A New Hampshire mom and her 15-year-old son were stunned to learn a Haverhill man - charged with raping the boy and held without bail on one judge’s dangerousness order - was sprung on $100 bond and a house-arrest order by another judge.
“It is a slap in the face that some judge who didn’t even speak to me or my son let (the defendant) walk for $100 cash,” said the mother, who the Herald is not identifying. She learned of the release yesterday. “My son is broken now, but he’s out for 100 bucks.”
$100 for statutory rape. This man lured a young boy into his home, gave him cigarettes and money in exchange for sexual favors, and is out on bail for a little more than it costs to fill up the tank of a pick-up truck. Contrast this with the story of Gregory Girard, who was held without bail for nearly three months because he was too dangerous to let back into society at any cost - because he bought a few items at a gun show and might have fired a few .22LR rounds in his attic. He was then released, with the charges continued without a finding - basically, if Girard doesn't get arrested in the next four years, it's like it never happened...
Molest a young boy? Out on bail for $100. Buy a piece of metal at a gun show? Held without bail for three months. That's how the state of Massachusetts classifies criminals. If you actually cause physical and emotional harm to a child, you get a light slap on the wrist and are free to go. If you dare to question the state's monopoly on force, you get the full weight of the criminal "justice" system brought down upon you, ruining your good name, destroying your ability to provide for your family, and holding you basically indefinitely while the state scrambles to think up some bullshit charge.
MA: The birthplace, and graveyard, of liberty indeed.
That is all.
2 comments:
If you actually cause physical and emotional harm to a child, you get a light slap on the wrist and are free to go. If you dare to question the state's monopoly on force, you get the full weight of the criminal "justice" system brought down upon you
Of course. A child rapist is no threat to the government. People who question the State are.
100 years ago, that judge would've have been tarred, feathered, and run out of town on a rail, while the animal (I refuse to acknowledge him as human) would have been put up against a wall and shot... if he was lucky.
Doesn't it feel great to know we're all civilized now? Personally, I think I was born in the wrong century.
-Borepatch:
"A child rapist is no threat to the government. People who question the State are."
You are sadly correct, my friend. Only it should be expanded to "people who question the State and have the means to oppose it are a threat."
Post a Comment