Rope, Tree, Some Assembly Required.

September 6th, 2007 | by Craig |

Honestly, why do we even bother letting guys like this continue to waste our precious oxygen and expel a dangerous greenhouse gas?

In court records and at the hearing, McKittrick argued that the judge should view the videotape of the rape made by Lacey before imposing a sentence. The judge agreed to watch the tape from a monitor in the courtroom turned away from the audience. The audio portion of the tape included the sound of the [18 month-old] child crying and Lacey telling her, “You’re OK.”

Words fail me.

  1. 15 Responses to “Rope, Tree, Some Assembly Required.”

  2. By moorcat on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    I can think of a REALLY good reason to keep this monster breathing… He will spend the rest of his unnatural life in prison (what little of it there probably is) - where his crime is just as repulsive to the prison population as it is to us.

    That may sound cruel and unusual but for people like this… I am willing to look the other way. I have children and now am raising my 3 year old grandchild.

    Moorcat

  3. By Gman on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    It ceases to amaze me that we don’t put people like this to death. I don’t mean this hatefully; justice screams for it. The innocence of a child is truly priceless and it has been taken forever. I think Moorcat is correct that this guy will likely perish in prison when his fellow inmates find out what he did.

  4. By Homestead on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    I KEEP TELLING YOU PEOPLE…. SET ‘EM FREE….

    ….. in downtown Billings….. I know about 300 angry mothers with rusty spoons who would be happy to take care of him for you.

  5. By Rocky Smith on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    The guy is scum and should never be let out. 30 years isn’t long enough. The recidivism rate for people like him is high. Treatment doesn’t work. I wouldn’t risk even one more child. Hope his new cellmate is rough and insistent…

  6. By carol on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    He said the public has a “rampant misconception toward sex offenders,” and he lamented the lack of resources.

    Oh, is this the not-enough-shrinks argument again? How the perps love all those suckers in the therapeutic establishment.

  7. By moorcat on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    That touches on a trend in law to “excuse” behavior due to factors such as upbringing, abuse etc. Personal responcibility is at an alltime low and it shows in our crime statistics. Few actually take responcibility for thier actions and as a result, you see people like this scumbag roaming the streets when he should have been locked up years ago.

    I am certainly not for the “touchy feelie” mindset. As a cop (in another life…), I saw way too many of these goblins get off or reduced sentances only to turn around and do it again. There is a reason I am for the Death Penalty and I applauded when Texas put in the “express lane”.

    For people like this, though, I think what he will have to live with in Prison is far worse than simply putting him to death (well, until someone finally shanks him…). Frankly, it couldn’t happen to a nicer guy…

    Moorcat

  8. By CrimeNe.ws on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    Montana

    Sorry Craig, you leave me no choice sometimes.

    Tape of rape played before sentencing:
    Reason to Blow Up the World…

    A Billings man who videotaped himself raping an 18-month-old baby was sentenced Tuesday to life in prison.

    District J

  9. By Wulfgar on Sep 7, 2007 | Reply

    Okay, enough is enough. Aren’t we all real special because we feel outraged by a crime that is, by the definition of the word, outrageous?

    I’m certain that we all feel ever so much safer since this guy is a monster … you know … a fantasy sent from elsewhere. He’s not human, of course he’s not. To admit that he might be is to admit that humans are really the problem, and certainly we share nothing with this “goblin”. No, he wasn’t created by evolution or God, like we were. He was created by J.R.R.Tolkien, apparently.

    I, too, hope that his new cellmate is “rough and insistent”. It’s just common wisdom that the response to torture should be … more torture. And when he finally gets shanked in the yard, hoowah! Justice is going to party that day, I can tell you!

    After all, the children he abused are ruined! RUINED!

    And the commenters at the Gazette have it right. His lawyer should be stripped of status and disbarred and caged with him. She should be tarred and feathered in the town square. Anyone who has had anything to do with this guy should suffer for the rest of their miserable and pathetic lives. A pox on all who have been tainted by him, I say!

    He should have been locked up long ago … except for that having ‘not been charged with a crime’ stuff. But that’s no excuse! People like this ought to turn themselves in before they ever commit such horrors. They’re monsters; don’t they know that?

    People, please get a grip. There is no tendency in law to “excuse” this crap for whatever reason. (Crime of this nature is at a low point, Moorcat; we’re just better at catching them now than we were previously. Shouldn’t that be celebrated?) This guy is one sick F@ck3R, but he is still a human and a citizen deserving of the law and justice as defined by the law. In my honest opinion, yes, he should be put to a painless death. He is a disease upon the social fabric, and likely can’t be cured. But this “Rapehimandkillhimandstickawidgetthroughhishead” bullshit needs to stop. We aren’t him. We aren’t the result of our animal urges, and shouldn’t react as such … at least I think we aren’t.

  10. By Craig on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    >but he is still a human and a citizen deserving of the law and justice

    Nope. He checked that card at the door when he decided to do what he did to that child.

  11. By noodly appendage on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    I think the sentence was lenient. That’s the point, and the hyperbole rebutting it is nonsense.

    Such behavior is repugnant to society and to individuals, and deserves our most outraged reactions.

  12. By moorcat on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    Looking up the word “monster” in Webster’s dictionary produced the following results -

    Main Entry: 1mon·ster
    Pronunciation: ‘män(t)-st&r
    Function: noun
    Etymology: Middle English monstre, from Anglo-French, from Latin monstrum omen, monster, from monEre to warn — more at MIND
    1 a : an animal or plant of abnormal form or structure b : one who deviates from normal or acceptable behavior or character
    2 : a threatening force
    3 a : an animal of strange or terrifying shape b : one unusually large for its kind
    *4 : something monstrous; especially : a person of unnatural or extreme ugliness, deformity, wickedness, or cruelty*
    5 : one that is highly successful

    I consider this person a monster. No, he isn’t the Balrog or Orc of Tolkien’s middle earth, but he is a monster none the less. Human monsters have existed throughout history - Ted Bundy, Jeffery Dalmer, Randy Woodfield, the list goes on…

    Yes, I hope bad things happen to this particular monster. I am not at all ashamed to admit that. He will never have to comfort a child who wakes screaming in the night after reliving an experience so horrible in dreams that they have blocked it out of their waking mind. This person will never have to deal with the long, hard road to recovery that the children he attacked will. I freely admit that I have a particular dark place in my heart for monsters like this. Call me cruel, but it is something I simply can’t be detached or “logical” (dare we say, philosophical)) about. This type of individual deserves everything it is subjected to…

    I have never said anything about the kids being ruined. Wulfgar, you of all people know that I would NEVER say that. I know better. I also know what the road to helping the children recover looks like. It isn’t easy (for either the children or the parents), it has lots of unexpected twists and turns, and there are a lot of tears and pain involved. I also know that it can be done and many times, both the parents and children come out the other side stronger for having taken the road. The flip side is that I will NEVER accept one of the monsters as anything less than a pox on society that should be exterminated.

    I have also never said that this monster’s lawyer should be punished (yes, I know you refered to the comments of the story). As you well know, I believe in a society of law - that every accused person deserves the best defense the law can provide. The lawyer isn’t at fault for the attrocities this monster has committed. The Monster is at fault. He should (and will) be punished.

    In a way, I envy your dispassionate analysis of this story. You are capable of being rational and measured in your responce. I am not, nor will I ever be to things of this nature. You also know why.

    Yes, I celebrate that society has finally grown up enough to start ridding us of these monsters. You have no idea just how much I celebrate it. That does not mean that I won’t wish bad things on those that still perpetrate this kind of violence on children.

    Moorcat

  13. By Wulfgar on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    No problem, Moorcat. I know where you’re coming from. I really do understand the outrage and I share it. My response was only in part to those folk here. What really set me off was reading the comments at the Gazette. I know better than to do that.

    Craig, he may have checked his humanity at the door, but the rest isn’t up to him; it’s up to us. We didn’t check our moral, ethical and legal responsibilities just because this guy did something horrible. He’s still a citizen, and deserves the rights and justice conferred by that status. We don’t owe him that; we owe us that.

  14. By Wulfgar on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    110 years for man 33 years old is pretty effectively a life sentence. Speaking of hyperbole, I’d be curious to know what you find lenient about that?

  15. By noodly appendage on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    His eligibility for parole is lenient.

    I get a little torn between the desire to uncover these crimes and the desire for cruel and unusual punishment that is fortunately against the law.

    We need family members to step forward and report these crimes. But were the punishments harsher, would we get that self reporting? Or would families not want their members put to death or sentenced to lautomatic ife imprisonment?

    In this case, a longer sentence past the usual lifespan would’ve seemed reasonable to many who aren’t necessarily advocating cruel and unusual punishments.

  16. By moorcat on Sep 8, 2007 | Reply

    Quite frankly, the sentence he was given could be argued as being “cruel and unusual” in that - unless he is segragated, he will be tortured and quite likely killed long before his sentence is complete. It probably would have been more merciful to sentence him to death.

    As far as parole….. If he lives long enough to be paroled, it is the duty of the parole board to recognise that this person has argued in court that he “couldn’t help himself”. He can’t be rehabilitated. He will offend again. It is also up to those in community to stand up and say “hell no” when the time comes.

Post a Comment