Mechanicville child pornographer gets lifetime sentence
Source: Times Union
By Brittany Horn
A Mechanicville man will likely spend the rest of his life in prison following his sentencing on Friday for sexually abusing and photographing two young girls under his care.
Robert V. McLaughlin, 58, received the maximum 60-year sentence for manipulating a 7-year-old girl and an 8-year-old girl whom he babysat between 2012 and 2014 to engage in sexually explicit conduct so he could produce child pornography, according to court documents. Federal Judge Mae D'Agostino ruled that should McLaughlin ever be released from prison — which is unlikely given his age — he will be under supervised release for his lifetime.
One of the young girl's mothers begged the court to impose the greatest sentencing possible in a letter submitted by the prosecutor. She said that as a mother, she felt she had failed her daughter in the worst way possible by not seeing the abuse sooner and protecting her from McLaughlin.
"I don't want her to go through life looking over her shoulder wondering if she'll see him or run into him out in public, because this is something that she is very scared of," the mother said. "I want justice for my little girl. Please help me. I failed when I let down my guard at protecting her before, but you can protect her now."
FULL story at link.
Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/news/article/Mechanicville-child-pornographer-gets-lifetime-6179165.php
About F---ing time!!!
He is going to be so loved in prison. That is a prison taboo. It could have been their family!
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)And that life sentences are cruel,and he should be eligible for rehabilitation and parole after a little while, etc.
There are always some regardless of the crime committed.
Myself: I hope he gets appropriate treatment from the other prisoners and never sees life outside of a prison again.
wryter2000
(46,045 posts)Just like for the poor guy who ran a revenge porn site.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)that he should be shot and yes I have seen people do that here on the DU.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)then you're not really anti-death penalty.
I don't support the death penalty in this case, or any other.
Giving that power to the government has proven to be a terrible mistake, and this case doesn't change that.
However, if some private citizen should take matters into his own hands and I ended up on the jury, I'd acquit.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)Why?
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)citizen juries are the least appreciated branch of government, yet they do still have the power to do this
Orrex
(63,209 posts)You're not talking about a relative of the victims; you expressly identified "some private citizen." By what right does that person get to kill another person with impunity?
In other words, although you nominally oppose the state's use of capital punishment, you endorse vigilante murder.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Immunity makes it so there's no limit to the former. But the vigilante takes a huge risk, so it's only likely to happen in the most extreme, clear-cut cases where he can be sure a jury will let him go.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)As long as someone is willing to risk an unsympathetic jury, murder is just dandy.
I don't see how that's morally superior to executions performed by the state.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Man finds out his kid got raped, and there is no doubt as to the rapist. Kills him, gets sent to trial for murder.
You're on the jury. Those are the facts laid out before you. Would you send him to prison?
I already explained how it's morally superior to executions performed by the state. The state has demonstrated that it is racist and bigoted against the poor, that it can conspire to hide the truth at zero risk to the conspirators, and that it has repeatedly and knowingly put to death innocent men.
If those are moral non-factors to you, then I eschew your morality.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)You declared that you'd acquit some random stranger who summarily acted as executioner. Now you're asking how I'd vote on a jury if the killer was the victim's father. That's moving the goalposts.
As to your newly posed question, well, it depends on how the judge instructs the jury, doesn't it? And how the defendant pleads?
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)If those goalposts have moved, it was you who moved them. I made no such stipulation.
My question actually pertains to a recent real-life scenario where exactly that set of events occurred. Father went to trial for murder, end result 6 months probation, no jail. Seems like a reasonable result to me.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)You certainly didn't include the family of the victims in your broad, blanket acquittal. I see that others have called you out for your vigilante exhortation, too.
You're doing the same thing as the hypocrites who claim to reject the death penalty but who adopt an "oh well" attitude when the attacker is murdered in prison. Tell yourself whatever you want, but don't pretend that you oppose capital punishment.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)The way it goes down in real life is that the person who takes revenge is always someone with a personal stake in the matter. Pretending that there is some wide universe of cases where it is otherwise is a fantasy scenario with no relevance to the real world.
My opposition to the death penalty as a matter of law is very simple: there should be major, life-altering risk in getting it wrong. Doing it under color of law eliminates that risk.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)You can rationalize it however you want, but you're still explicitly pro-death-penalty. I see it and others here see it. You're the only one who doesn't see it, in fact, or at least pretends not to see it.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)The words "some random person", as you quote, are your words, not mine.
You own that. Not I. Deal with it.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)I'm posting from my phone--forgive me if I don't memorize your every word.
You can rationalize it however you want, but you're still explicitly pro-death-penalty. I see it and others here see it. You're the only one who doesn't see it, in fact, or at least pretends not to see it.
Will you now answer the question? Or will you find some other bullshit excuse to justify your fondness for vigilante murder?
