Is this sentence too harsh? Man Who Mugged a 101-Year-Old Woman Gets 75 Years in Prison

[cali]

By ANAHAD O’CONNOR
Published: December 2, 2009

A man convicted of three muggings in Queens, including an attack on a 101-year-old woman, was sentenced on Wednesday to 75 years in prison.

In imposing the sentence, Justice Gregory L. Lasak of State Supreme Court in Queens lashed out at the defendant, Jack Rhodes, 47, for preying on older women, and noted that his sentence added up to almost one year for every dollar he stole from his victims. Prosecutors also read a statement from his oldest victim, Rose Morat, now 103, whose assault was captured on surveillance tape and led to an intense hunt for her attacker.

Ms. Morat said in the statement, “Atrocities done frequently by the man Jack Rhodes must be stopped,” adding, “so that this will never happen again to other good people and life once again can be enjoyed without fear.”

Mr. Rhodes was convicted in October of robbery, burglary and assault, and had been facing up to 90 years because the assaults were classified as hate crimes as a result of the victims’ ages. His lawyer, Paul Montgomery, did not immediately respond to a message seeking comment on Wednesday night.

Mr. Rhodes’s mugging spree began on Dec. 30, 2006, when he attacked Angela Kahn, 51 at the time, punching and kicking her in her Jamaica building before fleeing with some of her property.

In March 2007, Mr. Rhodes approached Ms. Morat in the lobby of her Jamaica Estates building, offering to help her outside as she walked toward the door using a walker. A moment later, he hit her repeatedly in the head, ripping her pocketbook from her arm as she fell to the ground. Mr. Rhodes got away with about $33 and Ms. Morat’s house keys.

“I did see stars,” Ms. Morat testified last year on videotape. “But I held onto my walker.”

Mr. Rhodes was also convicted of assaulting another Queens woman, Solange Elizee, who was 85 at the time.

<snip>

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/03/nyregion/03mugger.html

[Liberal_in_LA]

1. I remember the story. The video shows him rabbit punching the woman in the face.

She can't even put up her arms to protect her face. People were outraged... seeing crimes on video probably leads to higher sentences

[Captain Hilts]

2. He may as well have mugged a 4 year old or a golden retriever. Lock 'im up. nt

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. my grams is 101, and mentally in great shape

her arthritis is getting her slowed down, unfortunately, and she has a skin infection that is pesky.

About 8 yrs ago, (you do the math) she went shopping, and a teenaged mugger tried to steal her purse (even though it had no money in it), and knocked her down. She held on to the strap so hard, that the strap broke off. The police caught him a block later.

Luckily she was not hurt.

[Behind the Aegis]

4. 75 years is overkill.

[cali]

5. I'm leaning toward that position though I copped out and voted "I don't know"

[Behind the Aegis]

9. I voted the way I did based on no weapon, and minor injuries.

FWIW, I completely agree with the additional years for it being a hate crime.

[Common Sense Party]

6. As if he'll ever serve anywhere close to half that long.

[Flaneur]

8. Are you saying he will die in prison or that he will be paroled?

I don't know much about NY parole laws.

[Common Sense Party]

19. Appeals of the sentence and parole

I doubt he serves 10 years

[Behind the Aegis]

11. How does that relevant to my opinion of the sentence being overkill?

[Common Sense Party]

18. How does it? It does because we hear things like "75 years" and think "that's

a ridiculously long sentence!" However the reality is these guys rarely serve more than a fraction of the time sentenced. The judge is making a statement, but the appeals court and the parole board will shave several decades off this sentence.

[Behind the Aegis]

28. You have based your reaction on conjecture and hypotheticals.

Even if they do materialize, it doesn't change the idea that 75 years for these acts is an absurd sentence.

[Flaneur]

7. This is just another typically excessive sentence. We're quite fond of them.

I may be mistaken, but I think a lot of countries have a maximum sentence of 20 or 30 years, even for murder.

These were ugly crimes, but a much shorter prison sentence would be appropriate.

There is a reason we are the world's leading incarcerator.

And by the way, 75 years X $30,000 a year to incarcerate him: $2,250,000.

[mamaleah]

12. 20 years for murder is too short.

The dead did not get to live a full life. The murderer should get to spend life in prison.

75 for mugging a very elderly lady is a bit much, but as it has been said, he won't serve close to that. More than like will be sprung after 15.

[Journeyman]

32. The woman who raised me was murdered. Her assailant got 4 years in prison . . .

Dragged from her car on a sunny summer's day at an intersection in Los Angeles, shot twice through the left eye. Her murderer and his partner got half a pack of smokes, some change, and sentenced to prison until they were 25. Both were released when they turned 18.

20 years would have approximated justice. . .

[mamaleah]

36. 4 years?!?!?!?!

Disgusting.

[Lance_Boyle]

10. hate crimes?

Victims' ages range from 51 to 103 - that's an awfully broad "protected class." The hate crime aspect of this is nonsensical, so if that's where the extended penalty came from I'd say it should be overturned on appeal. It also seems fairly obvious that the motive is robbery. Misapplication of "hate crime" statute.

[Behind the Aegis]

14. The motive was robbery, the victims were elderly women.

He chose a specific group. He didn't rob just any person on the street. He targeted these women, probably because they were old and women. It was a double-motive crime.

[Lance_Boyle]

17. 51 is elderly?

He picked targets of convenience - that's what muggers do. I don't believe "hate crime" statutes should have played into this at all.

[Behind the Aegis]

25. I don't see 51 as elderly.

However, I don't know if the hate crimes stat was applied to that individual. He picked a specific group, old women. I find it difficult to believe there were no other potential victims parading about.

Out of curiosity, do you believe the hate crimes laws should ever be applied?

[Lance_Boyle]

34. His specific targets were the 'easy pickins' - same as it ever was for all muggers.

I think in order for hate crime laws to have a valid application there must be proof that hatred of the protected class was the motivator for the criminal action. It's pretty clear to me that in a mugging money is the motivating factor behind the crime. This is also born out by the fact that the mugger took money from the people he mugged. Had he assaulted them while shouting "death to old ladies!" and declined to steal their belongings I might take a different view of it, but it sure seems to me that the guy was after money (as muggers most often are), and picked the easiest targets (as muggers most often do).

[Behind the Aegis]

43. The "easy pickins" were old women.

Both groups protected by hate crime statutes. I don't know how it was proved, but it appears the proof was accepted. Had he also victimized shoppers getting out of the car with scads of bags, drunks, or distracted tourists (groups which are easy targets but not protected status), then I would agree with you.

[Lance_Boyle]

45. Coincidence or motivating hate? I need much more convincing that he chose them

specifically because of either of those features, rather than "hey, there's a person smaller or weaker than me who has money I can take from them." Do you really think the mugger was motivated by a desire to instill fear in the elderly or female populations rather than a desire to take some people's money? I'm not convinced that the supposed hate motivation is proven sufficiently to warrant a hate crime prosecution. I trust the issue will be revisited on appeal. And I think the prosecutor may come to regret trying that angle.

I wondered downthread whether this mugger could have gotten a lighter sentence if he'd copped to other muggings - males or younger victims. I'd be very surprised if he only ever mugged these three victims, and equally surprised if all of his (theoretical) unknown victims were old ladies.

[RaleighNCDUer]

30. All women.

If even one victim was an elderly man, I'd agree. It seems clear he was not just targeting the vulnerable, but women in particular.

[Lance_Boyle]

37. Muggers are opportunistic.

Do you really think that if the opportunity presented itself this guy would have passed over the chance to mug an old man, opting instead to wait for an old lady? All that's clear to me from the three attacks we know about is that he wanted money and picked people he thought would give him an easy go of it. I wonder if the mugger could have copped to other muggings (younger people or males) and reduced his sentence? If so, the hate crime aspect of this prosecution is wrong.

[dustbunnie]

13. He'll never serve the whole sentence.

But he did target the elderly specifically, knowing full well that attacking 85 and 100 year old women as he did could very well kill them. That deserves more than a few years.

[Demobrat]

15. He should stay in prison until

he's the age of his oldest victim. Then he can come out and learn what it feels like to be old and vulnerable to predators like himself.

[mbperrin]

20. Sensible. I like that.

And much less violent than beating him with baseball bats until he turned into a nicer person, my first reaction.

[PVnRT]

16. The question I would like answered:

Would he have gotten the same sentence if he mugged, say, a 21-year-old black man?

[Lance_Boyle]

21. no, because 21-yo black men are not a protected class, as apparently

people between the ages of 51 and 103 are. :shrug:

The hate crime aspect of the prosecution for a crime motivated by money is baffling.

[Behind the Aegis]

22. Would he have survived?

[dustbunnie]

26. Why? n/t

[WildEyedLiberal]

31. A 21 year old black man would at least have the ability to fight back

Also, it's not likely that said 21 year old would be seriously harmed by being hit in the head a few times.

An elderly woman with a walker cannot fight off a strong man, and a physical assault could cause far more lasting damage to the fragile body of an elderly person than to a healthy young adult.

Could your comparison be more apples and oranges?

[PVnRT]

51. Have you ever been hit in the head a few times?

Yes, for someone elderly the damage might be more severe, but don't pretend that just because you're young, it has no effect. Ask someone in the NFL with a career cut short from a concussion.

My point was, in the absence of evidence of this being a hate crime, why would he get a 75-year sentence (more than you get for things like manslaughter or rape) for mugging someone elderly versus anyone else?

[RaleighNCDUer]

33. No. But if he had mugged 6 21-year-old black men, possibly.

That would still make it a hate crime, though the extreme age of several of the victims of this crime probably counted as aggravated offense, as even a single punch on a 100 year old could kill, something unlikely with young male victims. Removing that aggravated circumstance, you just have simple muggings and hate crime, probably good for a 25 year sentence.

[dustbunnie]

40. He's black himself. How could mugging people of your own race be a hate crime?

[Behind the Aegis]

41. If he chose them because they were black, then it is a hate crime.

However, it would be very hard to prove without other types of evidence.

[dustbunnie]

47. That's not necessarily true at all.

There are many reasons why someone might choose to victimize others of their own race, none of them having anything to do with hate. White people commit crimes against other caucasians all the time. Would you consider all of those "hate" crimes? Probably not.

[Behind the Aegis]

49. I think you need to re-read my post.

White people can certainly commit hate crimes against others for being white. You seem to be confused as to what hate crimes are. Just because the victim is a member of a protected group doesn't mean a hate crime was committed. However, just because the perpetrator of a crime is the same "class" as the victim doesn't negate the possibility of a hate crime.

[dustbunnie]

53. No, I totally understood your post.

You said if this hypothetical black person chose his victims because they were black it would be a hate crime. I said that wasn't necessarily so. Perhaps he might target members of a black church or a hobby group, or even his black neighbors, for robbery let's say, for opportunistic reasons. His skin color might facilitate the crime because he blended in easily or felt comfortable with the group.

Same for any other group. If a white person started shouting "you white f*cking cracker, I'm going to kill you. White cracker asses like you deserve death" as he robbed and beat another, that would be a hate crime. Highly unlikely such a thing would happen though. Even less chance that it would prosecuted as a hate crime.

[Behind the Aegis]

56. Which is why I said: "without other evidence it would be difficult to prove."

[RaleighNCDUer]

42. Whoosh -

that slipped right by me. Although technically it might be possible - there were Jews that willingly helped the Nazis with the murder of Jews - that does make it much more unlikely. Still, a pattern of attacks on a single demographic would be worth a second look.

[dustbunnie]

50. Well, the Jews who helped the Nazis did so out of fear or for financial gain.

Not out of self-hatred. As I posted above, Caucasians commit violent crimes against each other all the time. They don't face hate crime charges over skin color. For them to mean anything, hate crime laws have to be very specific. Heck, there are crimes committed against women all the time - serial rapists for instance, who only target white, red-headed women. They are never charged with hate crimes either, although clearly these fall under the category.

[jmm]

38. My brother recently broke his arm.

He saw a 20-something black male friend of ours with a disability that makes it difficult to defend himself being attacked by a group of men and tried to help him. I highly doubt any of the people who attacked them, including the one who was on parole for a weapons violation and had a gun on him, will be facing this type of sentence.

edited for clarity

[Demobrat]

39. Depends. Is the hypothetical 21-year-old black man

dependent on a walker?

[whistler162]

23. Do the math

3 woman mugged = 25 years in jail per woman
3 sets of charges(robbery, burglary and assault) = 8.3 years per charge per woman victimized.

[RaleighNCDUer]

24. That's way out of line.

Surely, 50 years would have been sufficient. Would he still be a danger to the public at 97?

[WinkyDink]

27. No. This wopman lived over a century, and some THUG ATTACKS HER?? She COULD have DIED.

And what a GREAT ending to her long life.

Book'em, Dano.

[MilesColtrane]

29. 30 Years with no possibility of parole seems about right.

[Booster]

35. He more than likely would have killed his next victim, or the one

after that. Now if he had tried to mug a 250 lb young man - heehee - he might have been the next victim.

[Tim01]

44. "offering to help her outside as she walked toward the door using a walker"

He's too dangerous to helpless innocent people to be free.

And I think he enjoys hurting very old women. It wouldn't surprise to find out he has been raping them for fun ,too. Who knows how many victims there have been that he didn't get caught for.

[crazyjoe]

46. it's basically a life sentence, hopfully his fellow inmates will

find out what he did.

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

48. I'm not sure this is the proper application of Hate Crime legislation.

Seems like he was motivated purely by money. My guess is they were targets of convenience.
I'm sure he would of popped an old guy with a walker or wheelchair if he could have.

[marshall]

52. Don't hate crimes usually carry greater sentences than other crimes of the same magnitude?

It's not just a crime against one woman, it's a crime against all the elderly (or people of age).

And in practice this 75 year sentence will be no more than the 15 years originally asked for.

[flvegan]

54. Mugging and beating the shit out of them. Fuck that predator.

Had one of those women been MY mother, he should be BEGGING to stay locked up.

[TwilightGardener]

55. Vile human being. I'm certainly not going to quibble with the sentence, excessive or not.

[Freddie Stubbs]

57. He's 47 years old and mugging old ladies?

This isn't some kid who made a bad decision. This is a grown man who has likely been doing this sort of things for quite a while.