A curious slap on the wrist

One of the things that confuses me about the legal process is how the state could consider someone dangerous enough to need to be punished, but not dangerous enough to be kept away from those they may harm. The 2005 prosecution of Michael Jackson illustrated this oddity.

District Attorney Tom Sneddon charged the pop star with multiple counts of child abuse. He argued that Jackson was a serial predator who targeted boys between the ages of 11 to 15 years old. Sneddon also argued that Jackson began grooming the boys much earlier, usually when the boys were eight or nine. The DA was convinced that Jackson had no control over his behavior. If left with a boy, Jackson would abuse him. Of course, that is why Sneddon made no effort to remove Jackson’s children from his custody, particularly his oldest son Prince, who was the age Jackson supposedly favored.

I found that baffling. If Jackson is so dangerous, why let him keep custody? It was as if Sneddon did not believe his own argument.

Another case also baffles me. The judge in the case admits that the person is dangerous yet releases her without any punishment:

A Jefferson City woman won’t spend any time in prison after admitting to sex crimes against multiple children. Misti Fitzwater pleaded guilty to five different felonies Thursday.

A judge suspended Fitzwater’s sentence and placed her on parole. Judge Robert Schollmeyer was very clear that he did not want to have to revisit the issue with her, saying “If there is a violation that is alleged, you and I will see each other again. You do not want that to happen.”

Judge Schollmeyer went on to say, “If you and I see each other in this setting again, I assure you that I will do everything that is necessary to see that these sentences will be actually executed.”

That sounds very stern, yet it is hard to believe. Fitzwater plead guilty to one charge of statutory rape, two charges of statutory sodomy, and two charges of endangering the welfare of a child. She had sex with two children, giving them marijuana as well. The article does not list the ages of the victims, so I assume they were likely teenagers.

The maximum sentence Fitzwater could have received was 35 years. To receive parole is quite the slap on the wrist considering the charges. 

The curious part is this:

As part of the plea agreement, Fitzwater was placed on five years of supervised probation. During that time, Fitzwater is forbidden from contact with any child 17 years or younger. That condition of her probatioon does not include her own family members.

The judge says this conviction will not affect Fitzwater’s custody over her children in any way.

So we are to assume that Fitzwater is so untrustworthy that she cannot be around minors, but we will assume she would never abused relatives? Does the judge actually think Fitzwater is incapable of committing incest? Or does the judge think that Fitzwater is no threat at all?

Better yet, if she has custody of her children, how can she attend any of their functions? She cannot be around minors, so she cannot go to school plays, go on field trips, or even set foot on a playground.

It is as if the judge did not want to actually punish her, but had to do something and issued this ruling.

Advertisements

6 thoughts on “A curious slap on the wrist

  1. Pingback: Manosphere.com

  2. If you want to know about the Michael Jackson cases
    http://www.inquisitr.com/1944509/michael-jackson-molestation-accusations-timeline/
    http://michaeljacksonallegations.com/frequently-asked-questions-faq/

    The second site is esp good. Make up your own mind. I’m leaning towards innocent for two reasons:
    A. I assumed Jackson was guilty because of some of the rumors debunked on the second site. I also figured multiple accusations : smoke, fire. Jackson was a bit ‘weird’ after all. Lastly, and most importantly, I had no idea just how many children had passed through Neverland or spent the night there and just how powerful some of them were. If they had been molested they would have had more protection than the average child victim and none of the known ‘big names’ has come out in the years after his death.
    B. My God, the details of the trial. The malefeasance of the press (Jackson was treated every bit as badly from a PR standpoint as the Duke Lacrosse players), the Prosecutor -who seemed out to make a name for himself and seemed to have a vendetta from not getting Jackson in the 90’s-, the lies of the parents of the alleged victim…

    Well, I guess my faith in Jackson was restored after that. In my opinion he was a gifted, weird, strange tortured man who loved children and childhood (perhaps because he never felt he had one …just speculation) but he was no danger to those kids.

  3. About the second case:
    You know me. If they had been 15, esp 16 or 17 I wouldn’t care about the sex per-se. But then there is the drug. So yeah, I’m as baffled as you. Even though I approve of sex between 15 to 17 and legal adults in some circumstances I have always said the ADULT has the responsibility of ensuring safety, consent and teaching good sexual ethics. Even assuming she didn’t drug them to get them to have sex with her, she placed their futures in danger by exposing them to such a substance, and should have been punished for that if nothing else. I wonder if this Judge has some undisclosed conflict of interest or is just a sexist who would be gleefully sentencing a man in a similar situation to 20 or 25 years in jail (probably at least that with the drug ‘mandatory minimum’ crapola). Of course we don’t even know their ages so this could be even more outrageous.

    TS, I’m sorry, I don’t know what to make of “justice” in this country anymore. It seems like a freaking roulette wheel. We ruin people for one mistake, yet we let people who exhibit multiple predatory tendencies go free. While I know the sexual laws are all over the place from State to State I don’t understand how the ‘suspended sentence’ for GIVING DRUGS TO MINORS is even possible, esp since a different Judge might give me jailtime for buying 20 year old college kids or 18 year old HS seniors a keg.

  4. Pingback: A curious slap on the wrist – Manosphere.com

  5. after 30 seconds of research: The Judge is doing damage control.

    The boys were willing, supplied their own dope and didn’t catch a disease.
    She didn’t get pregnant. Bullets dodged.

    But if she goes to jail her kids end up in Gladiator Academy.

  6. Pingback: Dear feminists: men are sick of you “reassuring” us you don’t hate men, too | Toy Soldiers

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s