I understand what this judge is wanting to do here, but I think he is sending the wrong message and not doing his job of making sure justice is served.
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/apps/pb...313/1009&theme=
A Williston man who admitted repeatedly sexually assaulting a young girl for four years was sentenced Wednesday to spend 60 days in prison -- a punishment that angered the victim's family but was defended by the judge as the only way to provide counseling for the perpetrator.
Mark Hulett, 34, pleaded guilty in August to two counts of aggravated sexual assault and one charge of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child, all felonies. He faced up to life in prison on the charges.
The problem, agreed the judge and attorneys, was that the state Corrections Department decided it would not offer any sex-offender treatment for Hulett while he is in prison. The department determined that Hulett presents a low risk of committing a similar crime, and therefore he qualifies for counseling only after his release, lawyers said in court Wednesday.
Judge Edward Cashman's sentence, which he handed down after a two-hour hearing in Vermont District Court in Burlington, could incarcerate Hulett for the rest of his life if he fails to obtain counseling or otherwise follow instructions once he is freed in 60 days.
Judges lack authority under state law to order Corrections to provide treatment for incarcerated inmates, prosecutors said.
Hulett began sexually abusing the girl -- a friend's daughter -- when she was 6, and the conduct continued until the girl turned 10 in April, according to court papers and testimony Wednesday from the girl's relatives.
The Burlington Free Press does not name the victims of sexual assault and is not naming the girl's relatives to protect her identity.
Prosecutors wanted Hulett incarcerated for at least eight years, and in impassioned pleas the girl's family members asked for a stern sentence. Cashman, though, told the crowded courtroom that punishment was not his priority in sentencing Hulett, but rather finding treatment for the man to prevent future abuse.
"This is not a situation where I'm doing this for the family," he said. "My heart goes out to this family, and I would hate to be in the situation this family is. But there's other families out there, and there's other people who could be victimized, and I'm trying to take the long view."
Later, Cashman added that a lengthy prison term "will accomplish nothing but to harden this fellow."
The hearing was unusual at times as Cashman questioned witnesses, sparred verbally with Corrections officials, and at one point engaged in conversation with the victim's relatives as they sat in the gallery. The girl's aunt asked Cashman to impose a sentence of at least four years -- one for each year Hulett abused her niece.
"Mark should be taken off the street so it is not possible for her to cross his path," the woman said through sobs. "She will see Mark enough in her mind."
The Corrections Department's refusal to treat Hulett drew ire from prosecutors and the judge. Defense psychologist William Cunningham said Hulett showed little empathy for the harm he caused the girl and her family; regretted only "the loss of a friend;" and would require stringent supervision and dire consequences to comply with court orders, such as receiving counseling.
Prosecutor Nicole Andreson said punishment is a valid component of a sentence.
"This is not only about Mr. Hulett," Andreson said in arguing for an eight-year minimum. "To sentence him to any less demeans the level of trauma he has caused. To sentence him to any less will send a disturbing message of tolerance to the community."
Cashman disagreed, saying retribution "accomplishes nothing of value."
"We feed on anger," the judge said. "That's not my job. I've got to do something that solves problems. The one message I want to get through is, anger doesn't solve anything."
Hulett spoke briefly at the end of the hearing, crying as he apologized for his actions.
"I want to get treatment. I need it," he said before officers led him from the courtroom to begin his prison term.
After the hearing, Andreson said the main question the hearing raised is why Hulett wasn't eligible for sex-offender treatment as an inmate.
Full Version: Craziness in Vermont!
Hey, for once I agree with you on something, GOPGuy. I think the guy should spend many years in jail. The girl he assaulted will have to live with the consequences of his actions for the rest of her life. I would also hope that the state is providing the victim with counseling as well. If they are going to provide for it with the criminal, they should be at least as obligated to the victim.
And GWB should be his cell mate.
Agreed, what the hell are they thinking. Guys like that deserve their b...s cut off, then sent to prison. Then, they might feel a portion of what they themselves have put their victim through.
