...and I'll add to the likely prayer that a place be reserved in the deepest, darkest pit of hell for the person who did this and didn't stop to immediately assist her.
Creating jobs for cops is good. Re-educating them is even better. But, a more effective, wholesome and inclusive solution would be to create jobs for the targeted youth. To pay for job training like guaranteed seats in the next CNA course at CMMC or St. Marys, the next welding and metal fabricating courses at EMCC, and howsa bout starting up the old PAL (Police Athletic League) we all grew up with, along with scheduled PAL Hops at the old city hall?
That, in my view, could be a real benefit to both the city, the justice system and, ultimately, our people.
...just thoughts from a Lewiston American at-large who has been there.
Question everything...that's what newspapers are supposed to do on our behalf. Right?
Here, and this is for behavior obviously caused by a medical condition (i.e. chronic alcoholism), an 18 year old, now 42, begins his slippery slide as a habitual drunk driver. He spends "years" in jail for it. And, now, we wipe our hands of him for 10 more years.
The prosecutor wanted to impose a longer sentence with no probation. The Judge didn't agree. In fact, the Judge rejected the prosecutor's request for more jail time and, instead, urged Beaulieu to take advantage of programs offered by the Department of Corrections, including some that allow early release into monitored treatment programs. I agree with the Judge here. Although some would say the sentence abit extreme, it seems to be "in the range" based on the apparent facts of this specific case.
Those facts include the part of this story as related by Peter Richard Jr.,, Beaulieu's lawyer, who argued that his client was severely abused as a child, uses alcohol and drugs to “self-medicate,” and needs rehabilitation and treatment.
“When Robby gets out of prison, he is going to be exponentially worse without treatment,” Richard said, arguing for a five-year prison term with court-ordered treatment as part of probation. “He doesn’t take substances and go on joy rides because he enjoys breaking the law. He takes substances to escape his trauma. He’s addicted to getting away from what’s tormenting him every day.”
This is clearly behavior aggravated or caused by a chronic medical problem. And, in this country, we are not supposed to imprison anyone if that is the cause of someone's otherwise illegal behavior. We are supposed to "treat" them. That's the law!
Here, it is also apparent that Mr. Beaulieu was appropriately remorseful, but, even this, was given no apparent weight by the Judge or in the exercise of judgement by the local prosecutor. I have to ask, where did these people get their judicial training?
Beaulieu stated , “I apologize for my actions, to this court and my community. I’m very grateful that nobody was hurt by my actions,” Beaulieu said. “I’ve been in prison four times, and every time I get out, after I run out of my first weeks of medication, I feel like I’ve been dropped in a land that I don’t understand and everything is overwhelming.”
On the other hand, the prosecutor seemed just a little too eager in pressing for a longer jail term, in my view. I can't help but wonder... and I say this in the the context of several recent newspapers reports about the Governor's financiers pushing for privatization and expansion of the Warren State Prison for other medically affected Mainers... is the system being "influenced" or, even, "pressured" to press for jail terms for all medically affected people?
If I am correct, then this is no way to make a profit ... as Americans in other parts of the country have already decided. Out west, they jail their justice officers for this stuff... and rightly so.
As it appears that several oil tankers that derailed, exploded and destroyed the center of a town near the Maine border were intentionally mis-labeled by Irving Oil, they should not be allowed to be among the purchasers of this railroad company.
If I am correct, it is likely that the Irvings orchestrated both the so-called railroad bankruptcy and the subsequent Camden National Bank loan bailout. And, Mr. Matteo's obviously Irving induced statement that "keeping the railway running safely is good for the people and economies of Maine, the Northeast and Eastern Canada" is just confirmation that the Irvings are in control ... or are attempting to be.
There is, relatively speaking, clearly no economic benefit for the people of Maine. Although, there is an economic benefit for the Irvings of Eastern Canada.
Yes. Mr. Matteo, running a safe railroad is good for the people of Maine, but that is not going to happen, based upon the horrors of Lac Megantic, if you have to trust the Irving oil company of Canada to accurately represent the danger of their high explosive oil cargos, is it?
Here is a message for you, sir Irvings.
Accept responsibility for misrepresenting the danger of the high explosive oil in those railcars, which you were responsible for ensuring was accurate, and not the railroad company.
Accept liability for the deadly impact from the expolosion and destruction caused by your mislabeled oil.
Finally, apologize to everyone who knows about and has been, even indirectly, impacted by this horrible story and your apparently illegal and ongoing schemes.
Shooting Indians a few miles from Maine's borders in New, Brunswick, Canada who are standing up to protect land and water for all of us from Irving mining and natural gas fracking. With-holding information from the People of Maine about the deadly and permanent impacts of your proposed open-pit mining scheme in Aroostook County. Then add to this the mislabeling of deadly, high explosive Irving oil.
Allowing the Irvings to buy into or own anything in Maine, especially a railroad, just doesn't add up anymore.
You are finally being properly measured.
You are finally going to be properly weighed.
As you have certainly been found to be wanting, sir Irvings.
Can you hear it? Can you hear the heretofore silent chorus from the People of this Great State of Maine, Mr. Irving?
I believe they're saying, "Hey. You. All of you Irvings. Get out of our State and stay out until you apologize for your part in killing those poor people resting just a few miles from our Maine border. Don't come back to Maine, don't do business in Maine and learn to behave both here, in Quebec, and in New Brunswick, even! You are not a good corporate citizen, by any measure."
In fact, it should be government policy that a full and proper investigation be conducted and that we now start taking a closer look at anything the Irvings may be transporting from now on through the State of Maine. Look for anything going to or coming from the Irvings on any railroad and especially under the tarps of the Irving trucking names of RST, Sunbury, Midland, Irving ...ahhh, crap, the list is too long to include here right now, but there are, as I understand, more than 180 Irving corporations operating or attempting to operate in or through our State.
Watch for further mislabeling by these schemers and make reports to the TSB as required.
No one will take the Assistant or District Attorney seriously any longer, either. To be sure...
Oh, and let's also take a long look at getting training for or replacing the so-called school officials involved. These people need to get a life and stop tattling on obviously pranking kids in their charge.
Grow up. Get a life. Leave this child alone. And, in my opinion, if you're not adult enough to properly deal with children is these situations...(i.e. considering the best interest of the child as well as those of others who may be "credibly" threatened by the child's actions) then I suggest you find another "profession" as you are certainly no help to this child or the family you have now greviously impacted.
Prohibiting marijuana is expensive and costs Maine taxpayers millions of dollars every year to chase peaceful people who happen to enjoy smoking it.
Marijuana is not just used recreationally. It is also free and a well known medicine. It is effectively used for nerve pain, to reduce nausea in cancer patients and to induce them to have appetites they and our Elders need to help them stay healthy.
Legalizing pot would free a lot of peaceful people from hundreds of jails that currently cost taxpayers even more millions to pay for their food, housing, health care, attorney costs and the prisons, themselves!
What a waste!
Of course, the rich investors who want to build and justify more prisons in Maine don't want pot legalized or you to think about their schemes....and, certainly, they don't want you to act on legalizing pot anytime soon.
It is time to stand up, speak out and talk back to these schemers!
Stand up for freedom!
Free pot, free medicine and freedom from the high costs of arrest and unnecessary imprisonment of peaceful Mainers now!
Correct me if I am wrong, but this is the text that appeared on the 2010 referendum ballot, according to Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap, which read as follows:
Do you want to allow a casino with table games and slot machines at a single site in Oxford County, subject to local approval, with part of the profits going to specific state, local and tribal programs?
Yet, according to the article, "In June, Oxford developer Joe Casalinova announced plans to build a four-story hotel with between 80 and 120 rooms, meeting and conference space and a family-style restaurant directly across Route 26 from the casino."
If the site is undefined, then this plan is o.k., I suppose.
If, however, the site is pre-defined to the existing property, then the site where the existing Casino was narrowly approved by Maine voters is the only site that be used by this or any future casino company operating in Oxford.
Here, the article admits that Joe Casalinova has plans to develop a property "directly across Route 26 from the casino".
Wouldn't that now, in any plain reading of the language contained in the referendum question, be a casino operation in two, separate locations in Oxford?
If these are not two separate locations, then the site must not have been specified at the time the referendum question was voted on. In fact, it must be taken, that neither were the specific state, local or tribal programs specified that would receive part of the profits.
My question is, when, if ever and under what authority, were the state, local and tribal programs who would receive part of the profits from the approved Oxford casino specified other than legislatively?
And, wouldn't the Legislature be bound by the result of the referendum to equitably distribute casino profits to all state programs, all local programs and all tribal programs?
That's the plain meaning to be given the language approved by Maine voters in the 2010 referendum, in my view.
We now know voters were scammed with promises the casino would never be sold. It would be locally owned and operated. That is what Mainers approved in 2010 and nothing else.
This so-called seems to be fraught with problems. The biggest one being the fact that the Maine Gambling Control Board may not, as a result of this referendum law , as plainly worded above, have the jurisdiction to approve anything in relation to an Oxford casino sale.
That decision is for the People of the State of Maine, who approved it in the first place, to make for themselves.
And, everyone knows it.
In my view, there ain't no deal. At least, not until Mainers, themselves, say so.
In my view, there is merit to the call for an investigation into illegal actions of the Maine Governor. Further, however, is the need for an investigation into the probable illegal actions of his "lieutenants", political appointees or otherwise, for their roles in enabling or turning a blind, willful eye away from suspected illegalities...No difference.
This would include, from the so-called "bottom up", the "Deputies", "Hearing Officers" on appeal, "Directors" or "Supervisors", "Commissioners" and their paralegals, "in house" legal counsel and lawyers in the Governor's Office who knew or ought to have known of these seemingly illegal behaviors and either participated in them or did nothing about them when they had a duty to do so.
Many Mainers have apparently suffered from the Administration improper efforts to deny the rights of employees in the Unemployment Claims system of Maine, and continue to suffer.
An investigation is clearly warranted by both the federal and state Attorney's General. And, if the facts support it, charges should follow and prosecutions should be pursued accordingly to address and, thereafter, remedy that suffering.
In the meantime, there is a good basis for all those who were denied claims to immediately request their claims be reopened, fair hearings be conducted and the facts properly determined.
The hospitals must be paid...and paid now!
But, certainly not what they have been invoicing.
Instead, pay them for reasonable costs plus profits sufficient to provide a moderate income to health care providers and their staffs...and no more.
That would likely save the People of Maine around 200 million of what is allegedly "owed".
And, in the future, let's ensure automatic imaging or so-called x-rays and, especially, MRI's are only ordered by these same providers if there is a reasonable medical necessity for such costly testing.
With respectful deference to my friend, I just want to point out that I travel I-95 between Augusta and Houlton. The speed limit from Old Town to Houlton is 75 mph, but I find that most people do not travel that fast even in the best conditions. Most drive around 65 mph. I think that's because it's good on gas and feels safer.
I am no expert, but this proposal to increase the speed limit to 75 mph from Scarborough to Gardiner, and in an obviously "high traffic volume" region, including Portland, may not be wise and would, in my respectful opinion, be unwittingly risking far too many traffic disasters along that stretch of Maine highway...especially during the tourist season.
There's an obvious reason why the only part of the Interstate highway system in Maine to have a speed limit of 75 mph exists between Old Town and Houlton. The reason is that it happens to be the only stretch of highway that can safely permit that kind of speed. And, 75 mph is very, very fast even for us "million mile" drivers who absolutely love driving as a primary transportation and leisure activity.
But, as I indicate, even though we have State permission, and although legally authorized under Maine state law to do so, driving 75 mph is not usually acted upon by Maine drivers on that portion of the Interstate, because it is very, very fast.