Too Short?

[Drea Beth]

I am in shock... this guy needs to be locked up.

Judge: Man is too short for prison

SIDNEY, Neb. (AP) -- A judge said a 5-foot-1 man convicted of sexually assaulting a child was too small to survive in prison, and gave him 10 years of probation instead.

His crimes deserved a long sentence, District Judge Kristine Cecava said, but she worried that Richard W. Thompson, 50, would be especially imperiled by prison dangers.

"You are a sex offender, and you did it to a child," she said.

But, she said, "That doesn't make you a hunter. You do not fit in that category."

Thompson will be electronically monitored the first four months of his probation, and he was told to never be alone with someone under age 18 or date or live with a woman whose children were under 18. Cecava also ordered Thompson to get rid of his pornography.

He faces 30 days of jail each year of his probation unless he follows its conditions closely.

"I want control of you until I know you have integrated change into your life," the judge told Thompson. "I truly hope that my bet on you being OK out in society is not misplaced."

© 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed. Learn more about our Privacy Policy.



I "truly hope" that the judge's bet isn't misplaced either.

[LdyJhawk]

I flipped when I read that. I mean..I've never heard of a "you must be this tall to be incarcerated in this prison" rule...

[Tink]

What a crock of shit!!!

What is she worried he'll be more at risk for being sexually assaulted because of his size?

TOO BAD!!!
The beauty of incarcerating deviants like him *IS* that prisoners tend to REALLY dislike their kind and so they target them. Let them see what it's like. :aok:

[I'Cin]

New sign in front of Old Sparky:

You must be <this> tall to ride this ride.

[Krystal Moon]

this is SOOOOO WRONG!!!!!! he NEEDS to be locked up and if you ask me, it's really an eye for an eye- he sexually assulted children, so now he should be sexually assulted in prison.

[SilverMirth]

I'm sorry but his "size" should not be a factor and this judge needs to realize this fact. He is a hunter and needs to be treated as the hunted for a very long time. Even a 6 footer would be the new best "friend" of all the guys in the cell block once his crime is known to involve children. they maybe crooks, murderers and rapists but they have certain codes that they follow.

[Ysobelle]

Yeah, but in this country, we have laws protecting us from "cruel and unusual punishment." If he's going to be incarcerated, that's fine. But you can't send someone to jail knowing they'll be repeatedly raped there.

That's mob justice, and while we may feel it's perfectly justified, our legal system says otherwise.

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

I'm far more disturbed by this part:
[The judge] also ordered Thompson to get rid of his pornography.
Now that's cruel and unusual punishment!

:wink:

[Ysobelle]

I'm far more disturbed by this part:

Now that's cruel and unusual punishment!

:wink:


I'm SO gonna pull a Cheney on you one of these days.

[willow of the wooded fortress]

I'm SO gonna pull a Cheney on you one of these days.

That makes 2 of us!:wink:

Seriously, this makes me SICK! What the hell is going on in this world!

[kendermom]

Sigh.....
Brings light to the nature of society when an adult that has victimized a child is being protected for the same reason that humanity protects it's children - the fact that they are small and cannot protect themselves.

Unfortunately, I see both sides of this issue. I can see the judge's concern and beleive that it is good that she has given some mercy to a man that would be a target, but it does not excuse her decision to let a child predator off with a slap on the hand. She had other options for his punishment and it seems she either ignored them or didn't do her homework.

I weep for the safety of the children around him.

[Alianne]

Yeah, but in this country, we have laws protecting us from "cruel and unusual punishment." If he's going to be incarcerated, that's fine. But you can't send someone to jail knowing they'll be repeatedly raped there.

That's mob justice, and while we may feel it's perfectly justified, our legal system says otherwise.

He could be kept separate from the general population.

Most facilities keep sex offenders on a separate floor/block because they are considered the 'low lives' of a prison population by the other inmates....they have their own code and they don't look kindly on child molesters.

They put the 'slight and pretty' boys in prison, too...and they're just as often targets to become someone's 'bitch'...are we going to keep them out of jail, now?

[Jayde]

OMG!!!! you're :censored: kidding me!!!! What the Hell was she thinking?! Does she seriously think she's going to be able to control this sicko for 10 years?!

I agree with what my rogue had to say when I read him the story
"He's big enough to do the crim, he's big enough to do the time"

[DameGoode]

How old was the child is question for the conviction? I'm confused by the "not a hunter" assertion. That's an unusual statement, (which doesn't excuse it).

[Tink]

Yeah, but in this country, we have laws protecting us from "cruel and unusual punishment." If he's going to be incarcerated, that's fine. But you can't send someone to jail knowing they'll be repeatedly raped there.

That's mob justice, and while we may feel it's perfectly justified, our legal system says otherwise.

We can't send someone to prison if we know something bad might happen to them??????

OK, then I guess we should never send anyone else to prison....let's not stop there....let them all go because bad things can happen there and we can't have that. :roll:

By committing a crime you take your chances that this will happen.

I hope this ruling gets over-turned.

[Dedeley]

Why not send him to a women's prison? I'll bet there are lots of people there under 5'1". Although talk about mob justice . . . . . .

