 |
| SOR Home |
 |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Criminal Charges | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Offense: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
Posted on 03/17/2006 6:37:49 AM PST by 300magnum
HARTSVILLE, S.C. - Had Tonya Dixon realized the man living across the street was a convicted sex offender, she says she would never have moved with her family to a mobile home in a quiet, isolated neighborhood.
Officers, bloodhounds and helicopters continued searching Thursday for 47-year-old Kenneth Glenn Hinson, who is wanted in connection with the rape of two teenage girls in an underground room behind his home.
Dixon, who moved to the neighborhood about two weeks ago, searched her computer after news of the assaults spread and found Hinson's mug shot on the state's sexual predator list.
"They need a big ol' sign in the yard letting people know," said Dixon, 29, who has three young children.
The two 17-year-olds were abducted and assaulted in a room under a shed on Hinson's property, Darlington County Chief Deputy Tom Gainey said. The girls were left bound but managed to free themselves. Gainey said they were able to open the trap door in the floor and kick down the shed's door.
The state attorney general's office said Hinson had been recommended for the state's sexually violent predator program, but was rejected during the screening process.
Hinson was convicted of raping a 12-year-old girl in 1991. Just before his release from prison in 2000, a review committee recommended he be committed indefinitely to a Department of Mental Health facility for treatment, said Trey Walker, a spokesman for the attorney general's office. But a circuit judge later ruled that prosecutors failed to show Hinson would likely offend again.
"We thought then that the judge made a mistake," Attorney General Henry McMaster said Friday on "Good Morning America." "I think events, if all this is true that we hear today, it appears that the man should have gone into the system, certainly."
Hinson, wanted on kidnapping and criminal sexual conduct charges, is thought to have been spotted near the Darlington-Chesterfield county line in the state's northeast corner late Wednesday, said Deputy U.S. Marshal Tim Stec. Authorities said there were several reported sightings but none were confirmed, and believe he is still in the area.
The rural road leading to Hinson's home outside Hartsville is lined with mobile homes, many of them with bikes and toys lying in the yards. The neighborhood, which one resident described as "one big family," is about 20 miles northwest of Florence where busy Interstate 95 meets Interstate 20.
Argeree Cooks, who lives with her four grandchildren down the street from Hinson's home, was worried. Her family also did not know Hinson was a sex offender, she said.
"Why couldn't they tell us?" she said. "We have seen him. They need to tell people these things."
The problem with that is that everyone is entitled to defense under the law. Punishing defense attorneys for providing a required service is just silly.
Finish the sentences; ...based on crimes which they ACTUALLY committed in the past and the considered opinion of those responsible for evaluating their fitness to re-enter society and the likely hood of them committing such crimes again in the future.
---Punishing defense attorneys for providing a required service is just silly.
I have had the same thoughts as your post. I think judges are doing as they please and it is not always in the best interests of society or the victims. Look at the case of Shasta Groene. That monster was released and went on to murder and torture. The Groene case alone should have made judges wise up to sex offenders. I am just disgusted with everything to do with sex offenders right now. I support Jessicas Law. But honestly I think since these monsters can do these horrible acts on children then they should be dead, why give them a chance to repeat and ruin more children's lives? I don't think sex offenders deserve any rights. I've been told I am barbaric so I guess its true. Its just all so disgusting and sickening to see these monsters get out to repeat while the victim is scarred for life.
Greatest good for greatest number. Multilation of children SHOULD rank with rape and murder.
Why can't the family of the girls sue the judge for damages?
Circuit Judge Edward Cottingham
I'm no lawyer, but it's probably not possible to sue a judge for damages. I haven't ever heard of it before.
But you did not answer the question. Are you comfortable putting people away for crimes that they MIGHT commit?
Why not?
Unless there is a specific law that indemnifies judges for their decisions then why can't they be sued just like a doctor.
Judge malpracticed, he made a bad decision and someone was harmed.
Thanks for your research. Hopes this gets some circulation.
Not according to the code of Virginia. Title 53.1.
It goes on, covering 53 sections dealing with parole. http://leg1.state.va.us/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+TOC53010000004000000000000Section 53.1-134 Creation of Parole Board; appointment of members.
There shall be a Parole Board which shall consist of up to five members appointed by the Governor and subject to confirmation by the General Assembly, if in session when such appointment is made, and if not in session, then at its next succeeding session. At least one member of the Parole Board shall be a representative of a crime victims' organization or a victim of crime as defined in subsection B of § 19.2-11.01.
The members of the Parole Board shall serve at the pleasure of the Governor.
I have a bridge for sale...
Fox reports this creep was apprehended this evening. Read more here:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,188200,00.html
Your question presumes no crime was committed in the first place. It doesn't make sense.
Judge Edward Cottingham is the name of the judge who said the state did not prove he would offend again.
http://www.wistv.com/Global/story.asp?S=4636498
South Carolina Freepers and citizens need to hold this judge accountable.
|
| SOR Home |
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
| Criminal Charges | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Offense: |
|
||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||||||||||||||
Clearly, you don't want to answer the question, so you try to undermine it. The validity of the question does not depend upon any presumption I have or have not made.
To be as straightforward as possible, while I might be inclined to harsher sentences upon conviction for crimes actually committed, I am not comfortable with putting people away for crimes they MIGHT commit in the future, or for failing some sort of government-mandated psychological profile. Are you?
The only reason that I can see for someone demanding "government-mandated psychological profiles" is if they have some doubt about the punishment fitting the crime.
I don't have any such doubts. But apparently some judges do.
Is this the same trial in which the guy was just acquited yesterday?
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.