Monday, August 28, 2006

Stuck on Crazy

In today’s Burlington Free Press, there’s this story:

Derek Kimball, 34, of Hinesburg this morning pleaded guilty to two counts of aggravated sexual assault and one count of lewd and lascivious conduct with a child in Vermont District Court in Burlington.

Now, in case the name doesn’t ring a bell, let’s read on:

Court papers say Kimball engaged in two incidents of forced rape and forced oral sex with the girl. The girl, whom The Burlington Free Press is not naming because she is a sexual-assault victim, is the same child Mark Hulett sexually assaulted for several years beginning in 2003.

Still nothing? Okay, try this:

Hulett’s case sparked a public outcry after Judge Edward Cashman initially sentenced Hulett, 35, of Williston in January to a 60-day minimum prison term after he pleaded guilty. The judge said his sentence was the only way for Hulett to receive sex-offender treatment. Three weeks later, after the Corrections Department changed its policy and agreed to treat Hulett while he was imprisoned, Cashman increased Hulett’s term to a three-year minimum.

Now you remember, don’t you? Of course you do. Not exactly a high-water mark in Vermont Jurisprudence, is it? Well, brace yourself because it’s about to happen again.

Judge Michael Kupersmith presided over Kimball’s hearing. Under the plea agreement, Kimball faces a minimum sentence of 3 to 10 years in prison, and a maximum of 12 to 50 years. That means he will spend at least 3 years in prison and remain under state supervision for at least 10 years.

Yes, I know it says that he could conceivably get up to 50 years in prison, but let me ask you a question: When Mark Hulett, who admitted sexually assaulting this young girl for over three years – beginning when she was six years old – is given a three-year minimum sentence, why should Derek Kimball expect worse when he’s only admitting to doing it a couple of times? Granted, Vermont lawmakers have tried to address this, but it’s unclear at this time whether the new law will affect this case or not.

Both men can expect to receive sex-offender treatment (Hulett is already guaranteed it) while incarcerated and both will likely be released while still young enough to do more harm. In the case of Hulett, he cannot be held longer than the three-year minimum unless he “misbehaves in prison or is unable to find suitable housing away from children following his release”. Is there any reason to suppose it will be different with Kimball?

All I can say is don’t sell crazy here, we’re all stocked up.

Oh, and read this and ask yourself why the girl’s parents aren’t up on charges as well. It will make your blood boil.

No comments: