Judiciary system weak?

[LTb1ow]

Heard this debated for like an hour on the way home from work, had to find out if it were real... sadly enough it is...

http://www.delcotimes.com/articles/2009/06/30/news/doc4a49dc2ddc930610831208.txt


Sad sad sad...

Discuss? :lol:

[NastyEllEssWon]

my vote is jail time until chemical castration medications have taken its full effects...then some type of hearing to determine the inmates fate.



pedophiles make me sick. deffinately got off easy on this one. horrible. 1 freaking day jail. i hope he gets butt raped for 23 hours and 40 minutes, only stopping to change rapists :nod:

[LTb1ow]

Yea..

Funniest part was his defense.

Something along the lines of " he was a loser, couldn't get laid, and wanted to watch a virgin girl to figure stuff out" and of course " he didn't know kiddie porn was illegal".

Some people... and the friggen lawyer that defended him, man o man, morals are a thing of the past I guess.

[Crayface]

ehh there is no 100% perfect judiciary system, ours is seemed to be the most fair, one day of prison is low, but then again he is a registered sex offender and has to be supervised the rest of his life, meaning probation till he dies and that is a harsh punishment.

[LTb1ow]

Still. He broke the law. Why is there no jail time?

Why is there no mandatory minimum sentence?

[Tru2Chevy]

ehh there is no 100% perfect judiciary system, ours is seemed to be the most fair, one day of prison is low, but then again he is a registered sex offender and has to be supervised the rest of his life, meaning probation till he dies and that is a harsh punishment.

Only 10 years of probation and computer monitoring after his 1 day in jail. :-x

- Justin

[NastyEllEssWon]

Still. He broke the law. Why is there no jail time?

Why is there no mandatory minimum sentence?




i agree on the mandatory minimum sentencing for child porn

[LTb1ow]

And Justin, is this is too much for the lounge you can make it disappear.

[Tru2Chevy]

And Justin, is this is too much for the lounge you can make it disappear.

It's just fine here as long as everyone behaves....

- Justin

[LTb1ow]

Its just frustrating how one day can be considered punishment. Like its a slap in the face to me at least, to be able to say to a judge, " I was not aware I was breaking a law, oops my bad", and get a day... sad.

[Crayface]

"Graci is also facing a maximum lifetime supervised release and $250,000 fine and $100 special assessment."

It says ten years but with such a low incarceration period he most likely will get this.

it must not be in NJ though, in NJ as a registered sex offender you are given probation till you die.

[LTb1ow]

Ok so you get a buddy looking over your shoulder. Woo hoo.

[Crayface]

If it was only a buddy looking over your shoulder than it would be horrible, but its not its probation, im not trying to support this child molestor, imo he should be stoned but do you know what happens during probation?

[LTb1ow]

Not really, but I assume it is way better than being stuck in general population labeled as a kiddie porn guy...

[Crayface]

yea but then again if we throw everyone in jail, WE pay for it, the average rate to put someone in jail is above 50,000 dollars per person and we as working citizens pay for it. During probation this dude may have to meet up with his officer once a week, get drug tested at any time/date during the term and the officer has the right to enter his house anytime he wants to check up on him. Prison still is worse but i would also hate to be on probation for at least ten years

[LTb1ow]

I guess. Still. It just is embarrassing to me to see a judge hand down a day in jail as punishment.

[WildBillyT]

You want to talk about weak? How about a month for killing a guy drunk driving?

[LTb1ow]

Is that the vette driver who killed the kid high on coke?

[Crayface]

yeah now that was some bull chit, and what about the reverse discrimination case against the Fire Fighters with that new judge, shes going to be a horrible judge

[Frosty]

Supervised release is subjective. He's going to have to register as a sex offender for 10yrs here in PA....I guess he's also on probation for 10yrs(I assume that's what the supervised release is).

[LTb1ow]

Still just a major facepalm thought.

