Washington D.C. (The Weekly Vice) -- Massachusetts Democrat Rep. James Fagan has set off a firestorm of criticism after vowing to "rip apart" and "destroy" children who are victims of rape.
The shocking rant came when Rep. James Fagan (D) went to the House floor to oppose Jessica's law, a measure that would set mandatory sentences for child rapists. A measure Fagan condemned as "sentences of those draconian proportions".
Rep. Fagan, who also opposed Melanie's law and is a critic of naming a law in honor of a child victim, unleashed the tirade of opposition during a House debate on the matter last month.
In making his point about why minimum sentence standards in child rape cases should not be passed into law, Fagan said the following:
"Let me tell you why it's so wrong. It's so wrong because in these situations... that 6-year-old is going to sit in front of me, or somebody far worse than me... and I'm going to rip them apart. I'm going to to make sure that the rest of their life is ruined. That when they're 8 years old they throw up; when they're 12 years old, they won't sleep. When they're 19 years old they'll have nightmares and they'll never have a relationship with anybody. And that's not because I'm a nice guy. That's because when you're in court and you're defending somebody's liberty, and you're facing a mandatory sentence of those draconian proportions, you have to do every single thing you can do on behalf of your client."
Mark Lunsford, the father of Jessica (by which Jessica's Law was named for) had a few words in response to Fagan's comments.
"Why doesn't he figure out a way to defend that child and put these kind of people away instead of trying to figure ways for defense attorneys to get around Jessica's Law," Lunsford said. "These are very serious crimes that nobody wants to take serious. What about the rights of these children?"
The Weekly Vice Opinion:
Well readers, I apologize for being a few days behind the curve on this one, but I wanted to give Fagan a couple of days to scrape together an explanation for his comments since this video emerged. He hasn't. I'm sure it will only come after the growing surge of outrage forces him out of the dark hole his head is firmly planted in.
We have a little news flash for Rep. Fagan and we aren't going to tap dance around the issue with it.
After a child has been raped, many of them are already throwing up and having nightmares - that is if they haven't been murdered as many of them like Jessica herself was, you jackass.
Lawmakers are sent to congress to enact laws, not worry about how hard a defense attorney's job might be. Ooops, speaking of which, it comes as no surprise that Rep. Fagan is also currently a criminal defense attorney in Taunton, Massachusetts. Nice conflict of interest.
With sexual abuse of children out of control and bleeding heart judges throwing the perps back out on the street quicker than we can get them prosecuted, the last thing we need is Democrat Fagan ranting about what he'd personally aspire to do to a 6 year old child who's been raped and thrown away like a rag doll.
While we understand that a defense attorney's job may require them to challenge a victim's testimony, it's absolutely asinine to assert that a law shouldn't be passed just because a lawyer might have to vigorously defend their client. Let me be clear. ALL defendants should be vigorously defended by their attorney Mr. Fagan.
Massachusetts residents must be so proud of this maniacal, child predator pampering dimwit. Something tells us you'll just keep right on voting him into office. It's sad, to say the least.
Danny Vice
The Weekly Vice
http://weeklyvice.blogspot.com
Posts
8 comments:
Makes me just scratch my head and say "Huh?". Why on earth do people continue to elect guys like this as their leaders?
On a side note, I do agree with the draconian aspect of mandatory sentences though. Each case is different with different circumstances. They should all be handled on an individual basis. I just love how our governments like to just blanket everything.
I had a wreck a few years ago. Wasn't my fault at all, but I was forced to accept a "Following Too Closely" citation because my state blanketed all rear end accidents as at-fault by default. In my particular case, I hit the brakes and slid on loose asphalt from the road crew's paving machine like I was hydroplaning on water and had no choice but to plow into the truck in front of me. It didn't matter that I had three car lengths in front of me to try to stop.
Totally draconian. It's almost like the old "Well, you were seen talking to Billy the Kid last week, so you were obviously an accomplice to the murder he committed this week."
Jessica's law already has different levels built in for varying offense - and believe me, attorneys have ways to plea bargain out of this kind of law, if the offense isn't really aggravated child rape.
What Jessica's law seeks to do mostly is to make sure a real rape gets real time, instead of the judge just putting them back out on the street in 90 days as they are currently doing
It is hard to make a comment with a straight, objective view. All I can say is this politician is a closet pedophile, and I hope there is a special place in hell for him.
Does this guy have a wife? Children? If so how does he have the balls to go home? Any man who would make a statement of that nature, does indeed have a special place in hell. And, sadly enough, he probably will never apologize for what he said. He will defend himself with the same fervor as he does his clients.
If he has children, I bet they will never look at dear old dad the same. And as for his wife, how can she lay next to a monster that would do that to a child for the sake of money and status. I wonder how she feels about his remarks.
We are the best advocates for our children. Or, at least we should be. Jessica's Law is a wonderful idea born from an unforgettable tragedy. And, if after a trial and verdict, the defendant is found guilty, 15 years is a small price to pay for damaging a child’s future. We as a Nation need to stand up to people like this. Hit them where it hurts. The voters of Mr. Fagan’s district really need to stand up to this man, take him from his "civil duty" and quiet his words. Or, at least take away his forum.
Well i think we all know that Massholes have no mercy. However, there are pros and cons to this mans statements. Had he changed a few things around it wouldnt seem so bad.
for example being able to cross examine a child of certain age. A lot of times you can catch the child in a lie. and i think for children and parents who lie we need more vigorous defense attorneys. to ensure that innocent people are not sent away for crimes they have not committed.
however this kind of behavior can intimidate a victim into not speaking. this is witness intimidaton. and thats a criminal offense. agreeing with danny vice victims are usually very sick and having nightmares. and they relive the event over and over again.
im conflicted. this guy is an ass hole. but then again look at where he resides and his choice of job for life. you can tell hes dieing for authority.
lawyers are already cross examining the children in court. That already happens. No one is disputing an accused person's right to the best possible defense.
What Fagan is doing is trying to tear down any kind of minimum sentences for REAL, CONVICTED child rapists... Not ALLEGED child molesters.
This was Fagan THREATENING to tear kids apart on the stand, as a reason why there should be no minimum standards as provided by Jessica's law.
That's why there are so many repeat offenders out there. They serve a few months... maybe a year or two... and then they go free.
Research the case behind Jessica's law, and you'll see why this is so important.
You people are nutso. He wasn't threatening to rip children apart, he was trying (poorly) to make the (debatable) point that mandatory sentencing could have the effect of making defense attorneys treat child witnesses worse than they do now.
If he really believes that, then he's trying to help these children.
This is such a loaded topic in this country though that everyone starts foaming at the mouth and misinterpreting anything said by anyone who doesn't tow the culture's party line.
Get therapy.
I know this is an old post, but it is new to me. Anyway, you people have comprehension issues. What Fagan is saying is that in reality, a defendant's lawyer is OBLIGATED to do whatever he or she has to to try and attain the best outcome for their client. If this mean going after and eviscerating (not literally) the victim, that is what the attorney will do. Not specifically Fagan, he was speaking from the point of view of a defense attorney. It was a devil's advocate comment. Try rational thinking before you incorrectly assume someone's motivations, which were actually quite clear in this case, to anyone with a modicum of intelligence.
Post a Comment
****Please Read Before Posting****
The fastest way to post is to type your comment, click "NAME", enter any screen name you wish, and then click "PUBLISH".
Anonymous posts are discouraged, because it makes a conversation difficult to follow. No one can tell who's talking to who. Be somebody. Pick a name - any name. This way your fellow bloggers know who you are when you return to comment again. Thank you!