Our criminal justice system is supposed to keep people who are a danger to society away from people they might harm. Theoretically it is also supposed to help criminals become law-abiding citizens by punishing them for their crimes and showing them the error of their ways. Well, evidently California has lost that concept.
Yesterday The American Thinker posted an article about a recent court case in California that resulted in a very questionable sentence for the defendants.
The article reports:
In a case that’s drawing a lot of attention based on the insane level of leniency shown, two 14-year-olds who bullied, murdered, danced on the body of, and filmed a helpless 13-year-old, have been let off with the mother-of-all-slaps-on-the-wrist by a Riverside County Superior Court Justice.
According to local radio station KTLA:
Two 14-year-old Southern California boys who beat a fellow student in 2019, causing his death, won’t go to jail but must undergo anger management therapy, a judge ruled.
Riverside County Superior Court Judge Roger A. Luebs imposed the therapy as a probation condition before releasing the teenagers to their parents on Thursday, the Riverside Press-Enterprise reported Friday.
On Sept. 16, 2019, the teenagers were videotaped attacking 13-year-old Diego Stolz outside classrooms at Landmark Middle School in Moreno Valley, east of Los Angeles. One boy struck the teenager in the head from behind and he fell, hitting his head against a pillar. The boys then continued punching the boy, who died nine days later from a brain injury.
Would you feel comfortable with these children living in your neighborhood?
The article also notes:
Parts of his (Riverside County Superior Court Judge Roger A. Luebs) sentencing were obnoxious, too:
Luebs directed that each offender enroll in character development and anger management classes, as well as perform 150 hours community service, not play violent video games, avoid social media and write letters of apology to the Stolz family. They were additionally ordered to permanently steer clear of one another.
Luebs warned the pair that any probation violation could land them in deep trouble, possibly resulting in time behind bars.
Why, exactly, are they getting ‘one last warning’ to behave themselves, when they’ve already done the worst they could possibly do? These killers should have had their one-last-warning before they moved up to killing people. This didn’t happen out of the blue — one of these plagues-on-society was already on probation when he tried his hand at killing. How seriously are they going to take this latest ‘one-last-warning’? The message they’ve gotten so far is that if they get caught violating probation, all they will get is another one-last-warning. But remember, one more chance.
The article goes on to mention that California has been moving in the direction of reducing its youth prison population in past years. I guess its pretty easy to reduce your prison population if you don’t hold murderers accountable for their crimes.