Pantagraph.com | News | Man gets 12 years for sexual assault of three minors

Note: All views and opinions expressed in reader comments are solely those of the individual submitting the comment, and not those of the Pantagraph or its staff.

MY Kids wrote on Aug 31, 2007 10:08 AM:

" If those were my kids he's serving 12 years for. . . . they would be the toughest kids by the time that 12 years was up. I'd have them in all kinds of self defense classes. And the day he got out of prison. . . my kids and I would be there waiting for him to walk out that door with his paper sack of valuables. Sick em kids. . . ..like pit bulls!!! "

Re: To What is Wrong with Judges wrote on Aug 30, 2007 6:13 PM:

" A prosecutor makes a deal you are right, BUT the judge has to sign off on it making his decision the FINAL one. Just last week a man was sentenced by Fitzgeral to two 8 year prison terms for 3 counts of having sex with an 8 year old. What a travesty of justice this was for the victim and the family. These judges need to get the message that SEX OFFENDERS will NOT find safe haven in McLean County. If we need to get rid of a few of these liberal minded judges, lets open the door for them to leave. "

Complaints wrote on Aug 30, 2007 5:34 PM:

" if you don't like the sentences handed down by the judges for sex assault and molesters, why don't you judge them yourself and dispence your own justice! Vigilante is the way to go on this in my opinion. "

JD wrote on Aug 30, 2007 5:11 PM:

" Actually, it is the judges who have the final say in sentencing. While prosecutors may make deals, it is within the judge's power to disregard what the prosecutor wants, and assign a sentence the judge chooses. When is defendant makes the deal, they are usually advised that the prosecution can only ask for a specific sentence. If the judge decides to apply their own sentence, the deal is void and the defendant can attempt to withdraw their plea and progress through the system. "

terrible wrote on Aug 30, 2007 2:26 PM:

" Yeah, Jeff was supposed to be sentenced today and the idiots from DOC brought the wrong Jeff Young. What are the odds of that happening? Will he ever have to pay for all the wrong things he did? I'm not sure if it is ever going to happen. "

TO: TO: 'what is wrong' wrote on Aug 30, 2007 1:27 PM:

" What was a simple mistake? Molesting children?!?!? "

Just me wrote on Aug 30, 2007 1:13 PM:

" You would think that when 95% of the time when predators like this are in jail for the minimum time that they are and then in no time at all they will be in the paper for doing it again. It's like the saying goes "once a cheater always a cheater" ergo...."once a predetor always a predetor". It is a sickness and it won't change. Unfortunetly it is the kids that are suffering because they have to live with it for the rest of their lives. A lot of these crimes and deaths could have been prevented if they would have just kept them in jail the first time. What a wonderful country we live in. "

Correction Please... wrote on Aug 30, 2007 12:27 PM:

" Young's sentencing for the 2005 criminal sexual assault charges is actually today. It's too bad both of these "men" weren't found guilty in the other sexual assault case, they certainly should have been. "

dwarf wrote on Aug 30, 2007 9:59 AM:

" I can't believe this guy gets 12 years, while the guy who robbed the store got 22. This crime is far more heinous. "

If only it were that easy wrote on Aug 30, 2007 9:31 AM:

" The reason molesters get these light sentences is because the prosecutors hands are often tied. They do the best they can with what they have for evidence. They are relying on unreliable witnesses/victims, who are vulnerable to cross examination by the defense. They would be re-victimized on the stand, and their testimony could potentially backfire and get the defendant aquitted if they get crossed-up by the defense. So they make a deal that obviously is not "justice", but at least the molester has to do some time, rather than getting off completely. "

To What is Wrong With Our Judges wrote on Aug 30, 2007 9:18 AM:

" Why the judges? It is the prosecutors who make the deal. They are the ones to blame for saying that the lives and innocence of 3 kids are only worth 12 years. I can only assume that when the State's Attorney finds out that one of his assistants agreed to this then someone's head will roll. "

Gotta love it wrote on Aug 30, 2007 9:03 AM:

" 40 years for transporting Ecstasy, but 12 years for sexual assault of multiple minors. Yep. That's my country. "

king4congress wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:51 AM:

" It Is a flawed sentencing policy. These "men" should be dropped down the deepst darkest hole that this country has available....and left there. "

king4congress wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:45 AM:

" It Is a flawed sentencing policy. These "men" should be dropped down the deepst darkest hole that this country has available....and left there. "

Plea Bargain wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:40 AM:

" Why do these kinds of people get plea deals? So they can go out and do it all over again when they are released? The sad thing is that he will be out way before 12 years. The judicial system sucks. "

TO: 'what is wrong...' wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:27 AM:

" Good grief, it's a simple mistake. Have you never made one? "

Sentencing Guidelines wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:26 AM:

" Too bad the sexual offenders mentioned in this article weren't in possession of drugs. If that were the case, they'd be subject to mandatory prison time. With drug crimes - judges have no choice in sentencing. There ought to be a mandatory minimum imposed for all sexual offenders instead of drug offenders. "

To What's Wrong: wrote on Aug 30, 2007 8:04 AM:

" Don't blame the judges for what (I agree) seems to be a ridiculously flawed sentencing policy. I encourage you to familiarize yourself with the whole history of the War on Drugs - from Nixon in 1968 to present. You can blame the twisted sentencing policies on MANDATORY MINIMUM sentencing policies for drug offenders that were intended to remove a judge’s personal discretion in sentencing to insure all drug offenders are sentenced equally. At the very least, it seems our lawmakers should re-evaluate their priorities and values and apply the mandatory minimum sentencing to crimes infinitely more dangerous than simple drug possession. As it stands, the only hope we have of insuring extended prison sentences for sexual predators is if they’re in possession of a controlled substance at the time of their apprehension. "

Indian Joe wrote on Aug 30, 2007 7:58 AM:

" I have never been convinced that Pelo is guilty. I am more a wait and see. I am convinced that Pelo is stupid. You just don't go house hunting at 2:00 in the morning. "

"south" gregory wrote on Aug 30, 2007 7:20 AM:

" I think if you catch west main it'll run into south gregory. "

Penny wrote on Aug 30, 2007 7:11 AM:

" Mmmm...wonder if these victims will be healed from this in 12 years..ya think? It's no wonder pedophiles and molestors continue on their path of destroying our children; they know they won't receive much of a sentence. What a great message our judicial system is sending to America's youth: "This is all you're worth." "

What is wrong with the Pantagraph? wrote on Aug 30, 2007 6:36 AM:

" In the article, it refers to "south" Gregory. That street runs east to west. "

What is Wrong With Our Judges wrote on Aug 30, 2007 12:26 AM:

" This is ridiculous when a drug dealer gets more prison time than a full blown sexual predator. I have had with these mamby pamby judges who seem to want to make deals with pedophiles. A message needs sent to everyone of these robed elitists that if you dont slam the door for good on pedophiles you will not be retained. I noticed this article did not mention who the judge was, I am going to find out. Look at how many charges were dismissed, this is a slap in the face to both the victims and the families. "

Ads by Yahoo!

Practice Forex Trading

Allheartchefs Discount Chef/Cooks Pants

2008 Diet Of The Year: