I honestly didn't even think of that. Since the convict has been tried and convicted in a civilian court, and was retired honorably a few years ago, then legally, if the CG were to choose not to seek charges against him, he could keep collecting his retirement pay. While I would not like to pay him, personally, while he sits in prison, there is the question of his family. If he is entitled to retirement pay, would it be just and fair to punish his family, who might be dependent on the money?

quote:

You can tell me about all the five years olds in stirrups that you want, and I'll still tell you that no matter what happened to them, you do not have the right to take the law into your own hands. It's that simple. No amount of personal experience that you have will change my opinion.

"The 'right' to take the law into your own hands" has absolutely no bearing on what would happen should anyone touch my girls. I cannot say what I would do, and God forbid I ever have to face that situation. I am curious about your above statement; if Onions experience isn't going to sway your opinion, then why should your lack of experience sway hers? It is very easy to be disconnected and rational when it is not you or yours that has suffered. I truly hope (no sarcasm here) that if you ever become a parent and are faced with your child being molested, you are able maintain logic and rationality. For most of us, logic and rationality fly right out the window at the moment someone harms those that we love more than life.

quote:

While I would not like to pay him, personally, while he sits in prison, there is the question of his family. If he is entitled to retirement pay, would it be just and fair to punish his family, who might be dependent on the money?

That is an interesting point (so many of us forget to consider that the scumbag could have a family too!). Tough call all around as the a-holes actions could potentially leave his family without a source of income (assuming he is the primary bread-winner). Still, would rather see the retirement go to the victims family though (to pay for the coming years and years of therapy).

I am asking you. What would you do if it was your daughter, your son, your wife, sister, aunt, cousin etc? Everyone has a right to comment cuz everyone is a human being.

That SOB didn't do anything to MY daughter but I sure still wanted him to suffer for what he did to her step-sister.

Oh, want me to be plain about what I'd do with that knife? I'd cut the SOB's dick off if I had a chance. Yes, that's a crime. And I'd do some time for that, as I should.

I'm not advocating people running around killing people, maiming people, knockin them on the head or anything. I was expressing how I would react to someone hurting one of my own. I know it's wrong to take the law into my own hands. I'd still want to do it.

Keep in mind though, wanting to do something in a certain situation and actually acting on it are two different things.

Wow, we really got off the subject here. My opinion stands, you hurt kids you deserve the harshest punishment possible. And depending on the severity of the crime, it should include death.

Convicted child molesters should, at the least, be locked away for life.

If he got jail time his cell is not that small. Also he can get free, meals, education, medical, mail, lawyers, cable for his tv. He most likely be out in with another molester. I spent 1 year as a CO and we had it harder then the inmates.

Still, would rather see the retirement go to the victims family though (to pay for the coming years and years of therapy).[/QUOTE]

I CONCUR!!!

onion,

quote:

I'd cut the SOB's dick off if I had a chance. Yes, that's a crime. And I'd do some time for that, as I should.

Fine, that's all I was getting at. I'm not saying that one should or should not go to such measures. All I'm saying is that one's motive, no matter how just in their own minds, does not excuse the crime.

By the way, we also disagree on the death penalty, which I believe is an injustice in and of itself.

When I worked in a closed security correctional center (prison) sex offenders were put into a one cell block, but others were also in there. There was a reason for this, which I will not go into here, but if you are interested E-mail. They were usually out in general population, unless they requested to go into seg. Most inmates with sexual offenses, child or adult, never said what they were in for, but the word usually got around. Of four people who worked for me two were in for crimes against children, one for 2nd degree murder and the other was in the Eme.

No one on the outside realizes what it is like to have your freedom taken away. Twenty years is a long time. This is not to argue that it was not appropriate, that is up to the sentencing guidelines. As for sitting by yourself. Most state and federal prisons do not the "luxury" of single cells, except in segregation.

By the way, I was not a line officer, just a librarian with a lot of inmate contact.

There is nothing that I can think of, unless it is as a street cop in a large city, that prepares you for the inside. I know nothing in the USCG prepares you for it.

quote:

Originally posted by FourString:

I usually don't engage people like you in this debate since you never listen. You act all high and mighty because you happen to have children, and anyone who does not have children has no business commenting. I'm here to tell you just how wrong you are. I'm really tired of people with kids thinking that just because they engaged in procreation that their IQ is a hundred points above everyone else's. If having children would make me an irrational knee jerker (as most parents act when this issue is brought up) then I will remain happily without children. But then again, I have views on having a family while on active duty that would most likely not jive too well with the family folks around here.

Having children has nothing to do with it, though myself as a mother, I would love to create my own 'justice' on someone who does this kind of $heit!

Ok, how 'bout a different take since you seem to be all 'liberal'. What if YOU were that child? You've been robbed of your innocence and will be subject to horrible nightmares FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. You still want to be the liberal 'slap their hand defender' if it happened to YOU?

The 'system' needs to GET RID OF THESE FREAKIN ANIMALS because if it doesn't, they will be released to do it again...and again...and again. If the system means the 'system within the system' (ie. inmates taking care of him), then so be it. NO ONE, I reiterate, NO ONE has a love for CHILD MOLESTERS, and so be it, if justice will be done inside the walls of the system. They deserve it.

My sister was raped by a minister. Guess what the church did? They got rid of my sister and kept him. Two years later he killed a little girl, that's when they caught him. My sister lives with the results of rape to this day. She's 53.

quote:

If he is entitled to retirement pay, would it be just and fair to punish his family, who might be dependent on the money?

Maybe 50%? Thats about all I would go.

quote:

Originally posted by Wayne_13:
FourString,
The outcome of who tries the case is usually driven by which agency has the most stringent sentencing guidelines. The U.S. military court martials are subject to the same laws of double jeopardy. A member can face NJP in the miltary and still be tried for the same crime by the civilian courts or vica versa. However, if a member goes to a Court Martial then the they can’t be tried in Civilian court for that same crime or vica versa. We are talking same charges...

NJP = to a Civil case
Court Martial = to a Criminal case (defendent is protected permanently from double jeoperdy if acquitted).

If this is the case would you want to keep paying a retired member for 20 years while they are serving a sentence?
I am just curious if an Administrative board can stop the pay.

This is untrue as a matter of both Law and CG policy. The SCOTUS has long recognized the "separate sovereigns" exemption to the Double Jeopardy clause, especially how it relates to the military. The military does have the legal authority to try him under the UCMJ even after he has been convicted in civilian court. As a matter of policy, it normally is not done. However the limitation is thus;

quote:

No person in the Coast Guard may be tried for the same acts that constitute an offense against state or foreign law, and for which the accused has been tried or is pending trial by the state or foreign country, without first obtaining authorization from the Chief Counsel. Letter requests for authorization shall contain complete justification as to why deviation from the general policy against second trials ... is appropriate. CIM 5810.1D 3.B.4

Navy Policy limits retrials to crimes that fit certain criteria, which probably align well with what the CG looks for:

quote:

(1) Cases in which punishment by civil authorities consists solely of probation, and local practice, or the actual terms of probation, do not provide rigid supervision of probationers, or the military duties of the probationer make supervision impractical.

(2) Cases in which civilian proceedings concluded without conviction for any reason other than acquittal after trial on the merits.

(3) Other cases in which the interests of justice and discipline are considered to require further action under the UCMJ (e.g., where conduct leading to trial before a state or foreign court has reflected adversely upon the naval service or when a particular and unique military interest was not or could not be adequately vindicated in the civilian tribunal).

If you're interested in a neat paper on double jeopardy in today's military here's a great article by an Army lawyer.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: CoastieVal,

CoastieVal

In court Darren Jacksch, DC1, USCG (ret) tried to use his service to get an even lighter prison term,. The frist case occured in 2004, two years before he retired. Contrary to what he said, he did not follow the rules, the UCMJ and not any of our Core Values. He needs to be held accountable for his actions. Kids see us as the people that help them when they are in trouble on the water, they should also count on us to protect them from predators like Jacksch.

Being a father and grandfather I certainly can relate to the emotional feelings that many of share. If anyone ever attempted to harm one of mine I suspect I would attempt to take justice in my own hands - and probably succeed - without regard of the consequences. Biblical isn't it? Eye for eye tooth for tooth...

Apparently his day in court resulted in being found guilty, sentenced to prison, and that is the American Way - so says the Constitution that we all agreed to support and defend. Darn it. As Dennis implies - eventually the other prisoners find out and sometimes Prison Justice is biblical in how it is meted out. Right, wrong, or indifferent - it happens. From what I have read and heard child molesters aren't high up in the pecking order and the story of Prometeus Bound comes to mind: after he incurred to anger of the Greek Gods he was chained to a rock and the vultures picked his liver out during the day only for it to regrow overnight and suffer the same consequences the next day ad infinitum.

My opinion about his retirement, double jeopardy, etc? If he committed crimes while on active duty and then retires and the service has a reason to prosecute then so be it. It would be up to the service to decide; what if he did something to a dependent, in government housing or on base? Wait, I know what they'd do - when an active duty E7 was convicted in a state court and punished with 5 years of probation the service did nothing...that's right - nothing.

quote:

Originally posted by lima123:
CoastieVal

In court Darren Jacksch, DC1, USCG (ret) tried to use his service to get an even lighter prison term,. The frist case occured in 2004, two years before he retired. Contrary to what he said, he did not follow the rules, the UCMJ and not any of our Core Values. He needs to be held accountable for his actions. Kids see us as the people that help them when they are in trouble on the water, they should also count on us to protect them from predators like Jacksch.

Perhaps I was a bit unclear about my own thoughts in only putting down the technical aspects. I agree 100% with your assesment. In doing these actions while on active duty, and using his prior service as a shield from harsher punishment he brough discredit to the CG and our core values, and should be recalled to active duty for a Court Martial, at the very least with a reduction in his retirement pay, or having a portion garnished towards his victems.

My earlier post was just saying that the CG does have the legal mechanism to pursue this matter in a General Court Martial, above and beyond the civilian trial he has already recieved, contrary to the misinformed opinions some members have. The odds of the CG availing themselves to this recourse, however, is probably slim to none.

"If anyone ever attempted to harm one of mine I suspect I would attempt to take justice in my own hands - and probably succeed - without regard of the consequences."

Then the rule of law in this country is moot. Why even have criminal courts if those who have been wronged will refuse to abide by the same laws they claim to uphold? For that matter, let's just get rid of our independent judiciary all together. Apparently most people here are all for vigilanty justice (until they are the victim of it).


"Biblical isn't it? Eye for eye tooth for tooth..."

Unfortunately for you this nation's government does not ascribe to a "biblical" code of laws. We are not a theocracy. The victims of crimes must respect the rule of our courts in matters criminal and civil, just as the accused criminals must do the same.

quote:

Prison Justice is biblical in how it is meted

You mean forgiveness and compassion? Oh, I get it. You were referring to the "fire and brimstone" Old Testament.

Sometimes you need to have faith in the justice system...it usually works. Taking the law into your own hands can only make matters worse for your own family, you would be the one sitting in jail then. If you don't like the judicial system, then get off your butts and change it. Most judges are elected or appointed by someone who is elected. With the low rate of voters, it is no wonder that some judges are not up to par.

As pointed out, NJP & Court Martial are different. Also, the subject of Civilian v. Military charges is a case by case issue. Depending on the type of case, and amount/validity of the evidence, the military may simply wash their hands of the member because Civilian courts can resolve the case in a manner that best suits the crime and brings justice for the victims. (Harsher punishments than allowed under UCMJ and opportunity for Civil cases by victims). Also, it's how much publicity the issue has raised and the current climate in the area towards the CG or service. This type case never sits quietly or well with anyone, rightfully so.

A few points not mentioned is these cases are very expensive and often taking years to resolve. Does the military have the time and people to devote to it? Probably not, given tour rotations of lawyers, witnesses, etc. Does it make it any less wrong? No, but I'm sure that's a point considered when deciding to relinquish a case to civilian courts.

Pointed out earlier, NJP & Court Martial are two different proceedings. NJP is an Administrative proceeding. From my experiences in Legal Admin, a member who is convicted of a crime in Civilian Court system, can still face an Administrative proceeding based on that conviction, without it being Double Jeopardy. "Being convicted" is what has violated something in the UCMJ and made the person eligible for NJP. Usually, it's as simple as failing to maintain requirements of eligibility for a Clearance, or worldwide assignment. If active duty, could be jail time gets in the way of fulfilliing your military contract. They may also throw in "bringing discredit upon the Service," and "possibly misconduct," etc. Again, the Civilian conviction provided all that info to the Service in a nice package.

Given the Appeal process, (a few more years), the Service cannot really act on it immediately, (everyone is innocent . . .).

The CG did take it's first case to the US Supreme Court in the late 80's/early 90's on a jurisdictional point raised by another sexual preditor on active duty, with a lengthy history with children of his shipmates. He thought the CG didn't have any right to prosecute him because it didn't take place in military housing. After almost a year, it was heard by the USSC and they ruled because the military compensated it's members for housing when it was not available, it WAS within their jurisdiction. One of the most disturbing cases ever handled by all involved. He was stripped of all military rights, and privileges, etc. and sent to the military side of Leavenworth, til the paperwork was done, then moved to the civilian side to serve his sentence. For those who've never seen these issues in action, when it comes to out processing someone like this, it can and is done in record time! And there never seems to be enough soap to scrub it off when you're done.

In this case, the fact that this person used the military to try to get a lighter sentence, just set him up for the "discredit upon the service" Administrative point, it's all in the transcripts now, a matter of court and public records. He may very well be in line for his monthly check to disappear. Should be interesting to keep tabs on . . .my sympathies to the victim and their family, and to the member's family.

Effin bleeding hearts.