Uh...........not really. Massachussets State Representative James Fagan is apparently a little displeased with the consideration by the Commonwealth of "Jessica's Law", a bill that would mandate automatic 20-year sentences without the possibility of parole for anyone convicted of raping a child under 12: http://www.bostonherald.com/news/regional/politics/view.bg?articleid=1102761. Well, he's actually more than a little displeased, because here's what he promised he would do to the victims when he go them on the stand (he was on the floor of the Assembly when he made this speech):
"When they're 8 years old they throw up; when they're 12 years old, they won't sleep; when they're 19 years old, they'll have nightmares and they'll never have a relationship with anybody."
What a swell guy!
3 comments:
Upholding this law should be litmus for any judicial appointee.
BTW, breaking news over at JZ.
That defense lawyer is scum. That said, why is it always a choice between mandatories and complete discretion? Why not set it up so it's mandatory unless certain specific criteria are met, consistent with societal and constitutional parameters? With a real structured and difficult procedure to get less than the mandatory. That way the judiciary retains some discretion, but the bar is set so high that virtually nobody can meet it. Mandatories in general have been a complete failure- jacking up prison populations, and deterring very few. And given the psychological profile of the child rapist, a 20 year mandatory won't deter any of them.
Post a Comment