Page 1 of 1
Child rapist gets 60 days, judge says punishment not the ans
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:37 am
by Chris Luva Luva
http://www.wcax.com/Global/story.asp?S=4319605&nav=4QcT
There was outrage Wednesday when a Vermont judge handed out a 60-day jail sentence to a man who raped a little girl many,many times over a four-year span starting when she was seven.
The judge said he no longer believes in punishment and is more concerned about rehabilitation.
Prosecutors argued that confessed child-rapist Mark Hulett, 34, of Williston deserved at least eight years behind bars for repeatedly raping a littler girl countless times starting when she was seven.
But Judge Edward Cashman disagreed explaining that he no longer believes that punishment works.
"The one message I want to get through is that anger doesn't solve anything. It just corrodes your soul," said Judge Edward Cashman speaking to a packed Burlington courtroom. Most of the on-lookers were related to a young girl who was repeatedly raped by Mark Hulett who was in court to be sentenced.
The sex abuse started when the girl was seven and ended when she was ten. Prosecutors were seeking a sentence of eight to twenty years in prison, in part, as punishment.
"Punishment is a valid purpose," Chittenden Deputy Prosecutor Nicole Andreson argued to Judge Edward Cashman.
"The state recognizes that the court may not agree or subscribe to that method of sentencing but the state does. The state thinks that it is a very important factor for the court to consider," Andreson added.
But Judge Cashman explained that he is more concerned that Hulett receive sex offender treatment as rehabilitation. But under Department of Corrections classification, Hulett is considered a low-risk for re-offense so he does not qualify for in-prison treatment.So the judge sentenced him to just 60 days in prison and then Hulett must complete sex treatment when he gets out or face a possible life sentence.
Judge Cashman also also revealed that he once handed down stiff sentences when he first got on the bench 25 years ago, but he no longer believes in punishment.
"I discovered it accomplishes nothing of value;it doesn't make anything better;it costs us a lot of money; we create a lot of expectation, and we feed on anger,"Cashman explained to the people in the court.
The sentence outraged the victim's family who asked not to be identified.
"I don't like it," the victim's mother,in tears, told Channel 3. "He should pay for what he did to my baby and stop it here. She's not even home with me and he can be home for all this time, and do what he did in my house," she added.
Hulett -- who had been out on bail-- was taken away to start his sentence immediately.
Discuss...
I believe that people can be rehabilitated and can move onto healthy lives but 60 days is entirely too short.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 5:36 am
by SkinsChic
I believe he should be put in a room with the child'a parents for 24 hours ! That should cure him.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 7:25 am
by Fios
... while he's handcuffed and the child's parents are given a selection of blunt objects and a pair of shears
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:39 am
by Justice Hog
If I were that child's parent, I have a feeling that I would soon be looking at a murder charge myself. This is freakin' rediculous. I hate to wish any ill will on someone, but I would love for this judge's wife/daughter/neice to be sodomized by a deranged knucklehead and **THEN** ask this guy what the appropriate punishment should be.
This guy should not be a judge, IMO.
Oh...and before all of you hit me for having this attitude as a new defense attorney, I have decided that I will not represent SEX OFFENDERS no matter how poor I am. I just can't bring myself to represent such low-life people....sorry.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:51 am
by Fios
As an overarching philosophy I support a move toward a greater reliance on treatment and rehabilitation rather than the system of revolving prison doors we have in place now but that doesn't negate the need for punishment in any way. This person is guilty of a crime and should be punished for it.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 9:08 am
by JansenFan
Justice Hog wrote:Oh...and before all of you hit me for having this attitude as a new defense attorney, I have decided that I will not represent SEX OFFENDERS no matter how poor I am. I just can't bring myself to represent such low-life people....sorry.
What if they're innocent?
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 11:45 am
by Redskins Rule
You guys seem pretty pissed by this sentence and rightfully so. To make all of you feel better, I did hear of this one guy doing the same thing and got just 30 days in prison for his crime. The Warden told pretty much the whole prison the crime this guy committed........He was dead in two days. Noone knew who did it. Lets hope the prisoners do their "rehabilitation" on this guy! That piece of crap should not be walking this earth! How the heck can you do something like that to a child? Piece of crap deserves to die!
