# too short for prison!



## mrhnau (May 26, 2006)

I just read this and could not believe it. How on earth could this be construed as justice?


> A judge's decision to sentence a 5-foot-1 man to probation instead of prison for sexually assaulting a child has angered crime victim advocates who say the punishment sends the wrong message.





> Thompson, 50, had sexual contact over a couple of months last year with a 12-year-old girl, said Sidney Police Chief Larry Cox. He was sentenced on two felony sexual assault charges


----------



## Makalakumu (May 26, 2006)

mrhnau said:
			
		

> I just read this and could not believe it. How on earth could this be construed as justice?


 
Yeah, that's BS.  I can't beleive that a judge would take something like that into account when sentancing for a crime like this.  Their is a weird irony to all of this that is pretty disturbing.  This man sexually assaults a child and is protected (I'm assuming) because his height would make him a target for the same in prison.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 26, 2006)

This is BS.

So I am guessing if your 7 foot tall and get a parking ticket in Lincoln Nebraska you get life.

Throw the guy off the bench.


----------



## tshadowchaser (May 26, 2006)

so my question is is there a prison for midgets or those under 5 foot or do these people get away with just probation all the time
No disrepect to those mentioned above intended


----------



## Carol (May 26, 2006)

Wow.  I'm 5' 1" - what can I get away with?  

Just kidding...


----------



## terryl965 (May 26, 2006)

The judge needs to be re-avaluated and reaasigned to prison himself.
Terry


----------



## michaeledward (May 26, 2006)

I wonder why the judge does not feel the prison is a safe environment. Does that say anything about the criminal justice system in the country?


----------



## Blotan Hunka (May 26, 2006)

Yeah, its full of violent scumbags.


----------



## shesulsa (May 26, 2006)

tshadowchaser said:
			
		

> so my question is is there a prison for midgets or those under 5 foot



Sure there is - juvey/youth authority.  However, I don't think what happened to Dahmer in prison would happen to this guy in the youth authority.



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> I wonder why the judge does not feel the prison is a safe environment. Does that say anything about the criminal justice system in the country?



Why is it, also, that we're concerned about sending criminals to dangerous places?


----------



## Kacey (May 26, 2006)

I heard this story this morning on the radio; the DJs' opinions seemed to echo those already stated, and my opinion as well.  If this... uh... person... (so to speak) didn't want to risk prison, then he should have left little girls alone.  For the judge to use this offender's size as a reason to not imprison him leaves me wondering about the judge.


----------



## modarnis (May 26, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I wonder why the judge does not feel the prison is a safe environment. Does that say anything about the criminal justice system in the country?


 
I think it says far more about the type of criminals in the country than the system itself.  Certainly the inner workings of the prison system are outside a judge's scope of knowledge or authority.  That is why state's have correction departments to oversee and administer the inmates.  They consider things like age, gang affiliation, escape risk, and nature of offense in deciding how to best incarcerate a prisoner.

It also speaks volumes that a population of violent and predatory offenders view child sex offenders so dimly.  When people who kill, rape, carjack or whatever think something is reprehensible, you would hope a judge would too.  Call me glib, but if you avoid having illegal sexual contact with children, you needn't worry about being treated poorly in prison, regardless of your size


----------



## michaeledward (May 26, 2006)

shesulsa said:
			
		

> Why is it, also, that we're concerned about sending criminals to dangerous places?


 
Because the State is operating that prison system in our names. If it is a dangerous place, do you want your tax dollars supporting it? 

Or do we just want to escalate every criminal offense to a capital crime, and execute people upon conviction? You know, the way they do in Saudia Arabia, or Afghanistan under the Taliban.


----------



## Don Roley (May 26, 2006)

Well, if we want to make prisons safer for child molestors, we are going to have to try to attract a better class of criminals.....  

Either that or solitary confinement for their entire sentence.


