Post by Dr. T is an alien on Jan 21, 2012 16:47:04 GMT -5
Sometimes I just feel the need to be outraged at something. Now is one of those times. I will explain in a later post, but let's just say in involves my wife's ex. I just need to be reminded that he, despite how low a piece of crap he is, is in fact not the worst human being that I could ever deal with. The misbehavior and abuses of power by politicians are usually enough to get my blood boiling proper, but sometimes I need to go farther to get rightly pissed off. 72 year old Albert Gaub delivered for me:
Missoula day care owner loses bid for reclassification as low-risk sex offender
By GWEN FLORIO of the Missoulian | Posted: Thursday, November 3, 2011 6:15 am |
Albert Gaub was convicted of assaulting a toddler while he was owner of a day-care in Missoula.
A 72-year-old day care owner convicted of repeatedly assaulting a toddler in his care has lost his bid to be classified as a low-risk sex offender.
The Montana Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal from Albert Gaub, who with his wife formerly ran the Cuddles and More daycare center from their home in Missoula.
Gaub pleaded guilty in 2010 to assaulting the girl, who was not quite 2 when the attacks began, over a period of 18 months. He was sentenced in January to 30 years in prison with 15 suspended, and later classified as a Level 2 sex offender, considered at a moderate risk to repeat his crime.
But that designation amounted to a "substantial injustice," Billings-based Assistant Public Defender Eric Bunn contended in Gaub's appeal.
A psychosexual evaluation recommended the lower-risk classification, Bunn noted, adding that Gaub "had no prior convictions or criminal system involvement, was advanced in age, and had no history of violence." Although the Gaubs ran the daycare center for about a decade, there apparently were no other victims, he wrote.
"Worthy of note is that Gaub upon ultimate release from incarceration shall not be working at a day care. Therefore, any situational opportunities will be significantly diminished. Upon release, Gaub may even need the assistance of a nursing home," he wrote.
In classifying Gaub as a Level 2 offender, the District Court cited his attitude and his refusal to admit wrongdoing. During an interview with police, Gaub characterized his victim as "4 going on 40."
"Gaub claimed that (the girl) knew what she was doing and what was going on, suggesting that if the little girl had not been so promiscuous he would not have abused her," the Attorney General's Office wrote in its response to Gaub's appeal.
And Gaub wrote in a statement that "I only touched the young girl in a wrong way and did not physically, hurt, abuse or harm her at all."
Although Bunn termed the District Court's classification a "gut-feeling call," the Supreme Court disagreed.
"There clearly was not an abuse of discretion," Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote. Justices Patricia Cotter, Beth Baker, Michael Wheat and Brian Morris concurred.
Read more: missoulian.com/news/local/missoula-day-care-owner-loses-bid-for-reclassification-as-low/article_4ddc603a-05a8-11e1-ab77-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1k8ALOzUj
This stain on humanity had the nerve to say that a four year old girl seduced him repeatedly and that his behavior is purely the result of HER behavior??!! Even more, he made this statement while applying for reclassification from a 2nd degree sexual criminal (meaning he is apt to repeat his behavior) to a 1st degree sexual criminal (meaning that he is not considered a risk to repeat).
I can almost process that this choad would justify his behavior as such and use that as grounds to appeal his status, but he has a lawyer arguing his case for him! That is more mind blowing for me. I realize that as a lawyer you have to do the best job you can for your clients even if you personally despise them and their activities. I just cannot believe that an attorney would let him make such a statement in such a hearing.
I don't know. Maybe the guy insisted that he do so against the advice of his attorney. Maybe, as a public defender, the attorney just sucks at his job so much that he does not know that this approach is more apt to get his client's status increased, not decreased. Maybe the attorney dislikes the guy so much that he let him do this, knowing that it would end badly and forever poison any future legal proceedings that he takes part in. Who knows?
You can discuss this story or you can add your own to top mine. Please, feed the fire of my hatred.
Missoula day care owner loses bid for reclassification as low-risk sex offender
By GWEN FLORIO of the Missoulian | Posted: Thursday, November 3, 2011 6:15 am |
Albert Gaub was convicted of assaulting a toddler while he was owner of a day-care in Missoula.
A 72-year-old day care owner convicted of repeatedly assaulting a toddler in his care has lost his bid to be classified as a low-risk sex offender.
The Montana Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected an appeal from Albert Gaub, who with his wife formerly ran the Cuddles and More daycare center from their home in Missoula.
Gaub pleaded guilty in 2010 to assaulting the girl, who was not quite 2 when the attacks began, over a period of 18 months. He was sentenced in January to 30 years in prison with 15 suspended, and later classified as a Level 2 sex offender, considered at a moderate risk to repeat his crime.
But that designation amounted to a "substantial injustice," Billings-based Assistant Public Defender Eric Bunn contended in Gaub's appeal.
A psychosexual evaluation recommended the lower-risk classification, Bunn noted, adding that Gaub "had no prior convictions or criminal system involvement, was advanced in age, and had no history of violence." Although the Gaubs ran the daycare center for about a decade, there apparently were no other victims, he wrote.
"Worthy of note is that Gaub upon ultimate release from incarceration shall not be working at a day care. Therefore, any situational opportunities will be significantly diminished. Upon release, Gaub may even need the assistance of a nursing home," he wrote.
In classifying Gaub as a Level 2 offender, the District Court cited his attitude and his refusal to admit wrongdoing. During an interview with police, Gaub characterized his victim as "4 going on 40."
"Gaub claimed that (the girl) knew what she was doing and what was going on, suggesting that if the little girl had not been so promiscuous he would not have abused her," the Attorney General's Office wrote in its response to Gaub's appeal.
And Gaub wrote in a statement that "I only touched the young girl in a wrong way and did not physically, hurt, abuse or harm her at all."
Although Bunn termed the District Court's classification a "gut-feeling call," the Supreme Court disagreed.
"There clearly was not an abuse of discretion," Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote. Justices Patricia Cotter, Beth Baker, Michael Wheat and Brian Morris concurred.
Read more: missoulian.com/news/local/missoula-day-care-owner-loses-bid-for-reclassification-as-low/article_4ddc603a-05a8-11e1-ab77-001cc4c002e0.html#ixzz1k8ALOzUj
This stain on humanity had the nerve to say that a four year old girl seduced him repeatedly and that his behavior is purely the result of HER behavior??!! Even more, he made this statement while applying for reclassification from a 2nd degree sexual criminal (meaning he is apt to repeat his behavior) to a 1st degree sexual criminal (meaning that he is not considered a risk to repeat).
I can almost process that this choad would justify his behavior as such and use that as grounds to appeal his status, but he has a lawyer arguing his case for him! That is more mind blowing for me. I realize that as a lawyer you have to do the best job you can for your clients even if you personally despise them and their activities. I just cannot believe that an attorney would let him make such a statement in such a hearing.
I don't know. Maybe the guy insisted that he do so against the advice of his attorney. Maybe, as a public defender, the attorney just sucks at his job so much that he does not know that this approach is more apt to get his client's status increased, not decreased. Maybe the attorney dislikes the guy so much that he let him do this, knowing that it would end badly and forever poison any future legal proceedings that he takes part in. Who knows?
You can discuss this story or you can add your own to top mine. Please, feed the fire of my hatred.
