Posted on 02/03/2006 1:48:58 PM PST by Jim Robinson
BURLINGTON - It began with an inaccurate local television news report, with the errors repeated by Vermont print and broadcast media. The story was quickly picked up by Internet bloggers and right-wing talk radio and soon reached at least three sensationalist national cable shows. Within a week, bloggers were posting ever more extreme comments, calling for vigilante action against a longtime Vermont judge and posting his home address and phone online. State politicians jumped at the chance to be on national television, repeating the errors and adding to them. Nationwide, there were calls for boycotts of Vermont if the judge were not removed from the bench. Both the Republican governor and the Democratic Speaker of the House joined in condemnation of the judge.
~~ snip ~~
Another blog which promoted the WCAX story was freerepublic.com where postings were equally intemperate. “Any parent that does not move from Vermont immediately needs their head examined!,” one declared. “More proof liberals do not care about children, although that’s what we keep hearing is the reason to take our money.” Appeals to vigilante justice were frequent: “Time to get a rope,” preached one writer. “Get two, one for hizzoner and one for the perp! Same tree, side by side would send a clear message to perps and judges!” echoed another.
Postings soon included links to the website of Gov. James Douglas, so that complaints about Cashman could be submitted electronically. Another posting provided the judge’s home address and telephone number. Bloggers pushed for national coverage of the story. “Rush [Limbaugh] mentioned this case at the end of his show today, and I hope [Bill] O’Reilly comes on board when he returns on Monday . . .
(Excerpt) Read more at vermontguardian.com ...
Our pledge to you -- readers, advertisers, and subscribers -- is to provide socially responsible news and opinion on a human scale.
So it's socially responsible to cover for a judge that sentenced a child rapist to only sixty days?
I found the FR quotes mentioned to be very entertaining.
Fear the FREEP!
bump for this thread.. one of those quotes might be mine :p
So what was inaccurate about the initial sentencing of the scumbag in question by Judge Cashman? Did Cashman not say that he "did not believe in punishment", did he not refute the concept of retribution for such heinous crimes as was committed by the defendant? Was it not an accurate portrayal of Cashman, as a liberal-bleeding-heart more concerned with the sex pervert getting treatment, and less concerned about the impact upon the victim?
Sounds like either the MSM got it wrong from the beginning by reporting inaccurately, or they are defending the actions of the judge based on what was reported. Either way, the MSM is irresponsible.
The report was incorrect in two major respects: the sentence the judge imposed and the statements he made about punishment. The defendant pled guilty to three crimes pursuant to an agreement that gave him the chance to withdraw his plea if he was sentenced to more than 90 days to serve. The crimes were two counts of aggravated sexual assault (based on admissions that the defendant had, over the course of four years starting when the child victim was 6 years old, licked the child’s vagina on multiple occasions and placed his penis in the child’s mouth at least once) and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct (based on an admission that the child had stroked his penis “quite a few times”). Judge Cashman imposed an incarcerative sentence of 60 days to 10 years to serve for the first count, a consecutive probationary sentence of 5 years to life on the second count and a consecutive probationary 2- to 5-year sentence on the third count. Thus the statement that the judge “sentenced him to just 60 days in prison” was incorrect.
Ah, so he got 60 days in prison and probation. Big whoop of a difference.
As far as the judge’s position on “punishment,” the Joyce account was likewise wrong. What Judge Cashman actually said was “I keep telling prosecutors, and they won’t hear me, that punishment is not enough.”
Yeah, judge, but the punishement YOU handed down was nowhere near enough.
The judge said that he had “started out as a just deserts sentencer,” but he had “discovered it [retribution] accomplishes nothing of value … doesn’t make anything better, . . . and costs us a lot of money.”
Yeah, but it keeps a perv off the streets.
He now realized a sentence must “solve a problem” so that “people are better off after the sentencing than they were before.”
Unless, of course, they just rape another child after they are done. But what's a few ruined lives as long as a noble social experiment can go forward?
Hang 'em High ~ Bump!
VT's print media are totally out of touch with reality.
A smearing of a judge? Lord have mercy.
Will Hunter? You forgot his first initial "G" JimRob.
Wow, was determining all of that in his job description, too?
-PJ
Legislation and irresponsibility from the bench SUCKS!!!
OMG! I did quoted!
This made my day!
Bottom line is that the guy got 60 days in jail and probation for raping a little girl for years.
Is the Vermont Independence whining because nobody would listen to the judges defenders?
If he felt that way, he should run for office and change the sentencing laws.
And from what I've seen from Vermont, he might just win an election, and make the state a perv's paradise ("They perved paradise, and made it a stalker's park")
It's sad a journalist doesn't understand the need to back up his article's premise with any evidence. That's some good ol' fashioned lefty reporting there.
I read the article a couple times. Was the creep sentenced to sixty days or not? If so, then how can they claim that everybody has an erroneous interpretation of what happened?
Does anybody know what the statutory sentence in Vermont would be for the guy? What the hell are they talking about "judicial independence" for?
Judicial independence to ignore the statutes set by the duly elected legislature of the People of Vermont?
The spin is almost as bad as the crime and the sentence.
Oh, but he had that other charge where he was sentenced to "5 years to life"......on probation.
Talk about a bunch of sniveling word-parsing crap.....
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.