[jims69camaro]

if the answer was probation, then this guy is in for a long haul. if it's not, and he is on parole when released, then he could have gotten a really sweet deal. i mean, most people know that parole officers are spread way too thin with too many people to supervise.

reverse discrimination case against the Fire Fighters

i hate to split hairs, but this phrase really bugs me. there is no such thing as reverse discrimination. there is discrimination, where someone is doing the discriminating and there is the thing being discriminated against. reverse discrimination, to me, would be the thing being discriminated against discriminating the person who previously was the discriminator... as in, i am now discriminating against you only because you discriminated against me. it's ridiculous. now, if the fire fighters were discriminated against because of their race, creed, color, religious affiliation, etc., it doesn't matter who is doing the discriminating. discrimination against someone for their race, etc. should cease, period.

now, sexual predators are discriminated against by the public at large and the prison population. is that a bad thing? i don't think so.

men from the middle eastern countries are discriminated against by all types of people. that little old lady with blue hair sitting across the aisle from him is doing some heavy discrimination. the TSA employees discriminated against them while they were in the line. oh, wait, that is just profiling. that's ok in most states... :mrgreen:

[Crayface]

hey now, reverse discrimination was a part of the case name, im only stating it! but i do agree with what you said..

[jims69camaro]

hey now, reverse discrimination was a part of the case name, im only stating it! but i do agree with what you said..

i wasn't attacking you, just the phrase. i could see once i went to the website that it was part of the name of the case. and these are supposedly "educated" people (lawyers do a minimum of 7 years schooling)... :mrgreen:

[Frosty]

Jim, I think they use the term "reverse discrimination" because it's white people people being discriminated against. I guess everyone assumes(including the law) that white people originated discrimination against minorities so anytime a white person is in that position it's "reverse" discrimination. Just a hunch. :D

[WildBillyT]

Jim, I think they use the term "reverse discrimination" because it's white people people being discriminated against. I guess everyone assumes(including the law) that white people originated discrimination against minorities so anytime a white person is in that position it's "reverse" discrimination. Just a hunch. :D

No, it's not that. I raised a big stink about how "reverse discrimination" seems to attribute discrimination to mainly one group of people back in a college social ethics course. It's not that. It's called "reverse discrimination" because white people are still the majority in the USA and are the "dominant" ethnic group. It's a relational thing. If Hispanics were the majority then it would be called "reverse discrimination" if they were discriminated against by white people.

I still think it's a ******** term and is still discrimination, and the implications are that it's one group that does most of it. But above is supposed to be the "real" explanation.

[NastyEllEssWon]

No, it's not that. I raised a big stink about how "reverse discrimination" seems to attribute discrimination to mainly one group of people back in a college social ethics course. It's not that. It's called "reverse discrimination" because white people are still the majority in the USA and are the "dominant" ethnic group. It's a relational thing. If Hispanics were the majority then it would be called "reverse discrimination" if they were discriminated against by white people.

I still think it's a ******** term and is still discrimination, and the implications are that it's one group that does most of it. But above is supposed to be the "real" explanation.




white people are the minority anymore

[Tru2Chevy]

white people are the minority anymore

In select areas they are, but whites are still the dominate race in this country by a pretty decent margin.

- Justin

[Crayface]

we are the minority in prisons!!! African Americans and Hispanics take that one by a long shot

[btownws6]

we are the minority in prisons!!! African Americans and Hispanics take that one by a long shot


as sad as it is to say this is very true. but our whole system is weak in areas and strong in others that's just how this country works i don't agree with a lot of it like the guy who got 10 or 15 years for killing his wife and then gets out and gets a 19 yr sentence for coke possession, makes no sense most people get huge sentences for drugs and then child porn you get a day i'll never understand that. and discrimination is discrimination no matter what color or religion you may be and it will never go away b/c we are shown this from the time we are small kids till seniors. but no matter what you do there is always a bleeding heart and most people don't want to look like the bad guy or the bad cop or the bad judge so the best we can do is live our own lives within the "guidelines" whether we like it or not

[jims69camaro]

Jim, I think they use the term "reverse discrimination" because it's white people people being discriminated against. I guess everyone assumes(including the law) that white people originated discrimination against minorities so anytime a white person is in that position it's "reverse" discrimination. Just a hunch. :D

well put. for a change... :moon: