CRIME AND PUNISHMENT: CONTRASTING CASES

Look at these two punishments and tell me if they seem fair:

A firefighter found guilty of attempting to manufacture meth is sentenced
to roughly eight years in prison. He receives a host of other sentences,
all of them running concurrently, for related charges.

A police officer found guilty of attempted aggravated criminal sodomy,
attempted aggravated sexual battery and aggravated assault faces --
assuming he has no criminal history and assuming his sentences run
consecutively -- a maximum of 71/2 years.

These aren't mere hypotheticals, but real-life examples that came to light
last week when, within one day of each other, former Kansas City, Kan.,
Fire Capt. David J. Bortka and former Kansas City, Kan., Police Officer
Brian Dupree found themselves on the wrong side of a courtroom.

Bortka received his sentence Thursday, more than a year after he
participated in a drug deal at a fire station across the street from Turner
Middle School. The sentence would have been longer had the judge not
departed from the sentencing guidelines.

Dupree pleaded no contest last Wednesday, less than a year after his
victim, a Hispanic undocumented resident who didn't speak English, bravely
came forward with the allegations.

Both men were on duty when they committed their crimes. Both men, it goes
without saying, undermined the public's trust.

There are, however, stark differences between the two cases. Dupree preyed
on one of the most vulnerable victims you could imagine. He put his victim
in the back of his squad car where the doors could not be opened from the
inside. And he allegedly showed his gun in a vain attempt to get his victim
to comply with a demand for oral sex.

Bortka, no matter how egregious his behavior, did not directly use the
power of his position to commit a crime. The closest thing to a proven
"victim" in his case, besides the fire department's reputation and the
public trust, was the woman who arranged the transaction on behalf of
police investigators.

And yet Bortka, not Dupree, faces the harsher punishment.

Bortka, of course, does not deserve our sympathy. He may even deserve more
than the eight years he got. Remember that a police search of Bortka's
residence yielded drugs, a gun, more than $7,000 in cash and ingredients to
make meth.

It's difficult to fathom that a leader in your fire department was
contributing to a market that has destroyed lives and exacerbated crime.
It's just as difficult to imagine why a firefighter would participate in an
activity known to be an extreme fire hazard.

Still, Bortka's actions don't offend in the same way Dupree's do. Bortka
was a public employee in a position of authority who should have known
better. Dupree was a public employee who used his power to commit a crime.

So why does he a face a less severe punishment than Bortka did? On one
level, the answer is complicated, mirroring the complexity of sentencing
guidelines that are created for a host of reasons -- from controlling
prison populations to deterring drug dealers who think they can move to
states with less severe penalties.

Several years ago, for example, Kansas nearly tripled the maximum sentence
for manufacturing meth. It did this, in part, because Missouri had stiffer
penalties. But as anyone who has seen a murderer get off with a light
sentence knows, relying on sentencing guidelines to measure justice will
drive you crazy.

On another level, the answer is quite simple. Dupree faces a lighter
sentence than Bortka because the thing that offends us most about his crime
- -- the abuse of his authority -- is not a crime in Kansas. It makes no
difference that he was a cop when he approached his victim. That fact
doesn't translate into a harsher sentence. In the law's eyes, you see,
Dupree is just your run-of-the-mill sexual offender.