This is one man that should be on Bush's spylist wiretapping! He's a terrorist let loose... Rape seems to go unpunished these days! Any crimes created against women are no longer important to today's legalized Macho Male System!
We have a registered sex offender who lives in our neighborhood. I know the house, but I hope that I never see the guy. When I am out with my children walking I avoid walking in that direction, I don't want the guy to see them (of course we don't let them out without ourselves or a trusted adult anyway, since they're 2 and 5.)
Of course even people like that deserve a second chance when they're let out, but I HOPE and assume that this guy has served MUCH more than 60 days! A minimum of eight years sounds about right!
Of course even people like that deserve a second chance when they're let out, but I HOPE and assume that this guy has served MUCH more than 60 days! A minimum of eight years sounds about right!
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Mar 13 2006, 04:04 PM)
(of course we don't let them out without ourselves or a trusted adult anyway, since they're 2 and 5.)
Hey, he started abusing the girl when she was six... and thereafter for 4 years.
Well kids betweenn 6-10 could be at school, in the playground, etc... and there's every chance that a slip of a moment could passby without an adult watching over her like a hawk. And this slip of a moment could be the most vital time of her life... if she should come face to face with a man who can't stop his insane sexual urge!
Realize that kids had actually been kidnapped at shops, at a wink of the eye? Oh yes, rapists can and should deserve a chance - when they are castrated! Zip and cut, and let them go on their way. And that's fine with me. I'll not mind even talking to these eunachs.
I do not mind some sex offenders as much.
Public urination you get caught, you have to register as one. So I have no idea of the degree that they are in. Though agreed, they do deserve a second chance.
This guy though, I do not know what the judge is thinking.
Public urination you get caught, you have to register as one. So I have no idea of the degree that they are in. Though agreed, they do deserve a second chance.
This guy though, I do not know what the judge is thinking.
QUOTE
I do not mind some sex offenders as much.
Public urination you get caught, you have to register as one.
Public urination you get caught, you have to register as one.
What?
This is especially appalling, given that treatment for sex offenders, particularly pedophiles, is notoriously ineffective. That's why some states (I believe that Oregon is one) are experimenting with true life sentences in special facilities for the most grievous offenders.
No, but... where is there a law that you have to register as a sex offender if you take a leak in public and get caught? It would seem that half the winos and street people in the US would be registered at this point.
Many years ago, some friends of mine and I had a picnic lunch on the rocks in the tide pools in Carmel, CA. It was a bit chilly, so we wore our pants over our bathing suits. We took off our pants and waded across the tide pools to the rocks in our bathing suits, keeping our pant legs dry. Then when we came back we did the same thing. Some old geezer with binoculars saw us zipping up our pants on the beach, called the police, and we almost got arrested for public urination when we were not doing such a thing.
Many years ago, some friends of mine and I had a picnic lunch on the rocks in the tide pools in Carmel, CA. It was a bit chilly, so we wore our pants over our bathing suits. We took off our pants and waded across the tide pools to the rocks in our bathing suits, keeping our pant legs dry. Then when we came back we did the same thing. Some old geezer with binoculars saw us zipping up our pants on the beach, called the police, and we almost got arrested for public urination when we were not doing such a thing.
That case dates back some time ago if its the same one, and I believe it is as the situation is identical, that we heard about a couple of months ago. Subsequently that judge faced so much heat that there were further developments and the sentence was extended. I don't remember what the length of incarceration ended up being but it was substantially longer.
QUOTE(MrJim @ Mar 13 2006, 04:31 PM)
What?
The definition is very ambiguous indeed.
For example, there are some people in some states who have been deemed by the courts to be sexual offenders because they turned 17 and their HS sweetheart is still 16 and they had sexual relations and were caught.
Also, I am not sure the public lists of sexual offenders is solving any problems. Instead, they often force true predators to continually move, and therefore local police departments often are unaware of their whereabouts, and that in turn leads to more crimes.