Stonepounder
(4,033 posts)A conviction of a crime requires that the prosecution prove 'beyond a reasonable doubt', yet we still see inmates being released time and again when new evidence comes to light showing them to be innocent. You admit that the government makes mistakes. Yet, you seem to think that one person who decides to be judge, jury, and executioner is somehow superior to a trial. Sorry, I just can't accept your argument. What is the difference between "beyond a reasonable doubt" and 'no doubt"?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)You're just in favor of changing who carries it out.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)when it comes to legislation I am 100% anti-death-penalty
If a man wants to blow the brains out of his kid's rapist, I'll not tell him he's wrong to do so.
When the state does it, they put people to death when they know he didn't even commit the crime, and have hidden the evidence that he's innocent from the courts and from his lawyer.
Difference between these situations is night and day to me, should be to you too.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)you're against the entire concept of a criminal justice system.
Enjoy your vigilante paradise.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)I fully support a criminal justice system.
Perhaps in your fantasy world there's no discretion on the part of a jury, but in the real world there is.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)What you call discretion is actually nullification. How you can advocate that and still claim to be in favor of a criminal justice system confounds me.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)After your dogged persistence it appears perfectly reasonable to derive from your posts that you support a racist system of institutionalized murder against the poor and minorities, despite the mountains of evidence that many of the people put to death are innocent of the charges against them and that prosecutors routinely withhold that information from courts and juries.
You're on the record supporting aggressive wars and now the death penalty. Any other Democratic positions you completely repudiate in favor of their GOP alternatives?
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Since you're referring to my supposed support for the bombing of Syria after the gas attack...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023563679#post1
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023586419#post2
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10023542545#post7
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Now it is clear that you unrepentantly support aggressive wars in the Middle East, and all it takes is a little bit of war propaganda which you willingly swallow whole, not a whit differently than the neocons did in lying us into the war in Iraq.
I'll give you credit for owning up to it.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Did you even read my posts at those links at all? 
Sorry, not buying that bullshit a second time.
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
Screw long-term consequences!
Exactly in what fucking universe can any of that be construed as supporting a war?
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)choose to look the other way when someone kills someone else it kinda does shoot the whole claim of being anti death penalty a good one in the foot.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)The death penalty as law is an institution that bakes in hardcore discrimination against the poor and minorities, and is often knowingly used against innocent people.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)People are acquitted of murder charges for reasons of justifiability all the time.
This is well within the existing process of justice under the rule of law.
The only thing I am saying that is even slightly controversial is that I think killing a sexual predator who targets children is justifiable homicide. You want to take the other side of that assertion, go for it. I'm very comfortable with my position on the matter.
7962
(11,841 posts)But i think the rule for it should be that it is only sought in cases where there is ZERO doubt as to the guilt of the accused. There are PLENTY of those cases out there. That would do away with the chance of executing an innocent
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)Is that often "zero doubt" is produced by deliberate withholding of evidence.
And the prosecutor is immune from criminal charges even after it is conclusively established that that withholding led to the death penalty.
A regular citizen, on the other hand, would have a much much higher risk if he were wrong, the kind that gets him a murder-1 conviction and 20 to life.
That's the kind of risk that is much more likely to make it only happen in actual zero-doubt cases.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)I dont believe immunity should apply when its a deliberate act by a prosecutor.
Accident? Sure, give them immunity.
A deliberate act? Throw their ass in jail for a long time.
ncjustice80
(948 posts)If a prosecutor has an "accident" innocent people lose theur freedom. If a conviction is overturned the prosecutor and arrrsting officer should serve a day in jail for each day their victim did.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)Accidents happen in this universe all the time and by accidents I mean things like new evidence is uncovered to prove someone that was convicted is innocent and its something that the prosecutor wasnt aware of at the time.
Or evidence that the prosecutor simply wasnt aware of nor suspected provided to them by the police, the crime lab or someone else that later turns out to be falsified.
Those types of things do happen from time to time and thats when immunity should apply for the prosecutor.
if on the other had you can prove the prosecutor knew and or suspected that evidence was false or if they hide evidence then immunity should be revoked and the prosecutor should be looking at a similar length of time in jail at a minimum to what the person they either were trying to send to jail or did send to jail.
7962
(11,841 posts)I know of cases like you speak of, and I think the people involved should ALL go jail. For a LONG time.
Here's a good example of what I'm talking about: the Atlanta Courthouse shooter. The guy took a gun from a guard and killed her as well as killing another officer while on the run. Shut down most of the city for quite some time too. There is NO DOUBT he is the murderer. There is no need to fake evidence or hide evidence. He did it, he's on tape doing it, there was no one else who COULD have done it
There are plenty of cases like this out there. No "reasonable doubt" for death penalty cases.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)in the foot not mine.
I mean either you are either a true anti death penalty person no matter who carries it out or your not, simple as that.
Man from Pickens
(1,713 posts)"The death penalty" refers to a specific type of legislation, an action carried out under color of law. And I remain 100% opposed to it, with nothing I have said contradicting that stance in any way.
What you appear to be mad about is that I won't extend that to a "no killing is justified ever" stance. But the reasons I oppose the death penalty - which I've made as perfectly clear as can be - don't apply to those other situations.
Perfectly consistent and ethical. You may or may not agree with the stance but I cannot be fairly accused of inconsistency.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)awoke_in_2003
(34,582 posts)cases like this make it hard sometimes, but I think he should spend the rest of his life in prison.
LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)It can be tough to distinguish between the merely visceral and emotional reaction, and the rational, more academic premise coming from the same person.
I've seen that inability on DU too.
Dragonfli
(10,622 posts)Maybe at Free Republic....
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)I want specifics, what are you angling for here?
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)In any way they choose to do it.
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts) FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)I wont'
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)Could you provide a list of who you think deserves rape?
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)There, that's my list.
As for your tired old sympathy, tell me why you disagree
NuclearDem
(16,184 posts)It's never acceptable.
Larry Engels
(387 posts)Besides, who will rape the rapers of the rapists?
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)Period.
AngryDem001
(684 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)So. Give us details, FLPanhandle. What sort of "misery" do you want to inflict?
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)Your sympathy for child rapists is noted though.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)LanternWaste
(37,748 posts)I'd feel rather embarrassed were I to walk through life so half-witted as to be unable to determine the difference between 'sympathy for a rapist' and the 'justice system'. If the most rational argument I could devise were simply to apply fictional conclusions to other people, I'd consider myself rather blissful in my ignorance.
No doubt though, you know the difference between the two; and could even craft a more rational argument if given enough time, resources and tools... That's very special. 
BrotherIvan
(9,126 posts)But not against life sentences. I think that someone who has committed a crime so horrific that they should be removed from society, or a series of crimes showing a pathology that means they will offend again, then a life sentence is warranted. That might not be a popular view.
blackspade
(10,056 posts)Weather from the cops, prison inmates, or vigilantes.
That said, I have no issue with the sentence.
This guy was a sick fuck.
Helen Borg
(3,963 posts)Hoppy
(3,595 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 4, 2015, 07:18 PM - Edit history (1)
I think it would be more fair, if he was shot.
bluestateguy
(44,173 posts)and let nature take its course.
appalachiablue
(41,131 posts)AngryDem001
(684 posts)+1000
Codeine
(25,586 posts)Grow up.
Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)
Post removed
7962
(11,841 posts)840high
(17,196 posts)
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)her children - of either gender?
I don't know the backstory on this. How did this man come to be a "babysitter"?
Orrex
(63,209 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)It's a statistical fact that sexual predation of children is far more common to males than to females.
7962
(11,841 posts)I dont care if it sounds "sexist" or not. Sometimes shit just has to be said.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)If someone would care to post the background on how this man came to be a babysitter for two little girls, I'd be grateful.
As for anyone else who wants to chide me for being "sexist", I don't give a shit.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)Last edited Sat Apr 4, 2015, 10:35 PM - Edit history (1)
Consider yourself lucky that your sexism is deemed acceptable.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)and everyone knows it because the statistics back it up.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)You identify a tiny, non-representative sample (predatory pedophiles), and you extrapolate this extremely aberrant behavior to men in general.
One could as readily declare that women are unfit to work as teachers because women are more likely to engage in inappropriate sexual relations with their male students.
There are any number of ways to justify sexism.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)As for "men in general" - as a woman I have been well-schooled in what "men in general" are capable of doing.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)Last edited Tue Apr 7, 2015, 08:04 AM - Edit history (1)
Short of that, I'm somewhat gratified that you can at least own up to your broad-brush generalizations.
Every sexist, male or female, can rationalize their sexism, having been "schooled" the same as you.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)I have as much sympathy for men crying "sexism!" as I do for whites crying "racism!". That is, absolutely none at all.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)Call it what you will, sexism or otherwise. I don't care to get into a pointless debate with you about semantics.
By your own declaration, it's clear that you see fit to judge men by poorly justified broadbrush generalizations.
An equivalent post by a man about a women would rightly have been hidden. You are fortunate that your gender-based prejudice gets a pass.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)Response to Orrex (Reply #85)
ncjustice80 This message was self-deleted by its author.
Orrex
(63,209 posts)This is the exact semantic debate I did not wish to enter in order to address scarletwoman's unjustified mischaracterizations based solely on sex.
If you can identify a readily accessible (i.e., non jargon-esque) term that accurately descibes grossly incorrect generalizations or anti-preferential treatment based on sex, I will be happy to consider that term for future use.
Absent a convincingly concise alternative term, it is unhelpful to preempt the use of a single two-syllable word simply because it doesn't capture the entire breadth and depth of a centuries-entrenched power structure.
If a white man were fired (or excluded) from a job specifically because he's white or because he's male, how would you characterize that action? If not as racist or sexist, then what?
Whatever term you suggest, the point remains that scarletwoman's statement was an unfair generalization based entirely on sex.
ncjustice80
(948 posts)Orrex
(63,209 posts)Suppose that we're talking about that most imaginary of creatures, the white male who understands his Privilege, and he is nonetheless fired or excluded from a job because he is white or male.
Since this mythical entity is already aware of his fortunate position in the socio-politico-sexual landscape, and since he doesn't need a snarky bystander to instruct him on this "teachable moment," by what term can we describe his mistreatment, which is based solely on his race or his sex?
If you can't offer an alternative to "racism" or "sexism," then you really have no basis to complain when a non-imaginary white male uses either term to identify such behavior.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,563 posts)...but I appreciate noninflammatory, downplayed descriptions.
While the demographics of statistical surveys wander all over the map, it's still safe to say that there ARE female abusers. While the prevalence of female offenders may arguably be less, in any given child care situation it only takes one.
cstanleytech
(26,291 posts)Granted it doesnt appear that there are nearly as many female ones as there are of males but still they do exist, as to why this women would let him babysit maybe it was money related after all daycare centers (and babysitters) for children are not cheap and alot of people cannot afford to pay as much as alot of them want.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)It's very possible it was money-related, as you say. My question is, how did it happen to be THIS man? Why? What were the circumstances that led these mothers to entrust their children to this person?
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)Not "this man" but "a" middle aged man?
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)trusted them.
But some non-related man? How much did the mothers know about him? How long had they known him? That's why I said I'd like to know the backstory.
Ask the mothers of the children abused by clergy why it might not be such a great idea to have their children babysat by middle-aged non-related men.
yeoman6987
(14,449 posts)Heck I am a male adult and would NEVER babysit or work in a day care center. For one thing it is not only protecting the children but yourself too. The daycare center case in California ruined so many lives and many babysitters have been ruined due to over zealous prosecutors with a situation that did not happen. I am not saying this with this case but it is a dangerous job to watch children no matter who you are.
scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)That's what I want to know. Did he advertise his services? Did a friend recommend him? I mean, how in the world did this mother come to entrust this man with her daughter?
Also, I get what you're saying about protecting yourself.
AngryDem001
(684 posts)scarletwoman
(31,893 posts)AngryDem001
(684 posts)The fact is that they exist.
The fact is that they typically get lighter sentences than their male counterparts.
Response to AngryDem001 (Reply #88)
ncjustice80 This message was self-deleted by its author.
project_bluebook
(411 posts)he will probably get parole in a few years while someone smoking pot gets 10 to 20.
BobTheSubgenius
(11,563 posts)I saw a short video earlier today that was about an inmate that killed his cellmate because that guy was not only a child molester, but a "bad" one, and wouldn't shut up about it. In his confession, he said, more or less..."yeah, I did it, and I'd do it again."
"I got down off my bunk, and because he was bigger than me, I hit him in the face a few times, then wrapped an electrical cord around his neck and took his life."
He said it with all the emotion of one choosing Salisbury steak or fried chicken for dinner.
Larry Engels
(387 posts)I find this amusing. But we send people to prison not for punishment, but as punishment. Dream up all the gory things you want done to this guy. I find that contradiction amusing, too! You do not have a coherent belief system, so your emotions dictate your politics. There are ways to get beyond this, and some people here have done so. Those are the people I pay attention to.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)At least at DU, we've trained the prison rape fetishists to put their fantasies in weird code or get their posts hidden. That's a start, I guess, but we still have over a dozen prison rape fantasies being expressed here, even in the OP.
Miles to go before fantasizing about sexual violence is eliminated as a legitimate post on this board.
Larry Engels
(387 posts)And the thought is the father of the deed.
Zorra
(27,670 posts)Larry Engels
(387 posts)BTW: everything "is what it is." Everything can also change.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)abused foster child. Then he abused his own daughter, who knows how many others? A Marine with no psy. help. He got away with a lifetime of abusing young girls.
Prison for life is not good enough. He should get the help he needs to reveal his entire history. Everyone he abused should know he is off the street for good.
These type of prisoners should have a prison option to 'self suicide' with an overdose of heroin or downers. To hope for prison abuse by inmates or beatings, abuse from guards is not the answer.
SharonAnn
(13,772 posts)Two of his granddaughters were going to testify against him about the sexual abuse they suffered from him. I was told that he had probably molested 100+ young girls over his lifetime. His daughters, their friends, neighbors daughters, their friends, his granddaughters, etc.
It's hard to believe that no one reported him during those 50+ years.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Response to Omaha Steve (Original post)
Post removed
