Kay Henson (spanking mom) back in WI jail. Freep the heck out of Wisconsin!

CP Prosecutions ^ | July 17-18, 2002 | Various

[HiTech RedNeck]

When a person pleads guilty, as Henson did, the judge accepts the facts of the case as contained in the complaint.

Boy this is confusing. If Wisconsin has a law exempting ordinary spankings from misdemeanor assault, it sounds like she pleaded guilty to a noncrime. The judge may accept the facts... but he can't have the law dictated to him by the prosecution.

[cherrycapital]

Actually, harbour, you are only displaying your ignorance. I am not a fundamentalist myself, more of a deist, but I was raised among many fundamentalists and they are actually the least likely of any parents to spank in anger. So your aspersions on Kay's "sect" (read: church)are singularly idiotic.

[cherrycapital]

Are you drunk already?

[HiTech RedNeck]

As applied to Gaston's delirious rant-rave it is a caricature... but not by much.

[cherrycapital]

How did this turn into a thread on the Gastons?

[HiTech RedNeck]

Mrs. Henson's advisors are Gastonites.

[Catspaw]

How did this turn into a thread on the Gastons?

You've got the Gastons (at least the missus) posted on your website.

[Catspaw]

She didn't plead guilty to child abuse.  She plead guilty to battery under 940.19(1).  What was she originally charged with?  

BTW, interesting definition of child abuse.  Apparently, if one limits oneself to soft tissue or internal  injuries, it's not child abuse, right? 

940.19       
940.19 Battery; substantial battery; aggravated battery. 
940.19(1)       
(1) Whoever causes bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another without the consent of the person so harmed is guilty of a Class A misdemeanor.
 
940.19(2)       
(2) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class E felony.
 
940.19(3)       
(3) Whoever causes substantial bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause substantial bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class D felony.
 
940.19(4)       
(4) Whoever causes great bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class D felony.
 
940.19(5)       
(5) Whoever causes great bodily harm to another by an act done with intent to cause either substantial bodily harm or great bodily harm to that person or another is guilty of a Class C felony.
 
940.19(6)       
(6) Whoever intentionally causes bodily harm to another by conduct that creates a substantial risk of great bodily harm is guilty of a Class D felony.  A rebuttable presumption of conduct creating a substantial risk of great bodily harm arises:
 
940.19(6)(a)       
(a)  If the person harmed is 62 years of age or older; or
 
940.19(6)(b)       
(b)  If the person harmed has a physical disability, whether congenital or acquired by accident, injury or disease, that is discernible by an ordinary person viewing the physically disabled person, or that is actually known by the actor.
 
940.19 - ANNOT.       
       History: 1977 c. 173; 1979 c. 111, 113; 1987 a. 399; 1993 a. 441, 483.
 
940.19 - ANNOT.       
       Under the "elements only" test, offenses under subsections that require proof of nonconsent are not lesser included offenses of offenses under subsections for which proof of nonconsent is not required.  State v. Richards, 123 Wis. 2d 1, 365 N.W.2d 7 (1985).
 
940.19 - ANNOT.       
       "Physical disability" is discussed.  State v. Crowley, 143 Wis. 2d 324, 422 N.W.2d 847 (1988).
 
940.19 - ANNOT.       
       First-degree reckless injury, s. 940.23 (1), is not a lesser included offense of aggravated battery.  State v. Eastman, 185 Wis. 2d 405, 518 N.W.2d 257 (Ct. App. 1994).
 
940.19 - ANNOT.       
       The act of throwing urine that strikes another and causes pain constitutes a battery.  State v. Higgs, 230 Wis. 2d 1, 601 N.W.2d 653 (Ct. App. 1999).
 

[Catspaw]

Boy this is confusing. If Wisconsin has a law exempting ordinary spankings from misdemeanor assault, it sounds like she pleaded guilty to a noncrime. The judge may accept the facts... but he can't have the law dictated to him by the prosecution.

