Posted on 04/14/2015 11:05:23 AM PDT by RonPaulLives
Outrage is growing over a Kentucky judge who let a home invader who robbed a family at gunpoint off with probation after openly criticizing the victims for letting their child be afraid of black men because of the crime.
Judge Olu Stevens of the Jefferson Circuit Court appeared even more offended by the victim impact statements offered by the family who was robbed than he was by the fact that a crime had been committed at all.
Now, a movement is afoot to have the judge removed from office.
According to the Louisville Courier-Journal, Jordan and Tommy Gray were held at gunpoint with their then 3-year-old daughter during a March 31, 2013, home invasion by two black men, one of whom was being sentenced for the crime in February.
Gregory Wallace, 27, had pleaded to the robbery, but Stevens declined to send him to prison, a decision he announced after a lengthy attack on the family whose home was robbed. The other home invader, who had a prior record, had already been sentenced to 10 years in prison.
The judge was “deeply offended” at the portion of Jordan Gray’s victim impact statement where she described the effect the night of terror had on her daughter.
“This incident has had the most impact on my daughter,” Jordan Gray wrote. “She is in constant fear of black men. When we are running errands, if we come across a black male, she holds me tight and begs me to leave. If (she) is playing in a room and I walk into another, she freaks out. It has affected her friendships at school and our relationship with African American friends.”
That statement, one that the victim apparently volunteered in good faith, is seemingly meant to show dismay at the corrosive effect of violent crime – how it eats at the basic fabric of society beginning with even its youngest members.
Stevens didn’t take it that way. In fact he took it another way entirely – that the Grays are somehow to blame for the reactions of a pre-schooler whose short acquaintance with the world is based entirely on what she perceives.
Instead of being outraged at the criminal, Stevens vented at the victims.
“It troubles me greatly what this statement says,” he said at Wallace’s sentencing. “I would want to make that part of the record, I am offended by that.
“If the perpetrator had been white, would they be in fear of white men?” he asked.
“It’s not going to affect what happens here,” he said, but “I’m going to make this part of the record.”
He then sentenced a man who pleaded guilty to robbery – a robbery that involved breaking into a peaceful home and threatening a man, his wife and a young girl at gunpoint – to probation instead of prison. No matter what the legalities might say, that’s the same as freedom.
Stevens later went on Facebook to justify himself.
“Do three year olds form such generalized, stereotyped and racist opinions of others?” he wrote. “I think not. Perhaps the mother had attributed her own views to her child as a manner of sanitizing them.”
The victimized family and prosecutors were outraged by the judge’s remarks and sentencing, understandably, but legal experts and ethicists were critical too.
Let’s see if the “working for you” WHAS, WAVE, WLKY tv news covers this one....
If you go today to his official campaign website, olustevens.com, it says "This Account Has Been Suspended." Yesterday, it was up and operational.
IMO.
It’s called “The Black Code.”
He should not be allowed to remain a judge.
That said, in some groups this so-called reverse racism is actually condoned (i.e. some blacks who hates white still argue that their hate is OK and is not racism because blacks cannot be racist).
Reverse of what, exactly?
The most common racism I see is that committed by "black" people against anyone perceived as "not black" or even "not sufficiently black".
The judge needs to be removed.
I have no doubt if the girl had been violently raped she would be afraid of all men!
(and this judge would probably accuse her of being sexist!)
impeach this idiot!
Well, you see the judge has to factor in four - five hundred years of oppression, discrimination, racism, white privilege, low IQ on the part of the judge, etc. The goal is to be in a position five years from now so that the white victim will go to jail for protesting the same type crime.
Oh, we KNEW this was coming, didn’t we?
So the Judge knows perfectly well that Black Criminals make people form opinions of Black People, yes even toddlers, but he just HATED seeing a white person say it. He couldn’t take the truth!
It is of course still racism but it is particularly insidious because much of Black culture in America thinks it's OK.
This isn’t STUPID,
this is downright EVIL.
A judge like this is a great advocate of home defense gun carry, along with the idea that an armed robber should not be allowed to live long enough to armed rob again. No “three strikes and you’re out”, but “three bullets and you are out for good.”
With all due respect to the judge, this issue is an example of what John Bingham was trying to prevent when he included the Equal Protections Clause in Section 1 of the 14th Amendment. In other words, the judge setting the criminal free means that the victim is not receiving the same protections under the law that other victims are.
Gee, a black judge who favors race above the law. Which two black thugs in DC does that sound like??
What you describe is “black” racism, and IMO is the most common kind in XXI Century America.
“Reverse” racism would seem to be the opposite of the most common kind ...
I suggest not allowing the “left” to define the terms of discussion.
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.