AP: Child molester's sentence vacated because of judge's Bible reference

[Sea Bass]

http://www.onnnews.com/Global/story.asp?S=2270118

Child molester's sentence vacated because of judge's Bible reference

Tuesday,September7,2004,9:25 PM

LINCOLN, Neb. Religious comments by a Nebraska judge have again resulted in a sentence of a convicted child molester being overturned.

The Nebraska Court of Appeals has vacated the 15- to 50-year prison sentence of Jay Bruna, a former school bus driver found guilty of molesting a child on his bus. The court based its reversal on the fact that Judge George Thompson referred to the Bible before sentencing.

In 1998, the Nebraska Supreme Court overturned the sentence of a man convicted of molesting a 13-year-old boy because Thompson had read a biblical passage about homosexuality during the sentencing.

In the Bruna case, Judge Thompson recalled that in 1998 he had quoted the Bible passage. He then observed, "It's not a message of condemnation, but of hope."

The appeals court says that made it look like Bruna's "sentence was based upon the personal bias or prejudice of the judge."

[Thiebear]

In either case was the person re-tried or re-sentenced or did they just walk... background here, background :)...

[twa]

While I am sure no one[or at least almost no one] wants our courts to turn into religous fanatics,the idea of vacating this sentence over a scripture reference is IMO as bad or worse.The thought that someone could molest my children and be convicted ,Then be released would have the likely effect of justfying taking revenge myself.:mad:

[ntotoro]

The appeals court says that made it look like Bruna's "sentence was based upon the personal bias or prejudice of the judge."

Eh... ? I certainly hope devoutly religious people aren't the only ones in this world who are against child molestation or pedophilia. This is just a ridiculous argument. The court should be ashamed for overturning a sentence this way.

Nick

[twa]

After checking out the full story he is in jail awaiting resentencing.While I do not agree ,I can see where the judges comments might influence the sentence.

[Funkyalligator]

This is disgusting and a travesty of justice...I don't care if the judge used a quote from the bible......this child molester should be in jail or dead!!!!!!!

[Symbol]

Originally posted by twa
While I am sure no one[or at least almost no one] wants our courts to turn into religous fanatics,the idea of vacating this sentence over a scripture reference is IMO as bad or worse.The thought that someone could molest my children and be convicted ,Then be released would have the likely effect of justfying taking revenge myself.:mad:

Why not, isn't their a biblical scripture that states an eye for an eye?

[gstahl]

Hold on folks, read twa's post. The guy is in jail awaiting re-sentencing.

I for one, do not want my judges to have bias religious or otherwise. Obviously, people each have some sort of bias, this should be kept out of the court and judges should know this. Reading a bible verse has nothing to do with sentencing guidelines.

What if a judge read something that had to do with segregation prior to sentencing a black man, that could be construed as bias, even if none was shown.

In the end the man will be in jail and will stay there (as he absolutely should). Child molestation is absolutely disgusting.

[ntotoro]

I don't understand all this talk about bias... bias this, bias that, bias ply tires... whatever. What bias? The dude is a pedophile. Do only religious people think being a child molester is wrong? The judge read something from the Bible. So what? Is he biased because he is religious? I don't get this at all.

Nick

[codeorama]

What if the judge was islamic and read something from the Koran?

Like gstahl said, the guy isn't going free, he's going to be sentanced again and in prison where he belongs.

[ntotoro]

The left would praise him as a good Muslim and talk about how Islam protects children... ;)

I honestly don't care. It's no big deal to me if the judge has any kind of religion at all because I think we'll all universally agree molesters and peodphiles are scum. I don't care if you're a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Atheist or Universal Unitarian or whatever. I personally have no problem with it.

I don't have any worries about the convict seeing the light of day for a while, either. I just think it's ludicrous and a waste of taxpayer dollars to re-sentence him because of this.

Nick

[codeorama]

Originally posted by ntotoro
The left would praise him as a good Muslim and talk about how Islam protects children... ;)

I honestly don't care. It's no big deal to me if the judge has any kind of religion at all because I think we'll all universally agree molesters and peodphiles are scum. I don't care if you're a Christian, Jew, Muslim, Buddhist, Zoroastrian, Atheist or Universal Unitarian or whatever. I personally have no problem with it.

I don't have any worries about the convict seeing the light of day for a while, either. I just think it's ludicrous and a waste of taxpayer dollars to re-sentence him because of this.

Nick

I agree, Pedophiles are scum, but again, the person is only being RE sentanced, it was not thrown out of court, they are not free on the street.
My concern with religion and government is that there may soon be a time where a different religion is more prominant and then it's views come to the forefront and I don't want that, I don't want a muslim leading my child in prayer at school etc...
But the point remains, a molester is a molester regardless.

[ntotoro]

Originally posted by codeorama
I don't want a muslim leading my child in prayer at school etc...
But the point remains, a molester is a molester regardless.

What about a Jedi? ;)

Nick

[codeorama]

Originally posted by ntotoro


What about a Jedi? ;)

Nick

Now that would be cool....:laugh: :laugh:

[Thiebear]

Censuring the Judge for reading the scripture is fine....
Suspending the Judge for reading the scripture is fine...

If the guy goes free because of mather, mark, or juhjeebus 5:12 then the judges that overruled it are now in the wrong. What they should have done is gone over the:

Facts
_____ multiplied by Law = x amount of years!
Sentence

if it came out normal leave it alone...

[Sea Bass]

Let's not forget that atheism is also a religion. We need to be careful when we try to limit religion in the government that we do not cross the line into introducing state sponsored atheism.

Also we need to be careful not to cross the line between "making no law respecting an establishment of religion" and "prohibiting the free exercise thereof."

I think sometimes people go so far to promote "separation of church and state" that they end up actually infringing on people's freedom of religion.

I can't help but wonder if the appeals court did not have their own bias when they threw out this case based on a Bible reference. Would a judge convict an innocent man based on his bias against child molesters (who doesn't have that bias?)? Did the sentence fit the crime? or was it unusually harsh?

If the sentence was not unusually harsh, that is significant proof that the judge's bias did not influence the sentence.