One of Rhode Island's most notorious criminals in the past few decades, Michael Woodmansee is a man who committed a crime so unspeakable, that the aftermath of his court case still resides with Rhode Island residents even to this day. A little info on his crime; back when he was sixteen, Woodmansee lured a five year old boy into his home in 1975, where he proceeded to kill and eat him. Hiding all evidence rather successfully for some time, the bag of the victim's bones was only discovered because Woodmansee attempted to strangle yet another boy, this one fourteen, in 1982. However, the fourteen year old managed to fend off Woodmansee and had him in the spotlight. Michael confessed his previous murder of five year old Jason Foreman and was jailed. Originally sentenced for 40 years, there was no trial because the family didn't want more details unearthed about the nature of their son's murder. As a result, Woodmansee's attorney accepted a plea bargain for 40 years imprisonment. To make matters worse, recent reports have been circuiting the media lately that Woodmansee had just gotten out of prison twelve years earlier than he was supposed to, on account of "good behavior", in August 2011. Fortunately, upon his release from prison, he was put in a mental institution in Cranston, Rhode Island on a 21 year probation, so Rhode Island families won't have to worry about this man being on the streets.
This case I feel was an excellent example of restraint on not just the court system, but for those families who are affected by the victims of a crime. The family was somehow able to put this horrible crime to rest and spare Woodmansee from a trial where he almost indefinitely would have been given a life sentence in prison. They didn't abuse the court system as a means to exact justice, like nearly any other family would have, and it is a rare thing to see restraint with matters such as these. However, upon hearing of Woodmansee's early release, the father did make a statement saying he would kill Woodmansee if he ever got the chance, so it really goes to show how valuable to courts are to both the victim's family and the criminal. I am hardly condoning child murder when I say that it was a good thing that he never got a trial; I merely found this family to show a tremendous amount of restraint despite the facts of the matter.
If anyone wishes to find out more about this case, visit the link below:
No comments:
Post a Comment