Mom who caged teen son gets 20 years behind bars

[Alonzo]

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) -- A mother was sentenced to 20 years in prison Thursday for keeping her 17-year-old adopted son caged in her home.

Brenda Sullivan, accused of caging her 17-year-old son, pleaded guilty to three counts of aggravated child abuse.

Brenda Sullivan pleaded guilty in January to three counts of aggravated child abuse. Prosecutors agreed to drop lesser child neglect charges.

The teen weighed 49 pounds when child welfare workers found him in 2005 in what appeared to be a cage. Sullivan told a judge at the time that Ohio authorities told her to keep the boy, who had severe medical and emotional problems, in a crib.

"There's only one conclusion when you look at the medical evidence in this case, and that is that she literally starved him," prosecutor Julie Schlax said.

Two other children, 13-year-old twins the Sullivans adopted as infants, both testified they were kept in similar cages.

Sullivan's husband was also arrested, but died in January 2007 while awaiting trial.

Sullivan's lawyer, Charles Fletcher, said he didn't think prison was the right option because she does not pose a threat to society. He said they would appeal the sentence.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/05/23/caged.teen.ap/index.html

Interesting argument on avoiding jail, though I don't think it's a good precedent to set.

[micfranklin]

Threat to society? Maybe not

Threat to her children? Hell yes. This is America, not Guantanamo Bay or any other place where you can rightfully starve people.

[1Samuel8]

I do not think this woman should be kept in jail.

Her name, photograph, location and details of her actions should be published following which, she should be released into the public.

[Muser]

She's mentally sick. I, for one, take great delight in the irony that it is now she who will be living in a cage.

[Alonzo]

I do not think this woman should be kept in jail.

Her name, photograph, location and details of her actions should be published following which, she should be released into the public.

And the person who does so should be locked up on attempting to incite violence through vigilante justice.

She's mentally sick. I, for one, take great delight in the irony that it is now she who will be living in a cage.

If you are arguing she's mentally ill, shouldn't she be in a psychiatric hospital?

[Buck Laser]

I do not think this woman should be kept in jail.

Her name, photograph, location and details of her actions should be published following which, she should be released into the public.

It sounds to me as if you prefer vigilante justice to our judicial system. I hear that there are areas in Africa with no functioning government. Maybe you'd be happier there.:shame:

[Muser]

If you are arguing she's mentally ill, shouldn't she be in a psychiatric hospital?

She's mentally sick and a criminal. And really, aren't all criminals who intentionally abuse, harm or kill other human beings technically "mentally sick"?

[Alonzo]

She's mentally sick and a criminal. And really, aren't all criminals who intentionally abuse, harm or kill other human beings technically "mentally sick"?

No, many are (I've seen estimates of anti-social personality disorder in the 40% range), but not all of them.

But what's the point of jailing someone who's mentally ill and likely to be released? If there's a possibility of release, shouldn't treatment, and therefore prevention of future crimes and integration into society, be the goal?

[PatrickHenry]

To me, the systematic starvation of the boy is a greater crime than his unlawful imprisonment.

[ViolaLee]

Not a threat to society? Are they kidding? Off to jail monster mommy.

[cronic]

Not a threat to society? Are they kidding? Off to jail monster mommy.

Yep./. I'd have to concur with you on this..

[micfranklin]

Maybe she should go to a men's prison with a bunch of angry, crazed and deranged murderers and rapists.

[cronic]

Maybe she should go to a men's prison with a bunch of angry, crazed and deranged murderers and rapists.

she might like that tho..

as demented and mean as this woman was.. I'm surprised she wasn't raping her kids to

[micfranklin]

she might like that tho..

as demented and mean as this woman was.. I'm surprised she wasn't raping her kids to

The shoe will definitely be on the other foot if she was raping them and ended up there.

[Elrathin]

Threat to society? Maybe not

And if she had another kid, then what? It's not like the state can order her not to have any more kids.

I'd definately say she was a threat to society.

[1Samuel8]

I do not think this woman should be kept in jail.

Her name, photograph, location and details of her actions should be published following which, she should be released into the public.And the person who does so should be locked up on attempting to incite violence through vigilante justice. I should get a Nobel Prize in Economics for saving the tax-payer from dangerous over-spenders like you.

If "vigilante justice" was a serious threat, this woman would leave of her own accord and go some place else. I believe YOU should be ostracized for accusing people of things they did not do. YOU are the dangerous one.



It sounds to me as if you prefer vigilante justice to our judicial system. I hear that there are areas in Africa with no functioning government. Maybe you'd be happier there.:shame: Wrong. I prefer ostracism and self-exile to wasteful government spending.
By the way, do you have any idea how much money you are spending for your part of the judicial system?????????? I bet you do not have a clue.

[micfranklin]

And if she had another kid, then what? It's not like the state can order her not to have any more kids.

I'd definately say she was a threat to society.

That's why I said maybe not and that's why she should get a nice reserved cell in block 3A for her.

[Alonzo]

I should get a Nobel Prize in Economics for saving the tax-payer from dangerous over-spenders like you.

If "vigilante justice" was a serious threat, this woman would leave of her own accord and go some place else. I believe YOU should be ostracized for accusing people of things they did not do. YOU are the dangerous one.

You want a nobel prize for advocating vigilante justic? :madlaugh:

[Buck Laser]

I should get a Nobel Prize in Economics for saving the tax-payer from dangerous over-spenders like you.
Wrong. I prefer ostracism and self-exile to wasteful government spending.
By the way, do you have any idea how much money you are spending for your part of the judicial system?????????? I bet you do not have a clue.

The actual justice system--the courts, not law enforcement--are not a very significant part of either federal or state budgets. Whatever the price, I'm willing to pay it to avoid vigilante justice. When I was young, we still had lynchings. Maybe you'd have enjoyed being there, huh?

[Mia]

I don't agree with what this poster said, but he did clarify he's not talking about vigilante justice. So if we're going to argue with him, at least let's argue with what he's actually saying.

It happens to be true that everything we think should be handled by any part of the justice system costs quite a bit of money. That's not an irrelevant part of any discussion pertaining to what the outcome should be.

For instance, for every year one would like to see added onto a sentence, that's about $20K. It adds up!

[Pookie]

Yep./. I'd have to concur with you on this..

Well put, Viola. I agree with you and Cronic.
Purrs,
Pookie

[1Samuel8]

Thank you for your audience. For instance, for every year one would like to see added onto a sentence, that's about $20K. It adds up! Exactly. I, for one, do not even make $20K a year and I know there are many other people like me.







Whatever the price, I'm willing to pay it to avoid vigilante justice. Well, no. You are completely mistake in two ways:
1) you are actually defending is forcing everybody else to pay without choice -- you alone, are not paying for it
2) you are actually not avoiding vigilante justice anyway.

Back to # 1), you are also feeding a justice system that is very discriminatory and unfair. Shame on you.

[GhostintheMachine]

Still sounds to me that she belongs in a mental institution, jail will most likely not solve the probability of her causing problems in the future, and I think it remains obvious that vigilante justice will not solve anything.