This is so sickening. .......WTF???????

[2tonevalk]

This is the most disgusting thing I have read in weeks.  A man sodomizes a 5 yr old and the guy gets a year in jail. 
There has GOT to be a special room in hell for this scum.  Not just the perpetrator BUT,,,,,the judge, the prosecutor, and the guy's attorney.  I hope they all find out REAL soon.

Wister child rapist sentenced to 1 year in prison after deal with prosecutors
By Associated Press
10:36 AM CDT, May 18, 2009

McALESTER, Okla. (AP) — A Wister man charged with raping and sodomizing a 5-year-old girl has been sentenced to one year in prison.

David Harold Earls pleaded no contest last week to charges of first-degree rape and forcible sodomy as part of a plea deal with prosecutors.

Prosecutors say they reached a plea bargain after consulting with the victim's family and out of concern about the 5-year-old's ability to testify in the case.

Under his conviction, the 64-year-old Earls will be required to register as a sex offender for life after his release from prison.

Earls' attorney could not be reached for comment.

___

Information from: McAlester News-Capital, http://www.mcalesternews.com

[fudgie]

Wow, unbelievable.  Get caught with a little weed and get more time behind bars. Judicial system just dont seem right these days. 

[Robert]

Find out the prison hes going to and write the inmates about him or send the article about him to the prison. This will change things real fast.

[..]

Round the back of the jail. 50 cents for a 45 bullet and job done.

[Hoosier Valk]

Wouldn't be suprised if he didn't serve his full term. Might be carried out by six.

[JimL]

Here is the part that is hardest to believe........

When I first saw this story being broadcast, I turned to my wife and said:  "It must be another case where an idiot Vermont judge is legislating from the bench".

Was I ever shocked when I saw that this case was adjudicated in the great state of Oklahoma!  

[Bagger John - #3785]

Wow, unbelievable.  Get caught with a little weed and get more time behind bars. Judicial system just dont seem right these days. 

Not even close. Get caught offering MP3 files for upload and be subject to 5 years federal time plus a $250,000 fine.

When an intellectual property crime carries a stiffer sentence than a violent felony...folks, we have a problem in this country.

[Jess from VA]

In my day, the UCMJ provided that rape of a child under age 12 was punishable by "death or such other punishment as a court martial may direct."  When the Supreme Court recently ruled on this issue, they entirely forgot about the long standing UCMJ, Article 120.

Most child sex offenders are unable to control themselves, short of constant chemical castration.  Each and every one that commits this type of offense on a child should be executed.  A humane execution is not cruel and unusual punishment, and the human species is neither Godlike or endangered.  

If this was my child, I'm afraid I would have to ask the judge why I should let him live.  

[Chrisj CMA]

There has GOT to be a special room in hell for this scum. http://www.mcalesternews.com

Dont worry........There are sins and there are SINS.......in the Bible it says its better for a a person that  hurts the little ones that millstone be tied around their neck and be thrown into the sea MATT 18:6.  So I think GOD will be this guys ultimate judge.  It will SUCK to be him on that day

[cutter]

Bring him to Gonzales Tx. They still have a gallows he can swing on in the old jail........ 

[stormrider]

Knowing someone dear to me that was abused as a child, I wouldn't have a problem being God's hand in doling out the punishment. That child will be scared for life, the sicko pervert will do it again if given the chance. Sad thing, this kind of perversion happens more times than we care to think about. The ride-in I put on in October,
Thunder on the Square, is a fundraiser to support an agency that tries to help kids like this. The director says that things are getting worse. America needs a good dose of repentance.

[Willow]

but I'm very troubled by our responses in this thread.

First, we are presented with a very brief news piece, one sided and incomplete.  Some news items are written specifically to raise in the reader an emotional response.  This one looks like a good example.

Hear me well, I am not in any way defending the behavior reported to have allegedly taken place.

In what few facts we are given, we are told that a man was charged with a crime and that the prosecutors "reached a plea bargain after consulting with the victim's family and out of concern about the 5-year-old's ability to testify in the case."  That means there was enough evidence of the crime for an informed body to determine the man should be charged, but that the prosecutors (note the plural) believed there was a strong possibility that there was not enough evidence to assure a conviction, that is, to convince twelve people beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime had been committed.  The accused pleaded no contest which is not the same as guilty.  A plea of no contest may at times mean the defendant believes that more damage would be done in his defense than would be done by his accepting the judgement of the court without a formal trial.  It could also be a tool of the defense attorney to leverage his bargaining power with the prosecutor.  Apparently the defense attorney believed there was a chance, a risk, that the prosecutor could get the conviction of which he was unsure.  Sometimes a defendant will refuse to defend himself or even plead guilty out of a sense of guilt over something that he has done which is not the same as that of which he has been accused.

At any rate, the highly criticized prosecutors and judge were privy to more information than was given to us and they put their, I believe, best efforts into the outcome.  At the very least, most of us should have prefaced our emotional responses with, "If he's guilty of what he's accused."

Vigilante justice often is not.  That's why we are a nation ruled by law and not by emotion.

Most child sex offenders are unable to control themselves, short of constant chemical castration.  Each and every one that commits this type of offense on a child should be executed.  A humane execution is not cruel and unusual punishment, and the human species is neither Godlike or endangered.  

If this was my child, I'm afraid I would have to ask the judge why I should let him live.  

This one is so fraught with ignorance and fallacy that it cries out for a response, but the mind is overwhelmed by the multitude of options.  Let's try two.

The assertion that "most child sex offenders cannot control themselves" is contradicted by the very incident to which we are reacting.  The 64 year old man is accused of "child sex offense"  (whatever that means to the one on whose ears it falls) apparently for the first time.  Did he "control himself" for sixty-three years?  Did he commit repeated offenses for sixty-three years before getting caught?

Truthfully, we all can control ourselves, and by law are required to.  Thus the insanity defense, but even the insanity defense doesn't assert that the perpetrator could not control himself, but only that he couldn't know that what he was doing was wrong.  Once we start down the path of "can't control himself" it takes only a few steps to arrive at the place in which we are all just helpless victims of ourselves and our environments.  I don't accept that premise for either myself or others.  Isn't the common excuse of rapists, "She showed me too much leg and I couldn't help myself?"

We have jumped quickly from "child rapist" to "child sex offender".  Be careful where you go with that.  Many of our midst enjoy the sight of a young woman, scantily clothed, before an open refrigerator.  By my assessment, the young lady appears to be about fifteen or sixteen years of age.  Were we to let our hands go where our minds lead us with that picture we would be legally, and rightfully, identified as a "child sex offenders".  No danger to most of us.  We are not likely to do with our hands what we have pretended with our minds, not because we are holy and righteous, but because we legitimately fear the social and legal consequences.  Let us though not let ourselves off the hook so lightly.  Were it proven that the refrigerator girl or some similar art actually consisted of the image of one under the age of eighteen, and were we in possession of such images, knowing or not knowing the ages, we would be illegally holding child pornography and, by definition, "child sex offenders".  Could we help ourselves?  Oh, I certainly do hope so.

I agree with the last statement from the quote, but believe that the word afraid has been exchanged for the word proud.

Dont worry ........There are sins and there are SINS.......in the Bible it says its better for a person that  hurts the little ones that millstone be tied around their neck and be thrown into the sea MATT 18:6.  So I think GOD will be this guys ultimate judge.  It will SUCK to be him on that day

       
For the record, what Matthew 18:6 says is "... but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble ... ".  It's more a threat to false teachers than to child molesters.  It has to be taken well out of context and very loosely interpreted to apply to the present situation.

The concept of "sins" and "SINS" is an excuse for each of us to feel that someone else's wrongdoing is somehow in a completely different category than our own.  For the most part it just isn't so.  With human justice, there are "crimes" and "CRIMES" but that is only in our eyes.  The Christian scriptures do not support the idea that there are big sins and little sins, whether in the concept that some or more severely punishable than others or that some are less forgivable than others.  Also according to the Christian scriptures, the place called hell is as bad as it gets.  It's sort of like putting the capital criminal in an electric chair.  The consequence is what it is and the length of time that the electricity is allowed to surge through his body is pretty much irrelevant.

Thanks for taking the time to read my rant.  I'm not asking us to be less enraged at despicable behavior toward children.  I'm not asking us to condone what is unthinkable.  I'm just asking that we process information through our minds and not just our emotions before we speak.  I'm suggesting that we not let the author of a nine line news story jerk us around so.  

I'm not riding today and it really is annoying me.  
  

[Stude]

 I have a gut feeling that the father of the little girl wants the scum bag out of jail as soon as possible,
so he can carry out his own justice.Can't touch the scum bag if he is in jail and the scum bag can't hide
if he gets out of jail... I am pretty sure as to how this story will end a year from now.

[John Schmidt]

"I'm not riding today and it really is annoying me."   

Sorry bud, just had to zing you a little. Aside from that, I pretty much agree. I had read and heard of this particular case recently and there apparently is more behind his sentence than is immediately available. My guess....the strength of the case and the age of the child involved had a lot to do with it....sure doesn't mean I agree with it. But, if it gets around while he's locked up I would not want to be in his shoes.

[Chrisj CMA]

Willow........

If you read all the translations of Matt 18:6  It says things like whosoever offends, scandalizes, causes to stumble, causes trouble to, and causes to sin.  Yes youre interpretation is correct it applies to teaching (causing to stumble) also, but the point of this verse is that Jesus was showing his heart for the youth.  Just how much he protects them, and there are Sins that carry more consequenses than other sins.  The bible says there is a sin unto death (thats a whole other doctrinal study)  But, my point is if teaching the little ones wrong carries a stiff punishment because we cause them to sin.....how much more do you think the Lord dispises sexually abusing them. (And, what is sexually abusing them teaching them?)

Oh, and this incident was reported on the news, I know he needs the protection of the law (presumed innocent and all that) but it aint looking too good, and besides all these comments are in the case of anyone not just this guy that have actually done these things......

[Michael K (Az.)]

Hey Carl!
We'll have to get together to chit-chat next month.

[fiddle mike]

Bring him to Gonzales Tx. They still have a gallows he can swing on in the old jail........ 

Years back, a Corpus Christi man raped his co-worker's mentally challenged sister.  The brother came to work with a pistol and shot the rapist dead.  A jury decided the shooter was temporarily insane (as I recall) and gave him ten years probation - no hazard for an otherwise law-abiding citizen,
A lot of us would have fined him $27.50 for discharging a fire arm in the city and sent him on his way.

[Willow]

Hey, Stude.  My gut tells me there's no protective father figure in the picture or if he is he is probably carrying his own weight of guilt.  These incidents don't normally happen with strangers and the parents have to deal with the question of how they let this happan.  It's not always a legitimate question, but it still is one that gnaws on the protector.

Hi, John.  Yeah, I get a bit crabby.  I suspect that there may be very little difference between a one year sentence and a life sentence for this individual.

Hello, ChrisJ.  I use multiple translations, although I prefer the one closest to the original Greek.  My assesment is correct.  Taken in context it just doesn't say what you want it to say.  It doesn't necessarily mean that your point is incorrect; it just means that the text you chose doesn't support it.

Michael K, I'm looking forward to it.

[Chrisj CMA]

Hello, ChrisJ.  I use multiple translations, although I prefer the one closest to the original Greek.  My assesment is correct.  Taken in context it just doesn't say what you want it to say.  It doesn't necessarily mean that your point is incorrect; it just means that the text you chose doesn't support it.

Well Carl, we will just have to agree to disagree.......I read the entire passage again and as Jesus used a little child as an example of how to approach God and how to interact with each other, He was teaching them that if you offend them, entice them to stumble because of your behavior it is such a terrible offence that it would be better you just die.

Any way you slice it, sexually abusing one of those little ones that God loves so much falls right into that warning........

I respect your wisdom, so I studied as many ways I know how and the context is broad here, not narrow........teaching them sunday school or teaching them life.  sinning in front of them, or enticing them to sin, sinning against them all teach them to sin and therefore cause them to stumble  and fit right into this grave warning from our Lord..........

I cant see it any other way, but I love the interaction.  Not trying to convert anyone, just the fact that we should be able to discuss this without name calling and anger is enjoyable to me.

Ban me if you want, or whatever but on this board we can and do talk about many non motorcycle things so why not Gods word as well?

[alph]

i have two little girls at home.  if anyone did to my girls what this guy admitted doing (no contest to me means he did it) i would have a hard time not finding someone to take care of him after he gets out.  i don't get into all this "jesus says..." junk.  a person like this is going to do it again, and probably get away with it.   worse yet, next time he might kill the child.  it's not like he cheated on his taxes, or had sex with another man (some states that's illegal), he physically hurt a child.  and he admitted it.  put it like this, i once got a speeding ticket, i went before the judge and pleaded no contest, he reduced my fine by $50 and i only lost two points.  yes, i was speeding, i was guilty, i pleaded no contest because i knew i would get off easier!  that's what this guy did!!!  same exact thing, just to get off easier. 

[Master Blaster]

The plea bargan prolly had nothing to do with innocence or guilt, but prolly more to do with a politically ambitious DA wanting another conviction on his record.  The American justice system is out of whack.  Proof is how many pols are lawyers.  Prime example is Hussien.

[fudgie]

but I'm very troubled by our responses in this thread.

First, we are presented with a very brief news piece, one sided and incomplete.  Some news items are written specifically to raise in the reader an emotional response.  This one looks like a good example.

Hear me well, I am not in any way defending the behavior reported to have allegedly taken place.

In what few facts we are given, we are told that a man was charged with a crime and that the prosecutors "reached a plea bargain after consulting with the victim's family and out of concern about the 5-year-old's ability to testify in the case."  That means there was enough evidence of the crime for an informed body to determine the man should be charged, but that the prosecutors (note the plural) believed there was a strong possibility that there was not enough evidence to assure a conviction, that is, to convince twelve people beyond a reasonable doubt that the crime had been committed.  The accused pleaded no contest which is not the same as guilty.  A plea of no contest may at times mean the defendant believes that more damage would be done in his defense than would be done by his accepting the judgement of the court without a formal trial.  It could also be a tool of the defense attorney to leverage his bargaining power with the prosecutor.  Apparently the defense attorney believed there was a chance, a risk, that the prosecutor could get the conviction of which he was unsure.  Sometimes a defendant will refuse to defend himself or even plead guilty out of a sense of guilt over something that he has done which is not the same as that of which he has been accused.

At any rate, the highly criticized prosecutors and judge were privy to more information than was given to us and they put their, I believe, best efforts into the outcome.  At the very least, most of us should have prefaced our emotional responses with, "If he's guilty of what he's accused."

Vigilante justice often is not.  That's why we are a nation ruled by law and not by emotion.

Most child sex offenders are unable to control themselves, short of constant chemical castration.  Each and every one that commits this type of offense on a child should be executed.  A humane execution is not cruel and unusual punishment, and the human species is neither Godlike or endangered.  

If this was my child, I'm afraid I would have to ask the judge why I should let him live.  

This one is so fraught with ignorance and fallacy that it cries out for a response, but the mind is overwhelmed by the multitude of options.  Let's try two.

The assertion that "most child sex offenders cannot control themselves" is contradicted by the very incident to which we are reacting.  The 64 year old man is accused of "child sex offense"  (whatever that means to the one on whose ears it falls) apparently for the first time.  Did he "control himself" for sixty-three years?  Did he commit repeated offenses for sixty-three years before getting caught?

Truthfully, we all can control ourselves, and by law are required to.  Thus the insanity defense, but even the insanity defense doesn't assert that the perpetrator could not control himself, but only that he couldn't know that what he was doing was wrong.  Once we start down the path of "can't control himself" it takes only a few steps to arrive at the place in which we are all just helpless victims of ourselves and our environments.  I don't accept that premise for either myself or others.  Isn't the common excuse of rapists, "She showed me too much leg and I couldn't help myself?"

