BANGOR, Maine — A Glenburn woman who was scheduled to be sentenced Monday on sex charges involving a 7-year-old boy withdrew her guilty plea after the judge rejected an agreement that called for her to serve a maximum sentence of 17 years.
District Court Judge Bruce Jordan said that Katie Dube, 27, should spend between 21 and 24 years behind bars for the sex crimes she has admitted committing.
Dube was arrested with her live-in boyfriend, Terrence A. Pinkham, 27, of Bangor, in May on charges that they sexually abused the child in early 2012.
The child, now 9, lives with a relative in rural Penobscot County and is related to Dube.
The Bangor Daily News is not naming the relationship between the defendant and the victim nor is the paper identifying the family he now lives with in order to avoid identifying him.
Dube pleaded guilty in October to five counts of gross sexual assault and two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor. The agreement negotiated between Michael Roberts, deputy district attorney for Penobscot County, and defense attorney Hunter Tzovarras of Bangor called for Roberts to recommend Dube spend 17 years in prison in exchange for her guilty pleas. Tzovarras on Monday urged the judge to sentence his client to between seven and 10 years in prison.
Under Maine law, if a judge rejects a plea agreement, a defendant may withdraw a guilty plea and go to trial. Dube did that Monday but a trial date was not set.
Dube also may decide to re-enter her guilty pleas now that she knows the judge’s thinking on how long her sentence could be, Roberts said Monday after the court proceeding.
Pinkham and Dube were indicted May 30 by the Penobscot County grand jury on five counts of gross sexual assault and two counts of sexual exploitation of a minor. Pinkham has pleaded not guilty to them and is scheduled to appear in court again later this month, Roberts said Monday.
Dube sobbed throughout most of Monday’s hearing. She described a life of drugs and violence with Pinkham, who she said forced her to engage in sexual abuse of the child.
“I’m extremely ashamed,” she told Jordan before the judge told her he was rejecting her plea deal. “A lot of things can be replaced but kids aren’t one of them.”
She apologized to the victim and the dozen or so family members in the courtroom.
In rejecting the plea agreement, Jordan said that the Legislature has said that gross sexual assault on a child under the age of 12 is so severe a crime that it is punishable by any number of years. He also said that Dube chose to resume a relationship with Pinkham, who has a history of drug abuse and domestic violence, when he was released from prison in early 2010 after five years in a stable relationship with another man.
“She initiated contact with Pinkham,” Jordan said. “She said that she went back to him for his looks and the drugs.”
Dube and Pinkham remained Monday at the Penobscot County Jail unable to make bail.
Wow, finally a judge that will do what is right, kudos to him.
AWESOME. you took the exact same words right out of my mind!!!! ? this is one good and decent Judge,, who will sleep easy!! May God Bless this Judge!!
It’s a terrible thing what’s happened to this child. Thank you to this judge for making an example of pedophiles!
Thank you District Court Judge Bruce Jordan for seeing that the life of a child, that this woman has taken the innocents from, is not replaceable. Treat your children with the love and respect they deserve, they are only little once, you have 1 time as parents to do right for children, keep them away from the sicko’s like this lady! I hope she goes away for the rest of her life!
“The BDN is not naming the relationship” when the video they post has the judge flat out saying mother/child.
And this really isnt that “rare” with this paper. It’s all about the illusion of “standards and the moral high ground” when they in the next breath do the exact opposite thing.
I hope to god that I get this judge when I take my sexual abuse preditor to court soon. All judges should think this way!
What is this attraction to bad boys? Self destructive.
But “no one is bad” around here, they’re just “good people going through a rough time/repeating their own cycle of abuse”… This area has turned that into the new “normal” so no one ever has to take responsibility for ending the cycles. It’s all about what sounds nicest and “not judging” because “everyone makes mistakes” (as if all mistakes are on par).
Believe it or not there are bad girls too. Try turning the question around and then see if it makes better sense to you.
it makes no sense.
men generally don’t want angry, violent, mean-spirited women.
Yes, there are bad women in the world but the MAJORITY are often victims of abuse who psychologically feel trapped in a bad environment or feel the need to appease the evil men who continue to control them. The justice system needs to be more aware of this fact, because most women only want what is best for their children (if they have them).
