Jeana (DP)
Former Member
Ella, please add a link to your post above. Thanks.
VT - Mark Hulett for raping young girl, Williston, 2005
- Thread starter PrayersForMaura
- Start date
KatherineQ
Former Member
- Joined
- Feb 8, 2005
- Messages
- 1,804
- Reaction score
- 45
I didn't see in the links how old the judge is - he does seem demented. Like he really isn't thinking rationally. It seems like after this decision, something will be done to monitor what's going on. Hopefully.
Maddy's Mom
And Caden's too!
- Joined
- Dec 1, 2004
- Messages
- 898
- Reaction score
- 0
I cannot believe this guy! A little girl was repeatedly raped for years and the monster gets TWO months?!?!? What is wrong with that judge? He MUST be demented! The judge believes the guy is a "low risk" for repeating. He repeated for FOUR YEARS!
That poor child. In 2 months she will be looking over her shoulder and living in fear because of not only the monster, but also the jerk judge who doesn't believe in punishment.
That poor child. In 2 months she will be looking over her shoulder and living in fear because of not only the monster, but also the jerk judge who doesn't believe in punishment.
BillyGoatGruff
New Member
- Joined
- Jul 1, 2005
- Messages
- 2,173
- Reaction score
- 10
The article states the sex offender program doesn't consider this guy as meeting their requirements for treatment, which is weird.
strach304
New Member
What planet is this judge from? The repeated rape of a 7 year old isn't considered a high risk offender? Rehabilitation of these offenders is an outdated theory anyway, it's been proven over and over again that they can't be reformed. At least if this judge had sentenced him to a long prison term he'd be off the streets and pose no threat to the public. As we've seen before in many cases his next victim may be murdered to cover up the crime, so fine judge you don't want to punish him? How about some consideration for the public's safety, ya know the ones who pay your salary :behindbar
well the judge knows releasing him in 60 days is his death sentence...
in jail they are protected from other prisoners, tossing them back on the streets allows for proper justice to happen.
The Judge is right, this move could save tax payers hundreds of thousands...
in jail they are protected from other prisoners, tossing them back on the streets allows for proper justice to happen.
The Judge is right, this move could save tax payers hundreds of thousands...
Jeana (DP)
Former Member
Rocky said:
:slap: :slap: :slap: :slap:
So, some citizen needs to commit a felony in order to stop this guy from molesting/raping children? The judge is not right and neither are you Rocky!
strach304
New Member
Rocky said:
Umm, like the vigilante that posed as an fbi agent and killled two pedophiles a few months ago?
Now we have to spend tax dollars to support him for what will probably be a life sentence. The whole point of imprisonment for cases like this isn't punishment in the usual sense because they know what they did and know they will do it again so the idea of punishment may not work but keeping these offenders off the street and away from the public would protect future victims. Steven Avery immediately comes to mind but there are so many more; Duncan, Carlie Brucia case, Jessica Lunsford just to name a few. If the judge has the mindset that prison as punishment doesn't work then how about castration? Also a more economical alternative.
mysteriew
A diamond in process
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 23,811
- Reaction score
- 818
Anyone here from Vermont?
A poster at Lost in Lima Ohio has posted a pretty terrible allegation about what has gone on with this child.
http://lostinlimaohio.blogspot.com/2006/01/cashmans-excuse.html#links
A poster at Lost in Lima Ohio has posted a pretty terrible allegation about what has gone on with this child.
http://lostinlimaohio.blogspot.com/2006/01/cashmans-excuse.html#links
Ae Judges not elected into their position. I am not sure of that, but I read somewhere that in some places they are.
Also I am SURE the prosecution is going to appeal the sentence and the appeals court most likely will subsitute a more fitting and proper sentence.
I am not sure in the USA if there are sentencing guidelines, but usually there are.
I agree, this guy needs to get off the bench it seems that he has more apathy for the criminal, then the young victim.
Usually when a person sympathizes with the criminal it could appear that he condones the behaviour............I wonder if this judge does not see the rape of a child as serious........
His bias is showing............
Also I am SURE the prosecution is going to appeal the sentence and the appeals court most likely will subsitute a more fitting and proper sentence.
I am not sure in the USA if there are sentencing guidelines, but usually there are.
I agree, this guy needs to get off the bench it seems that he has more apathy for the criminal, then the young victim.
Usually when a person sympathizes with the criminal it could appear that he condones the behaviour............I wonder if this judge does not see the rape of a child as serious........
His bias is showing............
lostinlimaohio
Inactive
First, I'm a bad registered user. I just snoop around reading what everyone says, and hardly ever make a post here.
However, this time I thought I would share Vermont laws since someone asked about sentencing guidelines. This monster was charged with "Aggravated sexual assault" and "Lewd or lascivious conduct with child".
Here is the Vermont law on those charges:
~~I'll retreat back to just reading everyone's posts now.
However, this time I thought I would share Vermont laws since someone asked about sentencing guidelines. This monster was charged with "Aggravated sexual assault" and "Lewd or lascivious conduct with child".
Here is the Vermont law on those charges:
By the way, thanks for linking my post, and if you haven't seen, the aunt visited again and verified that there is indeed another man with charges against him for raping this child. Cashman gave the public from Aug when he announced what he was considering as the sentence until now to show outrage, it's funny that the media waits until it is too late to step up and show enough anger, perhaps this sentence could have been avoided if there had been this much disdain showed in the begining. As we now know that there is a second person, who most likely will also be sentenced by Cashman- my personal spin is that we need to be prepared to fight him being on the bench for it, and if citizens can not get someone else to take over the case- make it known so that he is under to much pressure to pull this type of irresponsible sentencing again.
~~I'll retreat back to just reading everyone's posts now.
mysteriew
A diamond in process
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
- Messages
- 23,811
- Reaction score
- 818
lostinlimaohio said:
LOL Lost, thanks for the post. We don't call user's who don't post a bad registered poster, we call them 'lurker's", ROFL.
First of all, announcing the intended sentence and then waiting to see the public reaction is no excuse. That state set up mandatory sentencing guidelines. He is bound by the law as much as any other citizen. He should have been following the law! Will the prosecution be appealing this sentence?
And now we have a second perp coming up. Same girl, same offenses, same judge. Same sentence? This man who calls himself a judge, has to be stopped!
By the way, do you know how it came to be that this girl became the target of two sex offenders and assaults? Were they working together?
hoppyfrog
Retired WS Staff
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2005
- Messages
- 8,660
- Reaction score
- 249
Some judges ARE elected, and some are appointed.CyberLaw said:
Some of the judges who are appointed are appointed by an elected official, so putting the heat on the elected official who made that appointment might be a strategy.
lostinlimaohio
Inactive
It was clear that he wasn't going to change his mind alone- I just believe had the political officials and media that are now jumping all over this, had done so earlier- he could have been stopped before making the sentence official. Better to prevent than waiting around to treat an infection.
As for how these two monsters where able to do this, and whether they where working together- I'm hoping to gather a bit more information on that myself. Still haven't succeeded in tracking down who perp #2 is yet. But, I'll let you know when I get all the info.
Thank you for the information regarding the sentencing guidelines.
If the law states that that a crime is punishable by a minimum sentence of one year, then that is the law.
There is something called a Judicial Review Board. This board deals with serious complaints about judges. It is usually initiated by other judges who have serious concerns with another Judges behaviour. Lawyers have been known to get together and file a joint complaint also. But that is not as common.
I am sure someone will be reviewing sporadic cases and seeing if his sentencing is sound.
Also when, not if this hits the Vermont Court of Appeals, they will be adding their two cents.
The States interest prevail over a judges 'views" and bias.
It is not an easy procedure to have a judge removed. But he can be re-assigned to other branches of courts, say, like a civil court where he can do no harm.
I am sure this is not just going to be "O.K.". especially when he is on the bench and broke the law.
This decision can be seen as "condoning" the behaviour of the criminal and showing bias against sexual assult victims.
As a judge you have to be impartial, just the very fact that he says "I don't believe in punishment, it does not work anymore." Shows that he is not impartial and cannot make sound decisions based on the facts before him.
If a criminal is not punished for his crime, then what else is there.........
That is the point of the sentence to punish and deter any future offences. I agree punishment does not work. But often criminals just don't care, all they are concerned is not getting caught and getting off.
I would LOVE to hear this appeal....and the appeals judges decision.
Was this man convicted of both offences or just one.
His decision is not in the public interest, as people will see a child rapist on the street after 60 days, not behind bars for years.
Where was the outrage...........did people actually wait to see if he was going to do this. Were they waiting for the sentencing to show outrage.
If no one spoke up, if no showed outraged then this judge could see this as "agreeing" with his sentencing.
I don't have a crystal ball, but I can see this Judge having serious problems in the future.
I don't know about Vermont Law, but a Crown would have 30 days to appeal. I don't know why if this sentence was made public before it was handed down, why the prosecution did not make a motion or ask the Judge to recuse himself.
If the law states that that a crime is punishable by a minimum sentence of one year, then that is the law.
There is something called a Judicial Review Board. This board deals with serious complaints about judges. It is usually initiated by other judges who have serious concerns with another Judges behaviour. Lawyers have been known to get together and file a joint complaint also. But that is not as common.
I am sure someone will be reviewing sporadic cases and seeing if his sentencing is sound.
Also when, not if this hits the Vermont Court of Appeals, they will be adding their two cents.
The States interest prevail over a judges 'views" and bias.
It is not an easy procedure to have a judge removed. But he can be re-assigned to other branches of courts, say, like a civil court where he can do no harm.
I am sure this is not just going to be "O.K.". especially when he is on the bench and broke the law.
This decision can be seen as "condoning" the behaviour of the criminal and showing bias against sexual assult victims.
As a judge you have to be impartial, just the very fact that he says "I don't believe in punishment, it does not work anymore." Shows that he is not impartial and cannot make sound decisions based on the facts before him.
If a criminal is not punished for his crime, then what else is there.........
That is the point of the sentence to punish and deter any future offences. I agree punishment does not work. But often criminals just don't care, all they are concerned is not getting caught and getting off.
I would LOVE to hear this appeal....and the appeals judges decision.
Was this man convicted of both offences or just one.
His decision is not in the public interest, as people will see a child rapist on the street after 60 days, not behind bars for years.
Where was the outrage...........did people actually wait to see if he was going to do this. Were they waiting for the sentencing to show outrage.
If no one spoke up, if no showed outraged then this judge could see this as "agreeing" with his sentencing.
I don't have a crystal ball, but I can see this Judge having serious problems in the future.
I don't know about Vermont Law, but a Crown would have 30 days to appeal. I don't know why if this sentence was made public before it was handed down, why the prosecution did not make a motion or ask the Judge to recuse himself.