Stiffer Penalties for attacks on the elderly...

[ScreamingMeemie]

http://www.empirestatenews.net/News/20070314-4.html

snip-

Senate Committee on Aging Chairman Martin Golden (R-C, Brooklyn) Tuesday announced legislation that will impose tougher penalties for physical assaults on senior citizens. The announcement follows the recent vicious attack on Rose Morat, a 101-year-old Queens woman who was mugged on her way to church. The same attacker is also suspected of beating and mugging 85-year-old Solange Elizee just a half hour later.

While the assailant in these two cases could face robbery charges, under current law he would only face a misdemeanor charge for his physical attacks on the two elderly women. In addition, under current law, the penalties for the physical attack on the 101-year-old woman are the same penalties that would exist if the victim was a 25-year-old football player.

Following the attacks which took place on March 5th, the Senate Task Force on Critical Choices began to review the current laws governing physical attacks against the elderly. This review highlighted the fact that under existing law, these types of physical attacks on seniors are only class A misdemeanor offenses. A class A misdemeanor carries a potential penalty of up to one year in prison. In both of the muggings in Queens, the attacker could also face additional charges associated with the theft of property.

The legislation announced today would make it a class D or class E violent felony to assault any senior over the age of 70. The bill will also make it a class D or class E violent felony to assault someone age 60 or older who suffers from a disease or infirmity associated with advanced age. A class D violent felony conviction carries a potential penalty of up to 7 years in prison, while a class E felony conviction carries a potential penalty of up to 4 years in prison. As violent felony offenses, these crimes carry determinate sentences and the perpetrators will not be eligible for parole.

-snip


***I am a little ambivalent about this. What about a frail 68 year old? A 36 year old with a heart condition? Is this opening a can of worms? Wouldn't it be just as horrible to attack a parent with a baby in arms?

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. My thoughts, too

I have a friend who is near 70 who is in better shape than I am--hate to have anyone try to mug HIM. But I also know folks a lot younger who have medical conditions making them as frail as someone of advanced age.

[TechBear_Seattle]

2. R-C party affiliation?

I know that New York has some unique laws regarding party which make it much easier for minor party candidates to get elected. I'm not sure about the R-C, though. Is this a typo or a minor party?

As for the proposed law... I can understand the emotions that motivate it, but I don't like where it might lead.

[Warpy]

3. Nor do I.

Disability can strike at all ages. Some people are born blind. Others are born with defects like spina bifida that can have lifelong effects. Infirmity has no age limit.

There should be greater leeway in sentencing. Predators who pick on the very old, the very young and the disabled should get longer sentences than gangsters who pick on each other.

One size fits all sentencing serves no one. People who prey on the physically weak need to be off the street until they're old enough to be physically weak.

And don't ask me about nonviolent drug offenders!

[ScreamingMeemie]

5. From a search I have done, it appears he is a Republican, although

I don't know what the C would stand for.

[TechBear_Seattle]

8. Ah, found the answer

It seems that he won his seat through New York's cross party support system. He ran as a Republican (thus the R) but beat out other candidates when the Conservative Party gave him their votes (thus the C.) So under the New York system, he represents both the Republicans and Conservatives.

[ScreamingMeemie]

16. Thanks for looking that up TechBear...Good to know.

[LiberalFighter]

13. He apparently ran as a fusion candidate

Meaning that he was listed as both a Republican and a Conservative candidate.

New York law permits "fusion" candidates (i.e., individuals who concurrently seek an office as a candidate of more than one party).

[TahitiNut]

14. Sorta. The candidate can be listed on the ballot multiple times.

Voters often choose to vote on the Conservative line instead of the Republican line ... and those votes, even for the same person, continue to afford that party access to the ballot. Minor parties in MYS maintain their ballot access, even when not fielding a candidate of their own, by endorsing and naming a candidate from another party. Then, when the voters mark the minor party line instead of the major party line, that party continues to have ballot access - under the theory that they'd field their own candidate some time in the future. Back in the pre-Reagan days, it was quite conceivable to have a Democrat on the Conservative line ... since the liberal/conservative alignment wasn't quite as consistent.

Caveat: I say this based on living (and voting) in NYS for nine years in the 70s-80s.

[porphyrian]

4. Stiffer penalties will do nothing to prevent attacks on the elderly.

If you want to protect the elderly, stop treating them like garbage and warehousing them with people who aren't paid enough to give a shit.

[NightWatcher]

6. this is THE reason that I am opposed to 'hate crime laws"

" ***I am a little ambivalent about this. What about a frail 68 year old? A 36 year old with a heart condition? Is this opening a can of worms? Wouldn't it be just as horrible to attack a parent with a baby in arms? "

A crime is a crime, is a crime and it should be punished accordingly. I dont think that motivation should aggrivate, mitigate, or increase sentance. I think that the action alone should steer the punishment.

[ScreamingMeemie]

7. Disagreed. But I've been there before.

You're allowed your opinion.

[NightWatcher]

9. thanks

I like to debate the issues, but I am a straight white male, so I really cant comment to being the victim of open hate.

[LiberalFighter]

11. Knowledge that the individual in all probability is weaker than most individuals

and attacking them is worse than committing a crime against one that can defend themselves.

In some states murdering or assaulting a handicapped individual provides for stiffer prosecution.

[Zuiderelle]

15. If someone targets someone because they are prejudiced against elderly, that would be a hate crime.

A crime is not always just a crime. Ask the parents of Matthew Shephard. There ARE people who target groups of people because of their own prejudice that do need to be dealt with differently.

There's a difference between a criminal targeting the weakest victim they can find, and criminals targeting people because of a prejudice they have.

Why do you think that motivation shouldn't increase a sentence? It does when considering whether to charge someone with first degree murder or manslaughter. Motivation is critical.

[LiberalFighter]

10. Agreed.. .the legislation should be along the line of...

physical assaults on any person more than 5 years older or younger than the assaulter will be prosecuted with stiffer penalties. A different law would apply for adults assaulting minors.

Originally, the thought was assaulting an individual that is or may appear to be past their prime health and therefore unable to properly defend themselves from an able-bodied jerk.

[Wcross]

12. I don't agree with stiffer sentences.

I think the criminal should be sentenced to go to the victims Thanksgiving dinner with their family. Instead of a little touch football to work up an appetite, a good old fashioned ass kicking.
Yes, I know I am advocating vigilante justice but what kind of low life targets old women? Why does he feel he has to hit them to take their purses? I personally would love a little quality time with this thug. I hope New York's finest take a little time with him to explain why it is wrong to do what he did.