We have jumped quickly from "child rapist" to "child sex offender".  Be careful where you go with that.  Many of our midst enjoy the sight of a young woman, scantily clothed, before an open refrigerator.  By my assessment, the young lady appears to be about fifteen or sixteen years of age.  Were we to let our hands go where our minds lead us with that picture we would be legally, and rightfully, identified as a "child sex offenders".  No danger to most of us.  We are not likely to do with our hands what we have pretended with our minds, not because we are holy and righteous, but because we legitimately fear the social and legal consequences.  Let us though not let ourselves off the hook so lightly.  Were it proven that the refrigerator girl or some similar art actually consisted of the image of one under the age of eighteen, and were we in possession of such images, knowing or not knowing the ages, we would be illegally holding child pornography and, by definition, "child sex offenders".  Could we help ourselves?  Oh, I certainly do hope so.

I agree with the last statement from the quote, but believe that the word afraid has been exchanged for the word proud.

Dont worry ........There are sins and there are SINS.......in the Bible it says its better for a person that  hurts the little ones that millstone be tied around their neck and be thrown into the sea MATT 18:6.  So I think GOD will be this guys ultimate judge.  It will SUCK to be him on that day

       
For the record, what Matthew 18:6 says is "... but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in Me to stumble ... ".  It's more a threat to false teachers than to child molesters.  It has to be taken well out of context and very loosely interpreted to apply to the present situation.

The concept of "sins" and "SINS" is an excuse for each of us to feel that someone else's wrongdoing is somehow in a completely different category than our own.  For the most part it just isn't so.  With human justice, there are "crimes" and "CRIMES" but that is only in our eyes.  The Christian scriptures do not support the idea that there are big sins and little sins, whether in the concept that some or more severely punishable than others or that some are less forgivable than others.  Also according to the Christian scriptures, the place called hell is as bad as it gets.  It's sort of like putting the capital criminal in an electric chair.  The consequence is what it is and the length of time that the electricity is allowed to surge through his body is pretty much irrelevant.

Thanks for taking the time to read my rant.  I'm not asking us to be less enraged at despicable behavior toward children.  I'm not asking us to condone what is unthinkable.  I'm just asking that we process information through our minds and not just our emotions before we speak.  I'm suggesting that we not let the author of a nine line news story jerk us around so.  

I'm not riding today and it really is annoying me.  
  

Willow, this is why I respect you so much. You have a way with words that make, me at least, look at things in a different perspective instead of thinking with our emotions as you put it. Always enjoy your posts.

[Robert]

Willow I also do like your posts but in this case I really dont think that kind of thinking is merited. I have posted the last bit of the news article because I wanted all to see what the story said. You can draw your own conclusions but I think that this guy deserves much more than he is getting. As much as I hate to use this as a example look how many came forward to say that their priest had sex with them how many years earlier. Have you seen the statistics on how many rapes go unreported how many daughters or sons raped by a family memeber? I also know of people that were as a child raped and the perpetrator was never caught. How old does that make them now and they were never caught when the child has grown to be a adult. Even btk was on the loose for quite awhile and how high profile was that. So I don't agree about looking at it from a sensational stand point and that this guy had to be ok before this happened. If you read the rest of the article you will see that this guy is not a stellar citizen. If anything I am even more upset because the girl couldn't testify for herself and said it only hurt in the beginning. I agree to get the whole story and this is some that wasn't filled in. I think in this case the guy should get the death penalty. The trauma caused by these kind of events in peoples lives is catastrophic so I dont think that some of the reactions are strong enough, I weep for the devastation on people that these things cause it can almost never be erased. As for Christians These kind of actions also open a door for demons to come in and destroy peoples lives too. There are many books out from Christians on this very subject that Jesus was the only one that healed them and removed the guilt and shame and also demons. If you read  Mary Magdalene had 7 demons in her that Jesus healed her from and she was a prostitute. The Bible also says why have sex with a prostitute and give her your strength this is because sex that was designed for a man and a woman after marriage and carries with it spiritual ties that cannot be erased easily. Like the soul tie some have that never get over certain lovers in their life. So these kind of events destroy in more than one way, consenting or not their are ties that develop in the spirit. The Bible also says as it was in the days of Sodom and Gomorrah so shall it be in the end times, which I firmly believe we are in. I also cant agree with Chris on that quote he made but I do know that these little ones have a special place in His heart., We forget our life is as a vapor of smoke here today and gone tomorrow. But our spirit will live on some with Jesus and some to be cast into the fiery pit, the lake of fire that was reserved for the devil and his cohort. So pray for this little girl that she will find the Lord and claim Him as her Lord and be saved. Be of sober spirit, be on the alert. Your adversary, the devil, prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour. Let it not be you

Miller said the child was unable to qualify as a witness. “We couldn’t keep her in the chair long enough to get the questions out of her,” he said.

“You could tell, having to do that, and having gone through some of this process already, was having an effect on her and we didn’t want to further traumatize her.”

McClendon, the detective with the McAlester Police Department, also reported the girl who had been attacked told an interviewer that Earls hurt her “til I got used to it,” and that he gave her an ice cream cone, according to the affidavit. He also reported that the findings of a physical exam were consistent with the allegations.

“We thought it was better to take a plea bargain to secure a conviction rather than risk not getting a conviction at all based on (the victim’s) inability to testify,” Miller said.

The prosecutor said the victim’s family and police were consulted and approved of the plea bargain before it was handed down by District Judge Tom Bartheld, who also fined Earls $1,000. In addition, Earls was ordered to register as a Level 3 sex offender within three days of his release from prison, a level that requires registration for life and address verification every three months.

In Oklahoma, sex offenders are required to register with local police and the Department of Corrections, even if they move out of state.

They must also submit a DNA sample, and the law regulates their loitering, working or living near schools, parks and other areas frequented by children.

The charge against Earls had been filed with the prior conviction enhancement for a 1992 burglary in Pushmataha County that resulted in a five-year sentence, and a 1996 conviction in Hughes County for assault with a dangerous weapon that resulted in a 20-year sentence.

[Willow]

Willow I also do like your posts but in this case I really dont think that kind of thinking is merited. ... so I don't think that some of the reactions are strong enough, ...

Thank you, Robert, for your very thoughtful response and thank you for providing a more complete story.

After your response I searched for and read what I could find on the web regarding the case.  With that information I would certainly back away from any concerns I had with respect to whether he's guilty.

I am still concerned, however, with some of the generalized assertions and that we did formulate most of our opinions with incomplete information.  I also still believe the short AP release, although not untrue, was specifically formulated to inflame the reader.

I am not without exposure, experience and knowledge of victims of child directed sexual abuse.

I sincerely hope that justice is served whether intentionally or coincidentally.

Were I to use a quote to appeal to the Christian public emphasizing how much God cares about little children I would use Matthew 18:10, "See that you do not despise one of these little ones for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven."
 

[Robert]

I just looked at that last night one of my favorites and how about Matt, Mark and Luke all have this similar account
Luk 18:15  And they were bringing even their babies to Him so that He would touch them, but when the disciples saw it, they began rebuking them.
Luk 18:16  But Jesus called for them, saying, "Permit the children to come to Me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these.
Luk 18:17  "Truly I say to you, whoever does not receive the kingdom of God like a child will not enter it at all."
what an awesome God
Chris I agree with you in principle just not that scripture.

[PharmBoy]

From what I saw on TV last night, I think that the judge is going to get the ax over this one.  He may not have to wait until the next election to be replaced.  I believe that the Attorney General has that power here in Oklahoma.  At any rate, the people here in Oklahoma are really "up in arms" over this...JTL

[Chrisj CMA]

quote from Willow: "Were I to use a quote to appeal to the Christian public emphasizing how much God cares about little children I would use Matthew 18:10, "See that you do not despise one of these little ones for I say to you that their angels in heaven continually see the face of My Father who is in heaven."
 

 

[bsnicely]

Well, all of this is moot, because Bubba and his buddies in the big house will give the scum some of his own medicine and then,  well  you know. Even the worst in the system hates these robbers of Innocence.................