Posted on 3/14/2006, 9:05:07 PM by Former Military Chick
PONTIAC, Mich. (AP) — A suburban teenager accused of stabbing his mother 111 times withdrew his guilty plea Monday after a judge rejected a plea deal that would have freed him within 34 years.
Christopher Dankovich, 16, faces a March 27 preliminary examination on charges of murder and using a computer to commit a crime.
"I feel a responsibility to society," Oakland County Circuit Court Judge John J. McDonald said in rejecting the deal prosecutors and defense attorneys had worked out. The judge said a prison term of 22 1/2 to 34 years was too light for the crime.
Mitchell Ribitwer, Dankovich's attorney, said he would use an insanity defense at trial.
Dankovich was 15 when his mother, Diane Michele, was stabbed to death on April 24, 2005. Authorities have said she had discovered her son was using the Internet to look at pornography and learn how to make weapons.
The teenager was arrested at his family's cabin in St. Helen, more than 100 miles to the north.
Bit of a calculated risk, though. If the defense can get the jury to buy the insanity defense, then he goes to the loony bin--and, the way things go nowadays, probably gets released in fairly short order. It's the correct move, but risky.
}:-)4
I heard from someone that you are one who thinks like I do. Imagine my surprise when I read that judge thought this was TOO LIGHT! Sorry, I should've said delight!
I will ping the 'someone.'
Pinging CA - check this out!
How quaint, a judge uses his inherent discretion in a way that pleases a given person and hooray for the man in the black robe. But, let the same judge exercise his judicial discretion in another case that displeases the same poster, and the judge becomes a demonic, usurping judicial tyrant. Thus, it's situational ethics and partisan predispositions that drive the opinion of an observer. It is subjectively based and not founded in objective analysis.
"...it's situational ethics and partisan predispositions that drive the opinion of an observer. It is subjectively based and not founded in objective analysis."
Uh-huh. Which one of the 111 stabs was subjective? What part of "THOU SHALT NOT KILL" is unclear? When a judge upholds the moral law we must support the judge.
When a judge bends the law subjectively AWAY from moral law, that is indeed when they are usurping judicial tyrants.
"I feel a responsibility to society," Oakland County Circuit Court Judge John J. McDonald said in rejecting the deal prosecutors and defense attorneys had worked out. The judge said a prison term of 22 1/2 to 34 years was too light for the crime.
So often we see folks complaining about the judges on the bench, O Reilly will even take a few to task. So, when I read what this guy had to say, well we should first say, he is doing his job and bravo. But, when so few seem to be stepping up as Judge McDonald did today than perhaps we need to go that extra step and really voice our appreciation. I hope a few will agree.
C'mon, he was performing a retroactive abortion. Nothing wrong with that. /SARCASM
111 times? Talk about compulsive.
Agreed
I wonder if this kid was ever taken to church or if he could list the 10 commandments. I would think not.
I have to agree with you it might be risky but the JUDGE took a stand ... and I admire him for that.
So many seem to waffle or just go along. I am just thrilled with this guy.
Please expand on your thoughts of the poster?
/sarc
If she had just left him alone, he would have found someone else to kill.
It's obviously her own fault.
So9
Excellent comment ... not sure why someone would take issue with the fact that a judge decided to exercise his authority and rejected the plea deal.
Judge McDonald has been known as a hardass but fair judge for a good many years, so this is no abberation on his part. The kid could have done a bunch better in choosing an atty, though, IMO. (I live nearby, and I believe there is an excellent chance that Ribitwer is already on McD's shitlist from long before this case began)
My congratulations go to Judge McDonald.
I enthusiastically agree with the judge. The defendant was not a part of my post, it was focused on the comment made not the case, the court or the defendant.
So how long in actual time is 22 1/2 years. Time off for good behavior, time served, he was young. What does this sentence really mean ??? 10 years.?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.