Oklahoma Judge soft on Pedos, one year sentence for raping a 5-year old girl

[satindesire]

I wanted to bring this to all of your attentions. This is an absolute outrage and needs to be brought to the general public's attention.

http://www.mcalesternews.com/local/local_story_157175737.html

Contact the government. Let them know that WE WILL NOT STAND for pedophiles being slapped on the wrist for raping and sodomizing innocent children. We need to protect our children from disgusting worthless trash like David Harold E. Earls.

District 18 Judge Thomas Bartheld should be IMMEDIATELY removed from office. There is no excuse for allowing a convicted child rapist loose on the streets so he can harm more of our innocent children.

Below is the link for information about getting into contact with the Oklahoma government.

http://www.billoreilly.com/blog;jse...96?action=viewBlog&blogID=-970889672438489161

 

[unregistered]

 

[JMohegan]

I wanted to bring this to all of your attentions. This is an absolute outrage and needs to be brought to the general public's attention.

http://www.mcalesternews.com/local/local_story_157175737.html

Contact the government. Let them know that WE WILL NOT STAND for pedophiles being slapped on the wrist for raping and sodomizing innocent children. We need to protect our children from disgusting worthless trash like David Harold E. Earls.

District 18 Judge Thomas Bartheld should be IMMEDIATELY removed from office. There is no excuse for allowing a convicted child rapist loose on the streets so he can harm more of our innocent children.

Below is the link for information about getting into contact with the Oklahoma government.

http://www.billoreilly.com/blog;jse...96?action=viewBlog&blogID=-970889672438489161

On the off chance that any O'Reilly fans are interested in the other side of the story, here is an article that presents it.

"We didn’t have our key witness,” said Miller, whose office later negotiated the plea bargain for a year’s imprisonment for Earls, with the rest of a 20-year sentence suspended. In addition, Earls is now a convicted sex offender and is required to register for the rest of his life once he is released from prison, Miller said.

“We were offered a year by the defense,” Miller said, standing outside of Bartheld’s office Monday. “Our option was to take that deal or go to court and risk losing all of it.”

Miller explained that his staff weighed the evidence in the case and the child’s demeanor in the courtroom during the qualification hearing.

It seems to me that it would be very difficult for a non-lawyer, unfamiliar with the details of the case, to determine whether or not Miller and Bartheld made the right call.

I don't know enough to judge whether Miller and Bartheld made a wise or inappropriate decision in this case. But I do know that I have nothing but contempt for the exploitation of this child's suffering by O'Reilly and Rivera for ratings gain.

My god, this turns my stomach. It is TV "news" at it's most disgusting - and these days, that's saying one whole hell of a lot.

 

[Netzach]

How much do you want to bet the District 18 judge is going to need a flak vest?

Yeah, this is really sad. However, let's also not forget the satanic abuse witch hunts in the 80's in MN, you have to actually try and convict people and not lose your head.

 

[intothewoods]

Miller explained that his staff weighed the evidence in the case and the child’s demeanor in the courtroom during the qualification hearing.

“The little girl was terrified to testify to anything,” said Miller. “Not just of being in the courtroom in front of (Earls).

“It took two days for her to qualify, to say if she could tell the difference between the truth and a lie. It was terrifying for her to answer questions. How are we going to put that girl on the stand?”

According to Miller, he relayed all of that information to Rivera during a 30-minute interview about the case before the program aired.

“I told him every bit of this,” Miller said. “It floored me the way he did this show, the way he did him,” the district attorney said, nodding towards the judge’s office.

Attorneys and a clerk who were in the courtroom and later, in the judge’s chambers, for the hearing said the girl fidgeted and got up from her chair, standing on a table in the judge’s office at one point. Another time she opened the door from the judge’s office and walked out into a hallway.

“She wouldn’t stay in the chair,” said Shayla Harper, Bartheld’s clerk.

Harper said it was apparent the child did not want to talk, even after the effort was moved from the courtroom into the judge’s office.

What bastards - weighing all of the various factors, including the impact of having to testify on this little girl, prior to making an informed decision as a prosecutor.

 

[satindesire]

E-mail to Governor Henry sent. Thanks for letting us know about this, Satin.

I'm absolutely horrified by a precedent set for sentencing child rapists to one year. Seems shady...something's up with the judge. One year.

Poor girl. Hopefully her mother is strong enough and capable of giving her the help and support she needs. She has a long road of recovery ahead of her; with a supportive mom (&/or other trusted adult) and good friends she'll be okay. (Speaking from personal experience).

Speaking from personal experience as well, I hope that bastard burns in hell for a good few decades while a couple of demons show him what it's like to be abused and taken advantage of.

 

[graceanne]

Speaking from personal experience as well, I hope that bastard burns in hell for a good few decades while a couple of demons show him what it's like to be abused and taken advantage of.

I hope they put him in general population.

 

[JMohegan]

What bastards - weighing all of the various factors, including the impact of having to testify on this little girl, prior to making an informed decision as a prosecutor.

Prosecutor and judge making tough but informed decisions. What a concept, right?

How pathetic is it that the FCC gets swamped with complaints about a Janet Jackson tit flashing, but O'Reilly and Rivera carry on with this disgusting distortion and exploitation of child suffering while Fox maintains its ratings?

Free speech, I know, yeah yeah. I just wonder, at what point does Fox "News" get called on the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded building?

 

[satindesire]

I hope they put him in general population.

Oooh, sweet justice.

 

[graceanne]

Oooh, sweet justice.

Pretty much.

 

[intothewoods]

Prosecutor and judge making tough but informed decisions. What a concept, right?

How pathetic is it that the FCC gets swamped with complaints about a Janet Jackson tit flashing, but O'Reilly and Rivera carry on with this disgusting distortion and exploitation of child suffering while Fox maintains its ratings?

Free speech, I know, yeah yeah. I just wonder, at what point does Fox "News" get called on the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded building?

You'd think that after the criticism in light of the Dr. Tiller murder, O'Reilly would be hesitant to inspire this witch hunt in the face of judicial and prosecutorial conduct that happens every day. Doesn't anyone watch Law & Order?! Yes, that's a tv show, but the fact that DAs and judges make tough calls all the time is fact.

I'm a diehard for free speech. In conversations with friends, I have defended Michael Savage with that whole AIDS comment and Imus and all sorts of idiots. But when someone commits murder with all of that vitriol out there, it gives me pause. If Imus got fired, why not O'Reilly? Why are people not more outraged?

 

[satindesire]

You'd think that after the criticism in light of the Dr. Tiller murder, O'Reilly would be hesitant to inspire this witch hunt in the face of judicial and prosecutorial conduct that happens every day. Doesn't anyone watch Law & Order?! Yes, that's a tv show, but the fact that DAs and judges make tough calls all the time is fact.

I'm a diehard for free speech. In conversations with friends, I have defended Michael Savage with that whole AIDS comment and Imus and all sorts of idiots. But when someone commits murder with all of that vitriol out there, it gives me pause. If Imus got fired, why not O'Reilly? Why are people not more outraged?

I guess I'm just as bad as him, then, for broadcasting this on the forum. I didn't do it for ratings, or to get attention. I did it because that bastard deserved more jail time than he got and that judge doesn't deserve to be a judge if he's going to let a CHILD RAPIST get away with his crime with a slap on the wrist.

 

[Homburg]

I hope they put him in general population.

I used to know a guy that was a sheriff's deputy. They had very strict rules about never talking about what an inmate did when putting them in gen-pop. They could in no way say what the offense was, the details etc. He resigned ahead of getting fired, as he'd in-processed a man that had put his own child into a pot of boiling water, and he just couldn't take it any more. As he closed the cell door, he said "Sleep well, Chester." Chester is slang for child molester, of course, and that particular inmate found out shortly that many of his fellow inmates have kids and strong opinions about people that hurt children.

I could never work corrections. I was offered a position, and turned it down. I couldn't exist in such an environment and maintain my humanity. The former deputy that related this story expressed that he had no regrets for what he did, or what happened to the inmate in question, but you could still see in his eyes that it bothered him.

viv's uncle is a corrections officer at a state pen, and just the nicest, most genial guy you'd ever meet. I don't know how he does it.

