Judge who ordered Sandusky's release without bond was volunteer with his 'charity'

Submitted by Matt on Tue, 2011-11-15 01:43

Only men cover up or enable things like child sexual abuse? Article here. Excerpt:

'FOX 29 News has uncovered a link between Sandusky's charity, The Second Mile, and the judge presiding over his case.

Prosecutors say Sandusky met his victims through Second Mile and Sandusky's foundation for at-risk kids.

We poured through the charity's donation records from 2009 and found that the judge who handled his preliminary arraignment gave Second Mile somewhere between $500 and $1,000 and has volunteered with the group. That's the same judge who released Sandusky on $100,000 unsecured bail.

That means Magisterial District Justice Linda Leslie Dutchcot required Sandusky to just sign his name on a piece of paper, and he was set free. There was no leg monitor, and no big bail. Prosecutors had asked for a half-million dollars at least.

FOX 29's Steve Keeley spoke early Monday morning with state Rep. Mike Vereb (R-Montgomery County), who said, "These details have got to be reviewed."

"I'm sending off a letter to Chief Justice of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania Ron Castillo and asking him to look at what happened here, to look at the reports that are out there, and if in fact does this district justice has a conflict of interest," Vereb said.'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

Actually, I like this wiffleball thrown at Sandusky by the female judge. He got what this judge would have given a female accused of child rape. So, it is gender neutral as far as I am concerned.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Luek on Tue, 2011-11-15 07:39

'So, it is gender neutral as far as I am concerned.'

I suppose in a manner of speaking, it is. But anyone facing these charges, when there is such evidence as to show their severity and probability of correctness, should not be let free until trial regardless of their sex. However, women, as you point out, all too often do not get held to the same standard as men; men are usually kept locked up while women are usually let go with SOB ("Sign On Bail"). So from the POV of there being the same kind of "whiffleball" being pitched to the male suspect in this case as would be to a female, yes, there is equal treatment, but only paid for at the Devil's price. The bigger issue I feel is that no one facing such charges, wherein the charges are backed by the kind of evidence that is backing them in this case, should be let free until trial with nothing but SOB as bond (or no bond, as the case is), regardless of their gender. Any woman suspected under such conditions as this of committing child rape should be kept well locked-up behind bars until trial, as should any man.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Matt on Wed, 2011-11-16 02:58