Wesley Barbosa CRJ300 Final

Wesley Barbosa CRJ300 Final - CRJ300 Final Wesley Barbosa...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
CRJ300 Final Wesley Barbosa CSU Global Court Report
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
The next court I sat in on was for a sentencing. The case number is CR000837 with Judge William Robbins. When I walked in the defendant’s mother was speaking to the court. She had nothing but nice things to say about her son. After she sat down the judge allowed the defendant to speak for himself. He had a very long and sad story about how he was helping a friend out. He said that his friend had two runaway 13 year old girls who she was hiding from authorities. His friend asks him for money to help support the girls but he had said no. Instead he had offered to let the girls come to his house and clean for him and he would pay them. He stated that the teenagers had STD’s and it was not possible that he could have had sex with them because he has never had an STD. He stated that the friend that was looking after the girls had sold one of the girls to another person who had gotten one of them pregnant and the girls were making up this story because he did not give them enough money. He said the girls had given several conflicting statement and had never mentioned the fact that he wears Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) mask at night for his loud snoring. The Judge and the courtroom heard him out. Then the judge laid it all out. The judge told the defendant that there was a DNA sample on the victim’s panties that matched his DNA. The judge told him that the victims accurately described his bedroom before they had seen any pictures. The judge said that the victims were only 13 years old and he believed that there was beyond sufficient evidence that the defendant had had intercourse with both of the victims. The judge was disappointed that the defendant was in denial and he proceeded to sentencing. The Judge did not state what Count 1 was but he gave the defendant 24years to life, indeterminate on that charge. Count 2 was the same. Count 4, 5 and 9, delinquency
Background image of page 2
of a minor, was 6 years to run concurrent with Count 1. Count 13, Sexual assault on a child, was 6 years to life, indeterminate to run consecutive to Count 1. The defendant was walked back into custody and the defendant’s mother was loudly crying. The defendant’s people left the court room very upset at the decision. I stayed in hopes of more sentencing and observed the prosecutions people giving each other hugs in victory, they made phone calls and were very excited to share the news. This happened to be the last sentencing of the day. Life Sentences; Determinate and Indeterminate America’s current justice model which is based on individual responsibility and the punishment of offenders is the reason we imprison so many American citizens for the rest of their life or for very long periods of time. Life sentencing began in the late 1800’s and was considered a form of alternative sentencing. The idea of life sentencing became more popular ass
Background image of page 3

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full DocumentRight Arrow Icon
crime was not eradicated in the current system. Back then prisons were set up to successfully
Background image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

This note was uploaded on 02/05/2012 for the course ART, HCM, 300 taught by Professor Smith during the Spring '11 term at CSU Pueblo.

Page1 / 8

Wesley Barbosa CRJ300 Final - CRJ300 Final Wesley Barbosa...

This preview shows document pages 1 - 5. Sign up to view the full document.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Ask a homework question - tutors are online