 

[intothewoods]

I guess I'm just as bad as him, then, for broadcasting this on the forum. I didn't do it for ratings, or to get attention. I did it because that bastard deserved more jail time than he got and that judge doesn't deserve to be a judge if he's going to let a CHILD RAPIST get away with his crime with a slap on the wrist.

I don't think you're as bad as him because I don't think you posted this maliciously. I haven't looked at the case, but if the guy's guilty, then yes, he deserved more jail time. But how is that the judge's fault?

The question here is would you prefer that this guy go free?? Because that's what the prosecution and judge were facing, and why this idea that the judge should be rebuked for getting the max they thought they could get is insane. If you read the article, the prosecution did not have the evidence to win their case. Their witness was a child who was not able to testify in a way that would come across as reliable. The defense has a right to cross-examine any witness against him, and you better believe that would get nasty. So should they have taken the risk that this guy go free??

 

[SimonBrooke]

Prosecutor and judge making tough but informed decisions. What a concept, right?

How pathetic is it that the FCC gets swamped with complaints about a Janet Jackson tit flashing, but O'Reilly and Rivera carry on with this disgusting distortion and exploitation of child suffering while Fox maintains its ratings?

Free speech, I know, yeah yeah. I just wonder, at what point does Fox "News" get called on the equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded building?

The problem here (we've had similarly difficult cases this side of the pond, too) is that it is simply cruel to force a child of five to relive this sort of experience, and questioning in a formal court of law is an impossibly rigid and harsh treatment for a child of that age, anyway. By forcing her to testify you're compounding the damage done by the original assault.

There aren't easy solutions to this. The ritual of adversarial justice that we have developed in the English speaking world is really very poorly equipped to deal with child witnesses, particularly child witnesses who have experienced trauma.

In this case the headline number is the one year in prison. But Earl is also sentenced to nineteen years suspended - so for most of the rest of his natural life, the police can just lift him and slam him inside for any expression of unhealthy interest in a child. The fact that Earl pleaded 'no contest' means the child did not have to go through cross examination. It's not perfect, but this isn't a perfect world. The judge may well have done the best he could.

 

[satindesire]

I don't think you're as bad as him because I don't think you posted this maliciously. I haven't looked at the case, but if the guy's guilty, then yes, he deserved more jail time. But how is that the judge's fault?

The question here is would you prefer that this guy go free?? Because that's what the prosecution and judge were facing, and why this idea that the judge should be rebuked for getting the max they thought they could get is insane. If you read the article, the prosecution did not have the evidence to win their case. Their witness was a child who was not able to testify in a way that would come across as reliable. The defense has a right to cross-examine any witness against him, and you better believe that would get nasty. So should they have taken the risk that this guy go free??

I don't think a jury would have let him go free.

And in all honesty, one year in prison isn't the judge doing the best he can. I've seen girls who obstructed justice when their boyfriend got caught selling drugs go to jail for longer than this.

 

[Tawny_Temptress]

I think someone should sodomize the judge and then they can ask him if a year plus probation is enough.

 

[Betticus]

It's Oklahoma, they still have a guy doing 99 years for possession of marijuana.

Look at other factors involved, a prison stay for a child molester isn't exactly a picnic. What happens to them is normally far worse than the damage they did to the child, if they even survive in prison.

There has also been a trend that is disturbing with justice in the realm of child abuses. The penalties have been elevated to such horrific levels that it seems to be worth it for a child abuser to just go ahead and murder the child and dispose of the body. In another place or time when you would have opportunity for someone with the desire for kids to seek professional help we've pushed this issue to the point where there is no help for these persons in the time they need it most, before they ever actually physically or mentally abuse a kid. Instead they try to hide it until it becomes obsession and then leads to criminal acts for which the penalty is so unbalanced that it leads to murdered children littering the country.

Once the crime has been committed there is nothing you can do but be mad and seek vengeance. I'm thinking that the better way is to change that philosophy to one of prevention vs. knee jerk reaction after the fact.

Of course, some people out there just need to be killed because nothing you do can make them fit to be in the presence of the rest of humanity.

