He would “not fare well” in prison a good reason for probation vs jail time?

That's good to know. If I ever commit a crime I will point out how I would "not fare well in prison."

The point is that child rapists fare particularly poorly. Also, Jeffrey Dahmer-types, who eat their victims, fair poorly, as well. Whereas, Bernie Madoff fairs well, because the warden will protect him well.

And how do all the children fare that around said child rapists? Shows much more compassion for the criminals than the most innocent of victims.

Your reasoning also supports that this man would fair well in prison seeing how wealthy he is.

Also from the article "... prison officials can put inmates in protective custody if they are worried about their safety, noting that child abusers are sometimes targeted by other inmates."

Basically this sentencing is a load of crap -- given too him much more likely because of his wealth.

But you will then have to back that up with proof that you have a few hundred million dollars in your bank account. The Justice Department should immediately investigate the judge and the IRS should check every bank account and every financial nook and cranny associated with the judge to see how much money was passed hands between the judge and defendant.

He should have been sent to prison with having the defendant remain in solitary confinement the whole time.

"Affluenza" is apparently a real thing now.

That should motivate the poors to do something about their poorness.

Yikes! I'm not defending rapists or how they're treated. Prison conditions are in no way a democracy are in any way representative of how it 'should be' run. I'm applying no logic or reasoning of mine - just reporting the facts as they are.

well that's a relief - I thought maybe you were considering freeing them all.

That's Hawkeye's perview (intentionally spelled that well - TM pending).

I suppose now that you have TMed the word, you want to be paid perview.

I personally feel that prison (i.e. deprivation of liberty) should be the punishment, and that prisoners, no matter what they have done, should have the same rights to dignity and decent treatment as people on the outside. It is the duty of the State to ensure that those rights are protected. If there is such a thing as "pound-ass Federal prison" as some people seem to think, then it is a disgrace. Having said that, I think that a man who raped a three-year-old definitely belongs in prison, and for a long period. I see from Google that an Australian got seven and a half years for a similar crime, and I think that is a bit short. Ten to fourteen seems about right. Plus very strict parole conditions.

That's rule of law America, Linkat.

But one has to wonder why y'all are getting your panties in a bunch when the USA does equally abhorrent things to children daily.

--------------
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/torture-killing-children-shot-ndash-and-how-the-us-tried-to-keep-it-all-quiet-2115112.html

Torture, killing, children shot – and how the US tried to keep it all quiet

The largest leak in history reveals the true extent of the bloodshed unleashed by the decision to go to war in Iraq – and adds at least 15,000 to its death toll


Sunday 24 October 2010
So now we begin to know the full extent of what Tony Blair called the blood price.
A detainee tortured with live electrical wires here, children shot by US troops at a checkpoint there, insurgents using children to carry out suicide bombings somewhere else; on and on, through 391,832 documents. At the Pentagon, these messages were the day-to-day commonplaces of staff inboxes; for Iraqis, they detail, in the emotionless jargon of the US military, nothing less than the hacking open of a nation's veins.
Today, seven and a half years on from the order to invade, the largest leak in history has shown, far more than has been hitherto known, just what was unleashed by that declaration of war. The Iraqi security services tortured hundreds, and the US military watched, noted and emailed, but rarely intervened. A US helicopter gunship crew were ordered to shoot insurgents trying to surrender. A doctor sold al-Qa'ida a list of female patients with learning difficulties so they could be duped into being suicide bombers. A private US company, which made millions of dollars from the outsourcing of security duties, killed civilians. And the Americans, who have always claimed never to count civilian deaths, were in fact secretly logging them. At a conservative estimate, the new documents add at least 15,000 to the war's death toll.
It was yesterday morning when WikiLeaks, the crowd-funded website which achieved worldwide fame for releasing Afghanistan material earlier this year, uploaded nearly 400,000 US military documents. Covering the 2004-09 period, they consist of messages passed from low-level or medium-level operational troops to their superiors and ultimate bosses in the Pentagon. They are marked "Secret", by no means the highest of security classifications.
The Pentagon's response was to say that the leak put the lives of US troops and their military partners in jeopardy, and other official sources dismissed the documents as revealing little that was new. An answer to this came from Iraq Body Count, the British organisation that has monitored civilian deaths since 2003: "These Iraq logs ... contain information on civilian and other casualties that has been kept from public view by the US government for more than six years.... The data on casualties is information about the public (mainly the Iraqi public) that was unjustifiably withheld from both the Iraqi and world public by the US military, apparently with the intent to do so indefinitely."
The Iraq War Logs are US documents, and so detail only a few incidents involving British troops. Two, dated 23 June 2008, record a pair of Shia men who say they were punched and kicked by unidentified British troops. Both men had injuries that were consistent with their stories. There is no record of any formal investigation. Another log, dated 2 September 2008, records that a civilian interrogator working with the Americans claimed British soldiers had dragged him through his house and repeatedly dunked his head into a bowl of water and threatened him with a pistol. The log says his story was undermined by inconsistencies and an absence of injuries.
Here are the main areas where there is fresh, and significant, information:
Civilian death tolls
The Pentagon and the Iraqi health ministry consistently refused to publish a death toll of civilians, even denying such a record existed. "We don't do body counts," said US General Tommy Franks, who directed the Iraq invasion. The Iraq War Logs reveal just how hollow his words were.
Since the beginning of the war, The Independent on Sunday has asserted that the true death toll of civilians in the war was far higher than military officials were suggesting. As early as 2004 the IoS reported that the Pentagon was in fact collecting classified casualty figures and that academics believed the death toll might be as much as 100,000 – or more.
The logs detail 109,032 deaths, some 66,081 of which are civilians. Iraq Body Count said yesterday that an analysis of a sample of 860 of the Iraq War Logs led it to estimate the information in all the logs would add 15,000 extra civilian deaths to its previous total of 107,000. To these should be added military deaths, and IBC's revised total deaths in Iraq would now be around 150,000, 80 per cent of them civilians.
However, some care needs to be taken in using this data. The information in the logs is by no means a comprehensive tally of all deaths.
The death toll of civilians is in stark contrast to President Bush's words in 2003, when he said that new technology meant troops could go out of their way to protect Iraqi civilians. "With new tactics and precision weapons, we can achieve military objectives without directing violence against civilians," he said.

DO READ ON!

Tsars: That's Hawkeye's perview

Source please.

Child rapists don't fare well in prison; therefore no child rapists should be sent to prison?

No USA war criminals and terrorist should be sent to prison, Roger?

Good point. I seem to have developed an immunity to afluenza.

Sounds fair. Punishment with opportunity of redemption. We treat prisoners worse than we allow pets to be treated.

The article cited in the OP contains a link to another article with more info on how this decision came about. It was really the prosecutor, and not the judge, who opened the door to the extreme leniency shown in the sentence.
http://www.freep.com/article/20140330/NEWS07/303300113/Du-Pont-heir-s-sentence-for-raping-daughter-3-raises-questions.

Just before this case was due to go to trial, the prosecutor suddenly offered a sweetheart plea deal--the charge would be reduced to a Class C felony, which carries no mandatory jail time, and for which sentencing guidelines suggest zero to 2 1/2 years in prison. And, on top of that, the prosecutor recommended probation, and not jail time.

While we don't know what was in the pre-sentencing report that might have contributed to this decision, the prosecutor's actions seem very questionable and appear to trivialize the nature of this man's offenses.

Certainly, this defendant is neither very elderly nor too physically frail to cope with a prison environment--he's 6-feet-4 and between 250 and 276 pounds--and, whatever mental health issues he might have, could have been addressed while he was incarcerated. If need be, he could have been placed in protective housing, if the nature of his offense against a child made him a vulnerable target for other inmates.

What makes this even more troubling is the fact that his ex-wife has also accused him of admitting to sexually abusing their infant son over a two year period--in addition to the sexual abuse of their daughter. Although police initially concluded they did not have sufficient evidence to bring charges in that matter, they are apparently going to take another look at those allegations.

I find the extreme leniency in this case outrageous, and the rationale that he would "not fare well" in prison without sufficient substantiation. Not just the judge, but especially the prosecutor, owe the public a better, and more open, explanation for their actions.

4th degree rape in a case where the prosecutor recommends probation. Ya, sounds right to me.




http://www.cbsnews.com/news/report-judge-says-du-pont-heir-wont-fare-well-in-prison/