bleechers's Blog

“Let me tell you why it’s so wrong, It’s so wrong because in these situations . . . that 6-year-old is going to sit in front of me, or somebody far worse than me and I’m going to rip them apart. I’m going to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined. That when they’re 8 years old they throw up; when they’re 12 years old, they won’t sleep. When they’re 19 years old they’ll have nightmares and they’ll never have a relationship with anybody. And that’s not because I’m a nice guy. That’s because when you’re in court, and you’re defending somebody’s liberty, and you’re facing a mandatory sentence of those draconian proportions, you have to do every single thing you can do on behalf of your client. That is your obligation as a trial lawyer.”

It is a lawyer’s job to defend his client the best he can, granted. That’s his “obligation” no matter what the sentence may or may not be. This is insane. In arguing against mandatory sentencing (in this case 20 years for CHILD RAPE), this lawyer is telling us that such sentences FORCE him to DESTROY children (children who have been victims of rape). So, again, society is being threatened that if we do not give in to the demands of lawyers (pick your group) they will be forced to wreak havoc upon us.

In my world we called that “protection money.” In this case, the “money” is going to some lawyer congressman in the form of reduced sentences because he doesn’t like mandatory sentences for CHILD RAPISTS. He is saying in essence “Oppose this law or I’ll destroy child rape victims!” Lovely.

UPDATE: The leftists on the Supreme Court joined their colleague in the House by voting 5-4 that the state has no right to seek the death penalty for brutal, horrible child rape unless the child dies.

"The Supreme Court today, in Kennedy v. Louisiana, found that the Eighth Amendment bars the death sentence of a man who brutally raped his 8-year-old stepdaughter, causing traumatic physical injury (decency doesn't permit quoting here the Court's discussion of the facts on p. 2 of its opinion), to say nothing of the emotional trauma. The decision was 5-4, with Justice Kennedy writing the opinion joined by the Court's liberal bloc."

Apparently there is great concern in some quarters for the rights of brutal, vicious child rapists.