And gee, people wonder why vigilante justice happens... If you ask me, this is a case that could provoke some out of the woodwork to take matters into their own hands. Which, you know, isn't to be encouraged, but since school shootings seem to be hip these days, why don't those shooters do, I don't know, something productive all Deadpool style instead of harming innocent people? It's unrealistic and distasteful (fucking school shooters; Secret of the NIHM holds the answer, yo) but still... personally, if someone was going to shoot someone, a fucking pedophile has my vote for a target. Lead therapy is cheaper than any other therapy, and has a 100% fool-proof rate of preventing revictimization. But, I admit I have a bias.
What gets me is how things like this aren't reported by American news, except at a quiet local level.
From a statement issued from DA Dan Rubinstein comes this:
Due to the great work of the DA on the case, at the next trial date, Mr. McFadden was convicted of nineteen counts as well as being adjudged a habitual sex offender, and was sentenced to more than 300 years in prison.
The court of appeals found that the trial court erred in determining that a continuance was required, disagreed that the delay was chargeable to the defense and therefore violated the defendant's speedy trial rights. This was found despite the trial court continuing the case to protect the defendant's Constitutional rights to a fair trial. The court of appeals vacated the convictions. Here, because the trial court felt this was necessary, it got delayed. However, because the court of appeals thinks the trial court was wrong, even though the defendant had waived his speedy trial rights in the past, found this statutory violation results in a dismissal. They acknowledged in the opinion that prior precedent exists to override statutory violations to protect constitutional rights. Despite that, they chose not to extend that precedent here, and blamed the legislature for the rigid rule.
I disagree with the ruling by the court of appeals. The Attorney General's Office, who handles criminal appeals in Colorado on our behalf, petitioned for a writ of certiorari to the Colorado Supreme Court, as I believe that the court's precedent in People v. Jefferson, 981 P.2d 613 (Colo. App. 1998) which found that "under certain circumstances, the six month speedy trial time frame will be extended where reasonable delay is necessary to protect other fundamental constitutional rights of the defendant," gave the court the ability to find that here, his statutory speedy trial right gives way to the court's desire to protect his right to a fair trial. Unfortunately the Colorado Supreme Court denied the petition, leaving the decision by the court of appeals as the final decision.
I am appalled that our justice system, in which a jury of the defendant's peers which the defendant helped choose, unanimously found him guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of sexually offending against 6 innocent victims, yet the court of appeals vacated the convictions after finding that the trial courts efforts to protect the defendant's constitutional rights to a fair trial violate an arbitrary statutory right that the defendant had waived on two prior occasions.
Soooo.... here's my peaceful solution.
Time to find out who is on the appeals board. And the Colorado Supreme Court. And out them as shitting on not just Lady Justice, but to those children who had their childhoods stolen from them by a fucking piece of shit rapist. How they erred on the side of a fucking rapist. That they supported a rapist.
How those shitstains can sleep at night is beyond me.
Here's a convenient (if a bit small) photo of child sex enablers, complete with their names. Perfect for public shaming!
Anyhoo, I did a search for the Colorado Supreme Court. Got this as a hit.
Complain about judges? Sounds good to me.
So, first you get the RFE (Request for Evaluation) of Judicial Conduct, you can download it here.
OR
If you prefer bitching to them directly, the State of Colorado Supreme Court page gives us their numbers. Feel free to call each one once (because multiple calls from the same person is harassment; multiple calls from multiple people is activism) and let them know that enabling child sex is pretty messed up. And/or ask some pointed questions, like:
- Why did the Colorado Supreme Court ignore the part of state law that says is the Defense is okay with waiving the right to a speedy trial if delays like a continuance was ordered because it serves their client's needs and protects his rights, such as in the case involving Michael McFadden, where Defense was waiting on a questionnaire.
- Would they be alright if McFadden babysat their children or grandchildren?
- Did they know the whereabouts of a serial child molester?
- Why didn't they have him register as a sex offender? Don't they care about the children of the people they supposedly serve?
Feel the need to meme that shit? Here ya go.