Strangely, so many in our society would willingly purge so much hatred toward or crucify two gays, or two lesbians, with their mutually accepted sexual acts, and give rapists of unwilling, little girls, a second chance? I can't believe how warped we have become! The guy is a pedaphile, He was raping this little girl for FOUR darn years. Hell, I could have beaten his sexual organs to a pulp, if that was my little girl! Just imagine the pain this little girl has gone through for 4 years, and he is required to serve such a short sentence? 60 days? Not even a quarter of the time he has persisted with his criminal act? Double the years of pain he had inflicted... at least that would be fairer justice!
QUOTE(Sunshine @ Mar 13 2006, 05:02 PM)
The definition is very ambiguous indeed.
For example, there are some people in some states who have been deemed by the courts to be sexual offenders because they turned 17 and their HS sweetheart is still 16 and they had sexual relations and were caught.
Also, I am not sure the public lists of sexual offenders is solving any problems. Instead, they often force true predators to continually move, and therefore local police departments often are unaware of their whereabouts, and that in turn leads to more crimes.
For example, there are some people in some states who have been deemed by the courts to be sexual offenders because they turned 17 and their HS sweetheart is still 16 and they had sexual relations and were caught.
Also, I am not sure the public lists of sexual offenders is solving any problems. Instead, they often force true predators to continually move, and therefore local police departments often are unaware of their whereabouts, and that in turn leads to more crimes.
They should at least have to notify the authorities when they move. It should be like being on lifetime probation, being checked up on.
If you move without reporting, you should be considered on the lam, entitling you to a ticket back to the joint. Of course the authorities would really have to be checking up on these people.
Agreed...
Mr. Jim - The list is so ambiguous it ticks me off. Though what I mentioned is true, I have a friend who had to register as a sex offender because he got caught publicly urinating. So, because of small offenses that they become penalized for something this big, I do not know exactly how depraved a person who is in the list's act was. The range is too broad that the few that I met, their crime is either that, or being caught streaking on a dare.
I agree with S Liberty here, I'd feel the same way. Justice is not served in this case.
Mr. Jim - The list is so ambiguous it ticks me off. Though what I mentioned is true, I have a friend who had to register as a sex offender because he got caught publicly urinating. So, because of small offenses that they become penalized for something this big, I do not know exactly how depraved a person who is in the list's act was. The range is too broad that the few that I met, their crime is either that, or being caught streaking on a dare.
I agree with S Liberty here, I'd feel the same way. Justice is not served in this case.
If you truly care about these issues, then please write your reps in the Senate and tell them to pass the Children's Safety Act!
Here's how: http://amw.com/features/feature_story_detail.cfm?id=1052
Thanks!
"Peggy"
Here's how: http://amw.com/features/feature_story_detail.cfm?id=1052
QUOTE
We Won't Give Up On The Children's Safety Act
2/28/2006
Write to your elected officials today to get the "Children's Safety Act" passed. Back in September, The Children's Safety Act --H.R. 3132-- passed the House, but not the Senate. Although the bill had bipartisan support, an unrelated hate crimes amendement that the Senate wanted to add stopped the bill in its tracks. In response, Congressman Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., introduced The Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005, or H.R. 4472 last December.
John Walsh was back on Capitol Hill on February 28 to make sure that we can keep our children safe from the hundreds of thousands of sex offenders in this country today.
Tuesday on Capitol Hill, John Walsh joined Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, representatives from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and other victims' advocates and parents like Mark Lunsford whose daughter Jessica was killed in Florida last year; Linda Walker, the mother of murdered college student Dru Sjodin; and Erin Runnion whose 5-year-old daughter Samantha was raped and killed by a sex offender, to push for this legislation in Congress.
John was on the Hill last July to talk about protecting our children, and he knows that politicians will be willing to listen this time too. Just yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist co-sponsored the bill, which is a sure sign of its promise.
What H.R. 4472 Will Achieve
The new Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005 will:
▪ Improve the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Program to ensure that sex offenders register and keep current where they reside, work and attend school
▪ Require quarterly verification, in-person verification and regular notarized verification mailings
▪ Require public access to state websites
▪ Create the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website to search for sex offender information in each community
▪ Expand terms to include juvenile sex offenders
▪ Require states to notify one another when a sex offender moves from one state to another
▪ Expand sex offenses covered by registration and notification requirements to include military, tribal, foreign and sex crimes and increase the duration of registration requirements to protect the public
▪ Expand community notification requirements to include active efforts to inform law enforcement agencies, schools, public housing, social service agencies and volunteer organizations in areas where sex offenders reside, work or attend school
▪ Create a new criminal penalty of a maximum of 20 years incarceration for sex offenders who refuse to comply with registration requirements
▪ Protect foster children from sexual abuse and exploitation
You Can Help -- Write To Your Elected Officials
Please write to your elected officials in Congress to urge them to pass H.R. 4472/ S. 1086. It's time to stand together to protect our children.
http://amw.com/features/feature_story_detail.cfm?id=1052
2/28/2006
Write to your elected officials today to get the "Children's Safety Act" passed. Back in September, The Children's Safety Act --H.R. 3132-- passed the House, but not the Senate. Although the bill had bipartisan support, an unrelated hate crimes amendement that the Senate wanted to add stopped the bill in its tracks. In response, Congressman Sensenbrenner, R-Wisc., introduced The Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005, or H.R. 4472 last December.
John Walsh was back on Capitol Hill on February 28 to make sure that we can keep our children safe from the hundreds of thousands of sex offenders in this country today.
Tuesday on Capitol Hill, John Walsh joined Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, representatives from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, and other victims' advocates and parents like Mark Lunsford whose daughter Jessica was killed in Florida last year; Linda Walker, the mother of murdered college student Dru Sjodin; and Erin Runnion whose 5-year-old daughter Samantha was raped and killed by a sex offender, to push for this legislation in Congress.
John was on the Hill last July to talk about protecting our children, and he knows that politicians will be willing to listen this time too. Just yesterday, Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist co-sponsored the bill, which is a sure sign of its promise.
What H.R. 4472 Will Achieve
The new Children's Safety and Violent Crime Reduction Act of 2005 will:
▪ Improve the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Program to ensure that sex offenders register and keep current where they reside, work and attend school
▪ Require quarterly verification, in-person verification and regular notarized verification mailings
▪ Require public access to state websites
▪ Create the Dru Sjodin National Sex Offender Public Website to search for sex offender information in each community
▪ Expand terms to include juvenile sex offenders
▪ Require states to notify one another when a sex offender moves from one state to another
▪ Expand sex offenses covered by registration and notification requirements to include military, tribal, foreign and sex crimes and increase the duration of registration requirements to protect the public
▪ Expand community notification requirements to include active efforts to inform law enforcement agencies, schools, public housing, social service agencies and volunteer organizations in areas where sex offenders reside, work or attend school
▪ Create a new criminal penalty of a maximum of 20 years incarceration for sex offenders who refuse to comply with registration requirements
▪ Protect foster children from sexual abuse and exploitation
You Can Help -- Write To Your Elected Officials
Please write to your elected officials in Congress to urge them to pass H.R. 4472/ S. 1086. It's time to stand together to protect our children.
http://amw.com/features/feature_story_detail.cfm?id=1052
Thanks!
"Peggy"
QUOTE(xyzse @ Mar 13 2006, 05:20 PM)
Agreed...
Mr. Jim - The list is so ambiguous it ticks me off. Though what I mentioned is true, I have a friend who had to register as a sex offender because he got caught publicly urinating. So, because of small offenses that they become penalized for something this big, I do not know exactly how depraved a person who is in the list's act was. The range is too broad that the few that I met, their crime is either that, or being caught streaking on a dare.
