Judge John McKeon (Facts & Photos)

Judge John McKeon
Judge John McKeon

Who Is John McKeon?

John McKeon is a district judge who oversees a three-county area of eastern Montana.

John McKeon Rape Case Controversy

Judge John McKeon is under fire for his decision to give a very light sentence to a father that raped his 12-year-old daughter. McKeon gave the father a 30-year suspended sentence after his guilty plea and ordered him to spend 60 days in jail over the next six months, with credit for the 17 days already served.

Montana statute requires a minimum sentence of 25 years in prison for anyone convicted of rape, incest or sexual abuse of a child 12 or younger but has a loophole that allows judges to order treatment outside of prison time.

McKeon issued a statement: “The sentence may not be a popular decision by certain members of the general public, but it is a just and proper decision given the record before the Court and the law the Court is sworn to uphold.”

John McKeon Impeachment

A petition is circulating asking that Judge John McKeon be impeached and removed from his position as a result of the light sentence he handed down.

John McKeon Photos

Judge John McKeon
Judge John McKeon

For more news like this follow on Twitter or Facebook

Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Clinton T-Shirts
Don't Blame Me, I Voted For Clinton T-Shirts

  • Andy Baumgartner

    Is he a Mormon? If so that explains everything, those cultists treat women worse than Muslims, and their “men” are absolutely proud of it! Case in point that sister wives show

  • dbtheonly

    First off, anytime a news story is done on a legal issue that looks absurd, they’re going to get it wrong. They’ll leave out some key fact, miss some key evidence, muck it up somehow.

    So here. At first this looks absurd, 60 days for rape of a 12 year old daughter.

    The first question though what is the purpose of prison. Punishment, prevention of future crime, rehabilitation, the satisfaction of seeing someone behind bars? Any ? All?

    So, from what little beyond the basic I could find, and I’ll gladly defer to your research skills;

    1. The Defendant has a life sentence as a sex offender and must register as such forever.
    2. Defendant has entered a treatment program and the continued suspension of his sentence is conditioned on his continued progress in that program.
    3. The Prosecution could find no one to urge a harsher sentence at the sentencing phase of the trial.
    4. Several people, including the victim’s Mother, urged the suspension of the sentence.
    5. Defendant apparently has a healthy relationship with his two sons. (Don’t ask me how that happens. But there was testimony to that effect.)
    6. Defendant apparently has a functional relationship with this wife(!)

    Then on the issue of impeachment, Judge McKeon is due to retire in a few months. He’ll be retired by the time any impeachment action can be taken. So, other than hitting his pension, there’s not much to be achieved by impeachment.

    There’s a lot more to the story.

  • Dave

    It is ironic how we severely prosecute ranchers for something that didn’t severely injure someone (maybe threatened damage, but no injury), but when it comes to physical and psychological harm, it is treated as a minor misdemeanor infraction. Those ranchers served their time but then had to go back and serve more time because of the “mandatory sentencing”.

    This is not about having a suspension of a sentence because of being a “good guy” and having requests from the victim’s mother or from the sons. But the state statute is what should be observed. If being lenient, then it should be at the lowest end of the crime’s category. Looking up what MT has for the penalties (cause I’m more familiar with IL law residing in IL)

    -Imprisonment for a term of 100 years, a fine not to exceed $50,000, and shall be ordered to complete the educational, cognitive and behavioral phases of a sexual offender treatment program; and if offender is released after the mandatory minimum period of imprisonment (25 years), offender is subject to supervision by the department of corrections for the remainder of the offender’s life and shall participate in continuous, satellite-based monitoring
    -Life imprisonment or imprisonment for a term of not less than four years or more than 100 years and a fine not to exceed $50,000
    -Life imprisonment, or imprisonment for a term not to exceed 100 years, or a fine not to exceed $50,000

    So mandatory minimum of 25 years, so give him that. Maybe early release after half of the sentence is served and review of rehab.

    (on soap box now)

    This is the problem with our justice system. Being a pro-2A I find it ridiculous how our politicians try to “protect” us be creating stricter laws that violate the 2A. When in actuality it is the CRIMINAL who is the danger, not the law abiding citizen. We should punish the crimes. I’m not a promoter for things like drug usage like marijuana or anything, but we put them in prison for drug usage but then do releases to violent criminals who are the ones who need to be kept away from society. You can rehab a drug user easier than someone who has committed violent sexual offenses. It doesn’t matter if it is family. The victim will most likely suffer psychological effects that will affect her and other people around. She has a higher chance of becoming a habitual drug user, alcoholic, suicidal, low self-esteem, etc. due to the psychological trauma. She may turn out fine if she is strong enough, but the probability is higher because of it. I am all for keeping a family together, but how can you keep a family to keep family values if the daughter has issues of trust and her father and now mother who defended her father. This is why I am against this, especially since there is already a mandatory minimum sentence. As I said, start with that, and then let him work for his freedom and release with probation. I know someone who spent more time for forgery, which may have financially hurt the victim, but in no way really physically or psychologically affected them for life, just maybe the mistrust between the victim and the felon.

    (off soap box)

    The judge should by all means follow with the statutory requirements. If the people wish to change it, they have their general assembly rewrite the criminal punishments for this type of crime. Not for the judge to change at the drop of a hat.

    • dbtheonly

      “Montana statute requires a minimum sentence of 25 years in prison for
      anyone convicted of rape, incest or sexual abuse of a child 12 or
      younger but has a loophole that allows judges to order treatment outside
      of prison time.”

      Our friend, and gracious host, characterizes this as a “loophole” I’d suggest the less pejorative “provision”. No law is violated. A specific exemption is utilized.

      Until very recently the Second Amendment guaranteed your right to get drafted. But that is an argument for another day.

      Seizing Federal Property is no minor issue. Look what resulted from an armed militia seizing Fort Sumter in South Carolina.

      The issue remains, what is the purpose of the prison system? Is it strictly incarceration?

      But my key point is still, the Lamestream Media, intentionally, or otherwise, will miss key facts in reporting legal cases. Whether this is done through ignorance, incompetence, on an attempt to click-bait, is unclear. But one should hold the outrage until the facts are clear.