Suppose you had a disagreement with your neighbor.  And that neighbor decided to settle things by physically attacking you in a way that left you with six broken ribs, a prolonged hospital stay, ongoing physical pain and subsequent additional surgery.

How would you feel if a judge decided to give that neighbor a sentence of less than 1% the maximum which could have been imposed, on the grounds that he was really a very nice guy with an excellent background?

Welcome to the world of Senator Rand Paul (R-KY).  Because that is exactly what happened to him at the hands of his neighbor, Rene Boucher, and the sentence meted out by a Clinton-appointed judge.

But, I am happy to say that, based on a just-made ruling by the 6th Court of Appeals, this is going to change.

From Alex Griswold’s article at, we have this:

In 2017, Paul was tackled from behind by his next-door neighbor Rene Boucher over a mundane disagreement about lawn clippings. Paul was left with six broken ribs and a substantial hospital stay that forced him to take a leave of absence from the Senate. Paul testified that he suffered constant “intense pain” as a result of his injuries, and later required further surgery in August 2019.

Boucher could have received up to 10 years in prison for an assault of a member of Congress that inflicted personal injury, but prosecutors sought 21 to 27 months in light of his acceptance of responsibility.

District Court judge Marianne O. Battani instead sentenced Boucher to only 30 days, arguing that Boucher had an “excellent background,” was “an educated person,” and “participated in the community in [his medical] practice and in [his] church.”

Prosecutors appealed the case, arguing that the light sentence was “substantively unreasonable” compared with similar cases. The Sixth Circuit agreed Monday, noting that Congress specifically instructed courts not to give undue weight to class and education when sentencing defendants.

The judges concluded there was “no compelling justification for Boucher’s well-below-Guidelines sentence” and vacated the lower court’s ruling.

My one problem with Mr. Griswold’s article is its assumption that the attack on Paul was over lawn clippings.

It turns out Rene Boucher was a registered Democrat, avidly anti-Trump and in favor of his impeachment?

Is it possible the fact that Senator Paul is a Republican who often (not always) supports President Trump might have has more to do with Boucher’s attack than his lawn clippings?

No one can know for sure.  But if I were a betting man, that’s what my money would be on.

In any event, I applaud the court for vacating that ridiculous slap-on-the-wrist sentence (by a Clinton appointee, let’s remember) and opening the door for a more realistic punishment.

The sooner the better.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *