Inept justice system costs woman her life
January 25th, 2007When I was a freshman in high school, a schoolmate of mine named Billy Sprind got drunk and killed a woman. Joyce Bullock, 44, was driving down the highway when Sprind’s car crossed the median and slammed into her. Sprind got his driver’s license a month before.
The courts gave Sprind a slap on the wrist. He was sentenced to probation, weekends in jail and community service time. He violated his probation, was arrested for underaged drinking and was then sentenced to two and a half years in prison.
On Tuesday, Sprind struck again. He was drunk, crossed the center line of the highway and crashed head-on into an oncoming car, killing another woman.
I don’t know the statistics on how often something like this happens, but I can tell you it happens far too often. When Sprind killed the woman 18 years ago, he should have been thrown in jail for a long time, like 20-30 years. Period. I don’t care what the circumstances are, and I don’t want to hear about second chances. If you get drunk and kill another person, you should get more than probation and weekend jail time.
Now that he’s done it again, Sprind ought to go to prison for the rest of his life and never have another chance to kill an innocent person. He’s a killer, plain and simple, and he deserves to be treated like one.
If our justice system would take drunk driving seriously and get tough on criminals like Sprind, it could save a lot of lives.
Duh Tim they are banning smoking what more do you want?
This burns me up!! People in our culuture - parents, school administration, the government - just don’t know how to discipline. I know part of the problem is they are just wimps! I am all about giving people grace, but grace does not mean that we pretend sin never happened. I have to say that I do have a lot to learn about when/how to give grace, discipline and how to uphold justice (so Tim if you are trying to think of something to write about…) I have a passion to see justice in this world, but I wonder sometimes if my desire for justice is really bitterness and revenge.
I think the desire for justice is in itself a form of grace for everyone else in society. If someone has proven they are a threat to the wellbeing of others — as Sprind did, not just by his first offense, but by the violation of his probation — then we should be gracious to the general public by not allowing him to harm them.
I’m all for giving second chances to people who are not a threat to kill someone else. But if you’re dangerous, and if you’re likely to bring harm to someone physically, then you should be dealt with harshly.
He should be executed as a murderer as the scripture requires (Genesis 9:6, Leviticus 25:17) and it should have been done 18 years ago. No question then that he will ever do it again. Even if he’d been sentenced to 20 or 30 years 18 years ago, he’d probably still have been out by now on probation.
I’m with you Tim, but I think penalties should be unreasonably stiff for drunk drivers whether they kill anyone or not. It’s like firing a gun into a crowd.
A guy I worked with years ago dated a woman for a while who got plastered and killed a girl on a bicycle about a block from where I live. Sure enough, she did her 18 months and ended up in the news again a couple years later, killing an elderly pedestrian in another state where she had no record. It happens all the time.
On the other side of the “injustice” spectrum, take a look at this story, about a kid who got sentenced to 10 years in jail.
http://sports.espn.go.com/espn/eticket/story?page=wilson
He was 17 years old and received oral sex from a 15-year-old girl who instigated the act. Sad story. This would be a case, Kellye, when I think grace is certainly appropriate — because I don’t see how 10 years in prison could be considered “justice” for the offense.
I had a discussion the other day with my students about the value of life. Through the mess of what they have been fed by the media, we were able to see God’s plan and His heart about life. It came down to the value of life and that our society devalues it over and over by allowing killers to go free. We learned it is not about rehabilitation, it is not about an unfair justice system, and it is certainly not about appeals. It is telling the life that was taken unjustly “We value your life enough to put a stop to those who would kill again.”
Well said, Tim. And thank you for championing the cause of Justice.
When I found out about this tragedy it made me both sick and mad. I know Billy and I feel a certain amount of sympathy for him, but that doesn’t change the fact that I think he should be put away for life.
Just a little update about Sprind. I work with his wife’s sister and last I heard he was in pretty bad shape. He broke most of his ribs, his pelvis, and nemurous other things, on top of everything he now has pnemonia(spelling?) They don’t think he will live long. Looks like God’s justice has prevailed. I agree that he should have been punished MUCH more severely for his first offense but we can never understand why God allows things to work out the way they do. I feel sorry for the families of the people he killed but it also breaks my heart to think of what his wife and children are going through right now.
Ultimately everyone’s perceived justice differs! God does has a plan, this was allowed for a reason. There is no individual alive who is or can be 100% just. Where a justice is perceived to be served an injustice is also perceived to be served. It is what it is, a human attempt at law, order and justice. I guarantee where you think you could do better Tim you would also greatly fail somewhere else.
God himself does not propose to judge a man until the end of his days. Why should you and I? Better look in the mirror before you join in on this act of criticism.
So John, should we just do away with all the courts in this country? Should we just let serial killers and rapists run free, so as not to judge them? Because that’s exactly what you’re suggesting.
Don’t be ridiculous.
Why make your own blog joy out of someone else’s pain. Is your life that boring? Don’t you think that these families all deserve enough respect to keep your opinion to yourself. Maybe, just maybe, his daddy didn’t help him in life like yours has.
You know what Tim, he’s right. Just because his daddy maybe didn’t help him out in life like yours means that we should in fact excuse him from killing two innocent people. I can’t believe we may actually want to help innocent lives and punish the guilty - what were we thinking? Maybe we should go sit in prison and let all the murderers run rampant. After all, they might have had bad childhoods.
I see you didn’t answer my questions.
But to answer yours, I think that the families of the women Sprind killed deserve enough respect for him to be appropriately punished for his actions. I think every other innocent person in society deserves enough respect for him to be put away permanently so he can’t hurt someone else. And I think we need to stand up and point out when our justice system fails so miserably, as it obviously has in this case.
I’m not disrespecting the families of the people killed by arguing for justice, John. Quite the contrary. Sprind is the one who showed them no respect. So you can take up your concerns about “respect” with him, not me.
That’s what I think.
I’m sure if Billy is guilty, he will be handed swift justice. I’m not saying he doesn’t deserve it, if he is guilty. It’s simply not your responsibility to give justice to him. We shouldn’t do away with the courts, but doing away with your blog would be an excellent start. That…..is the answer to your question Timmy.
Nobody’s forcing you to read, Johnny. Simply click that little “X” in the upper righthand corner of your screen and you can be on your merry way.
And the last time I checked, I’m not the one giving out justice to Sprind, nor do I ever suggest as much. My opinions on what should happen aren’t binding to anyone. But the First Amendment certainly gives me the right to say what I think about the matter at hand.
Finally, I don’t share your opinion that Sprind will be handed quick justice. He certainly wasn’t the last time he killed someone — which is what the whole point of this post is about.
You said, ” He’s a killer, plain and simple, and he deserves to be treated like one.”
Before you go and call someone a killer, you better know exactly what you are talking about…..and the jury is NOT in yet. Billy may not live to see court from what I understand.
I’ve listened to your father preach for many years. Never have I heard a sermon on how to identify a killer. Never have I heard him preach on kicking a man that’s already on the ground, then spitting in his families face. Your blog does just that. Being a Christian is more than just going to church every Sunday.
I entered your blog when Googling Billy’s story after I heard what happened. I’ll make sure and never enter it again. That will make both of us happy.
John, identifying a killer isn’t really that difficult. A killer, according to the dictionary, is “a person or thing that kills.” Since Sprind previously pleaded guilty to reckless homicide, he himself has admitted that he is a killer. I’m not calling him anything that he hasn’t called himself.
That was before this latest incident. And no, although he hasn’t been found guilty by a jury the second time — yet — that really doesn’t matter. The description of “killer” already applies, no matter what the jury decides this time.
Another word you might want to look up is “justice.”
I’m sorry you don’t like my opinion about Sprind, but it’s hardly kicking him when he’s down. If he didn’t want people expressing outrage over his actions, perhaps he shouldn’t have gotten drunk and gotten behind the wheel of a car — especially when he already knew all too well what could happen.
And any hurt I might do to Billy’s fragile state of mind pales in comparison to the hurt he’s now caused to two families. That’s what really gets me about this, John. You seem so concerned about Billy, but show no concern at all for two innocent families whose lives he has devastated. Talk about some mixed up priorities.
Oh, and Scott — well said.
Thank you Tim. Oh, and just for you, I’ll click on one of the Google Ads, ironically the way John found this site, in an effort to keep it running.
John,
Not sure when I’ve read such nonesense.
John, read your Bible. God instituted civil government to deal with people like Sprind and others who’s actions break both His revealed law and harm others.