Although I've requested that we see a copy of the complaint, my guess is that she was charged with a crime that carried a higher penalty (either a C, D or E felony) and it was reduced to the misdemeanor in the plea bargain. Once she plead guilty to that crime, the judge uses the complaint as a basis for her sentencing.

In this situation, the judge probably accepted the recommendation, probably a joint recommendation (from the defense and the prosecution) about sentencing. However, the judge does not have to accept the sentence recommendation and can use the complaint as a basis for sentencing after a guilty plea has been entered, and it does happen if the judge feels the sentencing recommendation is to short or too long. I have seen a few cases in which the defendant pleads guilty, but there is no sentence recommendation. In those situations, each side argues for sentence.

The key factor is that she plead guilty. Had she taken this to trial and been found guilty, the judge uses the evidence, testimony and victim impact statements in his (or her) sentence. Had she been acquitted, she would've walked.

[Catspaw]

Such brilliant people. Camo fatigues, a bible, and a sense of absolute persecution by the federal government, state government, couty government, the school board, the utility companies, most churches, the business world, the Illuminat, the men in black, and the neighbor's dog is all they need to get through the pathetic failures that pass for their lives.

You did forget abusive. Note the personal attacks coming from this crowd, although they're verboten. Obviously, laws and rules are made for someone else, but they'll sure snark down taxpayer money when it suits them.

[RGSpincich]

Listen, pal, I've *personally* seen the "evidence"

The problem is not the evidence, the evidence is irrelevant at this point. Ms. Henson pled guilty to the abuse crime. She got off easy on a lesser charge and did not get hit with a felony. The one sided case you present is after the fact.

Ms. Henson was privy to the evidence, she was an eyewitness and knew exactly what motivated the spanking. She pled guilty. You may say she was coerced to do so. I say she is being coereced now by a bunch of lunatics with an agenda. It's funny to watch these things get retried on the internet with the facts twisted and the prosecution absent.

She is described as a "pastors wife".

Hardly, she tries to sell health supplements and her husband tries to sell religous stuff on the internet. He had been writing programs for "Dungeons and Dragons". They have no ministry.

No pastor here

Why do people who abuse their children almost always cite some higher calling in their life?

BTW, the CPS thing is a red herring, too. You do know that Ms. Henson is not in jail, do you not? Been out for a couple of days.

[Catspaw]

It looks like he gave himself a promotion from janitor to pastor.

Calvary Community Church Highway 50 and Harris Road P.O. Box 1200 Williams Bay, WI 53191-1200 414/245-6294	Position: Janitor/Webmaster Employment: Oct 1997 – Present	Duties: As a janitor, I clean and disinfect bathrooms, vacuum offices, hallways, and classrooms, remove trash and recyclable materials, remove snow and ice, clean drinking fountains, sweep and mop floors, and repair whatever breaks (i.e., air vent guards, door knobs, vacuums, etc). I also perform corrective maintenance on computer hardware and software when needed.

[RGSpincich]

You must've missed this...

I knew it was in there somewhere. ; )

[DJ MacWoW]

I agree that manual expression works but I doubt she had the time or the privacy to do so for quite a few hours. These people aren't terribly co-operative. They helped a friend of mine so much that she committed suicide. I was present for several "visits". I've never seen anything like it before.

[RGSpincich]

The most recent incarceration is a direct result of yet another anonymous report of child neglect against Kay alleging her 2 1/2 year old was in the street. Multiple witnesses observed a police officer take the child off of the sidewalk before bringing her to Kay's house and informing her that he had rescued the child from the street.

Because the kid was lucky enough to make it back to the sidewalk the Lunatic Fringe cries "no foul". Sounds like the neighbors are continuing to keep an eye out for the kids.

[montag813]

Why didn't she just leave the state at her first opportunity. F*ck the injustice system...I would be in New York in a Wisconsin minute...they would never find her there.

[FormerLurker]

The whiney "fundamentalists" too often cover up their egregious behavior by making such claims as this.

So now term "fundamentlist" is extended to JEWS?