Originally Posted By bboisvert <<Plus wouldnt he hood be a violation of their dress code?>> Not sure. I think they just look for long haired hippies.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>He should have never been out in the first place. Bottom line, this judge *bleeped* up.<< The judge could have sentenced him to a longer term, but there would have been no requirement for treatment for the guy - and he would have gotten out of jail earlier. And the judge felt that without treatment, the guy would offend again. But the judge's sentence forced the guy to get treatment OR be in jail for the rest of his life. The guy was still convicted and was on a pretty strict probation. The 60 day sentence was the only way the guy could get treatment. "That 60-day sentence came with lots of conditions. Hulett got up to 10 years on the first count, three years to life on the second count and two to five years on the third count. While all three of those sentences were suspended, Hulett got what amounts to a lifetime sentence of probation." What's best? Put him in jail knowing that he'll never get treatment and that one day he'll be back on the streets, or put him on probation under the condition that he gets treatment? Is the point to lock him away for a couple of years, or to try to make it so he isn't a threat anymore?
Originally Posted By cmpaley This whole episode shows that the right-wing media can't be trusted with the facts because they always leave something essential to getting to the truth out. Is it any woner why our country is where it is today? People don't want to THINK anymore, just go along with what they're told and OBEY.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>People don't want to THINK anymore, just go along with what they're told and OBEY.<< That's why liberals don't win any elections.
Originally Posted By cmpaley >>Is the point to lock him away for a couple of years, or to try to make it so he isn't a threat anymore?<< The poster who is being asked this has already said "once a child molester, always a child molester."
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<What's best? Put him in jail knowing that he'll never get treatment and that one day he'll be back on the streets, or put him on probation under the condition that he gets treatment? Is the point to lock him away for a couple of years, or to try to make it so he isn't a threat anymore?>> I don't want his kind out at all. I want him back in the general prison population and then let them know what this guy did. Because from what I've heard, and I have a family member serving a prison term, the general population is very hard on those pieces of crap.
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<The poster who is being asked this has already said "once a child molester, always a child molester.">> Yes that's is exactly how I feel, I can never forgive someone for hurting a child like this. To me that is the most despicable thing ever. To me there on the same level as a terrorist.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>I don't want his kind out at all. I want him back in the general prison population and then let them know what this guy did. Because from what I've heard, and I have a family member serving a prison term, the general population is very hard on those pieces of crap.<< That's great, and you're entitled to your opinion. And in essence I agree. But the judge is bound by the sentencing laws and corrections laws of his state. Why blame the judge for the laws that he is bound by?
Originally Posted By Shooba Brave TomSawyer. Some nice investigative reporting there. I can't decide if it's sad or funny, that people can have the reality of this decision presented clear as day, and still continue to rant and rave as if the judge has just tossed a child molester back on the street.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Thanks, Shooba. I think the first rule is: Bill O'Reilly is not a reliable source of information. ALWAYS double check what he says before you believe it.
Originally Posted By imadisneygal "Bill O'Reilly is not a reliable source of information. ALWAYS double check what he says before you believe it." While I agree with this wholeheartedly, I think we should double check anything that ANYONE says before believing it. "No spin" my Aunt Fanny! Everyone spins - generally the facts are wholly boring.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer Good point, wonderingalice - it's so easy to go to primary sources these days.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan Bill O'Reilly reminds me sometimes of Leslie Nielsen's character Frank Drebin in the Police Squad movies... Mayor: Now Drebin, I don't want any trouble like you had on the South Side like last year, that's my policy. Frank: Well, when I see five weirdos dressed in togas, stabbing a man in the middle of the park in front of a full view of 100 people, I shoot the (censored), that's my policy. Mayor: That was a Shakespeare In The Park Production of Julius Caesar, you moron! You killed five actors! Good ones!
Originally Posted By DDMAN26 <<But the judge is bound by the sentencing laws and corrections laws of his state. Why blame the judge for the laws that he is bound by?>> Then the people of Vermont should do everything to get this law changed. And if I were the judge, I would step back and take a look at these laws and realize the law is not right.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe I guess no one saw the factor as the AG for the state embarrassed himself and the state of Vt. by saying that people should NOT protest! Scary but I'm sure people will defend the NO-ACTION has been taken truth by claiming that it's been filed which does NOTHING until it's passed. Like Beau, I come from WACKO Massachusetts where we have to protect our own children and not rely upon the likes of Ted Kennedy to effect positive change. Perpetrators come first to so many people it's scary. I DON'T care about rehabbing child molesters as the recidism rate is almost 99%. I don't want treatment. I want them AWAY from my kids PERIOD! with NO chance of coming back to ruin more kids' lives.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >>Then the people of Vermont should do everything to get this law changed<< You mean like having the legislature bring up legislation to change the law?
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "I don't want treatment. I want them AWAY from my kids PERIOD! with NO chance of coming back to ruin more kids' lives." I can understand the sentiment to a point, but what you want is flat out never going to happen. The penal system, especially with these types of crimes, considers rehabilitation a fundamental element.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer >> Scary but I'm sure people will defend the NO-ACTION has been taken truth by claiming that it's been filed which does NOTHING until it's passed.<< You do understand that we live in a democracy, don't you? That the way we make laws or impeach people is guided by something more than mob rule?
Originally Posted By FaMulan I hope the new law is passed, I hope this rapist gets the treatment, I hope it works, I also hope his sentence is amended to where he has to pay for the lifetime of therapy that little girl is going to need to live a somewhat normal life.