I agree with S Liberty here, I'd feel the same way. Justice is not served in this case.
Mr. Jim - The list is so ambiguous it ticks me off. Though what I mentioned is true, I have a friend who had to register as a sex offender because he got caught publicly urinating. So, because of small offenses that they become penalized for something this big, I do not know exactly how depraved a person who is in the list's act was. The range is too broad that the few that I met, their crime is either that, or being caught streaking on a dare.
I agree with S Liberty here, I'd feel the same way. Justice is not served in this case.
Kind of outrageous that the system cannot make what seems like such an obvious distinction, or with the kind of case when an 17-year old has sex with a 16-year old.
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Mar 13 2006, 05:16 PM)
They should at least have to notify the authorities when they move. It should be like being on lifetime probation, being checked up on.
If you move without reporting, you should be considered on the lam, entitling you to a ticket back to the joint. Of course the authorities would really have to be checking up on these people.
If you move without reporting, you should be considered on the lam, entitling you to a ticket back to the joint. Of course the authorities would really have to be checking up on these people.
And that is not happening in many cases.
Are there travel restrictions too (i.e. vacation notification requirements)?
QUOTE(Arneoker @ Mar 13 2006, 05:28 PM)
Kind of outrageous that the system cannot make what seems like such an obvious distinction, or with the kind of case when an 17-year old has sex with a 16-year old.
That is the thing,Which is why I do not know how bad things are. I agree that many of these guys deserve a life-time of probation, but damn, some of it is just to severe.
Punishment does not fit the crime right now. Too light for some that deserve worse and too heavy on some that slips-up.
Sometimes I think the system only works with who shouts the loudest or has the most money. Though no surprises there.
I know of one other case --
There was a husband and wife team that owned a ballet studio. There was some show they put on, and a 16 year old girl in the troupe was not selected for the lead role. She got infuriated and charged the husband with molestation. The DA in our county, who prides himself on a high conviction rate, told the husband that if he fought it in court and lost, he was facing years and years in prison as a sex offender, and everyone knows what happens to sex offenders in prison. Plus, legal fees to fight the charges would run into the tens of thousands of dollars, which the man did not have. He ended up making a plea bargain, undergoing house arrest, extensive counceling, hundreds of hours of community service, and is now a convicted felon, as well as a registered sex offender. But he decided that it still beat ending up dead in prison.
The rest of the community apparently trusts the man -- he and his wife still run the ballet studio -- everyone knows of his conviction, but nobody apparently believes it or pays any attention to it.
There was a husband and wife team that owned a ballet studio. There was some show they put on, and a 16 year old girl in the troupe was not selected for the lead role. She got infuriated and charged the husband with molestation. The DA in our county, who prides himself on a high conviction rate, told the husband that if he fought it in court and lost, he was facing years and years in prison as a sex offender, and everyone knows what happens to sex offenders in prison. Plus, legal fees to fight the charges would run into the tens of thousands of dollars, which the man did not have. He ended up making a plea bargain, undergoing house arrest, extensive counceling, hundreds of hours of community service, and is now a convicted felon, as well as a registered sex offender. But he decided that it still beat ending up dead in prison.
The rest of the community apparently trusts the man -- he and his wife still run the ballet studio -- everyone knows of his conviction, but nobody apparently believes it or pays any attention to it.
You can rest assured that the US justice system is flawed.
There are many sex offenders on the rolls that shouldn't be. I don't know what the percentages are, but they are not trivial.
I think it is a travesty to continually harass these people by humiliating them with these public lists.
We need a better standard where only the true 100% guilty predators are placed on such lists. It should be a case by case basis.
There are many sex offenders on the rolls that shouldn't be. I don't know what the percentages are, but they are not trivial.
I think it is a travesty to continually harass these people by humiliating them with these public lists.
We need a better standard where only the true 100% guilty predators are placed on such lists. It should be a case by case basis.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.