Yeah right the judge has her own brain to think for herself and make dicision herself not another citizen.

It is sad when the care-takers are not listened to. So the guards had a serious problem with a man who murdered his mother. Was tried and convicted by his peers. While in person he had marks that showed he continued to have some very serious issues going on in his mind.
A recently appointed judge, a woman, felt he had served enough of his sentence and despite the warnings from those who knew him. She released the man to go out and kill a couple of newly-weds. This is so sad. Two family's now have great tragedy in dealing with her careless opinion ... despite the warnings. Sounds typical and unfortunate for Mitt, not that we were not already worried about his credentials. Being soft and careless about selecting the right people will always haunt you.

the reality is that this man only had 1 year to serve before he was available for parole. 4 until he was free. The judge's decision to release Tavares now vs. later would not have resulted in a different outcome. He most likely would have killed again, but the targets may have been different.

Blaming the judge in this matter is reckless and ignorant. If there's anyone to blame, which everyone loves to blame someone; we should blame the original verdict. It allowed a violent killer to get back on the streets regardless of time served. He should not have been given 17-20. He should have been given life or death.

I like to believe the best in people. I think he probably really thought she was a good candidate, probably even investigated her thoroughly. But you never really can know someone completely, and she turned out to be a little off. A truly unfortunate thing, but probably not Mitt's fault. Anyone would have made the same mistake, or else escaped it by luck only.

Thank you tumbleweedin and bdkjones, for your postive input

It's Romney's fault that MA doesn't hve the death penalty.

Agree with CharlesSr. The second murder had its seeds in the original prosecution and sentencing for manslaughter (rather than 1st or 2nd degree murder).

As I read this article, I kept thinking, "Am I missing something here? It wasn't as though she overturned a life-sentence. He was close to release anyway." Just another chance for Romney to grandstand as I see it (and Guiliani too, may I add?). It doesn't matter what the guards thought, once his sentence was over, it was over and he was going to walk out of prison.

The fact of the matter is that this felon would have repeated the crime whether released in four months, or one year, or four years. This is pure politics. Had Guliani had appointed any bench officers (which he did not being a lowly mayor), we would have similar examples.

type: make that "Giuliani."

doesn't mitts response appear impulsive and his eagerness to request her resignation seem politically expedient as an attempt to distance himself from his past decisions? hmmmm.....if he were elected president, would that impulsive trait to extinguish his cognitive dissonance impact our country in a positive way or place us in even more danger?

Willie Horton did not kill that couple in Maryland, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

We are a Nation of laws, not men. The judge, a former 'law and order prosecutor' was experienced and made a ruling under rule of LAW. What a novel concept! (for Republicans).

Now if Repulsians like Romney and the other Repulsian idiot mentioned want to make it about men instead of law... hey, what makes them think they're the only ones who can play that game?

Properly the judge should not (generally may not) go public to defend herself. So it kinda makes it look like Romney's also a COWARD as well a PANDERER to an ignorant and lawless mob.

Course, that's just MY opinion. For what its worth.

I'm in complete agreement that only citizens with a complete and infallible grasp of the English language should have an opinion.
I also agree that it's 100% Romney's fault that he appointed a (HA!) woman that allowed the whole tragedy to unfold by releasing a prisoner a few months early.
However, I also have to admit the merits of a simple life-or-death legal system. Think of all the money saved in DNA testing alone, much less the lawsuits brought when the wrongly convicted are later released.
This whole discussion could be avoided if we just forced all women to devote their lives to the dissemination of English grammer and spelling and strung up anyone who broke the law.
Ah, that life, like answers, were cheap and easy.

Totally agree Charles Sr. It's not like she released him 10 years early. Just another pathetic sentencing in Massachusetts.

This is a rather pathetic attempt by Romney to seem tough on crime.

As several others have already pointed out, the perp would have walked shortly anyway. Judges exercise far less discretion in these matters, and in deciding cases in general, than the non-lawyer public likes to believe. Unless anyone can point to a legal mistake by the judge, blame the laws she applied to the specific case, not her.

Romney's a charlatan.

Although the situation is undoubtedly unfortunate, Finn has a good point. He STANDS TRIAL for murder. Did I miss something, or are you still innocent until proven guilty in this country?

I think ToNancy has a good point, too - unlike bdkjones, he/she makes the point "germane to the argument", at least to a certain extent, and isn't so demeaning either. I also don't see any errors in his/her post, but I'm no English Prof ...

Typical! At one time, just over a year ago, Mitt Romney strongly supported this judge. Now that she had been involved with a decision that he fears will reflect badly upon him, he comes out in favor of her resignation from the bench to which he appointed her. I say, in keeping in line with that thinking, Mitt Romney should also step down from running from for president of the US. Obviously, if the Judge's making a bad decision requires her to step down, then Mitt Romney's decision to appoint her to begin with, should require him stepping down. What's the difference? If he truly wants to focus blame, then it is he who is to blame for appointing her in the first place. Interesting how politics works.

Thanks, GoodPoint, but my point was as follows: The ABC News story above states that Willie Horton killed a couple in Maryland after being furloughed. In fact, he raped the woman and severely beat the man, but he did not commit murder.

Finn, you are absolutely right. Horton committed rape and assault on that couple. What a joke abcnews is.

I think Romney made a huge error here. This may cost his nom, ironically what he is trying to avoid. Unless people aren't paying attention to details (and why would anyone anyway ?

The Justice Department is in desperate need of help. It is not just about the lady Judge However, she did show lack of of Judgment required by the position and should resign. The rest of the argument as to weather he was gonna walk out of jail or not is irrelevant. SHE SCREWED UP PERIOD.

It would seem the basic premise of this whole debate is incorrect.

I must disagree with Baruch. Although I do belive Mitt's choice to call for the judge's resignation is a little off, the situation is not his fault. As someone above pointed out, it is impossible to truly know someone. Mitt, I'm sure, did his best in appointing her.

Again - I don't exactly agree with Mitt's choice. On the other hand, though, it shows that he is willing to change WHEN THE FACTS CHANGE. It is not flip-flopping, it's adapting.

"cls-your gift of the word prevents you from veering off the path. i hope 'craptastic' will spread to the masses like fire. nancy"

Absolutely LOVE this word, but I didn't use it in my post.

"Craptastic" in post directly below mine from 'ToNancy.'

I know I will most likely be yelled at for this non-germane comment, but I feel I must express my opinion.

I, for one, feel that we should have an intelligence test required for voting. Having such a test would likely greatly reduce the number of people casting ballots who have not even researched the issues.

And please don't quote any history on me, this is totally different. African Americans have an equal opportunity for education in this day and age, and neither they nor any other socio-economic group would be unfairly prejudiced by such a test. Of course, to be fair to the poorer class, the test would (unfortunately) have to be at the high-school level, and not require a college education.

And now an attempt at relevancy:before taking a side and voicing it on this particular debate, as in all debates, please peruse the available facts carefully, and take in to consideration each individual's point. After thoroughly examining the facts and opinions already present, please proofread any comments you might choose to make, thereby implying your intelligence and the fact that you understand the issue, and are not simple a sheep in the flock.

I of course meant 'simply' and not 'simple' at the end of my post above. I did proofread my post, but missed that mistake. I am not asking for perfection, only for evidence that those voicing their opinion are not mindless.

Is the Judge gone yet? How about Mitt and Culoannie; do they still in crapstatic state? You guys are great. I really enjoy your opinions.

Is the Judge gone yet? How about Mitt and Culoannie; do they still in crapstatic state? You guys are great. I really enjoy your opinions.

Since when are mindless people hanging out on-line at news sites commentting on national affairs?
Why is there no spell check on these things??
I have to agree with baruch that the natural progression would be for Romney to resign. If one poor (?) decision disqualifies you from public life, then there will be nothing but simple sheep in a flock.

the word with fire behind it is craptastic not crapstatic. let's look at mitt's underlying dissonance. nancy

Now, nancy, crapstatic might be just as useful in duscussing politics.
:D

Please excuse the typos in the first line of the second last paragraph.

The sad reality of our entire system, including our public obsession with crime and criminals, is simply that we live in a world where violent crime is relatively low percentage of all human transactions, while white collar crime including the political life of our elected officials is relatively high, including every kind of skulduggery and toes on the legal line misdeadery in their career.

You can pretty much assume that the public at large will stay fascinated by violent crime while educated people elected by the public will cheat and steal for the foreseeable future, causing far more human suffering then they prevent.

Carl in Monument

Mitt has a record of being tough on crime--tough to a fault even.

1- He gave exactly ZERO pardons as a governor to criminals during his 4-yer tenure (very unusual, and perhaps even ground breaking)--whether you agree or not, this shows he has NO SYMPATHY for criminals

2- He supports the death penalty, and may have made it MA law had he not been fighting an 85% Democratic legislature

This is a case of a mistake that any conservative governor could have committed. He had no personal knowledge of Tuttman, only knew her based on her record. No one could have known she would go against her past.

Mitt in effect admits her nomination was a mistake when he called for her resignation. What else could you do at that point. Anyone who thinks now Mitt should step down doesn't understand agency. Individuals will act on their own will in the end, and we can only base judgement based on past experience--in all cases. The fault lies with the perpetrator, but it may have been prevented had the judge used better "judgement". This guy had attacked guards toward the end of his sentence--what the heck was the judge thinking????!!!! Mitt had no such assessment when he looked at Tuttman's record. As far as we know, she'd never made a judgement as off-kilter as this in the past.

Why did the guy only do 16 years for stabbing his mother to death? Because there's not enough room in prison, that's why.

And guess who makes up 1/3 of the prison population... non-violent drug offenders.

So why didn't the recommendation by Romney's Commission on Corrections Reform to eliminate mandatory minimum sentences for drug offenders ever get implemented? Why does Romney think it's OK to arrest more people in this country for marijuana (even the terminally ill) than for all violent crimes combined? Why does Giuliani think so?

Where are we going to put all these people, and how many more killers will have to go free to make room? Why isn't the press asking these questions?

There is no rational way to blame Romney for a decision made by an independent judge. We need to remind people of political science 101 basics--the judiciary is independent of the rest of the political system. Romney could have called for 35 billion dollar bail and the judge could have told Romney to take a hike and let the man go. I have never heard of a politician telling a judge what kind of bail decision to make. Some commentators (aka the Boston Herald) are essentially blaming these murders one Romney--intellectual and journalistic dishonesty at its worst. Note how even the victims family understand on person is to blame directly--the murderer and one person has something to answer for--the judge who let him go without bail. Dukakis was the boss of the guy who oversaw the prison furlough program. So while the attack on him was also not really fair, at least there was an employer/employee relationship to point to. The same goes for the Guiliani chief of police debacle. What this does show is how hard one has to push the limits of logic to implicate Romney in scandal.
We should all realize that scandals detract from the opportunity to accomplish anything and give your enemies fodder. Huckabee was a scandal monger in Arkansas: five campaign ethics violations, stealing carpets and art from the governor's mansion and destroying the governor's offices' computer harddrives. Guiliani has ties to the mob via his indicted police chief. Is this the worst you got on Romney? The Dems are in trouble!

I agree, this is nothing more than politics. If the suspect was released shortly before his sentence ended what on Earth would have stopped him from committing the same act later? Stupid. Sounds like what they really want is harsher sentencing, a judge stepping down won't change this, or prevent it from happening again.