Teen with 47 IQ gets 100 years in sex abuse case
Case stems from charges involving the fondling of a 6-year-old neighbor

updated 6:06 p.m. ET, Wed., June 10, 2009

PARIS, Texas - A teenager who has profound mental disabilities was sentenced to 100 years in prison after pleading guilty to charges in a sex abuse case involving his 6-year-old neighbor.

Aaron Hart, 18, of Paris, was arrested and charged after a neighbor found him fondling her stepson in September. The teen pleaded guilty to five counts, including aggravated sexual assault and indecency by contact, and a jury decided his punishment.

Lamar County Judge Eric Clifford decided to stack the sentences against Hart after jurors settled on two five-year terms and three 30-year terms, The Dallas Morning News reported Wednesday. The judge said neither he nor jurors liked the idea of prison for Hart but they felt there was no other option.
Story continues below ↓advertisement | your ad here

"In the state of Texas, there isn't a whole lot you can do with somebody like him," Clifford said.

Diagnosed as mentally disabled
Hart has an IQ of 47 and was diagnosed as mentally disabled as a child. He never learned to read or write and speaks unsteadily.

Despite being a target of bullies, he was courteous, well-behaved and earned money by doing chores for neighbors, supporters said. His parents say he'd never acted out sexually.

"He couldn't understand the seriousness of what he did," said his father, Robert Hart. "I never dreamed they would think about sending him to prison. When they said 100 years — it was terror, pure terror, to me."

Jurors said they sent the judge notes during deliberations in February, asking about alternatives to prison, but didn't get a clear answer. They believed the judge would order concurrent sentences, jurors said.

District Attorney Gary Young said he sympathized with Hart's situation but stands by his decision to prosecute on five counts. Prosecutors commonly pursue several charges for a single incident to see which the jury will support.

Diversion program not an option
Young said a diversion program was not an option since the law doesn't allow that for serious felonies.

"I hope people will remember he committed a violent sexual crime against a little boy," he said.

Hart's appellate attorney, David Pearson, said the court-appointed doctor did the bare minimum to assess competency and ran tests geared for mental illness, not mental retardation.

He said an appeal will be filed.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/31213058/

Only in Texas.

honestly...i wouldn't know how to handle it...would you if your son was fondled???? it's not an easy case. the man is mentally disabled...but something needed to be done so it wouldn't happen again...just not sure what

..obviously the court system that convicted him..has an I.Q less that 47...

The 6yo probably has more of a mental capacity. He was not accused of raping the boy. I'm sure the boy was not traumatized by this, at least he wouldn't have been before all this drama over it. What has been accomplished here? How would this kind of thing have been handled if it were two six year olds?

Yes, the boy could have been traumatized by this. He was fondled by someone that was physically an adult. That's who the child saw. It does affect a child.

I do believe that the 18 year old should have never, ever received the punishment that he was given. It's insane. Hopefully, something better will come out of the appeal.

I don't know what can be done with the 18 year old in this situation. He can't be allowed to go around touching children inappropriately.

This person cannot read,write, or even fully speak.He does not know what he did.

It's a tough situation. I don't know the answer. I do know, though, that he can't be touching children like that.

I'm wondering about this part, btw: "He was courteous, well-behaved and earned money by doing chores."

I wonder what kind of chores that they are talking about. When my child was 6, they couldn't do too many chores. lol

I dont know what is the problem here. The retard did an unspeakable crime against a child, and is barred from doing that to another kid, so it is well worth the Texan's taxpayer dollars to incarcerate him for his life. Why would anyone want him back on the street at age 18 in the midst of other children.

There are supposed to be facilities and services for people such as this. And it doesnt matter what he has done because he does not have the capacity to know right from wrong!!He is blameless

Yes, he should be in a facility for people like him. He wouldn't survive in prison.

Yes, he has diminished mental capacity.

He still can't be touching children. If he had done that to my child!

Another thing......he is going to someday be 30, 40, 50, and possibly still be doing this. What would you say if he was those ages and doing it?

Because he does not have the ability to understand what he did