Former senator James Marzilli was sentenced to three months for sexually harassing four women in Lowell a couple years ago.
I don’t condone his actions at all, but I think this sentence was much harsher than the crime deserved. I don’t see whose benefit jail time serves in this case.
What do others think?
Is this the type of crime for which a person should receive jail time? And was the Middlesex DA doing the right thing by seeking a year in this case?
I think the answer to both questions is no and that this is just another, specific example of how out of control our prison system is.
Please share widely!
Including his stint in Germany.
<
p>He committed a serious crime. Do you think his progressive stances makes it OK for him to molest women? Sexual assault is a crime, and if he hadn’t been a state senator, he’d have been in jail with a much longer sentence a long time ago.
Yes, sexual assault is a serious crime. He was not charged with and did not plead guilty to sexual assault, though. The charges were for sexual harassment. That crime basically consists of making very inappropriate come-ons and being annoying to women in public. Frankly, I don’t think that is a serious crime at all. If it was, police could raid every bar on weekend nights and arrest a handful of guys.
<
p>His progressive stances have nothing to do with whether his punishment is appropriate. From your response, however, it seems as if his progressive stances matter to you as far as what punishment he should receive.
<
p>I think a fine and maybe some probation would have been more than enough for this crime, especially given that his career is over and he is facing a civil suit.
A strange man pins you down on a park bench, mouthing lewd comments about your body, and THAT’S not a serious crime????
<
p>How enlightened of you.
<
p>As far as progressive stances go, I contrast your dismissive attitude here with the rhetoric about Jeff Perry – whose career is also over. 20 years ago, Perry was never accused of touching anyone, was never charged or convicted like Marzilli is, and is called a molster by BMG because he MIGHT have overheard an attack and did nothing. But since he is NOT a progressive, there is no attitude that he desrves a pass like there is for Marzilli.
<
p>How unenlightened of you.
accuse you of “conflation” or “not staying on point.” Yes, KBusch, I mean you, too. đŸ™‚
not to be a prick.
<
p>Thank you.
Again, you have the facts wrong. If he had pinned a woman down, the charge would have been assault. He did not touch anyone (though he attempted to grope a woman). I just don’t think it is a crime that warrants incarceration. As far as crimes go, this isn’t in the same league as battery, rape, murder, and other serious crimes.
<
p>I never called Perry a molester, and I have not seen anyone on BMG do that. As far as referring to him as an enabler and a defender of a molester, I (and others on BMG) am guilty as charged. His actions as a cop coupled with his later actions of lying and evading the issue make him a scumbag in my book. (Marzilli is also a scumbag in that book.) I don’t think anyone running for office deserves a pass on things that illuminate their character.
<
p>Marzilli doesn’t deserve a pass, but he also doesn’t deserve prison. He committed a crime and was duly convicted, but I don’t think the punishment fits the crime.
<
p>And, as I said before, this has little to do with Marzilli or his progressive views. I think that crimes like these should not result in prison time for anyone, whether committed by a former progressive senator or a poor person.
You completely made up your own version of the events leading up to Marzilli’s arrest. Well done. Michele McPhee was calling it a “sexual assault” today, as well.
<
p>No one is giving Marzilli a pass. I tend to agree that the punishment is severe. Should he ever be an elected official again? No. Should the public be disgusted with him? Yes.
<
p>The difference between Perry and Marzilli? Jim Marzilli talked dirty and offended and violated the women he did it to. Jeff Perry covered up at least one sexual assault, and was possibly present for and covered up a second one. Both situations are incredibly terrible for all parties involved, but Jim Marzilli did the right thing: He owned up to his transgressions, sought treatment, and plead guilty. Jeff Perry continues the cover-up to this day. Jim Marzilli is certainly a sick man for what he did, and is 100% responsible for what his victims went through. Jeff Perry is not responsible for what happened to his victims, Jeff Perry is not a molester or sexual deviant of any kind. He’s a poor judge of character for believing his underling, and showed a lack of any character of his own by covering stuff up.
<
p>Oh, and by the way:
<
p>
<
p>How soon we forget.
<
p>
<
p>Maybe if Sheriff Cummings would release his background report on Perry, my opinion would be different. Until then, Marzilli and Perry belong out of the public eye and off the public payroll (or pension-roll), but neither one belongs in jail.
I thought that was why he pled to the lesser charge – so he could keep the pension.
<
p>BTW – posters keep saying that the terms of his plea agreement means that’s all he was guilty of. Looking back on the reporting at the time, he could have been charged with assault.
I’m not sure about the pension, but I suspect he is keeping it. He should not get to keep it.
<
p>You’re not criminally guilty of things you aren’t convicted of or don’t plead guilty to. That’s how it works. And we don’t punish (or at least shouldn’t) people for things they may have done but have not been found guilty of.
<
p>If he could have been charged with assault and battery, he probably would have been. He was charged with attempted assault and battery (i.e. no touching), and as part of the plea will have that charge dismissed after the five years of probation.
<
p>Reporting at the time, especially from the Herald, probably wasn’t the best indicator of what actually happened. Reporters often get the law and facts wrong, and assault makes for better stories than harassment.
<
p>Re: Perry’s “career,” getting paid six figures as a special sheriff means that Perry’s career is going fine, even if his political career may be over. Marzilli will have a hard time getting a job of any sort.
And it’s pretty common to plead guily to a lesser charge to spare the state the cost and risk of going to trial. The lesser conviction is the incentive for the guilty. He is now legally guilty of harassment – this does not mean he could not have been charged with assault.
The felony that he did not plead guilty to was ATTEMPTED indecent assault and battery. So, not pleading to that felony was how he was able to keep his pension. He was never charged with indecent assault and battery, which means he was never charged with touching anyone. Attempted indecent assault and battery is not a statutory crime and was allowed as a charge only after an appeal by Marzilli to the Supreme Judicial Court came down in the government’s favor.
<
p>Maybe he did touch someone, but the DA never charged it. Judging by the fact that they sought 1 year in jail, and that they were willing to go to the SJC just to make sure they could charge attempted assault, I think they would have charged him with assault if they had the evidence.
What he did had nothing to do with the 17 years of service that he provided to the people of Arlington. He put in the years and his actions had nothing to do with his role as Senator. It makes no sense to me when he gets lumped with Turner, Wilkerson, and Demasi. They used their offices to profit. His acts were those of a man with mental illness, his acts had nothing to do with his office.
he has a political [hack] job.
“Do you think his progressive stances makes it OK for him to molest women?”
<
p>Who the hell has ever said that? What a rotten thing for you to say, PP. What good does it do to completely caricature what someone else is saying? Couldn’t I just as easily accuse you of being eager to put Marzilli away because he’s a progressive?
<
p>Everyone agrees that what Marzilli did was wrong eight ways from Sunday. And yet I have to wonder what good it does to send people who are diagnosed with mental illness — in this case, bipolarity — to prison for three months.
<
p>And that goes for anyone, not just an elected official. I’ve been thinking for a long time about public safety vis-a-vis mental health … we need a new approach. This isn’t the right one, and not just because Marzilli was a prog standard-bearer. Does it protect the public or deter crime to incarcerate the mentally ill? Or is treatment the smarter, safer, cheaper way to do it?
<
p>Gerry Leone strikes me as kind of an old-school, incurious lunkhead, frankly — and this isn’t the only case.
was that there was evidence he was having a serious mental health problem after the first incident in Arlington. I was disturbed by his not having sought treatment then. In a sense, that omission was the crime.
I shared a table with Marzilli at a political rally shortly before this all hit the fan. FWIW, he seemed like a reasonable guy at the time.
<
p>So, I think Marzilli had to be aware of his problem, and the same can probably be said for some of the people close to him. There were some very strong signs that he needed help, but like an alcoholic who hadn’t yet hit bottom he tried to get along without seeking professional help.
<
p>Serving three months in jail is one way to cement the notion that Marzilli no longer has the liberty to ignore this issue. I’m not saying it’s the best way, and I fully agree that mental illness is a strong mitigating factor in his defense. However, this is how the legal system played out for him. It’s not perfect but it’s practical and I hope it helps set things right, both for Marzilli and the people he offended.
I think three months seems about right. I will also register my respectful disagreement with Charley’s comments about Gerry Leone.
He accepted the terms of his plea, which was that the sentencing was left up to the judge. So he bought into the process and agreed to live with the result. Nothing unfair about it.
<
p>To those outraged by Porcupine asking what he asked, I do wonder how you’d have reacted to the sentence if the defendant were, say, Bob Hedlund (ack).
<
p>Charley, can you really say you’d have the same perspective?
by docs at McLean Hospital with bipolarity, absolutely I’d have the same view. To my mind, that’s a very meaningful mitigating circumstance: Did he do this because of some innate misogyny … or because his brain chemistry was on the fritz?
<
p>I don’t claim to have all the answers. But again, I question whether this keeps the public meaningfully safer, and provides meaningful deterrent to future bad behavior.
and I’m not going to second-guess McLean docs, but it is awfully unusual behavior for bipolar people to act out sexually.
<
p>Still, the bottom line is, he chose to plead guilty and knew the circumstances. So if he was willing to accept the risk, then it’s hard to be too adamant about “unfairness.”
<
p>And I doubt he’s the only schizophrenic to be incarcerated for harassing and intimidating the public.
He took the best deal he could get. He almost definitely would have lost at trial and the DA would have sought a greater sentence, so he took the better deal. That doesn’t necessarily mean jail time is appropriate or “fair” for this crime.
<
p>Similarly, when a person gets a few months for drug possession instead of a few years, it is still unfair, even though it’s a sentence they accept as better than the alternative.
I don’t know the details of all of Marzilli’s incidents, but speaking generally, 3 months for serial sexual harassment seems on the lenient side to me.
All of the incidents took place within a four-hour span on one day. It’s not like he was harassing everyone who crossed his path over a long period.
It’s not like he was harassing people in Acton or Cambridge.
WTF, thank God they arrested him before he really hurt one of these women. Take a few happy pills and tomorrow he’ll be next to you at Stop & Shop, shopping in the make-up aisle.
<
p>Longer jail time was in order and yes he should lose his pension.
As a legislator, Marzilli was a committed and effective progressive advocate for many years. He was a champion for the environment, glbt equality, elders, the disabled.
<
p>It just seems likes a waste that his mental illness derailed his life and led him to where he is today.
<
p>