As I referenced in my previous quote, its clear from Genesis 9:6 that God’s idea of justice for a murderer is death and he has given the civil government the right and responsibility to carry out that sentence (read Romans 13, specificallyverse 4).
To suggest that because God does not judge us in relation to our eternal state until we die also means that He would have us not pass judgment on those who commit crimes is ludicrous. We’re not condemning Sprind to Hell (the kind of judgment that takes place after death and that only God can mete out) but calling for temporal justice as prescribed by God’s law.
John Jacob Jingle Highmer Schmidt his name is my name to two to.
Don sounds a lot like John.
Tim,
I’ve had some time to think about the many comments that I received last night from your flock.
I believe you are missing the point(s) of my response.
You assume that I have no compassion for the victims families involved. You have no way of knowing that accusation. I assure you I do have compassion for everyone involved. I can also assure you that if I were them, I would want the maximum sentence handed down. That obviously didn’t happen years ago. If your blog would have been about the system, I would emphatically agree. But you take it to a personal level when you call any person by name. Are you now running your own press now? What drove you to create this blog, some sense of civil duty? Isn’t that why we have newspapers?
This blog of yours is not the civil government, as Larry F has suggested. The right and responsibility for justice is in the hands of the elected government, thankfully none of you. Do you actually think that anyone would suggest rapists, killers, and other thugs should run free? That is a ridiculuos question.
I do believe that the 1st Amendment gives you the right to express your beliefs about this case. I don’t believe that it makes it right to do so with personal attacks. Discussing your opinion on this matter in the privacy of your own home to the ones you love is one thing. Taking this opinion to the public arena is quite different. I believe the fact that this blog even exists is a sin.
I suggest talking this blog over with a few other people, possibly even your Sunday school class and/or your dad. If we publically ridicule every individual that has committed grave sin, we would never stop typing. The seats in our churches would be empty if we only let those people in that have done terrible things in their life. They most certainly would not let me in.
As for my priorities, I have my family and God. Nothing mixed up there either.
So much for never entering the blog again, huh John?
Let me get this straight. If a newspaper had published what I wrote, it would have been OK. But since it’s on a blog instead of in a newspaper, somehow that’s not right? Don’t be silly. Welcome to the new media of the 21st century.
Also, who has suggested that we only let people in church who haven’t done terrible things? You’ve not read that from me, nor will you read that from me.
And again, when someone like Sprind goes out and kills someone — not once, but twice — I think he’s deserving of criticism. His faults weren’t private ones, John. I’m not criticizing him for something he did in the privacy of his own home. He’s the one who chose to violate and harm the public. His acts were public acts.
I can cut him some slack if he had just done it as a teenager. Fine. Kids do stupid stuff. But once he went out and killed someone AGAIN, after knowing full well what he was capable of doing — sorry, but the fault is his. Again, if you don’t like people strongly denouncing his actions, maybe you should have told him not to go out and kill someone else.
And I don’t need you to make suggestions about this blog. I have plenty of people who I respect who read it daily — including my father, who, by the way, agrees with me.
Finally, if the existence of this blog is a sin, doesn’t that make you an accessory?
I was obviously not suggesting that the commentors here or the blog itself IS the civil government but that was expressing my opinion regarding what that civil government should be doing with regard to this situation as per the scriptures. Did anyone else think I was saying that? I kind of doubt it.
Though this was not directed at me, I really have to say that you have no understanding John of personal attacks versus descriptions. ‘Murderer’, or ‘killer’ as Tim pointed out earlier, is a pretty specific description. It’s not some kind of nanny nanny boo boo, your momma wear’s combat boots name calling. It describes a person who has done a specific thing as this man obviously has. What would you suggest we call him in order to spare him the indignity of having to face the facts? Perhaps you should also take the newspaper to task for even reporting this given your aversion to the truth being told here.
Wow…. Hey ‘Timmy’, from now on if you must allegedly discuss alleged criminals, please refer to them as alleged criminals. If someone is found allegedly drunk after an alleged accident, please refer to this person as an alleged killer. ‘timmyellsworthy.commy’ is not an alleged court of law. Also, if you feel that you must allegedly kick someone while they are allegedly down, do so while you are completely allegedly hammered so you get more alleged sympathy than the alleged victims, allegedly. Furthermore, if someone with the alleged opinions of the alleged ‘John’ above has heard allegedly many sermons of your alleged father, then I probably have met this alleged ‘John’. I do not recall someone as wacked out as John. So John must be an alleged name- more specifically an alias because I definitely would have remembered.
Allegedly lastly but not leastly, please refrain from talking about anyone else ever again. Please just pray for everyone and not comment in any public forum. Thanks in advance, allegedly.
Maybe we could just say someone lost their life due to his being vehicularly challenged as a result of improper bodily alcohol absorption. I’m sure its not his fault, his parents probably wrecked his self-esteem during potty training. Heck, there might even be an acronym for it that would qualify him for federal money under ADA.
Yeah Larry, we could call it VCAAROIBAA (vechicularly challenged as a result of improper bodily alchohol absorption). That has a nice ring to it, don’t you think?
Listen guys, if you do not have a PHD in somethin’, you don’t know nuthin’.
John,
“The right and responsibility for justice is in the hands of the elected government, thankfully none of you.”
You want to hear something that might scare you? I’m only a Junior in high school - I’ve got my whole life ahead of me. Give me your name and phone number so I can call you up if I ever become a part of our elected government. We’ll have lunch.
- Future President Scott Gladin
[Pssst…I don’t think Jeremy has a PHD in English…] [Oh ya - allegedly.]
Sorry, I have spent too much time down south allegedly.
Hey now - one of the greatest books, “Gone With The Wind” is from down here. What do you got?
The Ellsworth Clan
Riiiiighttt…..
So what do you wise guys do if they come back a month from now and tell the public that he was on prescription medication? You have him guilty before it even goes to court. At least be responsible enough to wait for a real verdict….then the gloves are off.
And as far as telling him not to go out and drink and drive, I haven’t seen him in 20+ years. I no longer live in southern Illinois.
As for me being an accessory to this sin, you’ve got that one wrong. I believe that when you see something that is obviously immoral, you should speak up. The verdict on your blog was in from the start. My mistake was entering this blog in the first place.
If your dad believes you are right, then have him print this one off and present it in the next sermon. I doubt that you are that confident…..but who knows….you go to great lengths to defend your actions.
Prescription medication. Right.
See John, you keep changing your story. You say “the gloves are off” if Sprind is guilty, but previously you said your problem was with “personal attacks” of any kind. You suggest it’s OK for a newspaper to write something negative about Sprind, but not for me. Which is it?
You say, “I believe that when you see something that is obviously immoral, you should speak up.”
Exactly like I did with this post from the beginning. It was immoral and unjust for the courts to be so lenient with Sprind the first time — as it is anytime they let someone guilty of reckless homicide off the hook so easily. And this is what they get for it — another person killed.
I’m finished arguing about it.
I’m assuming you mean that the medicine could impair his judgement by saying he could have been on prescription medication. Well, I happen to suffer from migranes and have quite a bit of prescription painkillers. Now, it says clearly on the bottle, “do not operate machinery.” I’m pretty sure that includes cars. Now, if he was stupid enough to ignore that warning while on narcotics or something, I say he’s still guilty.
I’ve had some time to think about this discussion and it really sickens me. John is right and Tim should be ashamed of his actions. See if I ever come back to this blog.
Well I’m back but only to point out how sinful this blog is. Before posting anything, Tim, you should make sure it is something your dad could use in a sermon. I doubt he would ever say anything about who Jeff Weaver signs with so you should take that topic down at once and repent. I vow never to return to this place!!!
I have returned. Someone has to shine the light and expose you and your works of darkness, Tim.
Meow
If only this blog were mainstream then it would all be okay Marty! Its a lot like slapping old lady’s in the face at church, its just wrong, but out on main street its the cool thing to do!
Meow
Update
Thanks, Jason. I saw this earlier today as well. It’s ridiculous that the maximum sentence he can receive is 14 years.
Well, although I may be seen as overly harsh by some, I’m hopeful that the DA will see that the “possible” additional charges will be made.
This article makes a clear case of Billy’s history of being unable to abide by the laws of this country/state. There’s no question in my mind that Billy deserves every day of whatever judgment a jury of his peers give him - probably more.
It’s such a sad story. From a messed up kid to a messed up adult. Ultimately, very likely an eternally tortured soul.