Another terrible decision by a rotten judge — and a six-year-old pays the price

Although I do not support the death penalty, sometimes it gets difficult to argue against in specific cases.  From ALa of Blonde Sagacity:

“…A convicted sex offender pleaded guilty Monday to raping a 6-year-old boy at a Massachusetts public library last year while he was on probation.

Corey Deen Saunders, 27, entered the plea Monday to child rape and related charges. He was arrested Jan. 30, 2008, after luring the boy to the magazine stacks in the New Bedford library while the child’s mother worked on a computer just a few feet away.

At a court hearing last year, prosecutors played a videotaped interview in which the boy told a child welfare official the assault was like being attacked by a “T-rex and an alligator.”

At the time, Saunders was on probation after serving four years in prison for the attempted rape of a 7-year-old boy.

Saunders had been released in 2006 despite objections from prosecutors, who are allowed under state law to ask that sex offenders be locked up indefinitely after completing their prison terms. Three psychologists supported the commitment request, but the judge granted him probation, citing his lack of sexual crimes while in prison.” (source)

I hope this case has caught Bill O’Reilly’s attention and that this judge is made to take accountability for this disastrous decision!

Now, it should be remembered that, in this case, there was an alternative: the “judge” could have had Mr Saunders retained in custody.  More, everyone connected with the case was recommending that Mr Saunders not be released, because he constituted a danger to children.  But — and it took me quite a while searching via Google to find this “judge’s” name — Bristol County Superior Court Associate Justice Richard T. Moses decided that there wasn’t enough evidence to keep Mr Saunders in custody.  Yet Mr Saunders, who had been sexually abused as a child and was developmentally disabled, was a ward of the state and had been through all sorts of trouble in state homes. including sexually-related trouble.  Reading through his record, anyone could have seen that this man was a danger to children and a danger to society.

And who is paying the price for Justice Richard T Moses’ lack of judgement?  A six-year-old boy is paying the price, his mother, who thought he’d be safe in the children’s books section of the library is paying the price, the rest of the family is paying the price.

ALa would like to see Justice Moses held accountable for his decision, but, of course, in the United States we cannot legally punish judges when the result of a bad decision turns out like this.  But we can take appropriate private action against him: we can publicize his name, we can tell people what he has done, we can hound him and hound him and hound him until he resigns his position, changes his name and moves out to where no one knows him.

Maybe once something like that has happened to some of these ridiculously, criminally sympathetic judges, the rest will get the message, and not take decisions like this anymore.

3 Comments

  1. …citing his lack of sexual crimes while in prison.” (source)

    Oh for godsake, there aren’t small children in prison so of course he didn’t commit crimes there. This is so outrageous and unspeakable and yet it’s becoming sadly, very familiar.

  2. There are a lot of thug hugging judges and it goes well beyond sexual predators.

    We should always look into the persons who appoint these hacks in black who tenderly administer slaps on the wrist. There is no 100% certainly that they will be Democrat appointees but that is the safe way to bet.

    Consider Judge Gregory Sleet, perhaps one of the more ‘sensitive’ judges to infest the Federal judiciary. When swindler Andrew Yao ripped off about $40 million dollars and spent it on a high-cost mistress, a lot of little people got hurt. Sleet gave the crook a year and a day but allowed him time to appeal. The appeals go on an on. Sleet showed his disdain for common sense police work when he freed a drug thug. The suspect got a little antsy around the cops and made a run for it, dropping (or throwing away) a gun in the process. He could not outrun the police and did not have time to throw away his illegal drugs. Guess who appointed Sleet to the Federal bench?

    When a Democrat hack in Delaware was charged with a variety of crimes in Delaware, the charges kept going away. One interesting aspect was a $2+ million ‘loan’ from a well-connected woman with a zoning matter before the County Government. This loan had not been reported on a mortgage application and this was illegal. The unique defense was offered that the borrower had no intention of repaying the loan so there was no need to repay it. This would indicate an intent to defraud and that would be a criminal action. But it could have been simple bribery, also a crime. Had it been a gift, there was no payment of the Federal gift tax. The matter was solved in a way that was not up to the standards of Solomon. A ‘senior’ (often synonymous to senile)judge who had been appointed by LBJ was found and he gave the lass ‘timed served’ as her penalty. This amounted to a few hours in the hoosegow.

    There was probably great joy in terrorist and criminal circles at the result of last November’s election and the recent rolling over of so many (nominally) Republican Senators who supported the selection of ‘pardon king’ Holder as Attorney General.

    Perhaps crime may be the safe alternative to work in this time of change. Never forget that the primary objective of Cook County vote rigging was the election of the finest judges money could buy.

    We might also remember how (then) Senator Biden blocked the nomination of a Bush judicial nominee to the Federal bench so that Obama could select a thug-hugging hack.

  3. The judge was playing the percentages. First-time offender, served his time well – and contrary to popular belief, child molesters have a far lower rate of recidivism than your average felon (around 20% vs. 46%). Top that off with the fact that keeping someone in prison beyond their sentence is of dubious constitutionality, and I’m not sure how the judge could have decided differently. He may have been able to provide treatment, but I’m not certain.

    Either way, your comments and Art’s reek of Monday-morning quarterbacking. Remember that judges have to decide based on the evidence presented to them at trial – they can’t see the future any better than we can.

Comments are closed.