Although I've yet to resolve in own mind the relative merit of some of the proposed sex offender legislation, here's what happened to me today.

Facts of the case:
Defendant licks the sexual organ of a five year old niece in the living room of his residence one night while his wife and kids are asleep. He also shows her a pornographic movie and invites her to perform oral sex on him but she refuses.

There are no eyewitness other than the victim and the defendant. Outrcy was to the victim's mother later the next morning and a report is made to the sheriff's dept. and CPS. Outrcy testimony comes into evidence but the CPS interview did not--see Crawford.

At trial, the victim, now 6 y.o.a., testifies about the incident and does a relatively decent job in testifying. Defendant testified at guilt and punishment denying any inappropriate contact.

No DNA or forensic evidence. No prior convictions or extraneous bad acts on the part of defendant.

Evidence on guilt took about 5 hours to put on. Jury deliberations on guilt took nearly three hours before returning a guilty verdict for Agg. Sex. Asslt. Child.

Following a brief punishment hearing this morning, the jury returned a verdict of 5 years--suspended.

Post-trial feedback from the jury implied that the verdict on guilt may have been a compromise verdict where several jurors did not feel entirely comfortable returning a guilty verdict on the uncorroborated testimony of the child victim and preemptively bargained for a probated sentence.

Contrast with the last one of these cases that I tried last year. where my victim was 17 y.o.a., had sustained 3 years of ongoing sexual abuse at the hands of her father who made some quasi-admissions after the investigation commenced. He got 50 years.

What if your victim was a year younger or was not competent to testify because she did not know the difference between right and wrong/truth and a lie. Now we can offer deferred. With a 25 year minimum we are out of luck. It is obvious how I feel about the new legislation.

Lee - what if we had a 25 year minimum for this offense? Would the compromise have been reached by the jurors? It seems at least likely that if these jurors knew there was a mandatory 25 year minimum, some of them may have refused to return a verdict of guilty. I like the broad range of sentences available in Texas - removing discretion with legislation like Jessica's Law may have the unintended consequence of making some of these cases unwinnable. And I'd bet that the bad guy does not make the 5 years, or whatever term of supervision was imposed.

The judge, thank goodness, suspended the sentence for ten years.

I don't know if a 25 yr. punishment minimum would have resulted in a "not guilty"--but I'm thinking I would have had a hung jury at best.

Mark, I don't know where I would have been had the little girl not been competent to testify but I know this defendant was not going to plead to any pen time sentence.

Bottom line: more trials, possibly even fewer guilty verdicts, but those that do get convicted really pay

Aside from the possible increased reluctance to come forward, might also be worth considering the increased likelihood of recantation.

I suppose the thought is that the harsher sentences will not prove to be a greater deterrent to this conduct, only assure the punishment fits the crime?

Lee I'll bet you have more Life sentences under current law than you do 5 year sentences for sex offenders don't you? Was your community outraged with the sentence? I agree with Mark we will see a lot more predators out on the streets if we are forced to try every one of these cases.I end up trying 75 % of my sex offender case because I usually offer 50 and occasionally 25.Bee County is laughingly known as Hell by my little town buddies but these people hate perverts and give Life sentences almost every time they get the chance.As a result the last case I had pled to 50. The ones offered probation are because the victim is too young or has uncooperative family members that victimize the child even more.Every victim is special and every case is different.Taking away our ability to negotiate and offer deferred when necessary is a really bad idea that will result in more children being molested as we try cases that we know will be hard to win.A hung jury to a child is a not guilty verdict.Other cases that are hard... Ie the sex with the child with everyone in the room or same bed is always a hard case.Not impossible but hard!Also a child with multiple attacks or outcrys against multiple Defendants.Don't look back Lee you did the right thing.