Archives | Buy Photos | Subscriptions | Submissions | Advertise | Contact

Friday, May 24, 2013

Published: July 9, 2009

The news reports during the past months concerning the conviction of Mario Hernandez on charges of child abuse cannot have been more disturbing, horrifying, or sobering to Islanders. We generally think of ourselves and this community as beyond such ghastly behaviors. Indeed, the letters columns this morning include several examples of the sort of behavior we have grown to expect of ourselves and our neighbors. It is what makes us pleased and proud to be residents of these six towns. But, in the largest sense, there is obviously more to us.

We are reminded too often that while responsible, generous, neighborly behavior may be the rule among us, there are exceptions. And the exceptions lead to questions. For instance, do we pay enough attention to the sordid as it may require? Is it enough to deplore the behavior, and the response to such behavior by persons of responsibility, or is there more to do?

Certainly, based only on the overlong history of the vile behaviors documented on June 17 by Mr. Hernandez himself, as he entered his guilty plea, the answer to both questions is no.

This is not to ignore the frustrating, maybe impossible, difficulties that are part of any, even the most wholehearted public effort, to detect this sort of behavior, to investigate it, to protect the young victims, to bring the bad actors to court, to prosecute and convict them, and to impose meaningful penalties. It's a long, fraught road. In this case, authorities along the way made earnest efforts, within the constraints of the law, to affect what they knew was astonishing and appalling misbehavior, yet it continued for years and affected several undeserving youngsters.

As Times writer Steve Myrick has reported, allegations of child abuse present complex legal issues for school officials, police, social service agencies, and the court. The immediate safety of the children involved, the rights of defendants, and the possibility that a trial could take an unexpected turn, all play a role and sometimes lead to a sentence that the public criticizes sharply.

In the Hernandez case, Mr. Myrick writes, "the prosecution's case rested heavily on the testimony of the two children involved. Cape and Islands Assistant District Attorney Laura Marshard made it clear in the courtroom that the reason she had agreed to accept a plea agreement was to spare the children the ordeal of testifying. In outlining evidence she described as 'sickening,' Ms. Marshard said the Commonwealth would prove that Mr. Hernandez repeatedly hit the young children with a wire, a kitchen utensil, and a boxing glove. Mr. Hernandez, a native of El Salvador who is in this country legally, admitted to those facts in court, as part of his guilty plea. Ms. Marshard asked Judge Julian to impose a total of 9.5 years in a House of Correction, with only one year to be served. She said that if the case had gone to trial and resulted in a conviction, she would have asked for the full 9.5 years to be served.

"Many criminal cases that wind up in the court system are resolved through a complex negotiation that results in a plea agreement," Mr. Myrick explains. "Through the various hearings and procedures leading to a trial, the defense attorney and the prosecutor often make offers and counter offers. On the day of a trial, the judge often takes a strong hand in negotiating a plea agreement. By letting the attorneys know what sentence he could accept in a plea agreement and what sentence he could impose if the defendant is found guilty, the judge takes some of the leverage out of the hands of attorneys and the prosecution, and provides a strong incentive for both sides to conclude the case. According to experienced prosecutors, sometimes a judge will let it be known that if a defendant is found guilty at trial, a lengthy prison sentence is certain."

And that is what happened here, that and the difficulties facing the prosecution which, at trial, may have needed the testimony of small children to succeed. So, Mr. Hernandez will serve less than a year, a sentence no right thinking person, considering the crime in the abstract, could possibly conclude is sufficient.

The state Department of Social Services played a role in the protection of the children whom Mr. Hernandez abused. According to records obtained by this newspaper, the state's involvement with the children in this family extends at least to 1997 and includes charges of abuse and neglect against Holly Hernandez (also known as Holly Geddis), mother of some of the children and possessed of a considerable criminal record herself.

Vineyard school officials, troubled by what they saw of the children, reported what they learned of the activities in the Hernandez household to state investigators. Ultimately, the state agency found enough evidence to substantiate an "immediate safety risk" to the children and recommend that all of them be removed from the home. But that wasn't until 2005. A police investigation ensued, and that led to court on June 17.

When there is violence against a child at home, school personnel are often the first to discover it. Under Massachusetts law, teachers, counselors, and administrators are "mandated reporters," a legal term which means if they suspect abuse or neglect, they are legally required to report it to proper authorities. It's not something school officials do lightly. It's heartbreaking, one told Mr. Myrick.

James Weiss, superintendent of Vineyard schools, described the role of school officials is to report abuse and work with children and families to improve such horrifying situations.

Yet, after all, the information we have tells us that this chain of deplorable behavior was 12 years old in June. Following all the rules now in place, the well intended public system whose role is to prevent, detect, and correct such egregious parental delinquency did not do so for more than a decade. Is there more to do? Of course.