A Williston man who admitted repeatedly sexually assaulting a young girl for four years was sentenced Wednesday to spend 60 days in prison…
Mark Hulett, 34, pleaded guilty in August to two counts of aggravated sexual assault and one charge of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child, all felonies. He faced up to life in prison on the charges.
Hulett began sexually abusing the girl — a friend’s daughter — when she was 6, and the conduct continued until the girl turned 10 in April…
Prosecutors wanted Hulett incarcerated for at least eight years, and in impassioned pleas the girl’s family members asked for a stern sentence. Cashman, though, told the crowded courtroom that punishment was not his priority in sentencing Hulett, but rather finding treatment for the man to prevent future abuse.
Once again, the “needs” of a criminal take precedence over the rights of a victim.
Update: The judge continues to receive ongoing criticism from officials and citizens alike.
why is this guy still alive? kill him before its too late. someone in vermont please stand up for this precious little child.
Even more alarming – 2 similar additional cases have occurred, recently! In 2 other states, judges let off child molesters with NO prison time – I guess if you’re a teen-age boy victim of sexual assault in this country, you can’t expect your abuser to even serve a few days of prison time. I will include a link below so you can get more details about these cases and contact information for the governors in each of 3 states where judges have made these grave errors of judgement.
First, I’d like to say that I do appreciate reading everyone’s point of view, here.
One issue that I’d like to address is that punishment has been equated with angry revenge. These are not one and the same, and I am surprised that a judge does not know the difference. He said, as a judge his job is not to get retribution, and he is right about that, but it is his job to punish people who break the law. For example, when I punish my children, it is not in order to get back at them and somehow be repaid by making them suffer. If I had that attitude about punishment, then I should not administer it. However, as a parent, it is my responsibility to punish my children, not only for their own good, but also for the good of the family and the society. If a child goes without any punishment or discipline they could not develop self-discipline and their behavior would become increasingly worse. As adults, when it comes to our sinful desires, we are a lot like children. Just as God established parents to be the authority over children, he established government to be the authority over society and certain people within that government were given the responsibility to punish wrong-doers. If a judge can’t handle that responsibility, he shouldn’t be in that position.
Maybe the question, here, should be: if a judge sees something wrong with the prison system, should he be allowed to make a ridiculously light sentence to a convicted man on the basis of the problems with the prison system? It appears to me that this judge made an extremely reckless decision. Although he claims to be trying to solve a problem by prescribing this person treatment rather than extended seperation from society, who does he think he is fooling? Everyone knows that people with this type of behavioral disorder are not easily reformed. Even though he claimed that he felt bad for the victim, his sentence of 60 days demonstrates his utter lack of empathy for the victim. What is this judge’s real agenda? Is it prison reform or setting a trend for letting child-molesters run free?
If you want your voice to be heard where it will really make a difference (hopefully), I’d recommend that you call or email the governors in the states where these 3 cases occurred. Here is a link you can copy and paste into your browser, for more information on how you can help: http://www.afa.net/petitions/issuedetail.asp?id=180