Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Cleveland kidnapper Ariel Castro goes for plea deal, life without parole +1,000 years
Hotair ^ | 07/26/2013 | Erika Johnsen

Posted on 07/26/2013 10:46:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind

Guilt or innocence was never really the big question at hand in the bizarre and sickening case of Ariel Castro, the Ohio-area man who kidnapped three women, imprisoned them in his home, repeatedly raped them, and starved and beat one victim into having multiple miscarriages. Shortly after the three women were finally returned to freedom back in May, however, the big question that arose was whether Castro could face the death penalty for deliberately killing the victim’s children in the womb. In Ohio, causing “the unlawful termination of another’s pregnancy” against her will constitutes aggravated murder, and the death penalty is an available punishment — but after negotiations with the prosecution this week, the dirtbag went for a guilty plea specifically to avoid the possibility and ergo will not go through the trial originally scheduled for August 5th. Via Fox News:

The Cleveland man accused of holding three women captive in his home for about a decade agreed to plead guilty in a deal to avoid the death penalty.

In exchange, prosecutors said 53-year-old Ariel Castro would be sentenced to life without parole plus 1,000 years.

Castro had been charged in a 977-count indictment. He had been scheduled for trial Aug. 5 on allegations that include repeatedly restraining the women and punching and starving one woman until she had a miscarriage. The former school bus driver also was charged with hundreds of counts of kidnapping and rape, plus assault and other counts.

Castro was in court Friday morning to enter the guilty plea. When asked if he understood he would never be released from prison, Castro said: “I do understand that, your honor.”

He added, “I knew I was pretty much going to get the book thrown at me.” …

Oh gee, he anticipated that he was “going to get the book thrown” at him? Man, the heart bleeds. Not.

CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR THE VIDEO



TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; US: Ohio
KEYWORDS: arielcastro; deathpenalty; kidnapping; liberalism; lifesentence; pleabargain; waronwomen
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

1 posted on 07/26/2013 10:46:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He’ll be out on parole after 400.


2 posted on 07/26/2013 10:47:28 AM PDT by cripplecreek (REMEMBER THE RIVER RAISIN!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Why a plea deal here.  Convict, fry or inject, shovel, and shut up.  The guy is guilty.  It's blatantly obvious what he did.  Think of the victims and do the right thing.




FOLKS, THOSE OF YOU WHO CAN, PLEASE CLICK HERE AND PENCIL IN YOUR DONATION TO HELP END THIS FREEPATHON.  THANK YOU!
...this is a general all purpose message, and should not be seen as targeted at any individual I am responding to...



3 posted on 07/26/2013 10:48:53 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Put him in a small, cold dark place and see how he likes it..scum of the earth


4 posted on 07/26/2013 10:52:50 AM PDT by Sarah Barracuda
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: cripplecreek

I see “A Very Special Lifetime Original” smarmy chick flick coming out of this. “Taken: The Cleveland Kidnappings”? Anything to keep the lo-info people occupied.


5 posted on 07/26/2013 10:53:02 AM PDT by Impala64ssa (You call me an islamophobe like it's a bad thing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

I think he will get what he has done.


6 posted on 07/26/2013 10:54:21 AM PDT by Baseballguy (If we knew what we know now in Oct would we do anything different?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Prosecutors would rather go after people they can “Nifong” like the Duke lacrosse team or George Zimmerman.

A known rapist, kidnapper, and murder gets off easy.


7 posted on 07/26/2013 10:54:53 AM PDT by a fool in paradise (America 2013 - STUCK ON STUPID)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“Why a plea deal here.”

I couldn’t bring myself to read the article; too depraved. But, a plea deal was probably offered because the prosecutor didn’t think he could get a stronger penalty. (I’m speculating.) It might also be that the prosecutor feels he could lose some or all of the evidence on a technicality and the jury might go for a lower sentence.

A lot goes on behind the scenes and even if the newspapers knew about it, their reporting is generally so bad they’d never get it across.


8 posted on 07/26/2013 10:56:08 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Hopefully he will be Dahmerized.


9 posted on 07/26/2013 10:56:25 AM PDT by Slyfox (Without the Right to Life, all other rights are meaningless.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sarah Barracuda

Lock him up for life in a women’s prison.
It wouldn’t be for long.


10 posted on 07/26/2013 10:57:44 AM PDT by tet68 ( " We would not die in that man's company, that fears his fellowship to die with us...." Henry V.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I would have made sure he gets put into general population

‘life’ in prison would be about 6 months, max.


11 posted on 07/26/2013 11:00:47 AM PDT by Mr. K (4 election)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

I think those are rational thoughts. It does disturbs me that the media can manipulate public opinion to the degree that it does, but why do authorities allow them to do it?

How hard would it be to list what this man did to these women, and demand justice? Certainly today’s women could be made to see this is an instance where a man took every decision a woman could make away from her, times three.

Boy, if a verdict was ever a done deal, this would have to be one IMO.


12 posted on 07/26/2013 11:03:25 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tet68

his new name would be Ariel Castrated.


13 posted on 07/26/2013 11:04:13 AM PDT by TurboZamboni (Marx smelled bad & lived with his parents most his life.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
Another sellout....

Should have gotten the Death Penalty for sure, but, we don't wanna have to argue the "life begins at Conception" issue in the Courts.

Another life-long burden on Taxpayers to fund this incarceration, with cable TV, Internet Access, food, shelter, etc., etc.

We could save Millions for Taxpayers if ALL prisoners on Death Row were executed immediately, free up needed prison space, AND, eliminate Repeat Offenders.

Unfortunately, the bilking of Taxpayers to pay the Lawyers to Argue for 20 years in Courts on useless/baseless Appeals is not gonna happen in YOUR lifetime.....follow the money.

14 posted on 07/26/2013 11:05:00 AM PDT by traditional1 (Amerika.....Providing public housing for the Mulatto Messiah)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather
Eh. It makes sense on a lot of levels. They spare the cost of a trial, which would turns into a sideshow and force the three women, who have been staying out of sight, to go public. Then there's the inevitable appeals of a death sentence, which would cost more public money, since I assume he's not paying for a legal team, and would drag on for years. Then there's the extra cost of maintaining a prisoner in death row for all those years, and the extra cost of transporting them back and forth to court for all those appeals. And then you get to the "win or lose" matter of getting a death penalty in a case concerning the killing of an unborn child, which could be defended any number of ways.

I'm not saying that he doesn't deserve to fed feet-first into an incinerator, but how much money do you want to pay for that satisfaction?

15 posted on 07/26/2013 11:05:08 AM PDT by Bubba Ho-Tep ("More weight!"--Giles Corey)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

(snippy)”It does disturbs me that the media can manipulate public opinion to the degree that it does, but why do authorities allow them to do it?” Authorities don’t have a press or propaganda machine. They rely on the “press.” The authorities can give the best story possible, but they don’t have an audience and the press does. The first amendment allows the press to present only those bits the press feels are relevant.

(Snippy) “How hard would it be to list what this man did to these women, and demand justice?” We have an adversarial judicial system. Just listing the charges and demanding justice is disturbly similar to The Inqusisition, where the accused was charged but not allowed to defend themselves in an adversarial manner. The founding fathers realized this created a high burden on the state but they wanted a high burden on the state and a lower burden on the accused. The Founders knew this would let some guilty people walk. But they preferred that over having the King’s 100% conviction rate.

(Snippy) “Boy, if a verdict was ever a done deal, this would have to be one IMO.” A lawyer told me that there was no such thing as an open and shut case. He said that no matter how stacked the case was on one side or another that it was always a 50/50 gamble as to how it would turn out. He said the best thing to do was stay out of court. Having said that, I’d have thought the Zimmerman case was open and shut in Zimmerman’s favor. But at least 40% of the people disagreed with me. I conclude the lawyer was right. The DA made a good call here. He also saved probably a million dollars off his budget that he can now use to go after other criminals.


16 posted on 07/26/2013 11:13:17 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

OK, I’d like somebody to explain to me how in the world can someone admit guilt, so he can escape the ultimate penalty...

Under Ohio law, he’s a murderer.

In ohio, is the punishment for murder the death penalty?


17 posted on 07/26/2013 11:14:20 AM PDT by WildHighlander57 ((WildHighlander57 returning after lurking since 2000))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bubba Ho-Tep

“I’m not saying that he doesn’t deserve to fed feet-first into an incinerator, but how much money do you want to pay for that satisfaction?”

