M54
Australian justice system
March 07 2013
Comments
-
RHP User
13 years ago
When has the punishment ever equaled the crime in this country. For most of the cases put before the courts the criminals walk away with either a pathetic jail sentence that doesn't come close to reflecting the pain and torment of the crime they committed or worse they get a slap on the wrist. The judicial system in this country is a joke and the criminals are laughing all the way in (and out) of court and the lawyers all the way to the bank with the repeat business. Until such time as the punishments fit the crimes, rates of crime will continue to increase as there is no true deterrent. In the case you mentioned 10-11 weeks per person is not anywhere near enough for the lifetime of pain, suffering and torment both emotionally,mentally and physically that his victims will have to suffer for the rest of their lives. If they have to live with a life sentence then so should he!!Great topic!
-
RHP User
13 years ago
A Judge or Magistrate is confronted with many things when sentencing and one of them is community expectations. Unfortunately they don't always get it right that's for sure. It is surprising with that sentence as the practitioner is in a position of trust and the sentence is normally quite harsh to reflect the fact of how vulnerable the victims were.Still if you want to see really harsh sentencing, steal money from the Government.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
A foster-carer took charge of baby after his father died and the mother wasn't coping. The baby had frequent visits to the Dr in the 3 months he was in 'care'. One of the problems was hair loss and another was that she was unable to use her arm. During a visit to the hospital it was established she wasn't able to use her arm properly because she had a fracture of the type asssociated with child abuse but this was not followed up on. Visits to the mother were cancelled with claims the baby was sick. The baby was administered very strong pain relievers with a follow up script requested long before the first one should have run out. She died sitting in the baby seat while the carer ran errands. No trace of the pain relievers she was supposed to be on was found in her system. The coroner ruled her death a homocide and stated that she was tortured, the hair ripped from her head, her little body covered in bruises, the inside of her mouth covered in deep cuts.The carer was charged for neglect! 6 years (I think) was the sentence, reduced to 7 months after another hearing where the judge deemed the carers family had suffered enough.The case was judged by a friend of the carers family.Now go and steal a teller machine and see how harsh the sentence is. This is something the Mr and I were talking about recently.No I don't believe the case you mention above represents a fair sentence for the crime, but that is the same for many life changing crimes. Not so Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Gross negligence from a knowingly infected surgeon? Board of surgeons knew it but failed to tell the AMA while he kept on performing surgical procedures. Talk about Dr Frankenstein. Deserves the maximum and a lifetime ban when he gets out. May be a lesser penalty because of the boards involvement though?
-
RHP User
13 years ago
The sentence handed down by a justice is NOT meant to reflect the feelings of the community. If this was the case, community would descend in to a very bloody anamalistic mob in 10 minutes as everyone screamed blood. Just check out facebook each time something awful happens and check out all the low life's screaming for vengeance.We are meant to be better than that. Or at least heading in that direction.Justice is meant to be based on a panel of educated, experienced, un-biased people. Not mob rule. Which is always very ugly.And no, I'm not defending this sicko's actions. He's just a number. Like all people before the law should be.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Sorry LRE but I thought what I said was reasonably clear god help the system if it was run on feelings, history has shown how badly that can be abused.Community expectations is something considered by educated and experienced people in the Justice system but as with all things human it can be flawed and that is why we have courts of appeal where any party can appeal a sentence if it is considered too harsh or soft.Don't forget that Justice is blind.Mrs Peachy, that Judge should have excused himself from the trial if he was a friend of the carers family and if that was the case It should be a re-trial. As LRE said, impartiality is crucial in any court hearing.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
MrsPeachyPier! I would like to think that the Australian Justice System is a fair one that actually works but when I hear reports like this I can't help thinking of it as the 'Australian Unjust System'! That case is a complete nightmare and I have heard of so many others over the years where children have died at the hands of these whack-jobs (some their own parent/s or guardians) and in a lot of these cases DOCS have a case file on them as thick as a bloody telephone directory! WHAT IS 'JUST' ABOUT THAT?