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 1:09 pm
by Irn-Bru
I feel so terrible for that little girl. No matter what punishment that guy gets, she has to face the rest of her life trying to recover from what he did.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 4:42 pm
by DESkins
When someone can show me an actual, proven, effective rehabilitation program for pedophiles, then I'd consider rehab AFTER punishment. Otherwise, I'll stick to the tested and true assessment of pedophiles, the only "cured" pedophile is a dead pedophile.
Posted: Fri Jan 06, 2006 8:00 pm
by Warmother
I think that the judge should have to live with this piece of crap until he is rehabilitated. Then give the turd to the girls parents.
Posted: Sat Jan 07, 2006 12:34 am
by Justice Hog
JansenFan wrote:What if they're innocent?
Let em get a different attorney to worry about that. I won't. For personal reasons (which I won't get into right now...but you can PM if you're overly curious and I'll tell you), I will never in my life represent a sex offender whether they claim innocence or not.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 11:30 am
by JansenFan
No, I was just asking.
It's not like I'm supportive of them. I was just curious.
I'm with the several on here, that if this happened to Jackson and the guy got six months, his life expectancy would be 6 months and 1 day.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 11:58 am
by UK Skins Fan
So it's not just the UK that has fuzzy headed liberal judges more concerned with making a name for themselves than dispensing justice? I seriously think that some of these people pass these judgements because they like to become celebrity judges.
It seems to me that the judiciary in general (certainly in the UK) is becoming increasingly distant from society in general. They are of the opinion that their job is to protect the offender from society, as much as to protect society form the offender. This elitist nonsense conveniently ignores the fact that the job of the judiciary is surely to uphold the laws of the land; laws which have been passed by the representatives of the people?
I doubt that it is possible to rehabilitate a paedophile. It can certainly be argued that they suffer from a condition that they did not choose, but then that would be equating paedophilia with alcoholism. Many years ago, people like this would have been castrated and flogged, and I personally think that is an entirely civilised way to go about justice, in this case.
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 12:04 pm
by BossHog
Justice Hog wrote:JansenFan wrote:What if they're innocent?
Let em get a different attorney to worry about that. I won't. For personal reasons (which I won't get into right now...but you can PM if you're overly curious and I'll tell you), I will never in my life represent a sex offender whether they claim innocence or not.
Don't you take an oath that says that you WON'T do that?
2. Compassion. Compassion requires respect for the personal dignity of all persons. In that connection, a lawyer should treat all persons, including adverse lawyers and parties, fairly and equitably and refrain from acting upon or manifesting racial, gender or other bias or prejudice toward any participant in the legal process.
-- PRINCIPLES OF PROFESSIONALISM FOR DELAWARE LAWYERS
Posted: Sun Jan 08, 2006 2:26 pm
by NikiH
DESkins wrote:When someone can show me an actual, proven, effective rehabilitation program for pedophiles, then I'd consider rehab AFTER punishment. Otherwise, I'll stick to the tested and true assessment of pedophiles, the only "cured" pedophile is a dead pedophile.
This is actually a scientficially proven theory. I am a very passionate person and if this happened to my child I would want to hurt someone but my motherly instincts would come out and I'd be more concerned with nuturing and protecting my child.
People who offend in this nature always have an excuse for their actions and they do it again and again with different excuses. I think as a whole the justice system has to do something. We need to find not only punishment more fitting to the crime in these cases but we strongly need to consider the fact that these people do not recover, they become remorseful after the fact and guilt keeps them from reoffending for a while, however, in the long run it's been proven they cannot make a break from this type of behavior.
And Justice, you are obviously in the wrong profession. Yes it's hard to justify representing pedophiles but rapists, murders, .....etc., are all capable of telling you they are innocent until you've proven otherwise. In my opinion, and no offense intending, lawyers are all masters of deception and lying and if you're not capable then perhaps you should try a different profession. I'm not directing this comment at you but I've worked in several places where I have daily interactions with a lot of lawyers and that's the impression I've gotten on a larger scale.