Actually, I think Vinnie and Guido would be happy to do it on their day off as a public service. But Vinnie and Guido won’t have access. However, their brother’s in the clink may still administer “justice” alla Jeffrey Dahmer. (A prisoner locked the guards out of a room and left Jeffrey with another prisoner who did the honors.)

BTW, love “Bubba Ho-Tep”...er...the name, that is.


18 posted on 07/26/2013 11:18:11 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I would give him the “deal” just to bring closure to his victims, not have death penalty appeals drag on endlessly, and not force them through the ordeal of facing him in a Courtroom. It’s a fair cop.


19 posted on 07/26/2013 11:21:58 AM PDT by henkster (The 0bama regime isn't a train wreck, it's a B 17 raid on the rail yard.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: WildHighlander57

RE: Under Ohio law, he’s a murderer.

In ohio, is the punishment for murder the death penalty?

_____________________

The powers that be don’t want this case to morph into another debate about abortion or when life begins...


20 posted on 07/26/2013 11:24:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather
It does disturbs me that the media can manipulate public opinion to the degree that it does, but why do authorities allow them to do it?

Authorities don’t have a press or propaganda machine. They rely on the “press.” The authorities can give the best story possible, but they don’t have an audience and the press does. The first amendment allows the press to present only those bits the press feels are relevant.

I believe that there is enough of a talk radio social media presence out here, that the 'official' media can't silence the prosecution.

How hard would it be to list what this man did to these women, and demand justice?

We have an adversarial judicial system. Just listing the charges and demanding justice is disturbly similar to The Inqusisition, where the accused was charged but not allowed to defend themselves in an adversarial manner.

Look, I do not advocate the prosecuting attorney be able to make definitives about guilt, but they certainly should be able to lay the facts out for the public, saying this is what we think happened.  "We hope to prove this in court."

I don't see this as the state denying anyone due process.

The founding fathers realized this created a high burden on the state but they wanted a high burden on the state and a lower burden on the accused. The Founders knew this would let some guilty people walk. But they preferred that over having the King’s 100% conviction rate.

When we have the president of the United States coming out and tainting a case, as we did in the Zimmerman trial, I think it makes it imperitive that the prosecution get their message out too.  This is today's reality.  I would not agree if the prosecution were to say, "We have this guy dead to rights.  He's guilty as sin, and deserves to die."  That's not the same as saying we think he did these things, and we hope to prove it in court.

Boy, if a verdict was ever a done deal, this would have to be one IMO.


A lawyer told me that there was no such thing as an open and shut case. He said that no matter how stacked the case was on one side or another that it was always a 50/50 gamble as to how it would turn out. He said the best thing to do was stay out of court. Having said that, I’d have thought the Zimmerman case was open and shut in Zimmerman’s favor. But at least 40% of the people disagreed with me. I conclude the lawyer was right. The DA made a good call here. He also saved probably a million dollars off his budget that he can now use to go after other criminals.


And I understand the reason why an attorney would say this.  In this case, you have three women who can testify to what this man did to them.

They list what he did to them.  They identify him.  Who could spin that into something sympathetic to the defendent.


21 posted on 07/26/2013 11:25:35 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“Why a plea deal here.”

I’m just speculating, but a plea deal here may be the “right thing” for the victims. If this case went to trial, one or more of the victims likely would have had to testify (while there is likely enough physical evidence to convict on some charges, victim testimony would be necessary to show the extent of what he did, etc.) Putting the victims through the misery of having to re-live what happened, testify about it, and be subject to cross-examination may not be worth it, even if they could get a death sentence for this guy.

Frankly, I’m a bit surprised this guy even took a plea. I half expected the sick f*ck (pardon my language, thinking about this guy brings out the worst in me) to take this to trial, simply to force the victims to testify.


22 posted on 07/26/2013 11:26:03 AM PDT by Conscience of a Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

This way the women don’t have to testify. That’s important. They’re traumatized enough for one lifetime.


23 posted on 07/26/2013 11:26:08 AM PDT by Politicalmom (Liberalism. Ideas so great they have to be mandatory.-FReeper Osage Orange)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Give the victims’ families a rope and be done with it.


24 posted on 07/26/2013 11:26:51 AM PDT by bgill (This reply was mined before it was posted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
I've brought up my opinion before, which absolutely no one agrees with. After Anthony Sowell a few years ago (murdered 11 women) and now Ariel Castro I said of Cleveland's worst elements: "if two rats come out of the sewer, you know there are more rats in the sewer". Well, there were three unsolved murders of women on Cleveland's east 93rd this spring and now a serial killer was captured on Cleveland's far east border , three victims (a lot of people speculate it's the east 93rd guy, changing locations after the women started wearing whistles and neighborhood watch started)

What's my point? I don't know if Ariel Castro killed some women and caused miscarriages earlier, but at least he kept the three women alive and by all accounts took good care of his daughter. There are probably other predators out there holding women. Cleveland can't even figure out which women are missing and which ones moved elsewhere. The message that has to be sent is that a predator will be better off letting any women captives he has free. Unless that's the case, there's no incentive to not kill the victims.

25 posted on 07/26/2013 11:28:31 AM PDT by grania
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; P-Marlowe

I don’t care how cozy the confines of a prison these days. It’d go nuts cooped up.

Rather they just shoot me and be done with it.

There should be some option that refuses these people the right to plead “not guilty”. He was caught red-handed. Now he has agreed to life+1000. Does that say he actually thought he was “not guilty”? To me it says he didn’t believe that plea of his for a second. He knew. He knew we knew. He knew it was insurmountable. Yet he had the audacity to stand in court and say “not guilty”.

They need pleas of: innocent, not guilty, I’m-gonna-try-to-beat-it, it’s hopeless, and guilty as sin.


26 posted on 07/26/2013 11:31:59 AM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He won’t live to see 5 years in prison.


27 posted on 07/26/2013 11:33:36 AM PDT by Bushbacker1 (Molon Labe! (Oathkeeper))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Conscience of a Conservative; Politicalmom

I believe your two posts were similar enough to respond to both of you with one reply.

There is a case to be made that this will lessen the victim’s exposure to more pain. I am not here to be mean to the victims. It’s my take that going in and telling the public exactly what this man did to them personally, is the best way possible for them to get their pound of flesh and make this man pay the sort of penalty his actions merit.

A swift trial, a frank accounting from these women, a conviction and the swift carrying out of justice is just what the doctor ordered to remedy this guy’s crimes and to make others considering this sort of thing to refuse to do it to avoid the penalty.

You may see this as very inappropriate, but I actually think these women owe it to other women to pursue justice in this case. There is a certain segment of our society that needs to be put on notice, our society WILL NOT rest until you are dead if you dare do something like this.

Nobody can do that for women, if the women who are abused in this manner won’t take every advantage they can to make sure these men pay the ultimate penalty.


28 posted on 07/26/2013 11:33:55 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

Not that I condone such things, but I have feeling this guy is gonna learn first-hand what’s like to be locked up somewhere and used as a sex toy by others.


29 posted on 07/26/2013 11:35:05 AM PDT by kevkrom (It's not "immigration reform", it's an "amnesty bill". Take back the language!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

I’m thinking that since one indictment is kidnapping and that’s federal he could be sent to a Super Max like in Colorado(?).


30 posted on 07/26/2013 11:37:02 AM PDT by SkyDancer (Live your life in such a way that the Westboro church will want to picket your funeral.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
Why a plea deal here.

I think this is one case where the impact on the victims is right tobe considered.

It would be years before they'd end up testifying. Why make them give up more of their lives for this scum?

Lock him up and let them try to move on.

31 posted on 07/26/2013 11:37:34 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (There should be a whole lot more going on than throwing bleach, said one woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Thanks for your response.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3047659/posts?page=28#28


32 posted on 07/26/2013 11:41:19 AM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

“I believe that there is enough of a talk radio social media presence out here, that the ‘official’ media can’t silence the prosecution.”

I believe the prosecution is legally restricted in what they can say. The idea is to try the accused in a court of law, not in the public which could easily lead to lynching. You might recall that Zimmerman’s prosecutor said that he was guilty even after he was acquitted. (I suspect that she’ll be censured for that, if not disbarred.)Also recall that the county prosecutor decided there was insufficient evidence to bring Zimmerman to trial. His prosecution was political. Would we voluntarily allow a political lynching by trying the case in the press and allow the prosecution to get-the-word out so that the accused can’t defend themselves? Instead of attorneys everybody would hire publicists.

