Story comments - Reporter-Times.com/MD-Times.com

Hot topics » County takes next step on d ... Man faces charges in deadly ... BZA to meet

Judge denies molester’s post conviction relief

read more recent story comments Reader comments

abathar
Friday, February 15, 2013: 8:55 am
More from abathar

""Before the trial, to spare the victim from having to testify, the state offered a plea agreement to Hinesley. That plea called for Hinesley to plead guilty to battery as a class A misdemeanor with credit for time served and probation. He would not have to register as a sex offender. After discussing the matter with his attorney, Hinesley rejected the plea.""

So in other words the state was willing to let this child molester go with no felony conviction, time served, and he would not have to register as a sex offender??

This is what's wrong with the system! They were willing to just let a guy like this go with time served and more or less sweep it under the rug, yet when it goes to trial it went from time served to a 25 year felony.

How can there be justice for the victims when there is such a huge discrepancy between what they offered and what he deserved?

nobodyimportant
Friday, February 15, 2013: 2:30 pm
More from nobodyimportant

If we were dealing with perfect people and perfect systems, your question would be right on target. But we aren't. When a prosecutor offers a reduced charge, (offenders are most often charged with 2 or more offenses for the same act) it is because a judgment has been made that they probably can't make the higher offense stick at trial. That's an educated decision, based on the information at that point in time, not exact science. To suggest a "sweeping under the rug" just doesn't make sense.

Obviously the offender thought even the lower charge could not be proven (his judgment mistake. It seems as if justice was served in the end.

2 comments found