You may be expecting Monty Hall to enter from stage left and the roar of an excited crowd. If you’re my age, you’ll understand that reference to the once popular game show where contestants chose between items hidden under large boxes or behind curtains. One might win anything from a new car to a lifetime’s worth of fishsticks, depending on how well you guess, or “make a deal”, as it were. It was a popular show, as I remember, and innocent entertainment fun.
Deal making has taken on a new, more serious tone in modern America as it has become the number-one tool in meting out justice in our court systems throughout the nation. Considering the monumental task of handling the chore of administering punishment to the many criminals we have here, at first glance it seems understandable. But, if you look at the justice system as a business, then why doesn’t the “service department” expand to meet the requirements of the increased “business”? What we need, it seems, are more courts, more judges and more prisons. Instead, increasingly the mindset is to reserve prison space for hardened criminals, the truly violent, and to “plea-deal” everyone else back to the street.
If it were that simple, it might not be as dangerous a philosophy as it is turning out to be. Instead, our prisons are populated by everyone from pot smokers to murderers, and navigating the judicial system turns out to be much more like the old television game show than it is akin to an honest “crime and punishment” scenario. To me, it is pretty simple. The punishment should fit the crime. However, in a society ever-more diverse, by our own design, there is rarely consensus on what is a “serious” crime, and what is not. Consider the recent case of the Souhegan High School in Amherst deciding that two thrill-killers should have their pictures included in the yearbook. ‘Nuff said.
Last week, an editorial in the Union Leader pointed out yet another horrendous “plea deal”. In Dover, a young man named John Wentworth had started a brawl with a complete stranger on a walking trail, not far from Central Avenue, and probably in view of other people. Richard Nolette wasn’t looking for trouble, the two were strangers, and Wentworth was about 80 pounds heavier, not unusual for “tough guys” to pick a fight with an easy target. Wentworth kicked Nolette in the head and torso, and then slammed his head into the sidewalk. Nolette was sick with AIDS at the time. A day later, Wentworth went to Nolette’s apartment looking to finish the job, but Nolette would not come outside. A day later, Richard died of head injuries.
It took a full year for Wentworth to be arrested and indicted, a travesty in and of itself. But the real travesty occurred last week when Superior Court Justice Kenneth Brown accepted a plea deal that would set Wentworth free in 18 months. Not surprisingly, many of Nolette’s family members, present in court, were outraged. Others, it is said, were satisfied with the outcome.
As a father of four boys I am confident that if one of their lives were to be taken in such a cavalier, senseless and brutal way, I would be satisfied with nothing less than the perpetrator sacrificing his or her life in exchange. That is simple and fair. I lose a son, my son loses his life…the perpetrator should match the deal. Life in prison. Yet somehow, as a society, we have come to a place where these sort of life and death negotiations are handed down everyday across the country and we don’t even bat an eye. I don’t know either family and have no stake in this beyond being astonished that as a culture we continue allow our “legal system” to dole out such mismatched doses of “justice”. Easy to pass it off when it’s not a loved one, but at some point, as a society, we may want to revisit exactly how the greater good is being served here.
And by the way, if it ever becomes a sure thing that manslaughter gets you 18 months, I expect we’ll all be seeing people being slammed, head-first, into sidewalks on a regular basis. Afterall, most of us learn as children that there are consequences for our behavior. That is what kept us from cutting the cat’s tail off with pruning shears. It will be interesting to see what changes await us as a culture as we slowly remove “consequence” from that equation.
Tags: John Wentworth, Plea Deals
Why would they make such a deal? Is there any recourse for the family? Could the file suit against the guy?
Bogey,
I can’t answer any of those questions. To me, it comes down to the judge. As you may know by now, just a few days ago Judge Gillian Abramson turned down a plea agreement for Steve Marks, one of the young men involved with the Mt. Vernon/Cates murder. He did not kill anyone, but was armed and present. The deal called for 30-60 years in prison and she turned it down. She’a a tough judge. Period. Also Kathleen Maquire is very tough. Interesting isn’t it? Women judges seem tougher than their male counterparts….
The death of Richard Nolette is a tragedy. The facts need no enhancing to make it any more horrific. That being said…..
“…. Wentworth had started a brawl with a complete stranger on a walking trail, not far from Central Avenue, and probably in view of other people….”
FACT: the brawl did not start on a walking trail. The brawl started in front of Nolette’s apartment located at 563 Central St. And there were 2 others present, in addition to Nolette and Wentworth- Nolette’s brother and a teenaged friend of Wentworth (most likely Kyle Boucher). There is no probability the incident was viewed by other people. The fact is a minimum of 2 “other people” witnessed the brawl.
“… a day later, Wentworth went to Nolette’s apartment looking to finish the job…”
FACT: Wentworth did go back to Nolette’s apt. after the initial brawl, however it couldn’t possibly have been the next day because less than a day later Nolette was already unresponsive and admitted into the hospital. There is no evidence that Wentworth was looking to “finish him off”. If there was, the grand jury would have charged him with some type of pre-meditated intention to murder him.
“…Superior Court Justice Kenneth Brown accepted a plea deal that would set Wentworth free in 18 months….”
FACT” Wentworth was sentenced to 2.5-6 years. If he completes his GED, along with other requirements, one year would be taken off his minimum sentence. Eighteen months is the minimum of time Wentworth has to serve- before he COULD be free, not WOULD be free.
“….if it ever becomes a sure thing that manslaughter gets you 18 months…..”
FACT: Again the 18 months is not what he got. And he was not sentenced for manslaughter. The charge, the guilty plea and the sentence was for “negligent homicide”.
Again, a horrible crime. However this commentary starts off with blaming lack of judges, prison facilities, and various resources as the reason for making plea deals. Then the blame lands directly on this particular judge. Liberty was taken to manipulate the facts. Was there some reference to the “greater good”? Did I miss something?
By the way, there is no “Steve Marks” whose recent plea deal of 30-60 was rejected by Judge Abramson. There is a William Marks. Sorry, I like facts
I wonder sometimes why some of you bother reading or commenting at all. I’m not a reporter and took my information from newsprint. The variations you point out, including the sentence, have nothing to do with, and change nothing, about the point the column makes, which is simple. 18 months…2 years…5 years…none of those are acceptable punishment for what John Wentworth was convicted of. He took a life. I apologize for the mistake regarding William Marks, but again, you know who I’m talking about, clearly. I know the Cates family and getting middle initials correct when commenting on the people involved, and having you chastise me for it, is rather small on your part.
So…while I appreciate your reading and rendering an opinion, your motives for doing so are rather mundane. I make no pretense of being a skilled or profound writer, just opining on a variety of topics.
And, finally, unless I’m missing something about the legal system, yes, the judge made the decision on sentencing, and I was wrong about the exact location and time that John Wentworth killed somebody.
Dollyhaze,
I notice you exert yourself by selectively and extensively addressing certain facts/issues put before you……but other questions put before you, that you can’t or are unwilling to deal with, you simply run away…….
With all due respect, that is the very definition of a credibility gap.
Jimbo,
I don’t think it’s running away as much as it is simply that it’s personal with a few of these people. Their primary interest is to rip into me, to parse and snip, and yes…most often the simple point of the column goes unanswered. It is simple, right? A few years in jail for bashing somone’s head in and ultimately killing them….is not “justice”.
Thanks for reading, as always.
Last night two asian women who were moving in across the hall asked for my help. I was pleasantly surprised at the gratitude they displayed for simply helping to move around some heavy furniture.
Needless to say I left with much gratitude as well.
Jimbo,
If only more people would realize the wonderful feeling of helping strangers. Your little story, brief and succinct, says it all. Imagine…as John Lennon once asked us to do…a world where we all intereacted like that.
its a real shame….that people like this poor kid don’t have guys like me for a brother…..because that bully thug would plead for the judge to give him a joey and a day sentence…..in other words….let me out one day after joey is dead……can’t stomach coward bullies….my life work to knock them down ……
…I didn’t think 18 months would have passed for “justice” in your neighborhood. Then again…that’s why your neighborhood is safe…with or without police…
A REASON TO HOPE! …..Judge Abramson is no Judge Brown:
NASHUA, N.H. – A judge has rejected a plea deal for one of the knife-and-machete wielding teens charged in the deadly Oct. 4 home New Hampshire home invasion.
William Marks, 18, of Amherst, N.H., potentially would have avoided a life sentence for the gruesome Granite State crime that ended in the brutal stabbing death of a young mother and injuries to her daughter, by pleading guilty to conspiracy to commit murder and other charges and testifying against others accused in the case.
But Judge Gillian Abramson said she wouldn’t accept the Marks deal because a sentence should be about punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence and segregating a criminal from the community
http://news.bostonherald.com/news/national/northeast/view.bg?articleid=1275198
I am proud to have Judge Abramson in New Hampshire. She is no-nonsense. Also, Judge Kathleen Maguire is one to watch. She, also, is a pragmatist. She once read the riot act as she was sentencing a former town administrator for possesion, distribution and manufacture of child pornography. I wish I had saved the statement. We are fortunate to have something a lot of states don’t have…a handful of lucid judges.
Although Judge Abramson expressed her judgement w/ decorum…..”a sentence should be about punishment, rehabilitation, deterrence and segregating a criminal from the community” …I got the sense that, in chambers, she ripped the proposed plea deal as BS, abhorrent, and nauseating. …..Perhaps even using some colorful language?
BTW…..where’s that good man Andy Looney?
…yes, I would loved to have been a fly on the wall during those negotiations.
We had dinner last week with Andy and his wife, and Lt.Col. Kevin Johnston and his wife and new son. A great time. Andy and Rose are travelling, probably back up North by now, but I understand he is having computer problems. I’ll keep you posted, but he is alive and well.