The public should only be advised of what the court has found, not be an active participant. (Oh, think of all the idiot neighbors you’ve known who would yell “burn the witch!”)

Yes, the president has tainted every case he has mentioned. It is highly improper for any authority figure to ever comment on any case. When a general (or the president) publically comments on a military criminal case it so damages the prosecution that the case can be seriously damaged, despite the evidence. Any comment by authority can prejudice the jury pool and arguably affect the judgment. It should never happen.

Suppose you’re accused of some heinous crime. The government goes to the press and denounces you saying, “They know guilty, but can’t prove it.” The president says that the police acted stupidly and your alleged victim could have been his child. You don’t have the ability to fight the damage done to your position.


33 posted on 07/26/2013 11:44:00 AM PDT by Gen.Blather
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I’d agree with you more if these were women victimized as adults, and without the special kind of trauma years of captivity and torture would cause.


34 posted on 07/26/2013 11:44:54 AM PDT by Trailerpark Badass (There should be a whole lot more going on than throwing bleach, said one woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind
PLUS a thousand years!? Ok, I like the touch/imagery.

5.56mm

35 posted on 07/26/2013 11:45:32 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I suspect the deal was made in order to keep the three victims and the “daughter” from going through the trial and testimony nightmare.


36 posted on 07/26/2013 11:54:58 AM PDT by Buckeye Battle Cry (Audentis Fortuna Iuvat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather
I believe that there is enough of a talk radio social media presence out here, that the ‘official’ media can’t silence the prosecution.

I believe the prosecution is legally restricted in what they can say. The idea is to try the accused in a court of law, not in the public which could easily lead to lynching. You might recall that Zimmerman’s prosecutor said that he was guilty even after he was acquitted. (I suspect that she’ll be censured for that, if not disbarred.)  Also recall that the county prosecutor decided there was insufficient evidence to bring Zimmerman to trial. His prosecution was political. Would we voluntarily allow a political lynching by trying the case in the press and allow the prosecution to get-the-word out so that the accused can’t defend themselves? Instead of attorneys everybody would hire publicists.

I don't believe I advocated the defendent be tried in public.  I merely said the prosecution should be able to list what their suspicions were, and explain they hoped to prove them in court.  I did not say I approved of definitive prejudicial charges of guilt.  I also didn't say I would ever agree with a representative of the court saying the verdict was unjust.  I fully approve of the charges brought against the original prosecuting attorney in this case.  I would agree with you that the current one should be dealt with too, for his after trial comments.

The public should only be advised of what the court has found, not be an active participant. Oh, think of all the idiot neighbors you’ve known who would yell “burn the witch!”

Idiot neighbors will do all sorts of things.  We know they're idiots.  We discount most of what they say.

Yes, the president has tainted every case he has mentioned. It is highly improper for any authority figure to ever comment on any case. When a general (or the president) publically comments on a military criminal case it so damages the prosecution that the case can be seriously damaged, despite the evidence. Any comment by authority can prejudice the jury pool and arguably affect the judgment. It should never happen.

I completely agree with your comments addressing this.  I do not view the president's comments to be even remotely appropriate.  It just goes to show how completely out of touch he and his advisors are.  They are completely ignorant of most acceptable standards for a public official.

On the other hand, the prosecuting attorney represents the public in court.  The public should be able to hear what the case consists of from the prosecuting attorney.  "This is what we suspect.  We will be trying to prove it in court."


Suppose you’re accused of some heinous crime. The government goes to the press and denounces you saying, “They know you're guilty, but can’t prove it.” The president says that the police acted stupidly and your alleged victim could have been his child. You don’t have the ability to fight the damage done to your position.

I don't advocate for either of these things to take place.

I do think it's reasoned to have the prosecuting attorney state what they suspect.  I still say he/she should also state they will be trying to prove this in court.  That makes it clear, it is only their view, not the only possible view.

As for an elected official commenting on any legal matter, it's just totally unacceptable.  It's tantamount to that official forcing his testimoney into court.  And even if he were in court, he couldn't say what his personal opinion was, which they are including in their public statements.  It's totally wrong on at least two levels.




