Yeah, Right...
A teen who pleaded guilty in a horrific case of animal abuse involving a dog was sentenced yesterday to three months house arrest and two years probation. The youth was less than three weeks away from his 18th birthday when he became involved in what his defence lawyer told court was a "poorly thought-out euthanasia attempt." Court heard the accused accidentally backed over a lab-border collie cross belonging to his best friend's mother. The teen and his friend then tried to kill the dog by taping a plastic bag over its head, dragging it behind a car and hitting it over the head with a shovel.
A poorly thought-out euthanasia attempt? It is amazing what you can get some lawyers to say if you pay them some money. No wonder they are often referred to as whores. How could anyone in their right mind ethically make such a defense? I have never understood the legal profession. I am sure some would argue that this is part of giving a defendant the best defense possible. But, I disagree. This type of thing is the very reason why people don't trust the legal profession.
I am all for mercy balancing out justice. I am all for forgiveness. I am all for giving people a second chance. I am all for repentance of sins. But, this is different. This is not a plea for mercy, forgiveness, a second chance, or repentance of sins. If the story is accurate, I see it as a way of denying the truth and avoiding responsibility. If I was the parent, I would have objected to my kid being able to make that kind of defense in court. Then again, parents don't have rights in court any more.
I think you just lay your case out before a judge, tell the truth, admit your guilt, and ask the judge to do the right thing, the moral thing, in that situation. Generally, if it is a first time offense, you will get a moderate or suspended sentence, a fine, and some court ordered counseling. That sounds right to me. It appears that this is what the court did here. This article isn't criticizing the judge, but the defense attorney who would make such an argument.
Only time will tell if this sentence does any good, or if we have just enabled this boy to do something worse in the future.
A teen who pleaded guilty in a horrific case of animal abuse involving a dog was sentenced yesterday to three months house arrest and two years probation. The youth was less than three weeks away from his 18th birthday when he became involved in what his defence lawyer told court was a "poorly thought-out euthanasia attempt." Court heard the accused accidentally backed over a lab-border collie cross belonging to his best friend's mother. The teen and his friend then tried to kill the dog by taping a plastic bag over its head, dragging it behind a car and hitting it over the head with a shovel.
A poorly thought-out euthanasia attempt? It is amazing what you can get some lawyers to say if you pay them some money. No wonder they are often referred to as whores. How could anyone in their right mind ethically make such a defense? I have never understood the legal profession. I am sure some would argue that this is part of giving a defendant the best defense possible. But, I disagree. This type of thing is the very reason why people don't trust the legal profession.
I am all for mercy balancing out justice. I am all for forgiveness. I am all for giving people a second chance. I am all for repentance of sins. But, this is different. This is not a plea for mercy, forgiveness, a second chance, or repentance of sins. If the story is accurate, I see it as a way of denying the truth and avoiding responsibility. If I was the parent, I would have objected to my kid being able to make that kind of defense in court. Then again, parents don't have rights in court any more.
I think you just lay your case out before a judge, tell the truth, admit your guilt, and ask the judge to do the right thing, the moral thing, in that situation. Generally, if it is a first time offense, you will get a moderate or suspended sentence, a fine, and some court ordered counseling. That sounds right to me. It appears that this is what the court did here. This article isn't criticizing the judge, but the defense attorney who would make such an argument.
Only time will tell if this sentence does any good, or if we have just enabled this boy to do something worse in the future.
No comments:
Post a Comment