That's outrageous!

There's currently a big furor over the rural Montana judge who gave a convicted child rapist only 60 days in jail, despite the fact that the man, an ex-teacher, was convicted of raping his own daughter, and admitted to doing so many times.  Sounds outrageous, right?  Like most "headline news", the quick news-bite leaves out the "messy stuff" that most real lives are made of, and which actually, IN THIS CASE, make the judge's decision sound much more realistic.  Surprised?  Read on.

Turns out, Montana law requires an absolute minimum 100 year sentence in such cases, with the first 25 years not available for reduction in any of the usual ways: no plea bargains, no parole, no time reduction for good behavior, etc. during the first 25 years.  So, how was the judge able to reduce his sentence so much?

There's a catch.  If a psychosexual evaluation by a qualified sexual offender evaluator concurs that treatment in a local community affords a better opportunity for rehabilitation of the offender, and ultimately a better chance for the protection of the victim and of society, the defendant can petition for such treatment. Which is exactly what happened.

The judge had to consider many factors, including that the victim and her family are dependents of the offender.  So, if he goes to prison, his family, including the victim, loses his support.  So, the judge mandated that the offender live in a different community, be forbidden to ever be in the presence of anyone under 18 without adult supervision, be forbidden to ever own a computer, have internet access, possess pornography, or firearms, for the rest of his life. And FORTY more, similar restrictions.  He is under a thirty year suspended sentence without parole, so if he EVER violates ANY of these restrictions, he's gonna be in prison for the next thirty years, without parole.

The girl's mother, grandmother, AND LAWYER all agree with this outcome, and even the prosecuting attorney has not objected or filed an appeal.  Everyone involved in the case is happy with the result-- except the press, who are having a field day!  And the public, who have launched a campaign to impeach the judge.

This impeachment campaign gets even crazier.  The judge, John McKeon, is due to retire in less than one month! Even a successful impeachment could not remove him from the bench before he retires anyway.  But there is one thing impeachment can do.  It can deprive Judge McKeon of the retirement benefits he has earned by serving for 22 years without a blemish on his record.

There is absolutely no reason for this.  No good reason, that is.  If anyone who is party to the decision does not like it, they can appeal.  That's the legal, democratic way to right a wrong.  No appeals have been filed by anyone who has any business doing so.  Fifty-five thousand readers of the Change.org website have signed the impeachment petition. There are only 7630 people in the whole county!   Obviously, virtually all the petition signers have absolutely no business in the case. The campaign isn't about justice at all. It's about outrage. And vengeance.

People with no knowledge of the case, and no business in it, are out to "get" Judge McKeon, because it will make them feel good.  So far, the Montana state government has shown the good sense to refuse to acknowledge their demands.  More power to them!