Child Molester On Probation: The Screwed-Up Ethics of Judge Maria Lopez

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare

If
this world were perfect, there would be perfect justice. Bad deeds
— if there ever were any — would be accordingly punished
with a fit sentence and everybody would look out for the best interests
of his fellow man. (If this life were perfect, there wouldn’t be
people reading that last sentence and thinking “She should have
written “Everybody would look out for the best interests of his
or her fellow human beings.”)

The innocence of children would be cherished and protected, and
Judge Maria Lopez would be working in a Dairy Queen, if this world
were perfect. That way, the worst harm she could inflict would be
to put peanuts on someone’s ice cream cone instead of sprinkles.

Since this world isn’t perfect, “transgendered” Boston-area resident
Charles Horton was undeterred by whatever remains of his conscience
on November 20, 1999 when he — in his female persona —
lured a twelve year old boy into his car under the pretense of needing
help in looking for a “lost child.” The boy was forced into the
car and driven off.

Horton took the boy to a deserted parking lot where he forced the
boy to suck on one of his fingers. When the boy resisted, Horton
intimidated him by holding a screwdriver at his neck until he complied.
According to an account in the Boston Globe, the child was rescued
by patrolling police officers, who “noticed a head bobbing in the
car.”

“In
a statement he gave police after being read his Miranda rights,
Horton allegedly admitted kissing the child and said that he had
used the lot as a place to perform oral sex on teenagers,” stated
Globe reporter John Ellement.

Horton was charged with kidnapping, indecent assault and battery,
and assault with intent to rape. His case proceeded to trial and
that was where he unfortunately met up with Superior Court Judge
Maria I. Lopez.

After hearing all the evidence, Judge Lopez chose to reward evil.
She was apparently very concerned about Horton’s status as a sexually
confused person and asked Assistant District Attorney David Deakin
what kind of prison Horton would be sent to — male or female.
When Mr. Deakin replied that either type of prison could keep Horton
in protective custody, Lopez snapped at Deakin, asking if Horton
would be “locked up for 23 hours a day.” That’s evidently a problem,
right?

On Wednesday, September 6, 2000, Lopez denied David Deakin’s request
that Horton be sent to prison for 8-10 years and sentenced him to
a probation of five years. Horton will be monitored by wearing an
electronic ankle bracelet only for the first year of his sentence.
He will be permitted to go to church and attend counseling sessions
and university classes. You might be interested to know that Judge
Lopez handed down this sentence knowing that Horton lives in a housing
project that some six hundred children also call home.

(Incidentally, the child Horton molested is now serving a life sentence
of painful and terrifying memories, but who cares about him?)

Lopez’s decision to not jail Horton was based upon the psychological
evaluation which determined that he is not a predator. Huh?!? I
find this inexcusable, since the crime Horton was being tried for
was predatory in nature: he kidnapped, sexually assaulted, and threatened
a child with bodily harm. What more could it possibly take to prove
that a person is willing to prey upon a child? I suppose we should
feel grateful that the psychological assessment did admit that Horton
has “impulses.” Don’t we all? For example, my own personal impulse
at this point is to move to Massachusetts and lobby long and loud
from Governor Paul Cellucci’s office to make sure that this woman
and her job are soon parted.

Writes Globe staff reporter Frank Phillips: “Lopez appeared to reject
prison for the transgender Horton not because of any doubts about
his guilt, but because she feared for his safety and emotional well-being
behind bars.” She also referred to this crime as a “low-scale” matter.
Since Horton expressed regret for what he had done to the boy, that
made everything just peachy again. All of you who disagree just
need to get over yourselves and stop being so judgmental.

When judges are on the bench in order to assist the villains rather
than support the victims, where does that leave us? As long as judges
like Maria Lopez are dispensing their peculiar form of “justice,”
we’re left with a deep moral quicksand that threatens to suck the
innocent under and denies them what they deserve: This twelve-year-old
boy deserves to know that Charles Horton is behind bars for a long,
long time. What he did was wrong and evil and there are times when
saying “Gee, I’m sure sorry” just doesn’t cut it. This is one of
them.

Since Lopez couldn’t bring herself to make Horton face the consequences
of his actions, she has become his accessory after the fact. If
he has another “impulse” and violates his probation by molesting
another child, maybe these two girlfriends could share a cozy little
cell together. Twenty to thirty years ought to do it.

That’s what would happen if this world were perfect.

September
19, 2000

Shelley
McKinney is a political writer whose work regularly appears in several
Internet journals. She takes great pleasure in exposing the politically
correct for their lack of logical thought.

Email Print
FacebookTwitterShare