On Friday, Lisa Biron, the soon-to-be former New Hampshire lawyer who did some work with the Christianist Alliance Defending Freedom (formerly the Alliance Defense Fund), was sentenced to 40 years in federal prison for exploiting her own daughter. Among other things, Biron filmed her daughter on several occasions while she engaged in extremely graphic sexual activity, and even took her to Canada to have sex with a guy she'd met on Craigslist. Read my diary on her conviction here, and my diary on her sentencing here. Biron has let it be known she plans to appeal, even though she made an emotional apology at her sentencing hearing. That led me to wonder--should New Hampshire prosecute her on state charges? On paper, it looks like a slam dunk--but looking at the facts, it's not as easy a call as it may seem.
Back in October, Biron was arraigned on seven state charges of possessing child pornography after a former roommate told police he'd seen porn on Biron's laptop. The feds were brought in due to suspicions it had been produced out of state. As it turned out, they were actually produced when Biron took her daughter to Niagara Falls, Ontario for sex.
From the looks of it, Biron seems to be appealing mainly on the grounds the 40-year sentence is too draconian. However, her attorney was suggesting a sentence of 15 years--worse than a bad joke in my book. However, the state charges carry a minimum of seven years per count and a maximum of 15 years per count. That means if Biron were to be tried on the state charges, she could be staring down the barrel of 49 years in prison--enough that would assure she does some pretty serious jail time even if the federal sentence is overturned. If the federal charges stand up on appeal and Biron were to be convicted on state charges, it would pretty much assure she would die in prison.
Ordinarily, I would argue that no expense should be spared to keep the likes of Biron locked up for a long, long time--and preferably never be allowed to live among us again. After all, her crimes are as bad, if not worse, as those of Jerry Sandusky. But there's a complicating factor here. The judge in the federal case, Paul Barbadoro, indicated that he gave some pretty serious thought to sentencing Biron to 100 years in prison. However, he opted not to do so in part because he wanted to be sensitive to the daughter's need to heal. The daughter, who is now 15 and living in foster care (not for long, hopefully) made a recorded statement saying that she wanted her mother to have a second chance, and that she wasn't a monster. Barbadoro said that he opted for the 40-year sentence in part to reassure the daughter that she was in no way responsible for her mother's horrific crimes. That made me wonder--would a trial on state charges keep the daughter from healing?
I have to wonder if Barbadoro was thinking about the case of Debra Lafave, a former middle school teacher in Tampa who was arrested in 2005 for having sex with one of her students. However, the victim's mother was worried for the emotional toll that the pretrial publicity was taking on her son, and decided going to trial wouldn't be worth the harm to his well-being. At her request, prosecutors offered Lafave a plea deal, which Lafave accepted--three years' house arrest, seven years' probation and registration as a sex offender. Apparently the victim's family was content with this, as Lafave would still be a convicted felon, effectively ending her teaching career.
It's a tough, tough call. While on one hand there needs to be assurance that Biron does some serious time, on the other hand you want to be sensitive to the daughter's need to heal. So what do you guys think? Would a state trial be worth it?