Henry Raymond
Fairfax News => Current News & Events => Topic started by: Henry on April 12, 2015, 06:34:15 AM
-
SHELDON, Vt. - A convicted rapist, who was released from jail this week after spending 23 years behind bars, was arrested again Saturday.
Police say Richard Laws was stopped on Route 105 in Sheldon for erratic driving. Further investigation revealed he was driving with a suspended license. The 49-year-old was taken into custody, processed at the St. Albans barracks, and released on a citation.
Laws got out of prison Thursday after more than two decades behind bars for kidnapping and raping a Mad River Valley woman. Authorities consider him a high risk to re-offend because he did not complete therapy while in jail.
"I can just say that Vermont Sate police are devoting a tremendous amount of resources ensuring that Mr. Laws remains compliant with the sex offender registry requirements," said Lt. Colonel Matthew Birmingham with the Vermont State Police, in response to Saturday's arrest.
Police say aside from this incident, Laws is in full compliance with those requirements. He's due in court Monday.
-
While I absolutely do not agree with what this man did, what does it say for the enforcement system to put this much bias against one man who severed out a term deemed adequate to his sentence. He apparently did not make enough problems in jail to warrant more time. Shouldn't someone who served their time be able to start over. I think his sentence should have been greater before but apparently the courts and the legislature did not agree. Now they're going to spend more time and resources following this one person rather than helping out with all the other problems that go on in this state.
-
So what you're saying kpplus2 is: if someone has committed a crime, that's it. No redemption, ever? Or does that only apply to certain people/certain crimes? Just curious, because I know a lot of people who view everything in black & white terms, when it's usually many shades of grey and by no means simple. Yes, his crime was heinous and there is no doubt his victim and her family suffered for it and I'm not diminishing that at all, but after 23 yrs, I'm sure they've reconciled the situation. He was punished, served his sentence and now is attempting to move forward. As a community, we can only hope he has reflected on his crime in that time.
He was driving with a suspended license after being released from prison from a 23 year sentence. I'm certainly not condoning this man's crimes; however, releasing someone after a lifetime behind bars, w/o some kind of "re-entry" program or assistance is really just a set up for failure. Especially since this guy is now middle-aged and was only in his 20s when he went to prison. He's learned zero life skills except how to survive in prison, but the expectation is for him to function on the outside. Who knows if he has any family available or willing to help him. Chances are good he does not.
What's the rest of the story here? Driving erratically in what way? Was he really? Or did he go too far over way or the other and turn his wheel back (as we've all done, surely) He wasn't cited for DUI, and given the statement of the cop, I'm really questioning the relevance of the erratic driving. The fact that he has a suspended license after just being released from prison...is something the state should help take care of upon release--in some manner or other. Not a hand out, but something to get people going on the right track. Maybe he was driving erratically, because he hasn't driven in 23 years and needs a refresher--there's one thing the state could do --in exchange for work. People want to be productive, it's a false notion assuming otherwise.
While I'm not a sympathizer of violent crimes, I do wonder why it is that these people are more often than not repeat offenders. I doubt rehab in jail has anything to do with it. And more likely it's the fact that that environment is more familiar, easier to deal with than the outside after a long period of time--and when you get out, you're treated like a pariah anyway, before you've had a chance to prove you're on the right track, if you're inclined to do so. The easiest route back is to re-offend.
Not everyone wants to change, but I do believe there would be less people going back to prison if thing were different when they are released--and different while they're there. The whole concept seems to make matters worse, not better. I don't know what to do with violent criminals, but locking them up in pens together for long periods of time and expecting good outcomes after years of whatever goes on (if you believe Hollywood, sex & violence), seems foolish.
I think the press should leave this man alone. If it were me being released after spending most of my adult life in prison (deservedly so) and I have turned a page and want to begin a new life and am willing to do what it takes to get over those mistakes from the past--what do you think those headlines do to me when I see I'm expected to re-offend? It tells me I'm not going to be given a chance no matter what I do, because the seed has been planted that I'm expected to commit another crime. So I know up front that everything I attempt--the door will be slammed before it's even opened. Then I'm picked up by the police and I haven't had a chance to renew my license yet. WTH. It's enough to make me want to give up before I even tried. Just saying.
I don't know if I really need to know when a sex offender is being released and moving to my neighborhood--I think that just causes undue upset & panic in people for no reason and doesn't give the person a fighting chance. There is a sex offender registry list for that info. And just because this guy didn't complete therapy in jail or whatever, doesn't mean squat. Maybe he started doing it and realized it was just a lot of BS and stopped. Do we really know? Absolutely not.
While the press does have a duty to inform the public, it doesn't have a duty to sensationalize, which it does, all the time. Sadly, that's what sells. We the public eat it up, so they, the press just produce more of it. And we the public tsk tsk at the spectre of it, but don't stop consuming! We are truly our own worst enemy.
The bottom line is you can't just take what you read/see on the news at face value, because it's often not the whole story. The only truth we know is Richard Laws is a sex offender, who has completed his prison sentence, and was driving with a suspended license, which it of course would be after 23 years of not being renewed and his only being released sometime on Thursday.
To get an official license now, you have to have a birth cert/and proof of residence in the form of utility bills or something sent to your physical address, otherwise you're only issued a driving pass or some dumb thing, but you won't be able to fly or get into government buildings with it, because it's not official, it just allows you to drive. But after 23 years--maybe a driving test is required?
-
This man wasn't convicted 2 years later. He was convicted exactly when he was. Views on the subject have changed since he was convicted but if we want to go and retroactively change sentences based on current laws that's going to be a tough path to go through.
This was an interesting note in the Burlington Free Press: "Laws said he called the state sex offender registry to provide a heads up. State police said nobody answers the phone after hours at the Vermont Crime Information Center, but when investigators checked, they found he had left a message, state police spokesman Scott Waterman said."
You're telling me that in an age of technology, we can't get one single person to answer the phone for a population that everyone is so worried about. I'd think there would have been a lot more interest in that part of the story. Sounds to me like Laws is at least "trying". I'm not going to say I actually believe his story and he should have called for help if he wasn't able to drive, especially after a prior DUI, but the guy hasn't been in society for 23 years so who knows what he's thinking right now.
-
This whole convo just leaves me in awe....... I will out of fear of offending someone bite my tongue. I'm sure Kpplus2 knows exactly what I'm thinking though...
-
WPTZ interviewed him outside the courthouse yesterday. He stated pretty clearly how he felt about everything....
-
It's an interesting topic to debate because I don't agree with so many of the terms people get and the amount of time they actually serve compared to what they were sentenced to. I'm not a believer of parole or early release because a sentence should be a set term, no longer, no shorter.
-
I realize I am coming off as a sympathizer for this guy and that's really not the intent. I think it's a crime to set him free if the state feels he hasn't been rehabilitated, but for some reason can't make their own law retro active. Putting this man on the street with no resources (or any released felon for that matter) and loading the headlines with all the key-terms: homeless, high risk, etc is just asking for failure and trouble. If there is a chance that he wants to make ammends, he doesn't stand a chance. Odds are that's not the case, but I don't see the rationale in the state flopping people out if they aren't ready to go. They can do whatever they want.
The fact it was reported to the authorities that he wasn't in compliance or whatever, but it was later discovered he was--but for the suspended license--kind of makes my point here. He has been set-up to fail whether he would or not. The general population already hates this man and he will never stand a chance--ever. What incentive is there to try?
Unfortunately, these people can't be castrated because it's considered in humane & it's too much of a slippery slope with inoccent people being convicted. However, it seems there should be something in these situations, when there is no doubt some one is guilty, before released back to the general population...