Skip to comments.T.F. woman sentenced to life for lewdness charge (molested 13-year old boy)
Posted on 06/15/2010 3:17:29 PM PDT by OldDeckHand
ELKO, Nev. A Twin Falls woman convicted of forcing a 13-year-old boy to touch her breasts was sentenced Monday to life in prison.
Michelle Lyn Taylor, 34, was convicted of lewdness with a minor under 14 in November after a week-long trial in Elko County, Nev., District Judge Mike Memeos courtroom.
With the conviction, Taylor faced a mandatory life sentence, and Memeo set parole eligibility after 10 years, the minimum sentence. If released on parole she must register as a sex offender and will be under lifetime supervision.
The district attorneys office did not offer a plea agreement in the case, said public defender Alina Kilpatrick, who argued the sentence is unconstitutional and doesnt fit the crime.
Super, double-dooper guilty.
Life for Breasts seems like a ridiculously pumped up penalty.
Let’s bring back walking the plank
Hmmmm, the penalty seems way out of line. Either I’m missing something or there is more to the story.
I know she’s ugly and fat but at 13 I would’ve been grateful.
How many PREVIOUS convictions?
Bad writer, bad writer!!
Slap him upside de head ;-)
That is what I think too.
In another couple of years he’ll be hunting any pair in sight.
I still think I was born too early...
It’s a mandatory sentence. In law, a 13 year old is a child.
No penalty for that.
If I’d been on the jury, I’d have held out for the death penalty.
Or, you would have turned into a serial killer.
I have to wonder how, exactly, she forced him to do it.
life? heck, murderers don’t always get life....what is going on?
Some child rapists get less time than this. There is either something missing part of the story or the judge is an idiot.
Life for Breasts seems like a ridiculously pumped up penalty.
Ummmm..., I would wonder how the wording of the law distinguishes between a mother's breast and some stranger's ....
I mean, is it actually written into the law, or are some people just "making it up as they go" ...
Not advocating anything kinky here... just wondering about that wording in the law ... more or less... :-)
It's the "under 14" that's the kicker. That particular crime in NV comes with mandatory life per statute. The judge had no choice, by law. Also, the jury isn't allowed to be instructed with respect to sentence before reaching a verdict.
The prosecution should have exercised more discretion and chose an alternative charge. Having said that, there's no way she'll do life. She's eligible after 10 for parole, if her sentence isn't reduced on appeal before then, which is probably likely.
What do you suppose other cultures think when they see us ‘shocked’ that adultresses are stoned to death...when touching a couple of (in this case) fat sacks gets you a life sentence behind bars?
Okay, at first I had a hard time believing that a 13-year old boy had to be “forced” into touching a female breast - and then I saw the picture. There are some things even 13-year old boys won’t do...
See my post just above. The judge had no choice. Such are shortcomings of mandatory minimum sentencing.
Gotta love these sentences. Mandatory life sentence, but we'll probably parole you, and then you'll have to do some paperwork.
There are some things even 13-year old boys wont do...
She probably traded him a pocket knife with two blades,
a screw driver/can opener, and a corkscrew.
As the punch line goes...” Yes, now I’m young and beautiful
but some day I’ll be old and wrinkled and you’d be surprised
what a boy scout will do for a pocket knife with two
blades, a screwdriver, and a corkscrew!!”
Based on the picture, harpooning would be more appropriate. Of course, the Sea Shepard guys would protest her conviction.
the kid is gonna be scarred for life..
We do not agree. 13 year old boys know the difference between flabby and nice. It is in our DNA. The boy was abused.
I’m guessing she has at least two prior felony convictions.
Well hey, the kid has some standards at least, if he had to be forced.
I understand Nevada has some of the highest crime rates in the country, but this is outrageous.
“She is getting a greater penalty for having a boy touch her breast than if she killed him
something’s messed up in the state penal code?
Well, I'm not sure how many cases you've prosecuted, but I've prosecuted a fair share. You can't make anyone plead down to anything. You charge them with the most serious crime you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt, and perhaps you hope that the accused will plead down.
Since you're happy to assume facts not in evidence, I'll do the same. She probably took it to the box thinking that she'd beat the rap, considering the disproportionate sentence. Her counsel may not have realized that a discussion about the mandatory sentence wouldn't have been allowed at trial.
Frequently, prosecutions are games of chicken and whomever blinks first loses. Sometimes, you don't blink, but you still lose. I've seen it happen PLENTY of times.
Maybe she tried to bribe the judge with sex?
I'm not familiar with NV law, but I'd guess they probably have life with possibility of parole, and life without possibility. This was the former, not the later.
Unless the judge was Shamu, or cro-magnon man, that's not going to help.
By the looks of the long sentence, I'd say she declined the judges advances.
Geez, there’s rapists and murders who don’t even get life.
Well you did not even have to click through, just read the article to the last paragraph to get to:
“The district attorneys office did not offer a plea agreement in the case, ...”
Maybe the PD is lying about this, but I doubt it.
All three chins are guilty.
I’d hit it!
“the kid is gonna be scarred for life..”
Only if he really can’t use the pocket knife mentioned in post #22.
I’m sure, no pun was intended.
He's probably not lying, but he didn't say that he approached the DA and his plea was rejected, did he? Like I said, it's a game of chicken, and whomever blinks first, usually loses. Just because the DA didn't offer a plea, doesn't mean that there wasn't a plea agreement to be made.
Be serious, the DA offers the deal. The PD might offer to consider a deal, but the first concrete move is up to the DA.
Don't believe everything you see on TV. It's my personal and professional experience that the defense makes the first approach about a plea, not the other way around.
I'm not at all surprised that the DA didn't "offer" anything.
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.