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

wrong. I care about justice.

Money and race.

Does it seem right to you that the prosecutor dropped the charges from second degree rape all the way down to 4th degree rape, given the fact that the child was repeatedly sexually abused over a period of years--when she was between the ages of 3 to 5? And, apparently, the only reason he stopped abusing her was because his daughter finally complained to her grandmother about what he was doing to her.

Don't you think there is a need for the prosecutor to explain to the public--and that includes the victim--why the lesser charge, and recommendation of no jail time, seemed appropriate in this particular case? Mental health treatment is available in correctional facilities, so a need for treatment is not sufficient reason for the no-incarceration decisions made by the state and the judge. Even if the child, who is now 11, can't fully understand these things now, at some point in the future she will be able to, and she's entitled to know why her father/abuser was spared any jail time, given what he did to her.

I want to see justice done too. But, in this case, I'm not sure the victim, or the public, has seen justice, given the crimes committed against this child.

There is a civil suit pending in this matter, and perhaps more information from the pre-sentencing report will become public during those proceedings to shed more light on the decisions made by the prosecutor and the judge, and the alleged "unique circumstances" in this case. Right now, I think they have a lot of explaining to do.

I am going to assume, because I have no evidence to the contrary, that the lower charges were agreed to because the prosecutor judged that he would have trouble with his burden of proof for second or third degree. I have seen reports that the prosecutor regrets not trying for a stiffer sentence on the 4th degree, but not that he regrets agreeing to 4th degree.



I dont think there is any good reason to try to explain such conclusions to a kid, nor do I think that there is ever reason to explain this to the public. We do not, or should not anyways, try cases in public opinion. The only persons this decision needed to be explained to was his boss, and the judge. Had the victim been an adult then the victim too.

du Pont heir didn't go to court-ordered clinic
Source: Wilmington News Journal

A du Pont heir who raped his daughter was supposed to complete an intensive treatment program at an inpatient psychiatric clinic in Massachusetts as a condition of a sentence that allowed him to avoid prison time.

But he never did, court records show.

Superior Court Judge Jan R. Jurden ordered probation for Robert H. Richards IV in February 2009, on the condition that he be accepted for treatment at the expensive McLean Hospital near Boston, according to a transcript of the sentencing. Jurden agreed to probation only after the prosecutor argued the state typically would demand prison time in such child abuse cases, but was willing to accept probation because of the therapy Richards would receive at the out-of-state clinic.

"If the court is not inclined to send him to the Massachusetts program, then the state would be asking for some period of jail that the court would feel would be appropriate under the circumstances," prosecutor Renee Hrivnak said during the Feb. 6, 2009 hearing.

More at link

Read more: http://www.delawareonline.com/story/news/local/2014/04/08/du-pont-heir-finish-treatment-records-show/7475045/


Looks like trouble is headed Mr. Richard's way...

I don't think so. He hasn't violated his probation, and he has complied with some sort of treatment. He's not the one responsible for the fact that the specific sentence, as ordered by the judge, was not carried out.

Of course, he still might be charged with the sexual abuse of his son, but that's a different matter.

How about in this case, Firefly?

http://able2know.org/topic/240584-1

Who is "wrong", Hawk?