 

[nh23]

Look at other factors involved, a prison stay for a child molester isn't exactly a picnic. What happens to them is normally far worse than the damage they did to the child, if they even survive in prison.

I'd say that's subjective.

There has also been a trend that is disturbing with justice in the realm of child abuses. The penalties have been elevated to such horrific levels that it seems to be worth it for a child abuser to just go ahead and murder the child and dispose of the body. In another place or time when you would have opportunity for someone with the desire for kids to seek professional help we've pushed this issue to the point where there is no help for these persons in the time they need it most, before they ever actually physically or mentally abuse a kid. Instead they try to hide it until it becomes obsession and then leads to criminal acts for which the penalty is so unbalanced that it leads to murdered children littering the country.

Once the crime has been committed there is nothing you can do but be mad and seek vengeance. I'm thinking that the better way is to change that philosophy to one of prevention vs. knee jerk reaction after the fact.

Of course, some people out there just need to be killed because nothing you do can make them fit to be in the presence of the rest of humanity.

I agree there should be some attempt at prevention. But studies show that the majority of these type of predators cannot be rehabilitated. So...a lengthy prison term, or risk another child?

I have to admit that I'm very jaded on this subject. The man who abused me from the ages of 5 to 8 and in a very sadistic manner at that..I still have physical scars on my body, didn't serve a day, but that's a whole nother story.

I am serving a life sentence after what happened to me, as are tons of other children who were abused. Why shouldn't the abuser serve one also?

 

[MisterSir]

I'm having trouble understanding something here - the guy was offered the one-year sentence as part of a plea bargain, but from what I'm seeing the prosecution were involved in negotiations with the guy's attorney over the terms of the plea bargain. Am I right in thinking that the prosecution offered this because they didn't believe they'd get a conviction otherwise?

 

[Netzach]

Again, neither is appealing. Guy either walks or gets one year.

There is not enough evidence to convict.

Not enough.

Not enough.

Everyone, the judge, each lawyer, everyone would love to get their hands on the scum that did this with a screwdriver and fifteen minutes alone. I believe that.

Should we waterboard the five year old for the full details? She's NOT TALKING. No one else knows anything.

Now, if this guy did it, he deserves the worst the world has to offer.

On the off chance that he didn't and he were your own flesh and blood, how excited are you about him being killed by vigilantes?

I absolutely support life sentencing of incorrigible child molesters. When convicted. By a jury. According to laws. I would not want to do any guesswork about whether a jury would have that one crazy person on it that would hang it, and if you think they don't exist you're unfamiliar with this process.

Hung jury, this guy goes home without even having a radio collar on his ankle or a parole officer.

 

[Betticus]

Sounds like the judge wasn't "soft" but that the way the legal system works had everyone caught in loopholes.

 

[intothewoods]

I'm having trouble understanding something here - the guy was offered the one-year sentence as part of a plea bargain, but from what I'm seeing the prosecution were involved in negotiations with the guy's attorney over the terms of the plea bargain. Am I right in thinking that the prosecution offered this because they didn't believe they'd get a conviction otherwise?

Sounds like the judge wasn't "soft" but that the way the legal system works had everyone caught in loopholes.

Yes, to both of you.

I don't think a jury would have let him go free.

Juries are highly unpredictable and they may not have had the option.

And in all honesty, one year in prison isn't the judge doing the best he can. I've seen girls who obstructed justice when their boyfriend got caught selling drugs go to jail for longer than this.

This is a plea bargain. The judge does not set the sentence, unless you know something I don't. The judge can reject the agreement reached by the DA and defense or accept it. I personally would not criticize a judge based on a media story because it's impossible to know all of the factors here and all of the evidence. If there is no evidence to convict this guy, rejecting a plea bargain and forcing a trial where there's a high chance the DA will lose and the molestor goes free is not judically responsible behavior.

 

[ZRT]

I'd like to see the bastard burn at the stake, but I've got to agree that we're hung up on the system here.

 

[Betticus]

We don't know all of the facts....

Maybe they talked to the girl, she said that she purposefully seduced him and would do it again as much as she liked.. so they gave up on her as a witness and instead roped this poor, innocent man who was seduced by a nubile young lass into a plea bargain knowing that he was innocent.