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

Why not send him to a women's prison?
"Oh no! Please don't throw me into the briar patch!!!" :-D

[Bean]

Cyranno:
Why do I picture you standing under a big old hornet's nest with a very large stick in your hands????????????

[Jayde]

Cyranno:
Why do I picture you standing under a big old hornet's nest with a very large stick in your hands????????????


he's that sick and twisted?

[Eric McTavish]

This guy should have gone to Amsterdam...

Pedophiles to launch political party
Tue May 30, 1:03 PM ET

AMSTERDAM (Reuters) - Dutch pedophiles are launching a political party to push for a cut in the legal age for sexual relations to 12 from 16 and the legalization of child pornography and sex with animals, sparking widespread outrage.

The rest of the story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060530/od_nm/dutch_pedophiles_dc_2)

[Tink]

This guy should have gone to Amsterdam...



The rest of the story (http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060530/od_nm/dutch_pedophiles_dc_2)

Will the members of this party be given psych exams?

They need it.

[Buxom Wench]

Update from the news wires:

http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/05/31/short.molester.ap/index.html?section=cnn_latest


LINCOLN, Nebraska (AP) -- A petition drive is calling for the resignation of the judge who sentenced a sex offender to probation instead of prison in part because of his short stature.

[Bean]

I guess the state Attorney General is appealing the sentence, or something like that. It has hit all the major news outlets with features today.

[SpeedKnight]

What a crock of shit!!!

What is she worried he'll be more at risk for being sexually assaulted because of his size?

TOO BAD!!!
The beauty of incarcerating deviants like him *IS* that prisoners tend to REALLY dislike their kind and so they target them. Let them see what it's like. :aok:

AMEN, Sister!

Yeah, but in this country, we have laws protecting us from "cruel and unusual punishment." If he's going to be incarcerated, that's fine. But you can't send someone to jail knowing they'll be repeatedly raped there.

That's mob justice, and while we may feel it's perfectly justified, our legal system says otherwise.

Nikki, m'love... How would this sound then... put the fugger in a maximum security joint? Oh wait... that didn't work for that Daumer guy, did it?

I agree with what my rogue had to say when I read him the story
"He's big enough to do the crim, he's big enough to do the time"

AMEN, Brother!

[Eric McTavish]

I guess the state Attorney General is appealing the sentence, or something like that. It has hit all the major news outlets with features today.

I have a feeling this was the Plan all along to forstall a plea or an appeal citing the fact that the defendant wouldn't survive this sentance, this way the appeal wil take into account the earler judges sentaence and resentance the ofender to his "real" punishment...

Just a thought.

[Ysobelle]

For some reason, I'm still annoyed by this.

When we sentence someone for a crime in this country, we sentence them to be incarcerated. We send them to jail. We do NOT say, "I sentence you to be raped, beaten, and abused." It's the same reason I was furious with what happened at Abu Ghraib. We're NOT animals, and we ARE subject to the rule of law. Saying it's fine for this guy to go to jail and get the crap beaten out of him is saying, "Oh, we know what happens in jail, and we're fine with that."

Yeah, some people are beyond reform. But if we give up on every single person who goes to jail, and we say it's just fine if they go in for pot posession, get raped in the ass every day for a year, and come out ready to murder someone-- if we're fine with that, we're exactly what we profess to despise: uncaring, jaded, cynical bastards with no respect for the law. We say we're fine with recidivism and escalation. We say anyone who does something bad and goes to jail has ceased to be human.

I will NOT put myself in that category. I will not say I'm fine with cruel and unusual. I will not say I'm fine with our jails being not only punishment, but destruction of humans.

[Eric McTavish]

I will NOT put myself in that category. I will not say I'm fine with cruel and unusual. I will not say I'm fine with our jails being not only punishment, but destruction of humans.

Very good points!!!
And well said...

One of the reasons I have problems with the "sex offender registry" is that once someone has completed their sentence (and any probation) they are supposed to be "free and clear" yet sex offenders must register for the rest of their lives?!?! Why doesn’t a murder or thief have to register as well?

[I'Cin]

Eric, here's why:

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

Presents, for the first time, data on the rearrest, reconviction, and reimprisonment of 9,691 male sex offenders, including 4,295 child molesters, who were tracked for 3 years after their release from prisons in 15 States in 1994. The 9,691 are two-thirds of all the male sex offenders released from prisons in the United States in 1994. The study represents the largest followup ever conducted of convicted sex offenders following discharge from prison and provides the most comprehensive assessment of their behavior after release.

Highlights include the following:


Within 3 years following their release, 5.3% of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime.

On average the 9,691 sex offenders served 3 1/2 years of their 8-year sentence.

Compared to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime.

The 9,691 released sex offenders included 4,295 men who were in prison for child molesting.


I'Cin

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

Within 3 years following their release, 5.3% of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime.

5.3%? That's it?!?

I mean, don't get me wrong, any crime is bad, but when the whole "sex offender registry" idea started, I was under the impression that it was being justified by a faaaaaaar greater recidivism rate; something like 60%.

I bought into the hype. I feel really stupid now.

[Capt. Stamina]

ACLU Sues Over Sex-Offender Ban

INDIANAPOLIS

Six sex offenders sued the city Wednesday to block a new ordinance that bars them from venturing within 1,000 feet of parks, pools and playgrounds when children are present.

The plaintiffs went to federal court to argue that the law is unconstitutionally vague, violates their rights to vote and attend church, and prevents them from freely traveling on roads that may pass within 1,000 feet of the affected sites.

The ordinance was approved May 15 and took effect immediately. It carries fines of up to $2,500.

The law includes an exception that permits sex offenders to visit those sites as long as they are with another adult who is not a convicted sexual offender.

The six, who include convicted child molesters and rapists, are represented by the American Civil Liberties Union of Indiana.

The city's legal office did not immediately return a call seeking comment.

http://www.breitbart.com/news/2006/05/31/D8HUUHUG0.html

[I'Cin]

5.3%? That's it?!?

I mean, don't get me wrong, any crime is bad, but when the whole "sex offender registry" idea started, I was under the impression that it was being justified by a faaaaaaar greater recidivism rate; something like 60%.

I bought into the hype. I feel really stupid now.


Keep in mind that: (a) 5.3% was the percentage re-arrested within three years of release (b) these numbers are from 1994 releases; (c) the population followed was only 2/3 of all male sex offenders released in 1994; (d) Compared to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime; and (e) almost half were child molesters.

Wait, let's see that again: FOUR TIMES MORE LIKELY TO BE RE-ARRESTED and ALMOST HALF WERE CHILD MOLESTERS (obviously my emphasis).

I will admit I'm somewhat ambivalent about registries. I think the possibilities for mistakes and people doing something dumb are very large. But as a parent, I want to know if some creep who "likes" little girls (or even big ones - I'm not big on the idea of a convicted rapist living next door) has moved in.

I'm not sure where the line is between protecting Mr. Scumbucket's right to do his time and go on with his life, and "mine" in knowing the Mr. Scumbucket has moved in 2 houses down. I know I don't want it to be after me or one of my daughters or one of my friends is attacked.

No easy answers, as usual.

I'Cin

[Ysobelle]

The problem with child molesters, unfortunately, is that they're skilled in the art of looking harmless to their victims, who are, on the whole, the most trusting. We have to tell the parents, in other words, because the kids don't know any better.

I would want to know if a sex offender moved in next door, yes. But I don't want to hear these things without knowing exactly what the person in question did. Did he have a fifteen year old girlfriend when he was nineteen? Or did he abduct a six year old and rape her? I'm always afraid of the mob mentality, and people going off without having the facts.

[Eric McTavish]

Eric, here's why:Within 3 years following their release, 5.3% of sex offenders (men who had committed rape or sexual assault) were rearrested for another sex crime.

On average the 9,691 sex offenders served 3 1/2 years of their 8-year sentence.

Compared to non-sex offenders released from State prisons, released sex offenders were 4 times more likely to be rearrested for a sex crime.

The 9,691 released sex offenders included 4,295 men who were in prison for child molesting.

I'Cin

The numbers of reoffending thievs (B&E artists) are higher, mad Violent crive (assault) are much higher and drug re-offenders absoultly kill those numbers,

but they are required to register...

[Eric McTavish]

Did he have a fifteen year old girlfriend when he was nineteen? Or did he abduct a six year old and rape her?

Here's the problem!!! Hell in some states you can be place onto the sex offender regestery for sexual harassment! And sexual harassment is almost impossiable to refute or prove in some cases.

[Lawencha]

The idea of the height of an offender rather than the wilfully aggregious nature of the crime as a determinant in sentencing is beyond comprehension. So, what IS the determinant of becoming a dispenser of legal justice in that state - since intelligence and concern for the most vulnerable of the general public doesn't appear to fit the criteria.

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

Here's the problem!!! Hell in some states you can be place onto the sex offender regestery for sexual harassment! Or even just for fucking a sheep (http://www.wench.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11063). :-)

Seriously though, in some jurisdictions it's gotten almost trivial to get onto one of those registries, and the general public doesn't bother to make any kind of distinction as to the nature of the act that got you put onto it.

"A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals and you know it."

[Emrld]

I may have missed some of this somewhere in the discussion - but this case is being discussed on O'Reilly at the moment.
The Prosecuter didn't ask for jail time . . .
Also mental instability has been brought to light
It actually quite laughable.

[Cyranno DeBoberac]

this case is being discussed on O'Reilly at the moment
And I'm sure he had plenty of intelligent and factual things to say about it. :roll:

So, is O'Reilly still claiming it was US troops that murdered captured German troops at Malmedy in WW2 (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=malmedy+o%27reilly&btnG=Google+Search) or has he finally figured out it was the other way around? http://img92.imageshack.us/img92/2971/364si.gif

But I suppose he's too busy sodomizing falafels (http://www.falaphilia.com/) to be bothered with studying history.

If anyone in this world needs to have a nice hot steaming cup of shut the fuck up, it's that waste of carbon.