"And what does the LORD require of you But to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God"
-- Micah 6:8

"The duty of the prosecutor is to seek justice, not merely to convict."
-- American Bar Association Standard 3-1.2(c)

"There may be a legitimate diversity of opinion even among Catholics about waging war and applying the death penalty, but not however with regard to abortion and euthanasia."
--Pope Benedict XVI, June 2004

Wednesday, March 22, 2006

Another perk of being pretty?

If you're a babe, do you get a free ride? Two cases might indicate just that. Meet Julia Diaco:

Sweet little 20-year old Diaco (she dressed as depicted in the picture for her sentencing) apparently was in the nasty habit of selling marijuana, LSD, cocaine, and mushrooms, including one controlled buy of $650 worth of coccaine. She would sell out of her NYU apartment and on and around campus. Eight separate times, she sold to undercover police officers. Did she need the money? Nope. Daddy's a wealthy builder.

Her sentence? Probation.

"News of the deal frustrated Anthony Papa, 51, who, like Diaco, was once a first-time, non-violent offender. Instead of probation, he was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison for delivering four ounces of cocaine for a police informant to an undercover cop for a $500 fee," according the NY Post article. Papa, however, draws the exactly 180-degree wrong conclusion: "I get angry with a case like this because the laws are not applied equally. Because she had money and the right lawyers, she didn't go to jail. Others should have that same opportunity," he said. "All people should be treated like this woman - with compassion." (Note the dig to court-appointed lawyers. Diaco obviously had "real" lawyers).

How 'bout instead we treat like cases alike and put the drug-dealing pretty rich girl in jail for 15 years?

Case #2: Meet Debra Lafave:
This is the clean picture (note the cross on the necklace)... if you want to see her pre-conversion to Christianity in a bikini astride a motorcycle, have at it.
Ms. Lafave, who is 25, and was a middle school teacher in Florida, was prepared to plead guilty to having sex with a 14 year-old student. She was pleading guilty because the prosecutor was offering probation, with no active jail time. Now, because a judge had enought guts to reject such a lenient plea agreement, the prosecution has elected to drop the charges against Lafave rather than go to trial, supposedly to save the victim the trauma of testifying in open court.

Now reverse the sex of the offender and victim: a male teacher with no criminal record having "consensual" sex with a 14 year-old student. Probation? Hardly. How about 8-9 years in prison? That's what teacher Richard Lalime got in Worcester, Mass., for having sex with a student who tearfully restated her love and support for Lalime.

Heck, even older, less "hot" looking Mary Letourneau had to pull 80 days in jail for having sex with her student (although she ended up in prison for much longer after violating a no contact with her victim provision of her suspended sentence).

Do we treat them differently because they are 1) women abusing boys; and/or 2) attractive people with no record? If so, shame on us.

(Of course, sadly, these teacher sex predator cases are not a fluke: according to a study commissioned by the DOE, one in ten kids will suffer some type of abuse at the hands of school personnel. Reason 12, 452 to consider home-schooling.)

HT: Glenn Beck for the NY Post story.

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Gee you mean that people who are attractive and wealthy (and white and Christian) get treated better by the justice system than people who are not? Why I never...

Tom McKenna said...

You may have trouble reading, because the point of the post was that young pretty females perhaps get treated leniently. How you got from there to Christians getting better treatment I can't imagine. You obviously didn't hear about Operation Rescue getting tagged under the RICO statutues, a gross miscarriage that it took the SCOTUS to correct. Oh yeah, and OJ Simpson--he was a white guy, right?

Ken Lammers said...

Pretty women get breaks in court? Say it ain't so. Nothing like that would ever happen in any of the courtrooms we practice in.

:-)

Anonymous said...

A good lawyer would have shown, with specificity what breaks they actually got, providing the specific statutes and showing how the exercise of discretion on the part of an apparently horny hurt us all. (In the case of the teacher that slept with the kid, the DA made his reasoning known, and so a good lawyer wouldn’t need to provide the statutory backdrop.)

On the good side, DAs hire a lot of women for their looks.

Faithmy said...

"On the good side, DAs hire a lot of women for their looks"

A REAL lawyer would have cited his sources for this statement.

An all female jury would have thrown the book at these women.

Anonymous said...

This is why women should not be allowed to serve on juries and they are generally paid less.

Faithmy said...

I think since they got off lightly--thats why MEN shouldnt be allowed on juries. As for being paid less, with your poor reasoning skills, I would be amazed if yu held a salaried job at all.

Anonymous said...

Well, women are paid less. Look at the way you write. Who would pay for that?

Faithmy said...

A real lawyer would have cited his sources for that statement.

Anonymous said...

http://www.orinkerr.com/2006/03/28/equal-justice-under-law/#comment-489

Go here to see a REAL lawyer pointing out that this case is not nearly as silly as Mr. McKenna is making it out to be.

Faithmy said...

Mr McKenna was making a valid point. Just cause you are too stupid to REALize it, dont take it out on the rest of us.

Anonymous said...

Tom is just playing to the lay people. He never practiced in New York, and he seems to be completely ignorant of what the normal sentence is for someone in her position. Moreover, if we are to believe Tom, we would be thinking that prosecutors make decisions based on whether they want to have sex with the defendant or not.

I never did this. Even a politically-minded person like Tom does not do it.

This is just a fairy-tale for the lay people.

Anonymous said...

Re: Fairy Tail for the Lay People.

It is fine when the media weaves these fairy tails because they need to sell papers and that is just the way things are. It is frightening that Mr. McKenna engages in this type of sensationalism given that he is a prosecutor. Not to beat a dead horse, but this is the same thing Feige does over at "Indefensible" and Tom seems to take a ridiculous, childish pleasure in calling him out for it. Give me some sober commentary, please!

Faithmy said...

"Give me some sober commentary, please"

Yeah Tom. You should take a page from this retards book. Everytime he disagrees with you (which seems to be a simple homosexual-knee-jerk reaction rather that an intellectual one) he says that you arent a REAL lawyer or you pander to the masses or some other load of crap.

Hey Anon--we all LOVE sober intellectualism like yours, please tell us YOUR blog address.

pattypoo said...

And whats with being too stupid to know it is "fairy TALE" NOT "fairy tail". It is especially funny when you make a really bone head mistake while calling someone else dumb! HAHAHAHAHAHAAA.