was able to work a lawn mower, and mow a law well enough that his neighbors would pay him to do so. Just because his IQ reads what it does, doesn't mean he is unable to understand what he did to that child. I feel bad for his sentence, but I don't feel bad for the crime he committed. Maybe I am heartless that way...but everyone keeps talking about how awful this is for him, and not once did anyone mention the pain and years of therapy the young boy will have to deal with. I am surprised with the level of mental retardation, that this young man wasn't in a group home of some sort. Even when you are poor there are still group homes for people who suffer from mental disorders. I am not sure what kind of facility he will be going to, and it might be a place that is actually good for him. But...I will say I agree with many of you, when it came to how long he will be there, when others can rape and kill babies and only get 7-8 yrs. Sometimes the justice system works in strange ways. Proud Memaw to Seyhan Olivia Christine ,Zoey Cirilo Jaylee & Ellie Abigail Lillian  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
I hope his case can be reviewed. That's just plain cruel, he needs help not a lifetime behind bars.  | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
Unbelievable...
This is as bad, if not worse due to the fact he is mentally disabled, then trying a young teenager as an adult in court. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
And yet this presumably competent man got one year for raping a five year old and may be out sooner because he has breathing difficulties. What the hell?
http://www.adaeveningnews...20704.html David Earls, 64, pleaded no contest on May 13 to raping a 5-year-old girl but had all but one year of a 20-year prison sentence suspended under a plea-bargain agreement.
[...] Earls was arrested for raping the 5-year-old girl victim in September of 2008, and has been held in the local jail, unable to make bail, ever since then. Authorities said he could be released in three months if his sentence in the rape case is applied retroactively to time served. They also said he has a serious lung problem, and is on oxygen and thus may be released even earlier for medical reasons. Murica: at least it's not Sudan. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |
MoniGram said: This was quite interesting to read...and very sad. Sad for the victim and sad for the young man with the mental disability. I am very torn after reading this...it seems like the young man did get the shaft when it came to his defense attorney, and sadly I feel his parents should have been more involved and pushed for a second opinion when it came to the Dr. It just seems like his case was handled badly period. His parents should look into another attorney, and see if he can't get his sentence reduced.
But....I have to ask this...this young man was able to work a lawn mower, and mow a law well enough that his neighbors would pay him to do so. Just because his IQ reads what it does, doesn't mean he is unable to understand what he did to that child. I feel bad for his sentence, but I don't feel bad for the crime he committed. Maybe I am heartless that way...but everyone keeps talking about how awful this is for him, and not once did anyone mention the pain and years of therapy the young boy will have to deal with. I am surprised with the level of mental retardation, that this young man wasn't in a group home of some sort. Even when you are poor there are still group homes for people who suffer from mental disorders. I am not sure what kind of facility he will be going to, and it might be a place that is actually good for him. But...I will say I agree with many of you, when it came to how long he will be there, when others can rape and kill babies and only get 7-8 yrs. Sometimes the justice system works in strange ways. I have to agree with you there. Like I said earlier, how many criminals out there could be classified as retarded? People tend to think of retardation as ultimate stupidity all drooling at the mouth not knowing left from right but you may encounter borderline retarded people everyday and not even know it. He held a job and was able to interact with the public and that counts for a lot. Also he had to do more than just touch that child in order to get 100 years or even 5 years. The report uses the term "violent act" which can only mean rape/penetration and restraining the child. There were five counts so he did something to that kid over and over. I'm sorry but if you have enough brains and urge to gratify yourself sexually with a child then you really need to be locked up for some duration of time. | |
| - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator |