Released pedophile convict accused of raping boy in library
By MARK PRATT
Associated Press Writer
NEW BEDFORD, Mass. –
A convicted sex offender who was released from prison over prosecutors’ objections has been charged with raping a 6-year-old at a public library while the boy’s mother used a computer nearby.
Corey Saunders was arrested outside a homeless shelter Wednesday evening shortly after a librarian saw them together, became suspicious and notified the mother, authorities said.
Already, the case has reignited debate over a state law allowing sexually dangerous predators to be locked up indefinitely even after they complete their prison terms.
Authorities allege Saunders lured the boy into a secluded corner of the library and raped him. New Bedford police Lt. Jeff Silva said the boy did not scream because he was paralyzed by fear; Saunders demanded the boy’s address and threatened to rape him again, Silva said.
“I think what shocked us the most is how bold this was,” Silva said. “It was 5 p.m. in a very busy library. What kind of monster attacks a kid? How is this guy out on the streets?”
Saunders, 26, was convicted in 2001 of indecent assault and battery and attempted rape on a child for attacking a 7-year-old boy in a foster home where he was placed. He was released about a year ago by a judge even though prosecutors and three psychologists said he was likely to strike again.
Bristol Superior Court Judge Richard Moses denied a motion by the district attorney’s office to keep Saunders in custody under what is called a civil commitment. The law, which mirrors those in several other states and federal court, allows authorities to postpone releasing sex offenders who are deemed still dangerous when their prison terms end, and move them to mental hospitals instead.
Opponents object that such laws unfairly keep inmates incarcerated longer [than] their sentences, essentially punishing them to ease the public’s fear that they’ll attack again. A federal judge in North Carolina agreed in September that the federal version was unconstitutional, though the matter has not been resolved in the courts.
Moses cited Saunders’ low IQ, his history of being sexually abused as a child and his lack of sexual offenses in prison as reasons to let him out. Also, a psychologist for the defense said Saunders was not likely to attack again.
Even though Saunders had difficulty in completing his treatment program, “such fact alone does not establish likelihood of reoffense,” the judge wrote.
“Saunders’ offending conduct took place over seven years ago. Also, Saunders, who has experienced an extremely difficult childhood and has a borderline IQ, was far from emotionally mature at the time of his offending conduct,” Moses wrote in rejecting the prosecution’s petition.
Former Bristol district attorney Paul F. Walsh Jr., who filed the petition, said Friday he can’t remember a case in which there was more overwhelming evidence for the prosecution.
“You had prior criminal offenses, failure to complete treatment programs, three psychologists saying he was dangerous,” he said. “I don’t know what more you could have.”
The judge is not allowed to comment on a pending case.
Suzanne DelVecchio, the retired chief justice of the state Superior Court, said Moses “is a wonderful judge, very cautioned in his decisions.”
“He thinks them through, and I am sure it has been very difficult for him since this happened,” she said.
Saunders was being held without bail. He is charged with rape of a child by force, indecent assault and battery on a child under 14 and enticing a child.
His attorney, public defender Lee Fortier, did not immediately return a call seeking comment Friday.
Saunders is classified as a Level 3 sex offender, the state’s most dangerous designation. He spent four years behind bars on the 2001 conviction, completing his sentence in December 2006.
He had lived in Boston and had been spending time in homeless shelters in New Bedford, and had registered with police, as required by law.
That’s not always enough, said Walsh, who believes sex offenders are incurable.
“In my 20 years as a prosecutor, never in my life have I seen a person convicted of sex crimes cured, never say, ‘I don’t have those feelings any more,’” Walsh said.
John Swomley, a lawyer who has represented some sex offenders, asserted that the law is based on politics, not science.
“What happened in this particular case is awful, but I’m not a proponent of civil commitment. I call it involuntary commitment,” he said. “You are putting them in prison for crimes they didn’t commit.”
To have a sex offender committed after his prison term ends, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is likely to reoffend, said DelVecchio, the retired chief justice.
“It’s heartbreaking for a judge when we make these decisions and we’re wrong, but judges make thousands of decisions and we’re only remembered when we’re wrong,” she said.
Walsh said such law are necessary, though he acknowledged they shouldn’t be draconian.
“You need a law like this to balance a defendant’s personal freedom against society’s right to be safe,” he said.
(This version corrects that Saunders was convicted of indecent assault and attempted child rape, not child rape.)
There is just so much wrong with this story that I don’t know where to begin.
Let’s begin with Chief Justice of the State Superior Court, Suzanne DelVecchio’s defense of Superior Court Judge Richard Moses, stating that the judge? “is a wonderful judge, very cautioned in his decisions.” This is in spite of the fact, that Moses disregarded three psychologists who said he, Saunders, was likely to strike again, and justified releasing him based on the opinion of one psychologist who said he was not likely to attack again, and Moses cited Saunders’ low IQ and his history of being sexually abused as a child.
That is information the court had before they sent the scum to prison. If they couldn’t use it to justify keeping him out of prison, what justifies using it to release him from prison?
DelVecchio then said “To have a sex offender committed after his prison term ends, prosecutors must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant is likely to reoffend.”
I’m not an attorney and I don’t play one on the net, but if I’m not mistaken, “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” is a requirement in criminal court proceedings and trials, not civil commitments.
[is there an attorney here who can elucidate on this?]
Even if I’m wrong, how is it possible to “prove beyond a reasonable doubt” that a person is going to commit a crime 1,3, 5 or 10 years down the road?
DelVecchio then wraps up her defense of Moses by admitting he was wrong!
This judiciary is blatantly flaunting its contempt for the will of the people. Art.III, sec.1 of the Constitution states that judges “shall hold their offices during good behaviour”.
Contempt for and disregarding the will, consent and safety of the people is not good behaviour. These type of judges need to be removed from the bench.
Here is a related case that will raise your BP even further.
This will bring your BP back down. Impeachment of Federal Judges
Email This
Posted by loboinok on February 2, 2008 10:49 pm
» Filed Under ACLU, Activist Judges, Child Exploitation, News
Trackback URL:
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator: The Quirks Of Super Tuesday...
- Weekly roundup « 4Simpsons Blog - Eternity Matters pinged this post.
Comments
7 Responses to “Released pedophile convict accused of raping boy in library”
-
-
-
Affiliations
The Giants
Advertise
-
-
Our Store
- Click the design to visit our store and help Stop the ACLU!
-
- More blogs about the ACLU
Syndicate Me
You did not give me enough information to make a conclusion on whether the four year sentense was apropriate or not. It may be that the legislature should make stricter sentences for sex offenders. He also may be an exception to the rule since he is only one example.
Judge Richard Moses as much as stated that he felt sorry for this serial predator. He had the option under law to civilly commit the predator, but his liberal sensitivities overrode any concern for public safety.
Moses is typical of too many liberal judges in Massachusetts who constantly release career criminals onto the streets. It?s time to adopt ?3 strikes? mandatory life sentencing for habitual, violent offenders. Enough!
The death penalty for child rape solves many of these problems.
I have a different angle on this story. The library’s computer policy opposes the use of Internet filters. It does so specifically naming the American Library Association as the reason. Unfiltered computers often attract criminals. It is possible that part of the blame falls on the library for attracting the criminal in the first place. The city may be liable as well for allowing the library to follow ALA policy and possibly not the library’s own enabling statute. In other words, the library may have been acting outside the law.
I am now trying to investigate this matter further to see if this is the case. Whatever I find, I hope the parent’s attorney also sues the library, the library director, the library trustees, and the city government with counts related to what I just said.
copy of letter I fired off to the imbecile judge:
Superior Court Judge Richard Moses
Superior Court
U.S. Post Office & Courthouse
15th Floor
90 Devonshire Street
Boston, MA 02109
Richard Moses:
I hope you’re happy with your socially liberal decision to allow Corey Saunders to leave prison. Frankly, I am not surprised that it would be a “judge†in the state of Massachusetts which has already been corrupted and morally crippled by its overwhelming homosexual influence.
I hope that one day you feel the terror and physical agony that little 6 year old boy felt as Mr. Saunders shoved his penis into the boy’s virginal rectum. I hope that you hear that boy’s internal screams in your dreams for the rest of your miserable life. Bastard! I pray that God punish you in this life and the next for your inhumanity. The same inhumanity which caused you to smugly think you had the right to release a monster into society and put young children at risk. Be happy and thank whatever god you pray to that it was not my son who was attacked by Saunders!
Sincerely,
Gabriel Espinosa
2/6/2008
It should be a mandatory 25 to life for anybody who sexually abuses a child. Period. Every molested child receives a life sentence.
How could the mom not pay attention to her child?