Republican presidential candidate Mike Huckabee's statement related to the release of a rapist, originally sentenced to life plus 20, who went on to murder a woman after his sentence was reduced -- and parole granted -- doesn't ring true.
Huckabee said he could not remember all the details of a meeting he had with parole board members during which the case of Wayne DuMond came up. But he asserted, "I didn't try to, you know, push anybody's buttons on it."
Two months after taking office in Little Rock, [then Arkansas Governor Mike] Huckabee announced he favored DuMond's early release because he doubted the inmate's guilt and because DuMond had been castrated while awaiting his rape trial. DuMond said masked men attacked him at his home, but no one was ever charged.
If this is the truth, that Huckabee believed an innocent man was in prison, then his stated reason for not commuting DuMond's sentence -- the man would be under no parole supervision -- makes absolutely no sense.
What I want to know is what specific evidence Huckabee had that made him believe a convicted rapist was likely innocent? If it was nothing more than bigotry against DuMond's victim then Huckabee has proven himself to be a bigoted fool.
And what evidence did Huckabee have that made him believe that DuMond was too dangerous to be released without parole supervision? And did he turn that evidence over to the parole board?
Did Huckabee even verify through a prison medical exam that that DuMond was castrated as he claimed? If that verifiable claim wasn't checked out then how can we expect Huckabee to evaluate claims related to national security?
Huckabee's attempt to shirk responsibility for his part in this man's release shows me that he doesn't have the level of honor I expect from the president of the USA. And this is the opinion I had before looking at other discussions of Huckabee's involvement with DuMond's parole.
Labels: Violence Against Women