-
RHP User
13 years ago
The story about BabyAlissa is a recent one to me that broke my heart, it happened in America though. Dunno why I kept referringg to her as him above, I did go through and fix some but missed some. Sorry! Aside from that, on the justice system in general, I thought the judge should have recused himself as well Vaga and the holes in the story where a difference could have been made before she died and after during the trial angers and saddens me.A story that is in the West today had Mr P coming home angry about our justice system. Next paragraph copied from the paper to avoid mistakes (well aside from typos lol)... "A suspended P-plate driver with 5 previous drink-driving convictions has walked free after a judge found his "carelessness" and "inexperience" killed an 81 year-old wheelchair-bound grandmother in a car crash two years ago."He had been overtaking three cars when he hit the third one. The impact caused the woman to be thrown from her wheelchair through a side window. Her husband who she had been married to for 61 years was driving at the time. The young man was convicted by jury of dangerous driving causing death.He was also caught driving three months after the fatal crash. Here comes the good bit (sarcasm intended)... The judge in his summing up said the young man's poor driving record was against him but he was not speeding while overtaking and although his alcohol level 0.036 - above the probationary 0.02 limit - drink was not a relevant factor. He was also fined $1700 in Perth Magistrate's Court yesterday for four related driving offences.While the young man has apologised to the family, I do not feel justice has been done here and nor do the family. This in my opinion is another travesty of justice that this young man obviously had no respect for the privilige of driving on our roads in what could be considered a dangerous weapon under the right circumstances. That he should be walking free to perhaps repeat his stupidity makes me question the justice system considering the details of the crime.Ms Blue, DOCS should have a folder on them. I'm in a group on facebook where I hear some terrible stories about what they are responsible for. This is documented... In one case they placed a young teen male who'd been accused of sex offences in his last placement with a family who had two young girls without advising the parents of his history. When the obvious happened, they blamed the young girls for not locking their doors at night. In my case, I was placed with a family where the mother had been in a concentration camp and the father had suffered sexual abuse at the hands of his 'aunts'. Despite notes about 'pictures of naked women on the walls' in the records, no attempt was taken to remove me from the family who I lived with from the age of 1 - 12 even after the foster-mother left when I was 10. A decision was made by the department after she left not to advise my real family that I was never adopted, thus removing the chance of me ever having a family of my own. Hopefully the new Royal Commision will make some difference. Peachy me
-
RHP User
13 years ago
That I don't think penalties do anything other than quench the vengeance of the aggrieved. If penalties actually stopped crime, the USA would be crime free. They have ridiculously harsh penalties for stupidly minor stuff. All penalties do is bleed tax dollars to little affect. I think it's basically understood that nearly everyone in prison is there because they are poorly educated or sick in the head.No... if you want to reduce crime you have to do the very hard social work. The sort of work that has the red necks and conservatives calling you a "goody goody".. You don't get anything without hard yards (sorry meters)..
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Your hunch that incarceration achieves little more than a sense of retribution is borne out by numerous studies and it is a fact that is understood anyone familiar with penal policy. There are several reasons alternative (more effective) systems are not placed on the political agenda, such as resourcing and a weight of public opinion based on misconceptions about the nature of offending. Wouldnt it be wonderful to see the taxpayer funds that are used to imprison people (approximately $100k per person per annum) used instead to ensure they didn't commit crime again.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
The cost is $100k per prisoner, not per taxpayer.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
That a young man was been caught drink driving 5 times and on the 6th killed someone (though the drink wasn't taken into account during sentencing) speaks to the fact that he has learned no lesson. After killing someone, what does a suspended sentence teach him? So, if not incarceration, what? I can't help but believe that dealing with issues early on in the piece, rather than leaving it till there is a trail of crimes, would make a difference.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
I hope this debate can carry on without anyone getting too judgemental as it's sure to raise feelings.Of course if we could spend the money re-educating every single person that commits a crime so as to not to commit again, that would be Utopia. Unfortunately that is just too dangerous to try to undertake and puts the public at large at unnecessary risk in many cases. It's not all about the criminal though.The sentence handed down isn't just a punishment for the criminal it is also a safety measure for the general public at large. How many chances should a person get? I admit the three strikes policy in the US is ridiculous, and the thought of life imprisonment for a trivial offence offends the sensibility of realistic people, however have you given thought as to how much money these criminals are costing the country by being let back out on the streets (or in some instances, by not even being incarcerated at all?) $100k is cheap. And that is just looking at the monetary side, without looking at the human suffering they are causing while they are out there. How do you put a price on that?I had a friend who was sent to jail for defrauding the government out of social security benefits. She failed to declare she had a part time job as a cleaner. She was a single mother with 5 children. The father had walked out on her years before and she was doing it tough. It was her first offence and the kids ended up in care. Now THAT was a ridiculous case to impose a custodial sentence. There was a case up here in Queensland recently where 2 kids had thought it funny to steal cars and trash them, knowing they wouldn't get any time "behind bars", causing over a million dollars of damage in the process, and risking the lives of others while they drove at ridiculous speeds . They were even interviewed on TV and laughed about it. Leaving them out on the streets, in my opinion, is the wrong decision. To think you can re-educate every and any individual is not realistic. Not only do you have to re-wire their brain, you may also need to take them out of the environment they are in. The country is big, but it isn't THAT big!Unfortunately some problems are just too big and too complex to solve, and removing the threat (albeit temporarily) is the best you can do. The question is....for how long? You will never get agreement but it does seem wrong that financial crimes against the institution are punished more severely than crimes against the person.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
It is actually only a very small percentage of criminals (about 3%) who are pathological offenders whose detention is necessary to protect the public. Paedophiles are an example - statistically their chances of reform are extremely slim. Murderers and rapists on the other hand are statistically unlikely to reoffend and the length of their sentence has absolutely zero impact on the probability that they will.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Quoting 'Bathsheba' It is actually only a very small percentage of criminals (about 3%) who are pathological offenders whose detention is necessary to protect the public. Paedophiles are an example - statistically their chances of reform are extremely slim. Murderers and rapists on the other hand are statistically unlikely to reoffend and the length of their sentence has absolutely zero impact on the probability that they will. I don't think you can back that percentage up. I also hate statistics. They can be manipulated to deliver almost any outcome you wish.When you refer to rapists, you are referring to convicted rapists. Do you think maybe those figures are slightly inaccurate due to the amount of rapists that are never convicted? Just sayin....We're not just talking about paedophiles, murderers and rapists. What about drunk drivers, arsonists, drug dealers, extortionists, people with a history of violence. Need I go on?Friends of mine from work were out enjoying a night on the town in surfers a few years back. They weren't drunk or noisy. They just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time when a some Bikies decided to go on the rampage through some clubs and on the streets (it was in the papers, so I'm not discriminating against anyone here - it's a statement of common knowledge). One of my friends was off week for a work with concussion. He was a contractor so didn't get sick pay. They terrorised innocent members of the public for fun. Do you really think they are going to reform? I'm happy to be in the minority, but I would be in favour of building MORE prisons! By all means revisit and review the conditions but I would be much happier for people (in the categories I mentioned for starters) to get longer sentences.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
The percentage relates to pathological offenders (ie those beyond ordinary means of rehabilitation). Recidivism is a topic I am very familiar with. It is also one where I should have known better than to get started because most people won't listen and even if they do it won't change the way things are done. I'll say one thing before I leave the topic though. Don't for a minute think I'm some bleeding heart liberal who doesn't believe in accountability. I just hate seeing my extremely hard earned taxpayer money wasted on something as ineffective as another prison.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Adrian Ernst Bailey? He had offended as a juvenile and did time, re-offended as an adult male and did serious time twice. Only to rape again and commit a murder.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
That poor woman with 5 kids receiving a custodial sentence for a first offence? Wtf? Why a dedicated mother trying her best to survive alone with 5 mouths to feed was penalised in this way, I just cannot understand? It's just laughable. To do that to a woman who is obviously suffering under the economy and fiscal model that the government has created only to kick her while she is down by take her children away too? Chicken or the Egg people? FFS!The police along with the government need to pull their fingers out of their arses and catch some 'real' criminals!Ridiculous.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
...you don't think about the consequences of crime at the time when you're committing it. But this is precisely the time people need to be thinking about it.More than 1% of the population of the USA is currently behind bars. An enormous cost to tax payers. As Bathsheba has pointed out, only a very small percentage of those are REAL criminals. I'd hate Australia to go down the same path because of the perception that prisons are revolving doors and sentencing people harder solves problems.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
The Law system needs to be changed. My brother was killed in a hit and run and the guy that did it got 3 years.. He did 18 months and was let out of jail. His previous history was not allowed to be spoken about in his trial ( he had been charged with rape and spousal abuse), When the sentance was handed down by the jury, he smiled at us all.. Me... I say let the punishment fit the crime.. But in the end Karma catches up to all who have asked for it! Death penalty?? im more in favour for it than sending them to jail where they are to be rehabilitated at the tax payers expense. Some cannot be rehabilitated.. This is just my opinion so please dont take offense if you are of a different view than me... :) keep smiling
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Hate to say it but money talks. You have money and you can afford the best llawyers, etc.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
There is only one juvenile detention centre in PerthWhen there was a riot at the detention centre where the kids broke the computers etc provided out of government funds (which then had to be replaced) Some of the kids had to be sent to an adult prison while doors etc were being fixed. Why is crime not dealt with asap in a place and time where we have the best chance of rehabilitation. I've spoken with kids under 18, some as young as 15, talk about how they know they will get away with it because of their age. I knew a group who trashed a restaurant (for the fun of it and while under the effects of drugs and alcohol) which meant the business could not do it's business for several days. The consequence handed down to the kids included having to fix the damage they had done, they didn't learn anything and went on to reoffend. Two of them are married to each other and one of them suffers spousal abuse at the hands of the other. It has nothing to do with where they came from either. The abuser comes from a 'good' home and the abusee comes from a family where there were many problems and some criminal activity. A lot of kids that end up in detention centres, juvenile or otherwise were under the 'care' of the state as children, a product of their environment. I'd love to see a utopia where we have a different system, but some people will reoffend regardless. It is in their brain chemistry. They lack an understanding or care of the consequences of their actions. They know they can get away with it.I only had a quick google but one stat' I read claimed 70% of rape accused are repeat offenders. That is only one statistic but I've lost count of the stories where the rapist was out for some reason, waiting for trial, whatever, and reoffended. People live in fear these days, we have to constantly on guard to protect ourselves. It is all too often the vulnerable who are the target of ciminals.My exes father was a con artist and proud of it. He was also quite proud of his ability to cheat and make more children who then grew up in an incomplete family. I had a lot of contact with criminals as a teen through to my early twenties, it was scary and dangerous and I was the victim of these people more than once. I made my own decisions that this was not the way I wanted to live my life. In my mid twenties, I met Mr P and slowly but surely changed as my life settled and while I woouldn't say I am any saint, I do not have the huge disregard for the effects of my actions on people that I did then. As mentioned by SoulsinSync, there is organised crime, these people get away with it because they have money from their criminal activities. I agree that money talks as far as being able to hire lawyers to find loopholes go.I'd thought to mention the Social Security benefits, not only will they expect you to make reparation by paying back the money but they will also charge you. Where is this commensurate with how sentences for crimes against the government are dealt with far more hashly and immedialtely than crimes against the individual? That is a rhetorical question.It is scary Blue that the children of that mother have now entered a 'care' system where the greater percentage go on to become criminals. It is scary that government officials will not need to commit crimes to access money because unlike many other hard working individuals who are essential to our system, they change the system to get pay rises every year regardless of the quality of that work. Plus well paid superannuation whether they finish their term or not. Their newspapers, parking, travel etc is paid by their constitiuents. It used to be that local cooucils did not get paid but they put it to a vote inhouse to change that system, yet another draw on taxpayers money. Now loal governmemt is working on making itself legal LOL. Just recently the system where bank accounts that had been inactive for 7 years had the proceeds going to the government has now been reduced to 3 years after being rushed through parliament. My scattered thoughts and experiences. More power to those of you who are much more capable of putting their thoughts together in what I believe is a more understandable stance. Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
People here keep on getting mixed up that laws are supposed to provide justice. There is no such thing. Laws are meant to control society, to bring order and to enforce any breach of it. Justice is to provide fair and equal treatment of people, both victim and perpetrator. Is the law fair? Hell, no. The application of the law is supposed to be fair although that does not work well either. No offence meant to the judges. They are restricted in their judgments though as well as being human. People make mistakes. Some people mentioned that a person got a light sentence. Is that justice? Who knows. Don't forget, people react differently. A drunk driver who kills someone might escape with a light sentence, but for some, they will never be able to forget that event. It will haunt them for a long time. For other, they will just shrug it off. Is there an easy answer to this? No. Yes, justice needs to be done and seen to be done. In a lot of cases, the people in need of it gets screwed while those who deserve it seem to get away with it. It is sad to say but looks like in this society and many others, might is right. You have the power, you get away with it.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Good lawyers are generally very expensive, funny how members of Bikie Gangs always have a really good silk hey! Still if the laws are passed where Police can question unexplained wealth things might change a bit, probably not much.Juvenile crime is a minefield where the penalties never fit the crime due to the fact that the offender is a juvenile and that's that and then the slate is wiped clean at 18 years.Still the system is set up so that it is better that a 100 guilty walk free rather than one innocent man be punished, you can lock up many real crooks Deepblue but court is never easy and it isn't meant to be, you ought to look at some case law, which is used so often, what a head fuck that can be. You have to prove beyond reasonable doubt every element of the crime committed and even then a jury can sometimes still rule in favour of the accused.And as for sentencing, you should sit there and hear the defence tell the judge how the offender is really the victim. A persons background is no excuse for violent actions against the vulnerable.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
I find this totally unbeleivable...especially knowing the laws surrounding manadory reporting that doctors and hospitals are subject to. There would also have been huge grounds for appeal due to conflicts of interest and the possibility that the judge to be stood down from the bench. Do not beleive everything you read on line. Quoting 'MrsPeachyPier'A foster-carer took charge of baby after his father died and the mother wasn't coping. The baby had frequent visits to the Dr in the 3 months he was in 'care'. One of the problems was hair loss and another was that she was unable to use her arm. During a visit to the hospital it was established she wasn't able to use her arm properly because she had a fracture of the type asssociated with child abuse but this was not followed up on. Visits to the mother were cancelled with claims the baby was sick. The baby was administered very strong pain relievers with a follow up script requested long before the first one should have run out. She died sitting in the baby seat while the carer ran errands. No trace of the pain relievers she was supposed to be on was found in her system. The coroner ruled her death a homocide and stated that she was tortured, the hair ripped from her head, her little body covered in bruises, the inside of her mouth covered in deep cuts.The carer was charged for neglect! 6 years (I think) was the sentence, reduced to 7 months after another hearing where the judge deemed the carers family had suffered enough.The case was judged by a friend of the carers family.Now go and steal a teller machine and see how harsh the sentence is. This is something the Mr and I were talking about recently.No I don't believe the case you mention above represents a fair sentence for the crime, but that is the same for many life changing crimes. Not so Peachy In theory, judges do not make the law but in reality they do influence the laws by following precedent. Nothing in life is fair. On the surface this seems a little unfair but as we do not have access to the legal brief, cases used for precedence or the Judges closing summary when sentencing we are not really in a position to say if what happened was just or not. The judge may have had to take into account a lot of extenuating circumstances. When deciding on sentence, it is not who is right or wrong in matters of law, it is a matter of who can argue thier case better. Who can find the stronger cases that have set precedence and can argue defence according to those cases. The legal system may not be fair, it may not be just but it is better than nothing. It is all we have so we need to just work with it.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
I've seen quite a few heart rending stories on facebook that people ask other poeple to share because they're looking for this and that person for doing this and that. I've found quite a few don't have any basis in reality when looked into deeper. I did quite a bit of study on baby Alissa including having a look at the snopes site who debunk myths. I found nothing to suggest this was anything but a real story based of facts. There is a facebook page for Alissa by people who are trying to to have the case looked into again. It contains copies of the death certificate and other paperwork in the notes section. Travesties of justice happen regularly, especially to those least capable of defending themselves. I can attest to that as a survivor of the 'care' system, I am one of 500,000 children who went through the 'care' system in a time period of four decades, google 'Forgotten Australians'. Fortunately there are many good people in that system who make a wonderful difference. It's up to each of us to look into things and not just take them at face value. Cheers, Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
VanDerbeck said at one point, according to the transcript. “I know Mr. Sprunger. He’s been on some boards with me — ah — the Council on Aging. We’ve sat next — together for several years. We’re just making the county safer for elderly citizens,” VanDerbeck continued during the hearing. “I know he’s got a good heart. … I think I went to a baseball game with him. So I wouldn’t do that, if they were bad people. But, still, something bad has happened.”