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 26, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Because the State is operating that prison system in our names. If it is a dangerous place, do you want your tax dollars supporting it?
> 
> Or do we just want to escalate every criminal offense to a capital crime, and execute people upon conviction? You know, the way they do in Saudia Arabia, or Afghanistan under the Taliban.


 
That's quite an all or nothing leap. 

And no they don't execute everyone for every crime in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan. 

Prisons are dangerous because dangerous people are put in them to keep them away from the rest of society, which they have or would haved harm. What was the saying, "Don't do the crime if you can't do the time"

What would you solution be, I am very curious to hear it?


----------



## modarnis (May 26, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> That's quite an all or nothing leap.
> 
> And no they don't execute everyone for every crime in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan.
> 
> ...


 

Nor does every criminal conviciton in the US result in a prison sentence.


----------



## bydand (May 26, 2006)

Maybe because I have kids myself, but using his height to give him probation for this act should be seen as ludicrus by anyone with brains.  As for prisons being a violent place, well HELLO!!!!!!!! it's prison, not a country club.  If you want peace and contentment, join a spa; if you want to molest children, get ready to face a violent and dangerous place.  Personally I would order implants and a long flowing blond wig for him before sending him away.  Guess that makes me an evil person also, but hey, mess with a kid like that and *NO* punishment is to harsh.  Send a strong message and maybe someone who is borderline will think twice about following throught with their "desires."  Slap them on the wrist with restrictions for 4 months and then probation and ....


----------



## michaeledward (May 26, 2006)

If the State is going to deprive a convicted person of liberty, does not the State have an obligation to the conditions in which that person is held during his detainment? 

The answer to that question is Yes.

Even if one were to view the prison system in this country strictly as a place of punishment, and not rehabilitation, there are ethical obligations demanded of the society that administers that punishment. Some may just want the convicted person to go 'Away', and the key destroyed. But even this does not absolve the imprisoners from their ethical custodianship.

If the environment of detention is beyond the measure of the sentence, we as society are meeting out un-just, justice. If the convicted person sentenced to 10 years in prison, but the true sentence is death at the hands of fellow convicts, we have failed in administration of our Justice system. 

Although solutions to this problem are difficult to come by, there are some ideas that could be implemented. Release all non-violent detainees. Bring down prison populations. Decriminalize drugs. Getting a bit more drastic, we might consider segregating inmates by race.

I offer no apologies for the actions of this man. That a judge feels our criminal justice system is not safe for the convicted, when there are more than 2,000,000 Americans in jail, speaks, unfortunately, to a much larger problem than the sexual abuse of the minor child.


----------



## Don Roley (May 26, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> Although solutions to this problem are difficult to come by, there are some ideas that could be implemented. Release all non-violent detainees. Bring down prison populations. Decriminalize drugs. Getting a bit more drastic, we might consider segregating inmates by race.



Everything aside from segregation is just silly IMO.

Every so often there is a call to decrease prison populations by only detaining those that commit violent criminals.

Well, do you want this guy to walk free? It is technically sexual assault- but the circumstances seem to point to no actual violence being used. It was over a couple of months. 

And I can tell you that there are things that are not violent, but are worse than beating someone up. There are people out there that have commited suicide because they were taken in by con men. There are con men who specialize in targeting the elderly. There are people who will come into your house and take everything you have.

If we don't put these folks behind bars, what kind of deterent do we have to stop them?

The legalization of drugs is another debate. But you might want to look into how many people are in prison on drug charges but were originally charged with something much more vile. Plea barganing kind of skews the numbers a bit. 

And if we do not put people in prison for anything other than violent crimes and legalize all drugs, then what are we going to do with all the break- ins commited by people hooked on crack? Hit them with fines when they don't have any money?

