Sentencing range shows little concern

Published 9:00 pm Tuesday, June 19, 2001

As I was reading the local section of the paper recently, I was struck by similarities between two recent court rulings; those of former Snohomish Country sheriff’s deputy Chuck Adams and Skipper Arthur Kohn. In the Adams’ case, the standard sentencing range called for as little as a six-month jail sentence, which is exactly what prosecutors are seeking in the Kohn case. What is so striking is that Adams was convicted of raping a 17-year-old-girl, and Kohn threw a kitten against a wall, killing it.

While I feel very bad that a kitten was killed during this man’s fit of rage, and am very glad that he will do time for it, I am horrified that another man’s act of rape could have received the same punishment. Is this how low we (as a society) rank acts of sexual crime against our young women?

By the way, John Henry Browne, Adams’ lawyer, needs to learn the difference between punishment and consequence. He claims Adams “biggest punishment … is losing his career.” That’s not the punishment, that’s the consequence. There is a difference.

Edmonds