Teen with 47 IQ gets 100 years in sex abuse case

help1

help1

CAGiversary!
Feedback
5 (100%)
PARIS, Texas - A teenager who has profound mental disabilities was sentenced to 100 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges in a sex abuse case involving his 6-year-old neighbor.Aaron Hart, 18, of Paris, was arrested and charged after a neighbor found him fondling her stepson in September. The teen pleaded guilty to five counts, including aggravated sexual assault and indecency by contact, and a jury decided his punishment.
Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford decided to stack the sentences against Hart after jurors settled on two five-year terms and three 30-year terms, The Dallas Morning News reported Wednesday. The judge said neither he nor jurors liked the idea of prison for Hart but they felt there was no other option.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31213058/#storyContinuedhttp://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26613008/

"In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," Clifford said.Diagnosed as mentally disabled
Hart has an IQ of 47 and was diagnosed as mentally disabled as a child. He never learned to read or write and speaks unsteadily.
Despite being a target of bullies, he was courteous, well-behaved and earned money by doing chores for neighbors, supporters said. His parents say he'd never acted out sexually.
"He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years — it was terror, pure terror, to me."
Jurors said they sent the judge notes during deliberations in February, asking about alternatives to prison, but didn't get a clear answer. They believed the judge would order concurrent sentences, jurors said.
District Attorney Gary Young said he sympathized with Hart's situation but stands by his decision to prosecute on five counts. Prosecutors commonly pursue several charges for a single incident to see which the jury will support.
Diversion program not an option
Young said a diversion program was not an option since the law doesn't allow that for serious felonies.
"I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," he said.
Hart's appellate attorney, David Pearson, said the court-appointed doctor did the bare minimum to assess competency and ran tests geared for mental illness, not mental retardation.
He said an appeal will be filed.
Click to expand...

I dunno, the dude is smarter than Lil' Wayne, so I think some repercussions are due, but 100 years is ridiculous.
 
I'm sure the appeal will be at least somewhat successful. Not to downplay the severity of what he did, but I think the judge was wrong to stack the sentences and I'm not sure prison is where he needs to be for the rest of his life; the kid is retarded.
 
What the hell? I thought the law was something like you have to be conscious of your actions to get punished for them. That's why we give kids separate sentences from adults, right?

Yeah, 100 years is crazy.
 
Too much.

And just as a preemptive strike: shut the hell up, Koggit. This is absolutely nothing like the story in the thread about the 4 kids getting 120 years for raping some other kid for months.
 
[quote name='help1']I dunno, the dude is smarter than Lil' Wayne, so I think some repercussions are due, but 100 years is ridiculous.[/QUOTE]

Lil Wayne makes millions with little creative effort and doesn't get 100 years in jail for raping a kid.

Also, he's lucky they didn't shoot him.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Given it's Texas, I'm surprised they're not executing him.

This seems a bit excessive to me, especially since the article doesn't really spell out what the kid did. Not that I'd defend "fondling" a six year old boy, but there seems to be some range of severity between "fondling" and "violently sodomizing", especially if the defendant probably had no real concept of what he was doing.

You stay classy, Texas.
 
[quote name='davo1224']How can he be considered impaired if 47 is the state's mean IQ?[/QUOTE]

Unfortunately, norms used in psychological and IQ tests are based on national samples, so it's not the examiner's fault ;)
 
[quote name='Darrith']Say "18" out loud. :bouncy:[/QUOTE]

Sorry, but eighteen years old =/= teenager in the U.S.

I shouldn't have to explain this to someone.
 
Technically he can be considered an adult by his age, but his mental retardation trumps that. He does not have the mind of an adult; decades in prison is not going to teach him anything whatsoever. Different arrangements should be made as they have been in the past for the mentally disabled.
 
Adulthood is not determined by IQ. We assume that, by the time a person is 18, they can function as an adult, but this isn't always true. I have met plenty of adults who are childish in their thoughts, but are not diagnosed with any mental disorder. They are, by no means, children.
 
[quote name='JolietJake']I was surprised, then i read it was in Texas. He's lucky he didn't get the death penalty.[/QUOTE]

Please...
 
[quote name='rabbitt']Adulthood is not determined by IQ. We assume that, by the time a person is 18, they can function as an adult, but this isn't always true. I have met plenty of adults who are childish in their thoughts, but are not diagnosed with any mental disorder. They are, by no means, children.[/QUOTE]

I'm not arguing that he should be tried as a juvenile or set free, just that 100 years in prison isn't the proper place for him. He was diagnosed, as mentally disabled from childhood. Not even capable of learning to read, write or speak well, do you believe he fully understood the seriousness of his actions? The law is not all black and white; there have been gray areas in sentencing adult criminals with mental problems before.

I just think this judge was wrong in sentencing him as if he's your run-of-the-mill monster who premeditated and carried out a child rape.
 
[quote name='steveinneed']Please...[/QUOTE]
What, you think it's out of the question? Hell, executions are practically the state pastime.
 
Does no one here consider the 6 year old boys viewpoint? Retarded or not, the 6 year old has to deal with this injustice for the rest of his life. Just because his IQ is 47 doesn't mean he shouldn't get severely punished.

And everyone here is soooo smart and hip for bashing Texas. Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.
 
[quote name='kram']Does no one here consider the 6 year old boys viewpoint? Retarded or not, the 6 year old has to deal with this injustice for the rest of his life. Just because his IQ is 47 doesn't mean he shouldn't get severely punished.

And everyone here is soooo smart and hip for bashing Texas. Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, but 100 years?! A little extreme, especially for someone who didn't know the repercussions of his actions. He likely didn't know he was doing anything wrong.

Yes, it was wrong, but 100 years in prison is NOT going to help this kid.

And everyone is bashing Texas because this kind of thing would ONLY happen in Texas ;)
 
[quote name='kram']Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.[/QUOTE]
Are you implying man on man "action" wouldn't be "normal"?
 
[quote name='kram']Does no one here consider the 6 year old boys viewpoint? Retarded or not, the 6 year old has to deal with this injustice for the rest of his life. Just because his IQ is 47 doesn't mean he shouldn't get severely punished.

And everyone here is soooo smart and hip for bashing Texas. Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.[/QUOTE]

What the hell? You're a dumbass.
 
[quote name='kram']...

Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.[/QUOTE]

Sure because it's legal for 6 years olds to get married in Mass. :roll:

Consensual male on male action is normal in every state, Mass. just acknowledges it. What adults do in their own bedrooms isn't remotely germane to the topic of child molestation.
 
[quote name='kram']Does no one here consider the 6 year old boys viewpoint? Retarded or not, the 6 year old has to deal with this injustice for the rest of his life. Just because his IQ is 47 doesn't mean he shouldn't get severely punished.

And everyone here is soooo smart and hip for bashing Texas. Hell if this was in Massachusetts they probably would've just married the two because boy on boy action is as normal as anything else.[/QUOTE]
... the fuck...:dunce:
 
id like to know more about what this kids retardation level would cause him to do / not do. at 47 how much would you know and would you know right from wrong? also is it possible the fondler was at one point molested by someone and he was just acting out his own experiences? 100 yrs is a bit much but im not against him being locked up somewhere retarted or not if i had a kid and he did that to him id want him dead as would most people. there seems to be more to this story than just wants been said. im also curious about the races of those involved.
 
[quote name='jbroush99']Will slidecage still have internet access in prison? God I hope so![/QUOTE]

Aww man, that is a low blow!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top