You might want to put the guys in cells large enough for them to lay down on a mat, with water taps and a window to put food through and then leave them there for their entire sentence. As long as you have prisoners interacting with other prisoners, there will be race wars, rapes and killing of child molestors behind prison. If we care about the safety of the criminals, then this is what we should do. But some would say that is inhumane punishment. :idunno:


----------



## Makalakumu (May 26, 2006)

I see the point you are trying to make, Mike, but I gotta wonder...is any prison anywhere in the world pleasent?  Maybe this is a place where the ideal and reality just do not mix well.  A little guy who rapes children surrounded in an environment filled with other predators is never going to fare well.


----------



## BrandiJo (May 27, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> I see the point you are trying to make, Mike, but I gotta wonder...is any prison anywhere in the world pleasent?  Maybe this is a place where the ideal and reality just do not mix well.  A little guy who rapes children surrounded in an environment filled with other predators is never going to fare well.



well maybe it will make him think how a child would feel with an adult aproaching him with simler intentions in mind? 

I think getting out of jail time is totaly wrong, if you cant do the time dont do the crime.


----------



## michaeledward (May 27, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> I see the point you are trying to make, Mike, but I gotta wonder...is any prison anywhere in the world pleasent?


 
I am not expecting 'pleasant'. 

Society is taking an action to restrict this person liberty. Society is taking control of when the detained can eat, sleep, ****, shower, and shave. There is nothing the incarcerated can do without our approval. Ethically, society has a responsibility for the safety of the incarcerated during that time we are restricting them. 

I am reminded of Father Geoghan. He died at the hands of a fellow inmate, Joseph Druce. Mr. Geoghan did not receive a sentence of death from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.


----------



## Drac (May 27, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Yeah, that's BS. I can't beleive that a judge would take something like that into account when sentancing for a crime like this. Their is a weird irony to all of this that is pretty disturbing. This man sexually assaults a child and is protected (I'm assuming) because his height would make him a target for the same in prison.


 
I'm with you this..So he'd be a target to the same suffering that he visited on children??? *T.F.B.*


----------



## Makalakumu (May 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I am not expecting 'pleasant'.
> 
> Society is taking an action to restrict this person liberty. Society is taking control of when the detained can eat, sleep, ****, shower, and shave. There is nothing the incarcerated can do without our approval. Ethically, society has a responsibility for the safety of the incarcerated during that time we are restricting them.
> 
> I am reminded of Father Geoghan. He died at the hands of a fellow inmate, Joseph Druce. Mr. Geoghan did not receive a sentence of death from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.


 
I'm not even sure "safe" is a reasonable expectation.  My uncle works in Oak Park Heights maximum security prison and they do some innovating and revolutionary things to reform inmates.  This prison was featured in a Discovery Channel special as a model for the entire country.  

For many their programming is successful, but for some, they are just too violent or disturbed or whatever and they will find ways to hurt other people no matter how you sit their and watch them.  My uncle says that these people dream about this stuff and plan it for months, taking small steps toward performing their act and then BAM!

With these folks, I suppose we could stop this by throwing them in a hole and throwing away the key, but that is against the law.  So, it becomes a tradeoff...the chronic violent offenders rights or the safety of the other inmates.  It's like one of those mobius loops that you can't escape.

I think that if our prison system had less people in it, they would be safer more functional institutions...and they probably would reform more people.  To do that, however, we are going to need better social programming in this country, free education, health care, more housing, etc...


----------



## modarnis (May 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I am not expecting 'pleasant'.
> 
> Society is taking an action to restrict this person liberty. Society is taking control of when the detained can eat, sleep, ****, shower, and shave. There is nothing the incarcerated can do without our approval. Ethically, society has a responsibility for the safety of the incarcerated during that time we are restricting them.
> 
> I am reminded of Father Geoghan. He died at the hands of a fellow inmate, Joseph Druce. Mr. Geoghan did not receive a sentence of death from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.


 
In an abstract sense society meets or exceeds those ethical obligations.  We house, feed, cloth, and provide medical care for incarcerated persons.  Here in Connecticut (along with Louisiana where I have first hand knowledge) when an accused is sent from court to prison, the mittimus (document or writ that authorizes their transport) reflects any special concerns the court or defendant's attorney may have.  These include mental health care, medical treatment, prescribed medications, suicide watch, or segregation by age.

In a practical sense, without housing all convicted criminals in supermax style institutions with 23 hour a day lockdowns, with the only contact with other inmates through a kennel type dog run,  assuring the absolute safety of a prison population is virtually impossible.  

In an equally persuasive ethical analysis, the welfare and needs of a majority of inmates seems to prevail.  Segregation type lockdown causes significant mental health issues and is a huge financial burden on taxpayers.

Society also has an ethical interest in protecting the majority of citizens from the misdeeds of others. Actions have consequences.  A simple way to avoid prison is to not commit serious crimes.


----------



## Drac (May 27, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> My uncle says that these people dream about this stuff and plan it for months, taking small steps toward performing their act and then BAM!


 
Your Uncle is correct...At a police conference a few years ago we saw a video taken off a surveilence camera in a prison yard of 2 inmates practice ways to defeat being handcuffed from every position imaginable...


----------



## Makalakumu (May 27, 2006)

Drac said:
			
		

> Your Uncle is correct...At a police conference a few years ago we saw a video taken off a surveilence camera in a prison yard of 2 inmates practice ways to defeat being handcuffed from every position imaginable...


 
Jeez, its like a kata list...


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 27, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> I am not expecting 'pleasant'.
> 
> Society is taking an action to restrict this person liberty.


 
And why did society restrict the person in prisons liberty? Was it because they were selling ice cr&#232;me from an ice cr&#232;me truck? No. Although it could be because they took a gun out and stole money from an ice cr&#232;me truck. 

IF a person can be rehabilitated, great I am all for it. However Child molesters, at least so far, have never been successfully rehabilitated. And speaking as a parent in the case of a child molester... hangins to good for him. So I am not exactly concerned about his prison stay being pleasant.



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> Society is taking control of when the detained can eat, sleep, ****, shower, and shave. There is nothing the incarcerated can do without our approval. Ethically, society has a responsibility for the safety of the incarcerated during that time we are restricting them.


 
They gave up many of the rights most free people have when they committed the crime that got them placed in prison.

Many of the inmates in prison eat better and are healthier in prison than out of prison. Prison is a violent place because it is full of violent people. TO be honest I do not feel that any prison should be comfortable.

Also in prisons there are areas that can separate prisoners from the general population. But that sometimes doesn't happen. 





			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> I am reminded of Father Geoghan. He died at the hands of a fellow inmate, Joseph Druce. Mr. Geoghan did not receive a sentence of death from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.


 
I am reminded of Jeffery Damer that was killed in prison... oh well. 


The state in which I live has some wonderful programs for rehabilitation for people who drive drunk, neglect their children, drug offenders, etc and these programs are fairly successful. Which is surprising since the majority of prison rehabilitation is very successful in prison but once the person leave prison they tend to revert. And there are also people that are, for lack of a better word, broken. They cannot be rehabilitated. A person that molests a child, so far, has proven to be one of those. 

Also the psychological factors involved with some (not all) child molesters come in to play here. Most unfortunately they tend to be victims of molestation themselves and the sexual development (mentally not physically) tends to stop right around the age they were molested. And they find themselves attracted to that same age as themselves as they develop physically. If they were given counseling at the time or close to the time of the molestation they have a chance. However once they are an adult, rehabilitation has so far proven to be unsuccessful. 

And before the onslaught of responses to this, not all children that are victims of molestation grow up to be child molesters. But they are left with some pretty hefty psychological scars. 

So a judge said prison is too violent a place for him so probation it is. Here&#8217;s another fact for you. It is HIGHLY likely he will molest another child. So if that happens then what.... Well he is still to short for prison so more probation.


----------



## michaeledward (May 27, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> They gave up many of the rights most free people have when they committed the crime that got them placed in prison.


 
A convicted person did not give up the rights of most free people. Society takes away those rights. There is nothing voluntary about it from the convicted persons point of view.



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Many of the inmates in prison eat better and are healthier in prison than out of prison.


 
Why is this? Why do we as a society feed prisoners?



			
				Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> So a judge said prison is too violent a place for him so probation it is. Heres another fact for you. It is HIGHLY likely he will molest another child. So if that happens then what.... Well he is still to short for prison so more probation.


 
Here is the conflict. Society has an obligation to keep itself safe. And Society has an obligation to supervise those whom we detain. If the judge feels it is HIGHLY likely he will be killed in prison, what recourse does he have available? 

I don't know the answer. I wish I did. Knowing we spend Billions of dollars every year, knowing there are more than half a million full time employees doing there best in detention facilities around the country, and knowing these costs and tasks are undertaken at our behest, it saddens me that if is seemingly so ineffective.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Prison_System/BigBucks_BigHouse_LA.html


----------



## Nebuchadnezzar (May 27, 2006)

modarnis said:
			
		

> ......Certainly the inner workings of the prison system are outside a judge's scope of knowledge or authority........



You don't really believe this do you?


----------



## Xue Sheng (May 28, 2006)

michaeledward said:
			
		

> A convicted person did not give up the rights of most
> free people. Society takes away those rights. There is nothing voluntary
> about it from the convicted persons point of view.


 
Why was it taken away? Did they believe that there were no  
consequences for committing a crime? They are in prison and I do not feel  
that prison and free to run in society should be the same thing.

Particularly for a child molester.



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> Why is this? Why do we as a society feed
> prisoners?



I could be wrong here, but I am just going to hazard a guess and say so they don't starve and people on the outside of prisons do not complain about the cruel and unusual treatment that is being forced upon prisoners that are forced to live in such a dangerous environment after having there rights forcibly taken away.

Other countries have other ideas. China had a prison where they put prisoners that had no physical wall. The prisoners were put there, given land to farm and animals as well. They were told farm and live don&#8217;t farm and die. And if we see you anywhere outside of this prison we will shoot you. The prison was in the Gobi. 

Not a way I would advocate, but it worked well for them at the time.



			
				michaeledward said:
			
		

> Here is the conflict. Society has an obligation to
> keep itself safe. And Society has an obligation to supervise those whom we
> detain. If the judge feels it is HIGHLY likely he will be killed in
> prison, what recourse does he have available?
> ...




It is expensive true, and it tends to be unsuccessful in rehabilitation as well. But it is what we currently have and there are some looking for a better way. And in some states these ways have been implemented and are working. But these are not to keep child molesters out of prison. They are ways to help non-violent criminals not Child molesters. 

I still maintain that releasing a child molester back into public is just plain wrong. So prison is dangerous, I do not care. Now that area in which this Child molester lives is considerably more dangerous for the children that this child molester victimizes.

So in my opinion the judge should be kicked of the bench and dangerous or not the Child molester should be thrown in jail.


----------



## modarnis (May 28, 2006)

Nebuchadnezzar said:
			
		

> You don't really believe this do you?


 
Maybe you should reread the post, specifically the sentence that follows and put it in its appropriate context


----------



## pstarr (Jun 8, 2006)

I live just outside Omaha.  I think we'd better arm ourselves against the midgets who are apparently free to do anything....!


----------



## Drac (Jun 8, 2006)

upnorthkyosa said:
			
		

> Jeez, its like a kata list...


 
And then some..An LAPD officer arrested a "gang banger" a few years back and in his possession was a guide to self defense against police officers that was written by them for for them.I t featured hand drawn illustrations where the LEO's were pictured as Nazis .Some of the moves could be real effective against an LEO who makes the fatal mistake of under estimating them...


----------



## hapki68 (Jun 8, 2006)

Don't you just love prison movies like "Caged Heat" and "Midnight Express"?

Sorry.. I've been sniffing glue.


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 8, 2006)

as a citizen of Nebraska I don't like it one bit.  But here are some facts to add to the discussion:

the judge is a woman.  (not relevant but some posts above used the masculine pronoun)

the laws in Nebraska allowed this decision. the judge did not act outside the law.

according to some reports I read, the judge studied the psych eval and did not believe this person was a habitual predator.



anyone under 5'2" that comes into my neighborhood will be watched with suspicion :uhohh: 

If we build a midget prison, will it be constitutional to hire only guards over 6'6"?

-David


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 8, 2006)

DavidCC said:
			
		

> as a citizen of Nebraska I don't like it one bit. But here are some facts to add to the discussion:
> 
> the judge is a woman. (not relevant but some posts above used the masculine pronoun)
> 
> ...


 
Damn...

Not outside the laws of Nebraska...wow!...

For once I am glad I live in NY.

Can they send a person over 7' tall to prison for life for a parking ticket?


----------



## matt.m (Jun 8, 2006)

Wow, just wow.  I have truly seen it all now.:shrug:


----------



## tradrockrat (Jun 8, 2006)

I brought this article up a while ago (when it happened) on another site.  I'm amazed at the difference of overall opinions expressed between the two sites.  Now, obviously the sites are geared toward different people - the other is a biker site - but wow.

This sentence is outrageous to me.  I don't give a damn for his safety in prison and I catagorically deny any of what Michaeledward said to be true.  I don't feel society owes ANYTHING to a predator who is willing to strip others of their very freedoms and societal rights.  By taking the actions he has, this pedophile has placed himself *outside* of society, therefore he deserves *none* of societies protections.

Obviously, I am on the opposite end of the "PC" spectrum from you, Michaeledward, so I'll just agree to disagree with you rather than pointlessly debate (I'm relatively sure we won't change each others minds about this...   )

Worrying about his safety is missing the forrest for the trees.  _*He*_ doesn't care for others safety, and he is guilty of one of the most heineous crimes imaginable - right up there with murder.  Study the pedophile and you'll have trouble sleeping at night.  They're freaks beyond rahab and they will do it agian and again.  This judge literally insured that another child will be molested.  I know there was a belief that he wouldn't do this again.  They are wrong.  This might have been his first, but sure won't be his last - especially now!

I guess what shocks me the most is that there are a lot of teachers of children on this site.  I expected a bit more vehemence.  Guess I'm kind of silly about this huh?  

Admittedly, I'm pretty over the top about childrens rights cause I've worked with sexual abuse victims and I've seen the reality of it, but my beliefs on the treatment of criminals has always been more about punishment than rehab.  I'm a staunch believer in capitol punishment, and I'm all for a revamping of our penal system to streamline the process.

I'd love to see prisons with 8x8 cells of concrete with bedding, toilet and nothing else.  I'd also love to see prisons required to be self sufficient - to pay for themselves.

JMHO.


----------



## DavidCC (Jun 8, 2006)

Xue Sheng said:
			
		

> Damn...
> 
> Not outside the laws of Nebraska...wow!...
> 
> ...


 
Don't be so sure the same decision could not have been made in any other state.  I'm not defending it, I'm just saying, I don't think there is anything special about our laws here...


----------



## Xue Sheng (Jun 8, 2006)

DavidCC said:
			
		

> Don't be so sure the same decision could not have been made in any other state. I'm not defending it, I'm just saying, I don't think there is anything special about our laws here...


 
I agree, and I am not attacking Nebraska. 

I could be wrong here, but I do not believe a judge in NYS has the right to change a sentence because he or she feels a convicted felon is in danger in prison. If it's a felony it is a least greater than 1 year of time in prison and there are different levels of felony an I believe Child molestation is an A Felony and I do not think a judge can say it's to dangerous in prison for you so I give you probation instead. They have facilities within prisons in NYS to keep certain types of criminals out of population. But it has been a while since I have had to deal with NYS law so as I said I could be wrong.


----------

