It's that signature bond our District Attorney, Scott Southworth, advocated for. I might understand defense counsel attempting to explain why there would be such a need....but the prosecutor? Especially when the guy is up on (5) counts of child sexual assault...(2) victims....over 7 years?
As the prosecutor, Scott had to believe that Gage was guilty...after all his office pressed the charges. One would also expect that he, like most of us realize, once a child rapist...always a child rapist. These guys just don't wake up one morning and decide that they will rape a child...it's a progression - so if guilty, then most likely there have been other victims...and if not confined, there would be more.
Hell, Scott and I both are part of the Juneau County Coalition Against Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault, we both know better - at least we should. But, perhaps since I haven't seen him at one of the monthly meetings in I cannot even remember when - well that might be the reason why I read what I did when I was pouring over the transcripts of the bond hearing for Patrick Gage.
Scott literally advocated on behalf of the accused and why he should be allowed to live and work outside of the country on a signature bond. I don't know about you...whoever is reading this...but I want a prosecutor to advocate on behalf of society and our protection...our safety...OUR CHILDREN!
Perhaps you should read for yourself what transpired on September 30, 2009 when the bond was being set....I'd say argue, but the only one that appeared to question a signature bond on someone up on all those counts of child sexual assault, seemed to be the judge - it sure as heck wasn't the District Attorney.
September 30, 2009 -
Judge Curran: I'm curious, Why a signature bond with someone who lives outside of the country and who has charges with such large potential penalties?
Southworth: It's an agreement between defense counsel and myself in a conversation we had based on Mr. Gage's appearance today. He flew in from the Cayman Islands.
There's really no purpose for him to run anywhere. We know where he's at. He made the trip here. It appears he's ready to address these charges.
He does have an attorney on board, who's in communication with us at this point. No contact provisions would be in place, if the court orders that.
Mr. Gage hasn't attempted to go anywhere. All we have to do is extradite him or get a warrant out for his arrest. And, as I informed his attorney...
Judge Curran: (interposing) What if he doesn't tell you where he's gone?
Southworth: We can track him, Judge. It's not difficult to track. If he were to run from the Cayman Islands, all we have to do is track his passport. At that point, we would pick him up. And we feel it wouldn't take us long if he does. He would then be responsible for all the extradition fees. International extradition..My guess is that would probably cost somewhere between fifty and one hundred thousand dollars or more. Under the statutes Mr. Gage would be liable for the entire amount of extradition.
Are you shaking your head? Now remember that right now Patrick Gage is being held in Canada after skipping the Cayman Islands, and after America's Most Wanted had to hunt him down - Do you have tears in your eyes like I did? Especially knowing that once captured in Canada the police there connected him to a sexual assault of a minor on May 22nd of this year? And now he is facing those charges, before he could ever be extradited back here to Juneau County?
The basis for Scott's argument on behalf of the bizarre recommendation of the signature bond is that if Gage skipped, and was caught, then he would have to pay for the extradition costs? GIVE ME A BREAK! Now I am not exactly sure who absorbs those costs first....Juneau County or the State of Wisconsin...but BOTH ARE FLAT BROKE!
Nice job on the tax payer's expense Scott!
Now can you see why this signature bond is nagging at me?
If Gage did rape or assault a minor in Canada, Juneau County had a hand in it.....after all apparently our District Attorney thought it wasn't a big deal if this guy skipped out on that signature of his. My apologies to the victim and her family - I AM SO SORRY!!!!!
I guess I just don't understand how Scott's thought process works.
There was another case I read about...It was completed last year. Another sexual assault case, this time it was originally (7) counts against the accused but had been plead down to (2). That guy initially was out on a $25,000 cash bond (much better Scott!) and actually received a significant sentencing ...however when I was reading the transcripts of that sentencing I was actually in agreement with much of what Scott said...until I came across one statement where I found myself shaking my head and asking "why even go there?"
" I do give Mr Green credit that he was in the Navy. It appears that he served four years in active duty and two years in the reserves, and was honorably discharged. That demonstrates that he's not a man that is just a slug. He's not just--he doesn't just lay around; he doesn't just do anything. It does appear--appear that he's patriotic and want to do something good with his life. His leisure time activities that were discussed appear appropriate, and but for the fact that we have such a long period of time of abuse and the previous criminal, it might be that a shorter period of confinement time would be appropriate."
WHAT??????? Oh BS!!!! This guy plead guilty to the crime....I mean he actually spilled his guts to police during the investigation... AND - apparently this wasn't a first time for something like this - but do you see what I see? Had he not had that previous criminal charge...and since he served in the military and in Scott's eyes made him "patriotic" ...that would have been a reason to let him off lighter FOR RAPING A CHILD???
Nope, I just don't understand how Scott's thought process works..................do you?
Comments