@Melora – Coerced abuse is a factor that differentiates male- and female-perpetrated abuse, males being much less likely to abuse in conjunction with another person. Coerced abuse is widely reported in the female abuse literature (O’Connor, 1987). Approximately 50% of Faller’s (1987) sample of 40 female perpetrators were involved in male initiated sexual abuse in which they played a secondary role. Similarly, McCarty (1986) found that over 30% of incestuous mothers acted in conjunction with a male accomplice. What is evident from these studies, however, is that a sizeable proportion of abuse did not involve male co-perpetrators. Furthermore, women who are initially coerced by males, may subsequently abuse independently (Mathews et al., 1989) Others, meanwhile, initiate abuse without any male involvement.
The idealization of women: its role in the minimization of child sexual abuse by females
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0145213498001197
Actually those familiar with mental health are aware that many VICTIMS of abuse themselves (the women) are often drawn to bad men or feel they are not good enough for good men. As a result, they end up with the same people whom they loath in the first place—men who abuse or tell them to abuse. This mentality is very common and I do hope the judge in this case examined the woman’s entire history before offering sentence.
@Melora What is your attraction to this story other than to excuse or minimize this woman’s role in the sexual assault of young child? Not one of your comments shows any real concern whatsoever, for the child victim in this case which is quite concerning given the fact that women can and do sexually abuse children independently without any coercion by men.
In your haste to verbalize as many ideas in as short period of time as possible, you seem to have misdirected your last question to the wrong @ (whatever kind of way of addressing someone that is).
Finally, a Maine judge with brains and guts enough to do the right thing. This POS woman deserves every bit of the 21-24 years sentence.
Thank you Judge Jordan. It is about time someone put an end to the plea bargains that Mike Roberts comes up with. Mike if you are too lazy to prosecute criminals instead of taking the easy way out with a plea bargain then maybe you should find another job. Until we get prosecutors in the DA’s office who will actually prosecute criminals, especially those who abuse children, we will have more Bob Carlsons running around loose
Actually it’s not a bad plea bargain for the state. It saves thousands of dollars in trial costs and the woman still goes to prison for a long time. That’s part of the whole point of plea bargains. Slightly reduced sentence while helping to relieve the clogging of the court’s docket. If every case went to trial we’d either need to greatly increase the number of courts or start dismissing cases for lack of a speedy trial.
Actually it is a bad plea bargain. Dube is 27, a sentence of 7 years would have her in prison for 4-5 years. That means she would be released while she is still young enough to have another child. In this case, I believe the costs and clogging of the docket are justified. She should be sentenced to 21-24 years with no possibility of early release.
The plea deal was 17 years not 7 that’s why I said it’s not a bad deal. She was permitted to ask for less but it would have been unlikely any judge would have given less. We’re only talking an additional 4 years for what the judge wants to do I just don’t think 4 years added to 17 years is worth the cost to the courts or state.
Oops, sorry, you are correct. The DA was recommending 17 years, the defense was going to ask for 7 years. Regardless of the plea and the recommendation, she should be sentenced to a period of time long enough to insure there is no possibility of her ever having another child.
Then she should have been given life without parole but then again I’m not one for revenge but rather punishment and rehabilitation and deterance.
I guess that is a difference of opinion between us: I see insuring she never has another child as a reasonable punishment for her crime, not as revenge. Revenge would be subjecting her to the same level of depravity to which she subjected her child and I am not advocating for that. Life without parole is not warranted (and would give grounds for appeal) as most women cannot bear children after age 50.
Perhaps a few years ago children after 50 was improbable but certainly not today. It’s still revenge not justice that you’re talking about. Perhaps instead we should simply sterilze her, and cut off the hands of thieves and gouge out the eyes of peeping toms.
I am very aware of the purpose of plea bargains. But thank you for pointing out the cost savings by using them. However there are some crimes that need to be prosecuted to send the proverbial message to the community. Sexual child abuse is one of them. Cost should not be a factor when it comes to protecting little kids from monsters like this witch and her psyco boy friend. Furthermore it is time for the legislature to put some really large teeth into the mandatory reporter law. Until we do our kids will be at risk to the likes of these two and Monster Carlson.
The problem with plea bargains these days is that they do not usually entail a “slightly reduced sentence”. Usually they are more like 10% of what a conviction would bring. There is no deterrent to committing a crime these days. When you can plea bargain murder down to 3 years in prison, that’s a problem!!
Show me a single case where a murder was bargained down to 3 years in prison. It simply does not happen if there indeed sufficient evidence of murder to start with. And you get your 10% figure from where? I suspect your imagination but if you have sources I’d like to see them. The plea bargain in this instance would have been slightly reduced from the 21 years the judge wants to the 17 years agree upon. So we have 4 years difference. A long way from 10% and at great cost to the community and further encouraging a clogged court system. Had this bargain been for 10 years or 7 years as the defense wanted I’d be saying the same as others here.
I didn’t say this plea bargain was 10% of what a conviction should bring. I was trying to illustrate why people are frustrated with the court system. I should not have used a specific %. Again, I was trying illustrate the fact that many plea bargains are for substantially less than what a conviction would bring when there is seemingly more than enough evidence to convict. Criminals know that they can just plea bargain their way out of a severe penalty. The threat of long jail sentences are no longer a threat to most.
Plea bargains where there is substantially less punishment than you would like is generally based on the fact that the state has a good chance of losing the case altogether. As far as the threat of long jail sentences no longer a threat that is simply wrong. The U.S. in general has some of the longest and most punitive sentences in the western world. I guess some people simply are not satisfied with us having the highest percent of people in prison in the world, by a wide margin, with us having the most people in solitary confinement than the rewst of the world combined. Perhaps we should start giving everyone convicted of a crime life. That’ll take care of the problem won’t it….that is of course until you’re the one charged and convicted.
Plea bargaining can be an effective tool for the state to get a guilty verdict while saving a crime victim from having to testify in open court.
Notwithstanding this case, would you rather have a guaranteed sentence of 17 years or proceed to trial and have the case potentially fall apart?
Ryan I believe very strongly in the jury system. I also believe in the concept of innocent until proven guilty. If the State does not have ample evidence to secure a guilty verdict at trial then it should fall apart. As far as what I would prefer is concerned…..I would rather we didn’t have child abuse of any type in our society. I also believe that when someone is convicted of a crime and is sent to prison that they have to do manual labor. Jails shouldn’t be someplace comfortable for the inmates. I spend a good part of the year in Florida and “work gangs” are a common site.
About time somebody stuck up for honest justice. Very strong chance the Pinky there was the main instigator and perpetrator, so do things in the right order. Get him up there for the 125 to 150 year sentence and see if more truth falls out of his stunned face. She gets no free pass by any means, but it may be best to put down the alpha dog first and see what shakes loose after that. Just thinking aloud… Cases like this do bring to mind some hill folk-style justice, tho: a time when “They needed killin’. would suffice.
He should be the judge for all child abuse cases…
right on!
gator bait
This crime should call for life in prison. I hope Judge Jordan gets the Pinkham case as well.
Watching the child abuse cases, It would seem (to a casual observer) that women sexual abusers get longer sentences than do men abusers, If that proves out to be true, and Dube’s lawyer uses that, she is likely to get a sentence considerably shorter then the one she originally agreed to.
Yes, I have noticed the same thing and worse, most women involved in abuse cases are victims of abuse themselves. Often they are controlled by the men in their lives either out of fear or some sick psychological attachment based on their own childhood abuse. The justice system needs to take awareness to this fact when dealing with female offenders.
@Melora – In much the same way as the general public, the media and the medico-legal system, female sexual offenders tend to draw on victim discourse, histories of abuse and claims of psychological ailments to justify their offenses. Please refer to the chapter on ‘Rationalizing Discursive Strategies’ in the following study,
http://www.academia.edu/1253935/Discourse_and_power_in_the_self-perceptions_of_incarcerated_South_African_female_sexual_offenders
@Melora “Most women involved in abuse cases are victims of abuse themselves. Often they are controlled by the men in their lives either out of fear or some sick psychological attachment based on their own childhood abuse. The justice system needs to take awareness to this fact when dealing with female offenders.”
Offenders’ Denial: Generally, sex offenders tend to blame society, the circumstances of the offense, the victim for their offending behavior (Gudjonsson, 1988) and their partners. We found that the great majority of the women in our study offended with their partners (N=12) and blamed them for coercing them, thus seeking to avoid
responsibility for their actions.
These findings support the seminal work of Mathews et al. (1989) who claimed that the small sample of women who participated in their study were male-coerced. These women tended to be dependent on their male partners with history of sexual or domestic abuse. Fearing abandonment, they felt compelled to obey the pressure of their partners to commit sexual offenses against children, often their own. In this study, an online female offender who was convicted of making and distributing indecent images of her own children also took very little responsibility for her actions and deflected blame wherever possible.
When confronted by the police with the recorded evidence found in the offender’s computer, she admitted her offense but blamed her male partner. One of the fundamental questions that the authors focused upon in analyzing the interview transcripts was: to what
extent can these female offenders deny their responsibility and blame their male partners?
Online child sexual abuse by female offenders: An Exploratory study
http://www.childcentre.info/robert/database/?id=10602&op=view_entry&entry_id=260
@Tux_Katz – The evil woman hypothesis would assume women are sentenced more harshly, but data show men receive longer sentences for sex offenses than women.
Sex-Based Sentencing: Sentencing Discrepancies Between Male and Female Sex Offenders
http://fcx.sagepub.com/content/7/2/146.short
Statistics and data are the establishments ways of making people doubt what they see.
Figures don’t lie, but liars do figure.
While I agree with the judge, I noticed that when women face abuse charges they often get a higher sentence than men, despite the fact that most women involved in these types of crimes statistically are abuse victims themselves or feel threatened if they do not do the evil act. I don’t know the personal situation of the woman in this case but I think it does show ignorance of abuse and trauma cases regarding women in general in how the justice system is quick to jail women but not men. Many male offenders get off scot-free despite abusing numerous children. I’m a victim of abuse myself (from a male offender) and he is still out there due to statue of limitations. So I totally understand the victim and need for justice. But women are also victims of threat and harassment and do evil things because they are afraid of the male perpetrator. Investigations need to be done on all sides to determine the reasons for abuse in the first place.
there is no statute of limitations in sexual abuse cases any more.
Women do evil things because they are evil, just like men do. Surely, there are times when a woman is compelled to do what she does, but that begs the question: Why is she staying with the guy when she knows that what he is doing is evil? Why didn’t she just go to the cops? She could have, and should have, refused to abuse the child, regardless of any consequences she may have faced. She is responsible for doing what she did.
Female sex offenders receive lighter sentences for the same crimes than males says a study recently published in Feminist Criminology, a SAGE journal and the official journal of the Division on Women and Crime of the American Society of Criminology.
http://www.sagepub.com/press/2012/may/SAGE_FemaleSexOffendersProtectedCriminalJusticeSystem.sp
As a victim of abuse yourself (from a male offender) I find it difficult to accept that you do totally understand the victim (7-year-old boy) and need for justice when your understanding of justice seems to be based upon the gender stereotype of the male offender (aggressor) and female victim. Do you, for example, acknowledge that female perpetrated sexual abuse can be just as traumatic and as harmful to a child (boy or girl) as sexual abuse committed be a man?
Praying for the child involved :/ so sad. Drugs are ruining our society and the minds of our young!!
BDN says they are not going to release the relationship between the offender and the victim to protect the identity…they will show a video instead that states the offender is a parent.
Finally, a judge in Maine who gives sexual abuse of a minor the serious time it deserves. I wish more judges were like Judge Jordan.
“The Bangor Daily News is not naming the relationship between the defendant and the victim nor is the paper identifying the family he now lives with in order to avoid identifying him. ” ….
Herrowww, BDN??? Anyone home??? You have a video which shows the judge stating what the relationship is between this monster and victim!!!! Come on! Wake up! Judge: “she violated the single most important position of trust in human affairs. There is no more serious breech then a parent who does something like this to a child.”
“Dube chose to resume a relationship with Pinkham, who has a history of drug abuse and domestic violence, when he was released from prison in early 2010 after five years in a stable relationship with another man.”…….
I guess the definition of “stable” has been changed now!
I am very sorry and sick to my stomach that this child had to go through this travesty! Pray that this child overcomes these atrocities that were inflicted on him!
Well what do ya know? A judge from Maine with some balls & brains. That’s a very rare thing indeed.
Bruce Jordan for President
Theirs to many ****** up people in this world
At least this judge is taking sexual abuse seriously, That is nice to see much better that seeing a case that gets 60 days for sexual abuse and spanned a couple year period.