And it's not the factory farms.
Baby's molester gets two years; could be out in less than six months
Yes, you heard right. Rape a baby, get six months in prison!
Bobby Joe Flores had gonorrhea. And at some point after he baby-sat for a 1-year-old girl, so did she.
But a state law prevented that information from being presented to a jury, so Flores pleaded guilty to a lesser-grade child molesting charge.
The result Monday was a prison sentence under which Flores could be free in less than a year.
Again, yes, you heard right. This... THING... raped a 1-year-old baby, gave her gonorrhea.... And because he had an STD, was able to get off with barely a slap on the wrist, because:
Indiana law prohibits the disclosure of information related to the identities of people who contract communicable diseases.
Such information can be disclosed only if the person signs a release; if the information does not identify the person with the disease; or if the release is necessary to enforce public health laws, according to state law.
Which prevented the prosecution from bringing the most incriminating evidence up in the trial.
You know, one would think that there would be another exemption in there for cases involving SEXUAL ASSAULT. But I guess that would mean working to protect the victims, as opposed to babying criminals.
And the thing that makes me most livid?
With 189 days of jail credit, Flores could be released from prison in as little as six months because Indiana law grants prisoners in the Department of Correction two days of jail credit for every day served without a disciplinary action.
He was going to get eight years, but the judge suspended six of those in favor of probation... And, in another case of babying criminals, Indiana state law will see him free before the end of the year.
Moral of the story: If you're a child predator, contract an STD and move to Indiana! Not only will the law pamper you by letting you off lightly for giving children horrific diseases, but if you behave in prison, you'll only have to actually serve one-third of your sentence! Which will probably ALREADY be cut down to one-quarter of its initially-proposed length in favor of probation!
AND NOW FOR THE STORY THAT WILL MAKE YOU GO "HUH?"
Toddler's abuser admits guilt, gets 14 years
Charged as an adult, 17-year-old Ahmad O. Alexander admitted Monday to doing horrible things to a toddler left in his care.
Alexander pleaded guilty to neglect of a dependent and aggravated battery, both Class B felonies, with an agreement capping his prison sentence at 14 years, according to court documents.
His girlfriend pleaded guilty earlier this year to a charge of neglect of a dependent.
.....DOES ANYONE ELSE NOTICE THE DISCONNECT HERE?
Rape a baby and give her an STD, get six months! Neglect and physically abuse a toddler, get 14 years! Yeah! Yeah, that sounds... that sounds... fair...
Wait, what? How does that make sense? The rapist gets a far lighter sentence than... what?
I think my brain is broken. The dissonance has left it FUBAR'd...
Also, notice how sterile-sounding the first article is, when addressing a rapist's actions... But when we get to Ahmad, they break out loaded rhetoric to portray him as some kind of inhuman monster (but, when addressing his girlfriend, they revert back to using the same old sterile writing style used for the rapist.)
Now, don't get me wrong... I think all three of them are absolute, worthless scum. But why use the loaded phrasing for only one of them? Why do the rapist and the willfully neglectful mother get treated with more impartiality than the abuser? Given the Gazette's tendency towards right-leaning, I wouldn't put it past them to have broken out the "evil monster" brush simply because of the abuser's "Muslim"-sounding name, but without talking to the author responsible for the article, I can't make any concrete calls :/
Anyway. I've said my piece (admittedly disjointedly... But I find it hard to think 100% coherently when something triggers one of my psychotic-rage buttons - one of which is child rape. Abuse is horrific in and of itself, but in my eyes, raping a child is even worse and deserves the harshest penalties possible, short of the death sentence. I simply cannot wrap my mind around the concept of coddling a child rapist in this manner.)
Now, what's your take on the whole sorry situation?