37 posted on 07/26/2013 12:04:18 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: xzins

If it is any comfort, I suspect he will not make it to Christmas before he suffers some kind of unfortunate accident in the shower. He will not serve 1000 years. He’ll be lucky to last a month.


38 posted on 07/26/2013 12:05:09 PM PDT by P-Marlowe (There can be no Victory without a fight and no battle without wounds)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
He's not thinking of the victims, but someone is.

Without a trial (which the plea bargain negates) those three young women or the little girl won't have to relive the horror of those years.

There will be no trial.

39 posted on 07/26/2013 12:13:17 PM PDT by Guenevere (....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Guenevere

The message to anyone else doing this...

You will never be killed for it. You will live out your days in relative comfort.

Some of these folks have already spent time in prison. It’s not that big a deal to them.

I am not without compassion for these women. I don’t want men to think they can get away with this sort of thing. That means there will be far more victims like these.

That is what terrifies me. I have female family members.


40 posted on 07/26/2013 12:16:56 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Trailerpark Badass

Sorry, I keep answering the same sorts of questions, so I’m going to link you to another reply.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3047659/posts?page=39#39


41 posted on 07/26/2013 12:18:43 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: P-Marlowe

Obama will probably pardon him and put him on his personal staff.


42 posted on 07/26/2013 12:37:02 PM PDT by xzins (Retired Army Chaplain and Proud of It! Those who truly support our troops pray for their victory!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Buckeye Battle Cry

Thank you for the mention. I addressed this several times up thread. I admit to having mixed thoughts on that.


43 posted on 07/26/2013 12:43:54 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

He’s playing to every prosecutor’s weakness: Fear of going to trial. The deal - some version of it - will fly, and judge, prosecutor and defense will all claim a victory.

Plea bargains were devised to please the courtroom triumvirate noted above, and the victim, as well as the people, completely shut out, because, in reality, they don’t count as far as those three are concerned. Empty dockets and win/loss records are all that matter.


44 posted on 07/26/2013 12:59:30 PM PDT by DPMD
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind

The system is corrupt. How many times have you heard of plea bargains where the criminal (oops, alleged criminal) pleads guilty to a ‘lesser charge’ which is not even the crime he committed, just something from the books that “sorta fits”.

We accept this corruption by saying “good” in such cases, by approving this dirty deal, because of the costs, the length of the trial followed by the length of time it takes to bring the case to trial, the endless appeals, all things that in a better system should not happen, and would never happen in the Wild West.


45 posted on 07/26/2013 1:08:19 PM PDT by Revolting cat! (Bad things are wrong! Ice cream is delicious!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SeekAndFind; ADemocratNoMore; Akron Al; arbee4bush; agrace; ATOMIC_PUNK; Badeye; Bikers4Bush; ...

Ohio Ping


46 posted on 07/26/2013 4:45:32 PM PDT by Whenifhow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gen.Blather

The women victims said they were relieved he will not be released...I think they agreed with the plea deal so they won’t have to go through the trauma again in a trial.

God Bless them.


47 posted on 07/26/2013 5:31:47 PM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie (Will Freepr combat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne

I disagree with you.

These women have already paid the price...And what makes you think anyone like this scum would be influenced by someone being executed for a similar crime???
He STILL doesn’t think he did anything wrong. the death penalty as deterrant only works for anyone that is rational and has a conscience.


48 posted on 07/26/2013 5:36:45 PM PDT by Recovering Ex-hippie (Will Freepr combat)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: TurboZamboni
his new name would be Ariel Castrated.

LOL

Or, more Spanishly, Ariel Castrato.

Long ago and far away, boys with gorgeous voices were castrated so they could sing women's parts in operas. They were known as the castrati. It was sort of an honor back then, before women were allowed on stage. But I digress.

Perhaps we should have public castrations for disgustoids like Castro, the way we once held public hangings.

49 posted on 07/26/2013 5:37:08 PM PDT by Veto! (Opinions freely expressed as advice)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Recovering Ex-hippie

I’ve had my two cents worth, so I’ll let your comments stand.

I do agree there are two fairly strong points to be made here, one on each side. It’s not important to me that my side prevail, but I do want it presented.

Thanks for the response.


50 posted on 07/26/2013 6:50:42 PM PDT by DoughtyOne (Kill the bill... Begin enforcing our current laws, signed by President Ronald Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-5051-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson