At sentencing on January 15, 2015, in explaining why he chose to impose the mandatory-minimum sentence of “only” 8-25 years in prison rather than the maximum of 25-years to life for a first-offender convicted of a nonviolent and victimless and malum prohibitum “crime,” the judge noted that Abigail was not a “predator” who was likely to re-offend and that her “victim” also knew their affair was “wrong” and was thus partly responsible. Thus, at the time, he was not a CSA victimologist.
For these comments, merely a bit of honesty and realism compared to what I would have said in his place and have written on this matter in general and specifically on the the laws of Michigan and Abigail’s sentence, I’m sure he was not only criticized, not only rebuked, respectfully, but also condemned, denounced, traduced, vilified, and subjected to a barrage of hate-mail and surely a few if not more than a few death-threats.
In July of 2015, the Michigan Supreme Court ruled that mandatory-minimum sentences were “unconstitutional” -theoretically in violation of the 6th rather than 8th Amendment.
And in August, roughly a month later, in justifying his decision to uphold her 8-25 year prison sentence and her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet,” he now argued (whether sincerely, having been “re-educated,” or insincerely out of fear and cravenness and pure self-interest) that she was a “predator,” possibly even a “rapist” and “pedophile,” who can never be cured but only deterred and controlled by imprisonment and quasi-totalitarian supervision, a “predator” who was likely to re-offend by having sex with young men under statutory age and, perhaps, also molesting prepubescent children.
He now realized or affected to believe that she was so dangerous, such a threat to all the children of Michigan and the other 49 states and the entire world should she be allowed to move or travel after her release from prison, that she deserved to be enslaved for at least 8-years if not longer and also forced to wear an electronic ankle-tether/”bracelet” that she can never remove by herself, not even when bathing or having sex with a lover if the state of Michigan and other jurisdictions permit such relationships, and which can only be removed, finally and officially, I assume by people in roles of authority, when she dies at age 77 or 86 or 94 or 102.
Our great good friend, Barton Deiters, who can barely conceal and contain his joy and approval and tendentiousness, writes:
A judge says the former Catholic Central High School tutor convicted of having illegal sex with her 15-year-old student was not denied a fair trial and does not deserve to be re-sentenced.
Kent County Circuit Judge Paul Sullivan also rejected the contention of Abigail Simon’s attorney that she should be required to wear an electronic tether for the rest of her life.
Sullivan also shot down Teiber’s request that the state-mandated lifetime electronic tether requirement be lifted because she was not a threat of re-offend. Tieber argued that the electronic monitoring violated his client’s privacy and Constitutional right against unreasonable searches and was “cruel and unusual punishment.”
Sullivan dispatched both arguments, saying that the public’s safety outweighed the minimal intrusion into Simon’s privacy.”Additionally, the invasiveness of a GPS monitoring devise can seem relatively minimal compared to the often lifelong effects these types of crimes can have on victims.”
“Shot down,” “dispatched,” what a joke! Yes, the “public’s safety outweighs the minimal intrusion” into the privacy of a woman who never committed a violent or other malum in se crime in her life and never will and is not a “threat to society” and “public safety” or to anyone nor even a danger to “re-offend” by transporting another biological man under age 16 to carnal elysium -and that’s assuming she lying about his forcing himself on her and “controlling her life.”
Simon remains in the Huron Valley Women’s Correctional facility, where she is serving out her eight to 25-year prisons sentence.
Her case has been filed with the Michigan Court of Appeals, which will likely hear her arguments within the next six to eight months. (“See why Judge says Catholic School Tutor does not deserve a new sex assault trial,” mlive.com., Aug. 13, 2015.)
Almost a year later, in June of 2016, the Court of Appeals upheld her convictions and also her life-sentence of electronic monitoring with an ankle-tether/”bracelet.”
The Michigan Court of Appeals has upheld the conviction of Abigail Simon, but says Kent County Judge Paul Sullivan should determine if she should get a different sentence…After Simon’s conviction and sentence, the Supreme Court changed the way those sentencing guideline are applied, allowing judges to use them only as a recommendation…In it’s ruling Thursday, the Michigan Court of Appeals sent Simon’s case back to judge Sullivan who will determine if, using the updated guidelines as as guide, Sullivan would give Simon a different sentence…The Court of Appeals also rejected Simon’s claim that lifetime electronic monitoring after her release from prison was unconstitutional. (woodtv.com, 6/17/2016.)
Since Sullivan had already upheld her 8-25 year prison sentence almost a year before the Court of Appeals ruling, shortly after the Supreme Court’s ruling, he obviously did so again for the same reasons, assuming he made such a decision.
It’s now May of 2017 and she’s been enslaved since November 2014, almost 2 months in jail and now well over 2 years in prison, and the Supreme Court will now decide her fate, apparently in Summer.
I’m 99% certain the Supreme Court, like the Court of Appeals, will uphold her convictions. It’s possible they will vacate her life-sentence of electronic parole monitoring, though I assume they don’t have the power to vacate her life-sentence of public sex-offender registration, since this punishment -which could be defined as “cruel and unusual” for Abigail and myriads of other men and women in the sense of being wholly gratuitous- is federally-mandated. I don’t know if they have the power to reduce her insanely draconian prison sentence.
If, miraculously, they overturn her convictions, she’ll be tried again, almost surely convicted, and crucified by the same draconian/Orwellian punishments -unless her “victim,” now an adult, doesn’t want to testify against her in another trial? If so, does he have that right or can the DA and a judge force him to testify against his will by threatening to charge him with a felony or misdemeanor?
So her only hope of being a free woman again -no jail, prison, mandatory “sex-offender treatment,” quasi-totalitarian post-incarceration supervision, electronic parole monitoring, public sex-offender registration- is if the Supreme Court overturns her convictions and her “victim” refuses to testify against her and the authorities, prosecutors and judges, cannot force him to do so, a possibility so remote as to be almost inconceivable.
So, bearing a miracle, it’s all over. She is doomed. She’ll never be free again. Unlike her “victim,” she’ll be traumatized, devastated, and “scarred for life.” And persecuted and punished for life.