Calls Arise for Vermont Judge to Resign
MONTPELIER, Vt. - Judge Edward Cashman should be the darling of conservatives: a churchgoer, a former prosecutor, a Vietnam vet and a member of the bench known for his hard-line stands: A decade ago he jailed for 41 days the parents of a suspect in a rape case because they refused to cooperate with prosecutors.
In the past few days, though, Cashman has been vilified by conservatives on TV and on blogs. On Fox News, Bill O'Reilly told viewers as video of Cashman rolled: "You may be looking at the worst judge in the USA." And several Vermont Republican lawmakers have demanded he resign or be impeached.
The reason: Cashman sentenced a child molester to just 60 days of jail time — a sentence he said was designed to ensure the man got prompt sex-offender treatment but critics say was too soft.
"As far as we're concerned, Cashman's district can hereby be considered a predator's sanctuary," wrote the Caledonian Record newspaper of St. Johnsbury. "As long as judges like Ed Cashman are allowed to sit on Vermont benches, children cannot be considered safe."
Cashman has been unswayed: "I am aware that the intensity of some public criticism may shorten my judicial career," he wrote in a memorandum this week. "To change my decision now, however, simply because of some negative sentiment, would be wrong."
The firestorm erupted last week when Cashman sentenced Mark Hulett, 34, for having sexual contact with a girl, beginning when she was 6, over a four-year period.
The Corrections Department had concluded that Hulett was unlikely to commit another such offense, and Vermont does not provide sex-offender treatment to such inmates until they reach the end of their jail time.
Cashman said he would have imposed more jail time — a three-year minimum — if the state promised treatment while Hulett was jailed.
"The solution to these concerns requires quick and effective treatment," the judge wrote. He also noted that Hulett tested at a borderline intelligence level, has the emotional maturity of a 12- to 14-year-old and did not understand why others were so upset by his actions.
Republican Gov. James Douglas said Thursday the judge should consider resigning. He condemned the 60-day sentence as insensitive to the victim and her family.
"When a grown man rapes a small child, justice is only served when the criminal is behind bars — for a long time — paying for his inexcusable crime," the governor said.
On Wednesday, the Correction Department reversed course and said it would allow Hulett to be treated immediately, in hopes Cashman would impose a longer sentence. Prosecutors planned to file a request Friday asking the judge to do so. Apart from the memorandum, Cashman has refused to comment on the furor, citing judicial ethics.
In sentencing Hulett to 60 days, Cashman warned the defendant would get life behind bars if he failed to undergo treatment or comply with other conditions, including a prohibition against alcohol or living in an apartment complex that allows children.
But the focus fell on the jail time. Calls and e-mails of outrage poured into the Statehouse and the governor's office. Letters to the editor filled newspapers. On Thursday the state's largest newspaper, The Burlington Free Press, called on Cashman to resign.
Cashman, 62, is a big, burly, balding and bearded figure, and a strait-laced ex-military man. Soon after he was appointed to the Vermont District Court bench in 1982 by a Republican governor, Cashman and his wife dropped out of their square dancing group because he feared it was unjudgelike.
"I can't do the same things everyone else does," he said in an interview several years ago, describing the life of a judge as monk-like.
State Sen. Richard Sears, a Democrat who is chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wondered if such distancing led to the sentencing decision. "Have we isolated our judiciary so much that they can't see what public reaction (would be) to a sentence like that?" he asked.
Cashman's early years as a judge were marked by complaints that he was insensitive to the concerns of female victims of abuse and that he unfairly favored fathers in custody cases. But those concerns seemed to have vanished by 2001 when Cashman won a new six-year term by a legislative vote of 137-15.
Sen. Vincent Illuzzi, a Republican who is also a prosecutor, said the criticism that Cashman is a lenient judge and should be thrown out of office is "contrary to his judicial philosophy and career."
"Over the years, if there's been criticism of Judge Cashman, it has been he has been overly harsh on offenders when it comes to sentences and conditions of probation," Illuzzi said.
In Cashman's most-publicized case before this one, he threw Arthur and Geneva Yandow in jail after they refused to help prosecutors make a case against their son, a suspect in a rape. The parents said it would violate their Roman Catholic beliefs; Cashman, himself a Catholic, argued otherwise.
Cashman has volunteered for almost 20 years at a halfway house for prisoners. He said in an interview in 2000 with the Champlain Business Journal: "If you're going to put someone in jail, you ought to see them on their way out."
In that same interview the judge talked about his love of his job.
"Every day is a gift," he said. "I keep thinking they're going to come back and say `Oh my God, it was Cushman, not Cashman. Give us back the robe.'"
Now I'm as liberal as the next gal, but I can't make sense out of this.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Have you heard about this?
Have you heard about this?Follow
Quote:
Now I'm as liberal as the next gal, but I can't make sense out of this.
Come on, Flea, you're only as liberal as the next girl if Gloria Steinem is sitting next to you.
2 schools of thought here:
Deviant sexuality is the result of illness and can be remedied through treatment.
If that's the case it does no one any good to see it put off. In that light the judge made a very consiencious call and should be lauded for his "progressive" thinking.
Or...
Deviant sexuality is inexcuseable and we should lock up and chop up the offenders to ensure that it never happens again.
If that's the case all of our laws on sexual misconduct are too lenient and should be greatly increased a la the ri-bob-damn-diculous drug sentences imposed by government bodies in this country. In that light, the judge should be fired immediately.
I am somewhere in the middle and think he probably used poor judgement, but his heart was in the right place.
Cashman said he would have imposed more jail time — a three-year minimum — if the state promised treatment while Hulett was jailed.
[...]
On Wednesday, the Correction Department reversed course and said it would allow Hulett to be treated immediately, in hopes Cashman would impose a longer sentence. Prosecutors planned to file a request Friday asking the judge to do so. Apart from the memorandum, Cashman has refused to comment on the furor, citing judicial ethics
I guess part of the question then becomes how Cashman will respond to the request.
Like Moe, I think the judge's heart was in the right place, trying to get the guy help and thinking he was ultimately bettering society by assisting in the immediate reformation of an abuser. But, as someone whose own (admitably uneducated as I don't claim to have a PhD on the subject) feelings are that you don't "cure" child molestors, I'd certainly feel better about the man serving a significantly longer sentence. If he can be doing both at the same time -- best of both worlds. In any event, I don't know that I'd be demanding he resign.
[...]
On Wednesday, the Correction Department reversed course and said it would allow Hulett to be treated immediately, in hopes Cashman would impose a longer sentence. Prosecutors planned to file a request Friday asking the judge to do so. Apart from the memorandum, Cashman has refused to comment on the furor, citing judicial ethics
I guess part of the question then becomes how Cashman will respond to the request.
Like Moe, I think the judge's heart was in the right place, trying to get the guy help and thinking he was ultimately bettering society by assisting in the immediate reformation of an abuser. But, as someone whose own (admitably uneducated as I don't claim to have a PhD on the subject) feelings are that you don't "cure" child molestors, I'd certainly feel better about the man serving a significantly longer sentence. If he can be doing both at the same time -- best of both worlds. In any event, I don't know that I'd be demanding he resign.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4REDACTED,
Posted: Jan 13 2006 at 11:23 AM, Rating: Sub-Default, (Expand Post) All child molesters should be shot when convicted. This judge should be shot. Any parent that does not feel this way should be shot.
The best part of that post was the FFXI bracket gheyness that capped it off.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
All child molesters should be shot when convicted. This judge should be shot. Any parent that does not feel this way should be shot.
I am a parent, you insipid little sh[b][/b]it. Knee-jerk, over-zealous responses to any issue is the surest way to eliminate any moral highground you feel you speak from.
Quote:
{Thank You}
Add one to that list, Mooglefu[/u]ckers should be shot.
Thank you.
snarghblah the Fussy wrote:
All child molesters should be shot when convicted. This judge should be shot. Any parent that does not feel this way should be shot.
{Thank You}
{Thank You}
Uh-oh!
Someone is butthurt.
If life gives you lemons, make lemonade. Then find someone that life has given vodka and have party.
This establishment does not serve women. You must bring your own.
This establishment does not serve women. You must bring your own.
I made no accusations of who was a parent and who was not. There should be no argument over child molesters. They should all die. There is no anger in my statement. It is just simply something that should be.
Think: A Time To Kill
Think: A Time To Kill
I think the judge is wrong, but if he has a long career of good work, one poor decision should not erase that.
The judge should have sentenced the defendant based on providing the best deterrence against others committing the same crime in the future. All other considerations should be secondary including getting treatment for the defendant, and any other considerations should not interfere with the deterrence that is the primary purpose of criminal law.
There should be no argument over child molesters. They should all die.
The reason that rapists and child molestors are not given the death penalty is because, if we did, then there would not be any deterence against a rapist or child molestor killing his victim after he finished raping them. He would already face the highest punishment available under the law. Therefore more people would die. Now if the Constitution allowed us to castrate them, then we would be talking some sense.
Edited, Fri Jan 13 11:55:03 2006 by fhrugby
The judge should have sentenced the defendant based on providing the best deterrence against others committing the same crime in the future. All other considerations should be secondary including getting treatment for the defendant, and any other considerations should not interfere with the deterrence that is the primary purpose of criminal law.
Quote:
There should be no argument over child molesters. They should all die.
The reason that rapists and child molestors are not given the death penalty is because, if we did, then there would not be any deterence against a rapist or child molestor killing his victim after he finished raping them. He would already face the highest punishment available under the law. Therefore more people would die. Now if the Constitution allowed us to castrate them, then we would be talking some sense.
Edited, Fri Jan 13 11:55:03 2006 by fhrugby
I also think the judge was doing the right thing by getting the defendant treatment as early as he could.
The guy is mentally deficient. I don't think the judge would have focused on early treatment if the guy was simply immoral or amoral. He wasn't capable of understanding the consequences of his act and its effect on the little girl. Had Hulett not been mentally deficient, I’m sure the judge would have nailed him to the wall.
Quote:
Hulett tested at a borderline intelligence level, has the emotional maturity of a 12- to 14-year-old and did not understand why others were so upset by his actions
The guy is mentally deficient. I don't think the judge would have focused on early treatment if the guy was simply immoral or amoral. He wasn't capable of understanding the consequences of his act and its effect on the little girl. Had Hulett not been mentally deficient, I’m sure the judge would have nailed him to the wall.
Quote:
Think: A Time To Kill
Christ the list keeps getting longer, add one more.
People who use Matthew McConaughey movies, as a moral compass should be shot.
Quote:
I made no accusations of who was a parent and who was not.
Quote:
Any parent that does not feel this way should be shot.
You're an idiot. Thanks for coming over from the FFXI boards. Stick around and chime in on everything so we can be enlightened some more.
RedjedBlue wrote:
Quote:
Think: A Time To Kill
Christ the list keeps getting longer, add one more.
People who use Matthew McConaughey movies, as a moral compass should be shot.
But, How To Lose a Guy in 10 Days has some true life lessons.
Quote:
I made no accusations of who was a parent and who was not. There should be no argument over child molesters. They should all die. There is no anger in my statement. It is just simply something that should be.
You're daddy stuck his pee-pee in your ********, didn't he? It's ok, go to church every Sunday for the next thirty years and repent for your evil ways and it will all go away. While you're at it drink a lot and beat your wife, I hear that's the best rememdy for such atrocities.
Edited, Fri Jan 13 12:20:14 2006 by Jacobsdeception
The DC area can beat this. I present to you Montgomery County Circuit Court Judge Durke G. Thompson. The following is about a case that happened in 2002.
[li]Man molests his daughter starting at age 9. Abuse continues until she's 10, when she finally tells her mother. Case goes to trial, man is convicted, judge sentences him to 10 years in prison. Judge then suspends all but 18 months of the sentence. Judge then allows the guy out after 14 months because of good behavior.
[li]The mother of the victim above later asks the Judge to allow the convicted child molester to move back in with herself and the victim (who is now 14). The judge, wanting to end the suffering of the family, allows the convicted child molester to move into the home where his victim lives.
[li]Ten months later, the victim (now 15) gives birth. Gasp! How did she get pregnant, one asks? The child molester's parole officer demands a paternity test; child molester flees, is captured, and is on trial for raping the same girl again. Thankfully this time he went before a different judge and was sentenced to 10 years in prison without the suspended sentence.
That's just one case. There are others.
[li]An "undocumented immigrant" refuses to marry her boyfriend; he beats her and rapes her for revenge. Jury convicts inside 45 minutes. Judge Thompson overturns the jury decision and orders a new trial for the rapist, who the judge let free on bond.
[li]During a sentencing hearing for a guy convicted of molesting an 11yr old girl, Judge Thompson told the victim that "it takes two to tango".
[li]Judge Thompson is known to have ordered retrials or gone soft on at least two other rape cases, and from the way people talked about the guy on the radio at the time of the kiddie-rape case above, it sounded like there were plenty more to choose from.
NOW had a page on him: http://www.now.org/issues/legislat/031902judge.html
His term isn't up until 2011 and so far they have been unsuccessful at removing him from the bench.
[li]Man molests his daughter starting at age 9. Abuse continues until she's 10, when she finally tells her mother. Case goes to trial, man is convicted, judge sentences him to 10 years in prison. Judge then suspends all but 18 months of the sentence. Judge then allows the guy out after 14 months because of good behavior.
[li]The mother of the victim above later asks the Judge to allow the convicted child molester to move back in with herself and the victim (who is now 14). The judge, wanting to end the suffering of the family, allows the convicted child molester to move into the home where his victim lives.
[li]Ten months later, the victim (now 15) gives birth. Gasp! How did she get pregnant, one asks? The child molester's parole officer demands a paternity test; child molester flees, is captured, and is on trial for raping the same girl again. Thankfully this time he went before a different judge and was sentenced to 10 years in prison without the suspended sentence.
That's just one case. There are others.
[li]An "undocumented immigrant" refuses to marry her boyfriend; he beats her and rapes her for revenge. Jury convicts inside 45 minutes. Judge Thompson overturns the jury decision and orders a new trial for the rapist, who the judge let free on bond.
[li]During a sentencing hearing for a guy convicted of molesting an 11yr old girl, Judge Thompson told the victim that "it takes two to tango".
[li]Judge Thompson is known to have ordered retrials or gone soft on at least two other rape cases, and from the way people talked about the guy on the radio at the time of the kiddie-rape case above, it sounded like there were plenty more to choose from.
NOW had a page on him: http://www.now.org/issues/legislat/031902judge.html
His term isn't up until 2011 and so far they have been unsuccessful at removing him from the bench.
JD wrote:
You're daddy stuck his pee-pee in your ********, didn't he?
I sure hope you count better than you use English, Mr. Treasurer.
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
JD wrote:
You're daddy stuck his pee-pee in your ********, didn't he?
I sure hope you count better than you use English, Mr. Treasurer.
As long as I don't have to go higher than ten I should be ok. I don't see this as being a problem for the immediate future with all you poor bastages.
Speaking of which, I need to make an alt. I'll get crackin' on that ASAP. When is our next raid? Bhodi, Smoggy, Anyone?
(Oh noez, another FFXIer has come to post!)
I'm in the camp of "castrate the bastards" when it comes to rape and child molestation, but of course there are always exceptions to the rule: In this case, the man in question is certified as mentally underdeveloped-
So this is an honest case of "He didn't know any better." Keeping in mind, I feel the judge made the right call in trying to expedite treatment, in the hopes that if he can be taught how and why it's bad, then he wouldn't do it again.
Now if it had been a case where the person knew what he was doing, knew the consequences, etc, and did it anyways because they felt like it, then yeah, chop them off with blunt rusty scissors.
I'm in the camp of "castrate the bastards" when it comes to rape and child molestation, but of course there are always exceptions to the rule: In this case, the man in question is certified as mentally underdeveloped-
Quote:
He also noted that Hulett tested at a borderline intelligence level, has the emotional maturity of a 12- to 14-year-old and did not understand why others were so upset by his actions.
So this is an honest case of "He didn't know any better." Keeping in mind, I feel the judge made the right call in trying to expedite treatment, in the hopes that if he can be taught how and why it's bad, then he wouldn't do it again.
Now if it had been a case where the person knew what he was doing, knew the consequences, etc, and did it anyways because they felt like it, then yeah, chop them off with blunt rusty scissors.
Implying that his "emotional maturity" prevented him from understanding why people were mad at him is a disservice to every child older than age 5 or so. I can't imagine a teenager not being able to figure out why the hell someone's angry with them.
We need to stop coddling these weak minded members of society.
Toss him into a wood chipper and be done with it; he'll serve better as fertilizer than as a citizen. Maybe we can get the host of `The Weakest Link` to come by and squeal her catch-phrase for us.
