It was a busy day in Oakland County courts today, Wed. June 3, as
judges resolved a public official's alleged public sex, a teacher's
extra 'efforts,' and a woman leaving the scene of a late night hit-
and-run accident (we always wonder about the booze).
All (kind of) admitted something was wrong and were in court to be
sentenced after pleading to their charges.
And none went to prison, perhaps a sign that that state is really
keeping the doors harder to open with easing guidelines and forcing
judges to look elsewhere for punishment. Prisons suck up more than 20
percent of the state budget, which will just keep on shrinking.
County jails are the other option, and twice that was used today.
The public official was sentenced to just probation, despite a police
report that indicated he was naked and having sex. His wife denied
it, and County Commissioner Kim Capello only answered the judge that
he was urinating (is that a biker thing?).
The judge gave him an opportunity to withdraw the plea, saying he
didn't want an innocent man to face a punishment. Capello declined,
and though he had -- thru statements -- indicated that the media and
police reports were COMPLETELY wrong, he declined to answer
questions. But his wife put out a statement, reinforcing his innocence.
Everyone feels bad for the wife, but hey, where's Capello to tell his
side.
Answer some questions, or else zip it.
Then later, the former Holly teacher who had sex with students was
sentenced to 9 months in jail. I recall a couple cases where women
went to prison for this, and that was from a judge who was not one to
inflate sentences.
And later on, a young woman who left the scene of a late-night hit-
and-run accident got four months in jail (though the 4,320 hours of
community service might actually be crazy -- 108 weeks at 40 hours a
week.)
If the crime was so bad to go nuts with the community service
(described by the judge as the time she would have spent in jail for
six months, and the math works), then put her in jail.
Either she did a terrible crime and deserves incarceration, or she
deserves a break and should be given a break.
In this case, another man (who has not been charged) also hit the
victim, and no one is sure who hit him first and where he was in the
road when hit.
Just seems like she is being set up to fail.
And not many people can afford to work a full-time job for two years
without pay.
So my guess is this will have to be revisited, probably with a
violation of probation hearing.
Maybe prison won't be left out of the equation after all.