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Francis Joseph Grego, 69. He was sentenced in Western Australia to 8 yrs/6months jail in 2011 for 14 counts of incest on his two daughters, aged 8-14yrs, between 1977-1983. The girls came forward in 1983 and told a Dept of Child Protection worker along with their own mother Sandra Grego. The daughters claims went nowhere because Mrs Grego herself also worked for the Dept of Child Protection and defended her husband. The claims were dismissed. The case went nowhere and the girls were forced to stay living in the family home where Mr Grego had threatened to kill them, sexually assaulted and inflicted violence upon them hundreds of times. They eventually came forward again as adults in 2010 which led to the conviction of Mr Grego. However he is serving a substantially reduced sentence due to his age and claims of ill health. Mrs Sandra Grego was still working for the DCP in 2010 and was suspended from any duties and cases where she was required to directly liaise with at risk children and families.This information was care of WAtoday.com.au. It also appeared on the front page and page three of The West Australian newspaper. If something has gone to court and received news coverage in The West Australian, radio and tv news headlines or online then I am inclined to believe the information is correct.Just because a persons job title includes "Dept of Child Protection" doesn't mean they protect children!Similarly, just because someone is called a "carer" does not mean they care!!
-
RHP User
13 years ago
You cannot compare American legal systems to those here, very very different re - State V Sprunger.Here the Judge would have to excuse himself in those circumstances and would not have presided over the matter.Unfortunately Deepblue, it is not uncommon for the offenders wives to not only support their husbands but to also take the stand in defense of them and lie.Often they will blame the investigator somehow and they can become quite aggressive towards them.Age is a factor in sentencing as the state does not want the prison system to become an old peoples home, that's just how it is right or wrong.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Btw, your pics are gorgeous and love your profile. Yes, I know you're not looking for girls lol. I thought I'd add to my story that my foster-parents were swingers and my foster-mother went to DOCS and told them that after she left at my age of 10, she also told them he made her do it. I was still left in his 'care' for another 2 years. Going through the 'care' system is a lottery. Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Thanks Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Quoting 'MrsPeachyPier'Btw, your pics are gorgeous and love your profile. Yes, I know you're not looking for girls lol. have to agree.....but shhh....ok? lol
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Quoting 'mikeandshel' Quoting 'MrsPeachyPier'Btw, your pics are gorgeous and love your profile. Yes, I know you're not looking for girls lol. have to agree.....but shhh....ok? lol CHEEKY! Peachy <3 :-D xXx
-
RHP User
13 years ago
Someone i know who took her "Father" to task 35 years after the event(s) because her sister, similarly abused, wanted to pursue it. That bloke, late in his age, got 16 years just recently.It's easy to point the finger at an isolated incident. But that does not a trend make. I wonder how many fair and balanced sentences there are for every unfair one?
-
RHP User
13 years ago
But, as the Seven news reported during the week, the Australian ambassador to the Papacy did not list the Royal Commision as a priority issue to be under discussion. He rang back 12 hours later to say that he didn't understand the questions. A video of the interview is available online.In a lot of cases the statute of limitations comes into play. I read of a case during the week where after going through commital and commital to trial, the case was abruptly dropped and the only reason given was the statute of limitations. There is a transcript of the AM radio interview with Debra Wooby online.Lastly, a recent case involving a CLAN member that went to trial had it's sentencing a few weeks ago. The man was sentenced in Perth Didstrict Court for 24 crimes he committed on young girls and boys during a 15 year period in the 1960s and 1970s. The convicted mans age and ill health were taken into account which made him eligible for parole after serving 14 years. The sentence was backdated to 2011. This was a very exciting outcome.I'd like to know the stats too but at this point know that most cases don't even make it to court for many different reasons. Peachy
-
RHP User
13 years ago
I think you will find PP that their isn't any Statute of Limitations on child sex offenses in WA and indeed on most indictable offenses in the WA Criminal Code. It is not uncommon for victims of these offenses to come forward much later and what is generally a catalyst is when they have children of their own and the molester is still in their lives by way of being a family member or friend of the family and they don't want the scum around their own kids.What is crucial for the cases to be presented in court is corroborating evidence of the victims accusations and this can be acheived by proving the offender had the opportunity, ie- he admits he was often looking after the victims at the time of the complaint or that the victim told someone about what was happening when she was younger.These are difficult cases but with competent investigators they can be put before the court successfully.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
There are always two sides to every debate. Everyone has had personal experiences which have helped form the opinions they have today , myself included, BUT i get to see the other side of things. I have a close family member who is a Judge, and believe me he gets as frustrated as us over the penalties he can enforce at times! As someone said earlier, Judges have to know the laws, -they dont get to make them. He has often wanted to hand down more or less, but is bound by the laws in place, regardless of his personal opinion. I totally agree that sometimes you hear of crimes going seemingly unpunished, and others that are over the top, and yes that why we have appeals. Wild_n_trips, you have my vote, i too believe that in some cases of extreme reoffences such as rape/torture/murder where it is obvious the offender cannot or will not be rehabilitated, and we as tax payers will look after him for the rest of his miserable life, then yes do away with him, they are a burden on society.
-
Letsgetcrazy09
13 years ago
Ding makes a very valid point. Judges must hand down decisions based on the law. The fact our politicians have limited what can be handed down by enshrining it in Statute makes it difficult for them. Handing down decisions outside of these generally leads to appeals and further use of taxpayers money. Vagabond, your previous comment on there should be a law for questioning where there is unexplained wealth, there is, it comes under Asset Betterment Test under tax law. We need better collaboration between the departments, and being state and federal this could take some time.
-
RHP User
13 years ago
*WHY WAS CHRISTY NOT CHARGED WITH MURDER?* "...considering the case included no witnesses to the abuse, no confession and no murder weapon, and Shaffer had no criminal record — “not even a parking ticket” — the indictments and plea agreement were not out of line."-Prosecutor Wible HERE ARE 2 CASES IN THE SAME AREA- -Jon Flint is serving a 65-year sentence for murder and neglect of a dependent in a LaGrange County case several years ago in which he was convicted of killing his 15-month-old son, Jacob. All based on circumstantial evidence! -In 2010, a South Bend mother who also had no criminal record was sentenced to 30 years in prison for neglect of a dependent in the death of her 2-year-old daughter. Kristina Byers-Escobedo’s sentence was recently reduced to 20 years for failing to prevent her husband from abusing their daughter, Maya. Valentin Escobedo was convicted of battery in the girl’s death and sentenced to 53 years. Kristina Byers-Escobedo WITH NO PRIOR RECORD! WAS SENTENCED TO 20 YEARS FOR "FAILURE TO PREVENT ABUSE" Jon Flint WAS CONVICTED SOLELY ON CIRCUMSTANTIAL EVIDENCE So Mr.Wible? No confession? WHY WOULD SHE CONFESS?? SHE KNEW HER FREEDOM WASN'T IN JEOPARDY No weapon? HER HANDS WERE THE WEAPON No witnesses? REALLY? HOW MANY MURDERERS INVITE AN AUDIENCE TO WATCH??!
Boards
-
Hot Topics
Topics: 15100 Comments: 88169
-
Girls Ask
Topics: 1416 Comments: 10244
-
Guys Ask
Topics: 2520 Comments: 11716
-
Couples' Corner
Topics: 2503 Comments: 9781
-
Swingers Lifestyle
Topics: 998 Comments: 5067
-
Fetish & Fantasy
Topics: 1301 Comments: 5762
-
Hot Travel
Topics: 780 Comments: 1984
-
LGBT
Topics: 170 Comments: 869
Forum help
-
Something related with that
-
Going somewhere & want to hook up?
-
Hasn't that topic been posted before?
RHP's popular dating tool
-
Where the heck did that topic go?
Discover what RHP is doing offline
-
RHP member's RL secrets
reply
like
Share