Bloody spell check GAOLS!
No.
It may come into play for parole but no not in original sentencing.
The fact that society thinks more prison time, more punishment, more authoritarian cops and judges, etc is always the solution to social problems like child abuse or sexual abuse is what bothers some of us. Not every act of cruelty and callousness can be solved by more cruelty and callousness, and there is the concept of give and take between individuals and society too (can you have a society that gloats in cruelty and still expect the citizens to deal with problems w/o cruelty themselves, etc). I don’t think there is a simple solution to this problem or this particular situation but acting like more and more draconian punishments will solve these problems is not going to fix it.
Why not give her 199 years instead. It becomes pointless after a while.
I think the sentence was ridiculously excessive. My own opinion is that this woman should serve around 15 years and receive whatever sentence would result in that, plus some subsequent restrictions on being allowed around children unsupervised.
This country is literally full of assholes with rap sheets a mile long for rape, drug dealing, robbery and murder (sometimes all on the same rap sheet, watch The First 48 sometime if you don’t believe it) who are nevertheless out of prison and walking the streets in their late twenties and early thirties, killing even more people and destroying the lives of their families and loved ones.
What this woman did was heinous but the child survived and hopefully will live a long life full of birthdays and bike rides and Christmases and marriage and home ownership and children and grandchildren, etc., etc.
Sentences should be proportionate to the crime, and this woman, as despicable as what she did is, still did not take the little girl’s life and she should not have to forfeit hers (or the better part of it, she’ll be in late middle age by the time she becomes eligible for parole and parole won’t be a given even then) as a result.
I’d much rather see people who actually rape and torture and murder people with evil and sadistic intent be locked up (or preferably, offed) instead of being turned loose back onto society like they are, but given that they are I most especially think that for her to have to serve a minimum of 30 years on a 99 year sentence is unfair and ridiculous.
IMO this is a case of a judge letting her emotions run away with her and imposing a sentence that is all out of proportion to sentences for much worse crimes handed out in this country every day and is just plain wrong because (again my opinion) judges shouldn’t be allowed to freely give vent to their own personal outrage in sentencing convicted felons.
I think the sentence will be reduced on appeal.
Drugs are a contributing factor in someone’s actions. A mom that was clear thinking would be less likely to strike a child. It’s not an excuse or get out of jail card. She still deserves a long prison sentence and should never parent a child again.
Really, I’m in total agreement with the other posters, except my definition of a long sentence is different. I don’t see 8 years or more in prison as a slap on the wrist or an easy sentence. 8 years is a long, hard stretch in prison. That’s serious punishment. Especially for a child abuser. This lady will get slapped around in prison. She’s got some hard time waiting for her.
A lot has changed in the public attitudes since I was in college. I recall in Criminal Justice we spent a lot of time talking about strategy’s for rehabilitation and reintegrating criminals back to society. I know some of those ideas failed and that’s one major reason there’s more emphasis on punishment these days.
I still cling to some of my ideals. But realize some people just won’t change no matter how much effort is put into them.
So you don’t think the child-beater deserves a life sentence because she didn’t kill the girl, but you support permanent lock-up or even execution for rapists and torturers? Even if they also didn’t kill anyone?
Which is it?
I support permanent lock-up [del]or even[/del] and preferably execution for rapists and torturers who’ve also committed murder.
This wasn’t clear? I thought I’d used “and” enough to tie them all together.
I’m still trying to figure out how one superglues a toddler to a wall and beats them into a coma without “sadistic intent.”
Wow, getting slapped around sounds like it might really hurt.
Cases like this make a strong case for thorough sex education, access to free or cheap birth control and convenient abortion services. The fewer people who “accidentally” get pregnant and have babies they don’t want, the fewer abuse cases like this we’ll see.
You know what struck me as an injustice? A little girl beaten into a coma and left with severe brain damage.
Well, that depends on how severe her injuries turn out to be, doesn’t it? Irreversible brain damage and all that.
From ABC News:
From ABC News
From NY Daily News
This is not what I consider a momentary loss of control. That would be a slap or kick or some other type of brief outburst from someone who doesn’t normally do that kind of thing. This was a long, drawn out torture session.
This woman had plenty of time to think about what she was doing. She had to stop hitting her child, go get the glue, apply it to her hands, hold them against the wall until it set, and then continue the beating. She BIT her child, did you see that part? She used her teeth to put marks on her child that were visible later on. She did these things while some of her other kids were trapped there with her, too scared to do or say anything because they knew she might turn on them next.
This wasn’t the first or the second time she had beaten one of her kids. This was just the first time she got into real trouble for it. The abuse was an ongoing problem. She has had other chances to straighten up.
What is a 99 year sentence in the US “justice” system anyway? It’s already been made clear that she’ll be up for parole in 30 years if she’s even there that long. Most likely she’ll be out in 10 years or less for one reason or other. At least with the 99 year sentence she’s guaranteed to serve some time for what she’s done to those kids.
I’m curious- why the glue? Was it to enforce time out, or was it that she glued the baby to the wall specifically so that the child couldn’t get away from the beating? Questions like this lead me to agree with the poster that supposed the judge and jury were privy to more details of the case, which contributed to the sentencing decision.
I doubt anyone who murdered a 2 year old child would be out in 20 years. I’d certainly hope they wouldn’t be.
Being on drugs shouldn’t be a defence. Someone doesn’t take drugs around their kids, to the extent they’ll lose control, by accident. If anything, deliberately doing something that causes you to lose control should make you more, not less, culpable.
Not that I’m anti-drugs, but I don’t consider that being drunk or high removes any responsibility for your actions.
Someone doesn’t “accidentally” get pregnant 6 times.
Plenty of states have minimum terms for murder that are shorter than 20 years (the shortest I can find is 6 in Arkansas), so it wouldn’t surprise me at all if it happened somewhere, even with a child victim.
I agree with this.
Not only goals. 
(Points out the now/know issue, then runs REALLY REALLY FAST, away from this thread before sisu lobs a cane-toad at me)
Regardless, I’ve shown a case in this thread of someone else i the same county of Dallas, this same year, who beat a child the same age to death. He was charged with capital murder. Given that, it seems fairly proportional that someone who beat a child almost to death would get 99 years.
She got off easy, if you ask me.
Now Charles Manson I’d like to see paroled just so he can do Letterman/Oprah/etc.
You really can’t know that- the only thing you know is that one person did something horrendous, that sounds pretty well psychopathic. Her mother could have been a perfectly nice, decent person, who just could not deal with a child with psychopathic tendencies; that’s just as likely as that she was an appalling parent who’s now going to abuse her grandkids.
For all you know, the grandmother could have been the one stable person in the kid’s lives, and could have been doing her utmost to help keep the kids safe from her crazy daughter, but was unable to get custody without clear evidence of abuse. We don’t normally treat parents of 23 year old criminals as guilty of their adult offspring’s crimes, regardless of how abhorrent the crimes are.