D.A. RENKEN COMMENTS ON HART SENTENCING
Washington County District Attorney Julie Renken is commenting on the overwhelming negative reaction to a probation sentence for former city Emergency Management Coordinator Webster Hart.
Renken says it was family members of the victim who requested the probation sentence.
Renken says that “Probation in this type of case is a rare exception, but it is not the rule.”
Renken say the recommendation was made after Hart underwent extensive psychological and medical evaluations. Following the evaluations the plea bargain was only extended, “after the victim’s family requested it be considered, with very strict conditions…Hart will be on a very short leash for the next 10 years.”
(Washington Co. mugshot)
Hart will have to register as a sex offender with the Department of Public Safety, must not return to Washington County except for court appearances or medical reasons, cannot have unsupervised contact with anyone under age 17, and must remain 1,000 feet away from any place “where children commonly gather”.
Hart also waived any right to an early termination of his probation.
Hart was arrested Oct. 7, 2014, after an investigation by the Brenham Police Department and Scotty’s House, a child advocacy center that serves Washington County.
Further investigation revealed no other victims and that the abuse occurred over a short period of time, which Renken said “does not excuse the crime, but was taken into consideration at the time the plea offer was made.”
It is not about the crime, but in this case it is who you are ! This case should have been handed over to someone outside of the country, then maybe justice would have been served..Please everyone hold on to your FAITH you know that God is the final JUDGE!! Pray for the child that will remember for the rest of their life what has happen to them.
Julie Renken is the best DA this county has has in a long time. She cares about the victims of crime and their wishes. Additionally she takes her office and duty to the people of her district to protect them from crime very seriously. If she believed that the request of the family in this case was the best outcome for the family, State of Texas, and the offender then I agree with the decision. All the people leaving negative comments obviously have never had to make the difficult decisions that the DA has to make everyday. Before becoming judgemental they need to walk a day in her shoes. Proud of our DA ‘s office and glad to have Julie as our DA. One last thought all law enforcement officers (yes the DA is considered law enforcement) can exercise discretion in their decisions. This case is a good example to justice being done with discretion.
Wow, that’s a lot of negativity towards our DA. Are any of you naysayers aware of all the good this legal team has done since elected? Very little praise over the years for all of the good work, but everybody wants to jump on this. Step back, do your research, but don’t judge. Leave that to the big man.
This is just another example of small town politics, always taking care of their own. All the while us regular folks are to be held accountable and judged by them. Do your homework around here this kind of stuff goes way beyond our current people in these positions, been happening for years.
Once a crime such as this is reported the offense at that point is against the Sate of Texas, and it is the State of Texas that either brings the offense to trial and/or either convicts or determines innocense. The victim or the victim’s family no longer has any legal say in the matter. So, I do not understand how the victim’s family could request the lighter sentence. The final decision was that of the DA, and she is trying to keep the heat off of her by stating the “family” wanted it this way. Their wishes could be considered but the ultimate decision was made by Ms. Renken.
Put aside the judgemental, spiteful attitudes and “think”. Read and comprehend, please. Indecency laws are online and quite clear. The facts of this case barely meet one paragraph of the entire section of “Indecency”. Reading comprehension is required to understand. Offender did not meet the definition of predator in this case. Our district court did well and handled this unusual case with wisdom and due consideration to the entire family. The unwarranted reaction of those who visciously judge have hurt this family nearly as much as the offense itself.
No one on here is authorized to judge!
John 8:7 states: But when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.
I agree, who re we to judge!
Justice not served? Show it at election time.
April is child abuse awareness/prevention month….. how absolutely disgusting! Our DA didn’t make people in this community feel any better about this- in fact, I think everyone is even more upset. How is it that between the child’s parents AND the state of Texas no one could provide justice for the victim? Wrong is wrong, no matter what organizations you belonged to- it appears that we all saw the side of Mr. Hart that he wanted us to see.
Why do we have laws? Why do people-not follow laws ? Why aren’t laws enforced ?
Why is everyone treated differently?
Why why why!!! Has a can of worms been opened?
This is a very difficult decision that affects many people. A child is a helpless, innocent living person. It is very sad that Mr. Hart conducted himself in this manner. I am not one to say what type of punishment he should get, but most importantly what concerns me is the child and the experience that Mr.Hart provided for her. Will she forget, or will this affect her for the rest of her life? I guess he was smart enough, even though actually very sad, to pick a family member so they could have a say so. I hope the mother of this child had an opportunity to express her desire. Life is not fair. Live and learn.
How do you know the victim is female?
This poor child has been victimized by Mr Hart, then again by the family allowing the child molester to go free and once again by the court for allowing him Mr Hart to be placed on probation instead of doing jail time. I will have consider this the next time these people run for reelection.
Still getting away with his crime. Even if family recommends probation. Doesn’t matter if it was 1 child and over a short period of time. More excuses. Victim looses again.
The problem I have with this sentence is that we see lots of young offenders come through the Washington County Courts facing drug charges. These are, in most cases are victimless crimes. I read on KWHI that many of these kids end up getting jail time for these drug charges. Then, we put on probation a former “County Official” who has molested a child. I don’t see the fairness in all of this.
In my opinion, the victims family recommendation should have been ignored. Wrong is wrong. This man was caught once. He was in charge of children VOLUNTARILY for too many years to count including my own children. How many more are out there that refuse to come forward?
I’m sorry, but it’s not fair to the victim . So what the family ssked. Did the actual victim. What about all of the children in this county. Our officials owe it to us citizens to do everything within their power to protect our children. I personally believe that what had occurred here is he recieved leniency, as is typical around here, because of his family and professional affiliations. I think Ms. Renken is just fooling herself. What she has done, is continue the questionable services and deals of her predecessor.
Certain crimes can be shown leniency, but NEVER any crime against a child. I think Ms. Renken’s actions in this case and others should be reviewed for proper procedural correctness including whether or not she or her staff overstepped their privileges by extending such a ridiculous plea deal. And should discrepancies be found, proper reprimand should follow, up to and including termination.
I’m curious about whether the psychological evaluation was conducted by a forensic psychologist, because such a case would demand that and that is the legal requirement. And I also wonder if a true risk assessment was conducted to determine how likely that such behavior would continue again.
I also understand that DAs do take into consideration family wishes, but it is a DA’s responsibility to consider the safety of the community and the damage done to a victim.