BigBadBrian
06-02-2006, 05:04 PM
Too short for prison?
Jun 1, 2006
by Dave Cloud
Every time you think that irresponsible judges couldn’t possibly do anything else to show more concern for perpetrators than their victims, a jurist possessing a “uniquely enhanced” sense of justice raises the bar. The state of Nebraska was home to the most recent example of this just last week, with the sentencing of a man convicted of child molestation.
In this case, Cheyenne County District Judge Kristine Cecava decided that 50-year old Richard Thompson, a 5-foot-1 man who had repeated sexual contact with a 12-year old girl over a two month period, was simply too short to face the rigors of prison as punishment for his two felony sexual assault convictions. Judge Cecava felt that, since he is so diminutive, it would be “dangerous” to send Thompson to prison.
Apparently Judge Cecava’s special sense of judgment does not include asking the opinion of Nebraska’s prison system administrators. “He’s not the shortest guy we have in prison,” said system spokesman Steve King. “We’ve got people from all ages, physical stature of all sizes, in general population.” King also added that Nebraska’s prisons offer protection options in for inmates who feel threatened, but said that no one had ever requested them due to height-related fears.
Instead of 10 years in prison for molesting the pre-teen girl, Thompson received 10 years of probation with mandatory electronic monitoring for the first 4 months. He is also barred from being alone with any child under 18 (too bad he hadn’t been told that earlier!), and he can’t live with or marry any woman with children who are minors. Finally, in a move undoubtedly designed to show that she was not coddling the convict, the judge ordered Thompson to dispose of all of his pornography. Ouch.
How far from the real world is Judge Cecava’s ruling? Even the American Civil Liberties Union, hardly a voice for victims’ rights, was puzzled by the decision. “I have never heard of anything like this before,” said the legal director of the ACLU’s Nebraska chapter, pointing out that nothing in the U.S. or Nebraska Constitution provides protections based on physical size—although Judge Cecava clearly believes that her personal opinion outweighs those apparently superfluous documents.
This begs the question of what, in Judge Cecava’s pseudo-enlightened opinion, the minimum height for a child molester to be imprisoned actually is. Of course, in the quest for “true justice,” such restrictions as the Constitution and the welfare of other children in the community can’t be taken into account; after all, there is a criminal who may be in danger here! And why stop with just height? Does the judge also have a minimum weight for prisoners in mind? Surely a 100 lb. offender would be hard-pressed to mount a vigorous physical defense in prison. Should bantamweight molesters also receive a pass?
Remember the cutout figures amusement parks use to determine if a rider is tall enough to ride a roller coaster or drive the bumper cars? With this ruling, it appears as though it might be appropriate for Cheyenne County law enforcement to get some of those, just to make sure that all of their arrestees are above the legal height limit for jail. The police could put vertically challenged criminals up against the measuring standard, and could just toss those who are below the limit back out into society. Problem solved! But wait—what about a tall, heavy individual who is extremely weak? Perhaps a session in the weight room to determine a felon’s maximum bench press should be part of a pre-sentencing report, as well. The possibilities for leniency, as defense attorneys must be giddily hoping, are limitless.
Nebraska's attorney general has promised to appeal the leniency of this sentence. He must hope that the appeal will be heard by judges who are admittedly not as gifted and insightful as Judge Cecava—but who instead realize that they are actually supposed to rely on the rule of law when making judgments. The big question now facing Nebraska’s citizens is whether Kristine Cecava is too short on common sense to be allowed to serve the remainder of her term as a criminal court judge.
Link (http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/Dave%20Cloud/2006/06/01/199370.html)
Jun 1, 2006
by Dave Cloud
Every time you think that irresponsible judges couldn’t possibly do anything else to show more concern for perpetrators than their victims, a jurist possessing a “uniquely enhanced” sense of justice raises the bar. The state of Nebraska was home to the most recent example of this just last week, with the sentencing of a man convicted of child molestation.
In this case, Cheyenne County District Judge Kristine Cecava decided that 50-year old Richard Thompson, a 5-foot-1 man who had repeated sexual contact with a 12-year old girl over a two month period, was simply too short to face the rigors of prison as punishment for his two felony sexual assault convictions. Judge Cecava felt that, since he is so diminutive, it would be “dangerous” to send Thompson to prison.
Apparently Judge Cecava’s special sense of judgment does not include asking the opinion of Nebraska’s prison system administrators. “He’s not the shortest guy we have in prison,” said system spokesman Steve King. “We’ve got people from all ages, physical stature of all sizes, in general population.” King also added that Nebraska’s prisons offer protection options in for inmates who feel threatened, but said that no one had ever requested them due to height-related fears.
Instead of 10 years in prison for molesting the pre-teen girl, Thompson received 10 years of probation with mandatory electronic monitoring for the first 4 months. He is also barred from being alone with any child under 18 (too bad he hadn’t been told that earlier!), and he can’t live with or marry any woman with children who are minors. Finally, in a move undoubtedly designed to show that she was not coddling the convict, the judge ordered Thompson to dispose of all of his pornography. Ouch.
How far from the real world is Judge Cecava’s ruling? Even the American Civil Liberties Union, hardly a voice for victims’ rights, was puzzled by the decision. “I have never heard of anything like this before,” said the legal director of the ACLU’s Nebraska chapter, pointing out that nothing in the U.S. or Nebraska Constitution provides protections based on physical size—although Judge Cecava clearly believes that her personal opinion outweighs those apparently superfluous documents.
This begs the question of what, in Judge Cecava’s pseudo-enlightened opinion, the minimum height for a child molester to be imprisoned actually is. Of course, in the quest for “true justice,” such restrictions as the Constitution and the welfare of other children in the community can’t be taken into account; after all, there is a criminal who may be in danger here! And why stop with just height? Does the judge also have a minimum weight for prisoners in mind? Surely a 100 lb. offender would be hard-pressed to mount a vigorous physical defense in prison. Should bantamweight molesters also receive a pass?
Remember the cutout figures amusement parks use to determine if a rider is tall enough to ride a roller coaster or drive the bumper cars? With this ruling, it appears as though it might be appropriate for Cheyenne County law enforcement to get some of those, just to make sure that all of their arrestees are above the legal height limit for jail. The police could put vertically challenged criminals up against the measuring standard, and could just toss those who are below the limit back out into society. Problem solved! But wait—what about a tall, heavy individual who is extremely weak? Perhaps a session in the weight room to determine a felon’s maximum bench press should be part of a pre-sentencing report, as well. The possibilities for leniency, as defense attorneys must be giddily hoping, are limitless.
Nebraska's attorney general has promised to appeal the leniency of this sentence. He must hope that the appeal will be heard by judges who are admittedly not as gifted and insightful as Judge Cecava—but who instead realize that they are actually supposed to rely on the rule of law when making judgments. The big question now facing Nebraska’s citizens is whether Kristine Cecava is too short on common sense to be allowed to serve the remainder of her term as a criminal court judge.
Link (http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/Dave%20Cloud/2006/06/01/199370.html)