Rose, I hope you don't have to wait a long time to see what happens to her.
She surely deserves jail time.
Gwen
> >Bonne chance!
> Merci!
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Please remove "Ima" to reply.
"RoseB" <Imarosab.1@shaw.ca> wrote in message
<stuff snipped>
> >Bonne chance!
> Merci!
>
> Yes I am Candadian,
Is that like being a Sugardadian? (sorry, it was too good to pass up!)
> and also in a small city so I believe the process
> is a little different. I am dealing with Victim's Services, and they
> are keeping me updated and giving advice.
That's excellent. Believe it or not, there was a time when no one ever
thought that victims should have advocates to help them through the process.
> The woman is not in jail, and has served no time. The latest I have
> heard is that this case can take many months before reaching the stage
> where she would be sentenced (if she is). I don't understand the
> process when it seems that it should be so simple, after all, she
> confessed.
Ah! You've explained it all. Here, in the US, accepting a plea bargain is
what it's all about. The courts unfortunately care more about saving money
than dispensing justice. That means they often reward those who save the
state the cost of a trial with a reduced sentence or even probation. They
claim that if they didn't do it, the courts would be swamped and trials
would be delayed by years. I personally don't believe it, but that doesn't
matter because judges and prosecutors do and act accordingly.
Her willingness to admit her crime is undoubtedly going to result in a far
lighter sentence than if she had contested the charges at trial. In the
hammer attack case I alluded to, the guy got five years (he'll be out in two
or three if he behaves) but he faced 20 years for attempted murder if he had
chosen to go to trial. Sometimes I think modern jurisprudence owes more to
Monty Hall and the TV show "Let's Make a Deal" than it does to the Magna
Carta, the Constitution and basic human decency.
Strangely enough, the best thing you can do is hook her up with an attorney
who would insist on a trial. They often do because it means higher fees,
even if it's enormously risky for the client. I wouldn;t recommend it,
really. The last thing you want to do is relive that awful moment, and
that's what happens at trial. Victims often say it's like getting mugged or
robbed or raped all over again.
Real justice would be to tell her "we've arranged for you to be beaten and
mugged sometime during the next year." Living with that fear for a year
would at least approach the suffering you're going through. Judges and
prosecutors who have never been physically assaulted really don't understand
what you've been through. My friend's attorney *had* been assaulted once
and as a result she approached the case with a zeal that proved you must
walk a mile in another person's shoes to know how they feel.
--
Bobby G.
RoseB - 13 Aug 2005 01:30 GMT
>"RoseB" <Imarosab.1@shaw.ca> wrote in message
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>Is that like being a Sugardadian? (sorry, it was too good to pass up!)
A Canadian I am, a good typist I am not. LOL
Rose @}>->--
Being educated means that rather than fearing the unknown, one seeks to understand it. RB
Please remove "Ima" to reply.