BEFORE EVERYONE goes crazy.
PLEASE NOTE:
1. This is poor reporting.
2. This is a plea bargan. This suggests the evidence the prosecutor had was tenuous or somehow in jeopardy. The "admissions" may (as many if not most do) have had admissibility issues.
3. At trial, the evidence may not have been admissible. This deal puts him on the predator list so he does have a lifetime stigma and does have places he can never live.
4. I see this as indicative of the incomptence of prosecutorial work. Poor lawyering done by people who never should have been admitted to law school.
2. This is a plea bargain. This suggests the evidence the prosecutor had was tenuous or somehow in jeopardy. The "admissions" may (as many if not most do) have had admissibility issues.
Your psychic sense is cluttered with lawyer-like fanciful conclusions not in evidence.
3. At trial, the evidence may not have been admissible. This deal puts him on the predator list so he does have a lifetime stigma and does have places he can never live.
See answer to #2. Here your supposition stinks a much as #2.
4. I see this as indicative of the incompetence of prosecutorial work. Poor lawyering done by people who never should have been admitted to law school.
Typical shark approach. Eat your own, while bemoaning a system composed of scum utterly devoid of ethics, and indifference toward the innocent of our society.
I agree with an earlier poster who speculated that Judge Robert Lewis and DA Ron Moore are probably pedophiles or child pornographers, too. Maybe they're on the same "file-sharing" network as the defendant. This wrist-slap sentence sounds too much like a "wink and nod" arrangement.
Plea bargains often result because the prosecutor's case isn't very good (ie, most damning evidence is inadmissible). This is often NOT a result of poor prosecutorial work and has nothing to do withh how smart or deserving of being accepted to law school the prosecutor is or was.