Judge sentences teen to 10-years of church for DUI death | Mail Online
Now, there are two things I want to examine in this case.

1) Is the judge sentencing him to church unconstitutional or illegal? Many people have been sentenced to church before and to my knowledge there hasn't been a precedent setting case to address this. Furthermore, the judge proposed the idea to the prosecutor, the family of the victim, and the offender's lawyer. All 3 sides agreed to the sentence.

2) Assuming this is a legal sentence, do you feel it is acceptable? Many would say he needs to go into prison, while the family of the victim doesn't want to see his life wasted or thrown out. It is a tough call, a toss up.

Thoughts?

__________________
"In Honor There Is Hope"

Canada born, Georgia raised.

I have no problem with the sentence. He is young and made a mistake. I am all for second chances. Hopefully the ten years of probation and church will help the lad and cause him to be a better person so he does not repeat the mistake.

After all, not committing further crimes should be a goal among our judicial system. If everyone learned from their mistakes, we would be a lot better off.

__________________

Conceptually I like the sentence. I LOVE the idea that we unbind judges from these stupid mandatory sentencing guidelines (federal and many states) and allow them to do what they do best. Make judgment calls. Mandatory sentencing, though great to an outsider, creates serious problems when there are better solutions for the fact scenario before the judge.

HOWEVER, practically, I have some serious concerns about this sentence. Linking any sort of sentence to religion is, to my mind, a violation of fundamental constitutional rights that cannot be violated. While today it may be all well and good that the child has found God and is willing to go to church, let's fast forward a couple of years down the road and see what happens if he decides he's a devout atheist or muslim, or Jew, or Wiccan... Well that screws with the sentencing and who handles the sentencing and... It's just a night mare. And IF there isn't a change, you've used government to force religion on the man violating his core first amendment rights.

Tough call.

__________________
The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to permit the conquered Eastern peoples to have arms. History teaches that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.

-- Hitler, April 11 1942

violation of his constitutional rights, IMO. I cannot abide a government that can force anyone to attend mythological ramblings on a regular basis.

__________________


To tax the larger incomes at a higher percentage than the smaller, is to lay a tax on industry and economy; to impose a penalty on people for having worked harder and saved more than their neighbors. ~ John Stuart Mill

Gypsy Soul Memories
Scuba Diver Life
Success Freaks

A wise judge and evidently a prosecutor concerned with the actual welfare of the community. Bully for them.

*** as for church. a court case isn't tried in a vacuum. this is a christian atmosphere and the judge seems to think the teen will best respond to that. If it was a Buddhist area maybe the punishment would be different. but I see nothing wrong with this particular condition.

**should a teen go to prison for 10 years? Not unless he set out to kill or did reckless crimes over and over. I feel as the family it would be a waste.

__________________
...

Also, it presents the possibility for preferential treatment.
Suppose another teen does the exact same thing. But this one's an atheist.
You can't sentence him to church without directly showing you're violating his first amendment rights. So do you send him to jail instead?
You're presenting a situation where two people of different religious outlooks receive disparate treatment. Based on their religion.
Constitutional violation.

__________________
"Try to become not a man of success, but try rather to become a man of value."
Albert Einstein

__________________
Never annoy a cat. We like our meals hot and bleeding.

Is the .006 a mistake? It seems to me you could get that level by walking past a drink.

I have no problem with this sentence for a couple of reasons.
First, it sounds like this was part of a plea agreement, so there was consent.
Second, he commited a crime that resulted in another's death. In my opinion he surrendered his rights at that point, if the Judge thought church would help I have no problem with forcing him to go.

I think they mean .06, probably a typo.

__________________
"In Honor There Is Hope"

Canada born, Georgia raised.