Well, I've been waiting to see how the Janklow sentencing would go. So I checked CNN's article on it.
He's had 13 tickets since 1990. He has repeatedly bragged about his lead-footed driving.
Then one day he's driving too fast, possibly not all there because he's diabetic and hadn't eaten, and he blows off a stop sign. He didn't see the motorcyclist, who died in the collision.
The defense at his trial tried to pull a "his diabetes made him sick so it wasn't his fault" defense, which the jury properly ignored as the horseshit of an excuse it was.
Yesterday was the long-awaited sentencing. I had it on my calendar because I didn't want to miss it. I had told myself during the trial phase that if he got off, I'd be obligated to start some kind of Internet campaign.
He was found guilty, second-degree manslaughter, speeding, failing to stop, and reckless driving. I told myself that if he got off with a really light sentence, that I'd have to speak up about it.
So, here's what he got:
100 days of jail time. 3 years probation, during which he can't drive. If that time goes by without incident the whole thing drops off his record.
But now I'm torn. On one hand, a lot of people figured he'd get off without jail time, but he did get some, in a county and state where the judge didn't have any minimum sentencing requirements. He could have gotten off with a wrist-slapping. Maybe the judge saw the potential for public outcry if it was too light.
Because here's what it boils down to. He has a long track record of driving irresponsibly. That irresponsibility killed someone. Because he thought himself above the law he was expected to be creating, he killed someone by doing something stupid. In that aspect, 100 days seems pretty light for killing someone. In three years, there will be no official penalty left. In three years, that motorcyclist will still be dead. I hope he wasn't a father.
Admittedly, he (Janklow) has lost his position in Congress. I sincerely hope that he sees the lesson he's being offered, and changes some of his attitudes. I also hope he never tries his hand in government again. I find behavior like his especially appalling when it comes from someone in Congress. If you're making the laws, and you don't like one, change it. Don't just be a sanctimonious asshole and blatantly place yourself above it.
I guess I expect better from role models. I don't expect people to be perfect. But I expect them to live up to reasonable expectations. I have no problem with a president who experiments with drugs in college. But a president who goes on MTV and essentially tells students that they might as well try drugs, now that I have a problem with.
<sidenote>
What happened was Clinton was interviewed on MTV about his famous, "but I didn't inhale" statement. He said that if he had it to do over again, he would inhale. When you're the President, allegedly the most powerful person in the free world, and you make a statement like that, you tell teens that they should try drugs. That's not he message I want the president giving.
</sidenote>
As a further aside, while I agree with some of Dubya's views, his stance on the definition of marriage and his siding with the sugar industry on recommending against changing health guidelines has probably cost him my vote.
But back to Mr. Janklow. Was the sentence light for killing someone? There will probably be public service involved. I guess for now it's as just as the system allows for right now. It sounds like he's genuinely remorseful about it. If he turns himself around and makes some changes, and maybe makes some effort to encourage safer driving, I could stand behind that.
Some people need to whack trees to turn their lives around. Maybe sometimes just a tree isn't enough. At some level, the motorcyclist agreed to be there, to be a part of that experience. Mostly I hope that the message didn't go unnoticed.
Posted by fictionman at January 28, 2004 08:17 PM