I am so bored of coddling the infirm. Whatever happened to eugenics?
We need to stop coddling these weak minded members of society.
Toss him into a wood chipper and be done with it; he'll serve better as fertilizer than as a citizen. Maybe we can get the host of `The Weakest Link` to come by and squeal her catch-phrase for us.
I am so bored of coddling the infirm. Whatever happened to eugenics?
Professor klyia wrote:
RedjedBlue wrote:
Quote:
Think: A Time To Kill
Christ the list keeps getting longer, add one more.
People who use Matthew McConaughey movies, as a moral compass should be shot.
But, How To Lose a Guy in 10 Days has some true life lessons.
And Sahara can show you how to be a studly survivor in the desert!
Wing wrote:
Implying that his "emotional maturity" prevented him from understanding why people were mad at him is a disservice to every child older than age 5 or so. I can't imagine a teenager not being able to figure out why the hell someone's angry with them.
/nod
Edit: And quoting is still eluding me--I'll just blame it on Friday the 13th.
Edited, Fri Jan 13 13:37:23 2006 by Thumbelyna
Thumbelyna the Hand wrote:
Wing wrote:
Implying that his "emotional maturity" prevented him from understanding why people were mad at him is a disservice to every child older than age 5 or so. I can't imagine a teenager not being able to figure out why the hell someone's angry with them.
/nod
Edit: And quoting is still eluding me--I'll just blame it on Friday the 13th.
Edited, Fri Jan 13 13:37:23 2006 by Thumbelyna
Hence the whole mentally-deficient retarded thing.
If life gives you lemons, make lemonade. Then find someone that life has given vodka and have party.
This establishment does not serve women. You must bring your own.
This establishment does not serve women. You must bring your own.
His Excellency MoebiusLord wrote:
Come on, Flea, you're only as liberal as the next girl if Gloria Steinem is sitting next to you.
Dude, are you spying on me?
I would argue that the main issue here isn't the treatment. You can treat an individual all you like, and most do recieve one form or another of treatment upon release. The main issue for me is that the judge skipped right from punishing the criminal with jail time to prescribing treatment for an illness he is not qualified to treat. There is still the matter of the crime he committed, and the punishment having to fit the crime. 60 days for four years abuse? Doesn't compute.
A failing of media, both liberal and conservative is narrow scope.
"Look at this judge and his lenient sentence, another case of liberal activists judges and the failure of our justice system!"
A nice sensational headline that draws eyes and plays to a certain group of people. However when you dig deeper there is more to the story. Is it some politically motivated attack by some shadowy group. Or is it just an editor realizing that his average reader/listener/veiwer is conservative and that a title "Worst Judge in America Sentences Molestor to Only 60 Days" will grab their audiences attention more than "Judge in question for fast tracking sentence of molestor in order to get treatment".
Then certain commentators such as O'Reilly, Hannity (trust a liberal like me to only use conservative examples) etc will grab onto it and help twist public preception. They feed off the story and the more shocking they can make it sound the better because it keeps the viewers watching.
"Look at this judge and his lenient sentence, another case of liberal activists judges and the failure of our justice system!"
A nice sensational headline that draws eyes and plays to a certain group of people. However when you dig deeper there is more to the story. Is it some politically motivated attack by some shadowy group. Or is it just an editor realizing that his average reader/listener/veiwer is conservative and that a title "Worst Judge in America Sentences Molestor to Only 60 Days" will grab their audiences attention more than "Judge in question for fast tracking sentence of molestor in order to get treatment".
Then certain commentators such as O'Reilly, Hannity (trust a liberal like me to only use conservative examples) etc will grab onto it and help twist public preception. They feed off the story and the more shocking they can make it sound the better because it keeps the viewers watching.
Bode - 100 Holy Paladin - Lightbringer
43 posts
Can you believe that crap? He just opened the doors for all the child molesters to take up resident in Vermont. Thank god they'll be out of here. I wonder if the Judge has children or grandchildren, and if this little girl was his of his family if the sentence would be the same? This guy needs to go, how the hell do you not harshly punish someone like him? He won't get the treatment he needs in prison is a bunch of crap!! He'll have plenty of treatment, treatment he deserves!! From what I hear those boys behind bars do not take to kindly to those who molest children.
Recent Visitors: 250
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (250)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Have you heard about this?
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC