LJWorld.com weblogs The Lawrence Crime Blotter

Lawrence woman sentenced to 10 years for crack cocaine

Advertisement

A Lawrence woman has been sentenced to a decade in prison for her role in a crack-cocaine distribution ring.U.S. District Court Judge John W. Lungstrum on Tuesday sentenced Lauren A. McGoff to 10 years' imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release. McGoff, age 25 at the time of her plea this summer, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine within 1,000 feet of a public elementary school. The case dates to 2004, when Lawrence police raided homes in the 800 block of Connecticut Street and 2100 block of Naismith Drive.Two co-defendants, Christopher L. Mumford and Earnest C. Martin, both age 30 at the time their pleas were entered earlier this year, have been convicted in the case and will be sentenced Jan. 29. Mumford pleaded guilty to using a gun in connection with a drug-trafficking crime, and Martin pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute crack cocaine.Martin previously had sought to withdraw his plea after he entered it, but he dropped that request.-contributed by [Eric Weslander.][1] [1]: http://www2.ljworld.com/staff/eric_weslander

Comments

doc1 8 years, 5 months ago

wow in this county thats more than what you would get if you killed someone.

Crispian Paul 8 years, 5 months ago

It is really unfortunate too that there is a 100 to 1 sentencing disparity between crack and powder cocaine. There is a bill in the works that would drop this, but still to 20 to 1 sentencing ratio. I.e. for one gram of crack you could get 100 years vs. one gram of powder cocaine. Certainly lends credence to the idea that there is a disparity between sentences recieved by upper income criminals and those who are lower income.

monkeyspunk 8 years, 5 months ago

doc: Its more time than the woman who was found guilty of felony child endangerment got when it was blatantly apparent that she shook the child. There is a chance that child will develop mental disabilities later in life, while her "attacker" gets probation.

compmd 8 years, 5 months ago

doc, that's irrelevant and inflammatory. This was a federal case. The federal statutes regarding drug offenses have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with the sentencing guidelines for murder in the state of Kansas.

oldgoof 8 years, 5 months ago

Well, sentence balancing is a serious issue. Ten years is a sentence longer than Andy Fastow received, who stole billions of dollars (and thousands of peoples retirements) in Enron.

Steve Jacob 8 years, 5 months ago

Crack-cocaine does not grow like weeds. And people who use crack will kill to get it.

introversion 8 years, 5 months ago

srj-

I understand what you're alluding to- how crack cocaine does not grow like... "Weeds." I also agree with the point that you're generally making.

However, by bringing in the element of killing over one drug and not another, you're really just leaving yourself open for some weirdo leftist to come in with some stat or trumped up story about someone getting killed over "Weeds." Hopefully my statement will somehow jinx it. Guess we'll have to see.

TheGoldenBoy 8 years, 5 months ago

It does sound very stiff to hear about a person being sentenced to that much time just for one drug charge conviction! It is the american taxpayer that gets victimized with this because of the amount of money it costs to keep someone incarcerated for a decade.

oxandale 8 years, 5 months ago

wow, chris mumford.. i remember him from highschool. Another classmate that will end up doing time.

Sigmund 8 years, 5 months ago

Wow, to read the comments one would think this was a simple user. I reread the article, "pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute more than 50 grams of crack cocaine within 1,000 feet of a public elementary school."

This is a Federal rap and distributing crack with the aggravated of within 1000 feet of a school. Ten years is good for me, especially if this piece of work was dealing to school kids.

Emily Hadley 8 years, 5 months ago

Wow, of all the crack busts in East Lawrence, I don't hear about too many.

The big deal here is that she was close to a school. It makes the penalties much stiffer.

I wouldn't exactly call drug dealing a victimless crime, but it sucks that really dangerous and violent people get probation and fines and a 25-year old selling stimulants gets 10 years of hard time. That seems like so much time in a prison environment that it would make successful rehabilitation a lot harder, aside from being incredible expensive.

I'd think supervised probation, where you have to provide for yourself while staying clean, might do a lot more good for someone.

Sigmund 8 years, 5 months ago

If drug dealers were generally responsible people capable of staying out of trouble and staying clean, then supervised probation might be a good idea. However, it has been my experience that drug dealers aren't responsible human beings interested in doing the right thing leaving society few options, punishment.

Mike Blur 8 years, 5 months ago

Also srj - crack users generally do not kill people. The perps of street violence are generally PO'd "gangstas" who get in a wad because someone "looked at them wrong."

In my personal eperience - and yes, I do have personal experience, being one of the few non-drug users that lived in a neighborhood of KCMO - crack heads are largely benign, if a bit needy. The garden-variety on-the street crackhead is more likely to practically beg you for $10 to give you a BJ. I was seriously weirded out the first time someone asked me - but after awhile, it's easy to tell the crack heads no.

I saw plenty of Jags, Vettes and Benz's roll through my lower-middle class KCMO neighborhood back in the day. I bet there were more than a few wealthy CEO types whose trophy wives didn't fully satisify them anymore, and they rolled into midtown KC looking for "relief" as it were.

In short - crack heads don't kill, but crack does. Definitely.

alongtheway 8 years, 5 months ago

i've considered adding a blog to this series of entries for 2 days; making sure to respond accordingly... this person '' lauren" was lucky to have the option of pleading guilty to only one of the offenses of which she was indicted. those who read one story without doing researching the original indictment, [ which is available to the public due to a wonderful resource of information open to the public called the "open public records act." i would suggest that those who are so eager to respond without all of the facts are showcasing their ignorance and laziness. this woman has had numerous charges filed against her in the federal courts. ten years is a long time- don't get me wrong. i'm not here to condemn, only to say that the true victims are the families of the addicts themselves along with the families of those in the profitable business of distribution. it will be the families that will suffer right along with her. the addicts families suffer- those who get caught and convicted suffer...everyone loses. this is exactly why we need to send a message to the public that this is not what we want in our neighborhoods. along the way to a better future, there are bound to be casualties- some of them deserved, and others completely undeserved. on another note, who cares if it's powder instead of crack...they both kill in the end. one way or another, they destroy people, families, and ultimately our souls. think about this entry prior to responding and see if it makes any sense to you. the bottom line is this- if it's near a school, in the city, on the streets, out in the country, or out of a drug house, we the public have no idea where it will end up... next thing you know you could be folding clothes and putting them away in your childs- husbands- wives- mothers- or fathers drawer and find a bag of drugs. is this really what we want for our country? i for one answer NO!

Tom Jones 8 years, 5 months ago

I think its all just really sad. If there weren't so many people out there smoking it, they wouldn't be selling it. I think we should focus more on that issue. and is the sentence gonna even do that much good? it seems a little harsh when so many other people get away with it day after day.

alongtheway 8 years, 5 months ago

kuhwk80- YES PEOPLE SMOKE IT! BUT....if it wasn't for the people who sell it, they may quit by choice or be forced to quit because it's not available. the latter is more likely than the former. it is also true that these users may switch to a different drug. this is unfortunate, but still a valid point worth thinking about . if i had children i would sure feel safer without these people { armed dealers} on the streets. i am glad that i am not a judge, because it is a very difficult decision to sentence a young woman to that amount of time, but at the same time this young woman made a choice...some choices we make in life have small consequences, while others have vastly greater ones. this is what this young woman found. i didn't make the laws. the judge didnt make the laws; he or she only enforce the law as it is written. "Lauren" made a plea for those ten years. nobody forced her. she did what was in her best interest by not going to trial. if you would just take the time to research this article and the other articles related to this story, you may see things differently. i challenge you to do this and then respond again. people DIE - ONCE AGAIN- PEOPLE DIE DUE TO THIS DRUG. i say that we need to cut it off at the source, or at least as close to the source a we can get. in this case that seems to be what the public has gotten. signed - concerned citizen

laughingatallofu 8 years, 5 months ago

Posted by parkay (anonymous) on December 6, 2006 at 5:48 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Throw away the key to their prison cells. <<<

OK, parkay. I'm with you. Where's the money going to come from? Raise taxes? OK. Tell me that you're in agreement with me. Come on, don't be shy. Or, maybe we should cut funding for edukashun---

Kansas----as backward as you think.

laughingatallofu 8 years, 5 months ago

Marion,

You've described why the "War on Drugs" has failed miserably.

"Just Say No" isn't gonna cut it. Poor Nancy.

But, let's lock 'em up and throw away the key. Thismakesmefeelgood. mmmmmm.

laughingatallofu 8 years, 5 months ago

<<< Posted by alongtheway (anonymous) on December 14, 2006 at 6:10 p.m. (Suggest removal)

kuhwk80- YES PEOPLE SMOKE IT! BUT....if it wasn't for the people who sell it, they may quit by choice or be forced to quit because it's not available.

Are you talking about tobacco? Interesting, what our society's priorities are.

alongtheway 8 years, 5 months ago

Marion, come on now. if you are going to post a blog for people to read, it would [ or should i say that it ought to be ] taken a little more seriously if you at least spell checked your blogs. another problem with our society- people eager to open their mouth without thinking or at least without a simple click of a button to have a computer correct the mistakes in grammar. no offense intended, but in this world we are judged and or respected by our production. if we produce; if we produce effectively; and most of all if we check our work... or at least the finished product.

alongtheway 8 years, 5 months ago

laughfingatallofu, I'm not talking about tobacco; but of course you knew that. i agree our governments priorities are not necessarily always in the best interest of the general public, but to make an analogy between cigarettes and the selling and manufacturing crack cocaine right next to an elementary school is a bit of a stretch for me. i must also say that i agree with a lot of what you have to say. these people, [ drug dealers ] do not and should not be anywhere but locked in a cage. that sounded a bit harsh, but it's true. if they cannot function in the country we live in, and obey the LAWS of the land than there need to be consequences. in this case i believe justice was served. at the same time i don't believe that we should glory in their downfall, nor allow ourselves to be happy when someone else is hurting. that serves no useful purpose, unless we are simply uncaring people. we are talking about another human being. i am glad these people are out of my neighborhood....for a long time. p.s. if cigarettes were illegal, and people knew that they would face hard time for smoking cigarettes, than i bet we would have a lot fewer nicotine addicts. i can't wait to hear your response-

sublime 8 years, 5 months ago

As whitney wuold say,"crack is wack"

classclown 8 years, 5 months ago

Posted by alongtheway (anonymous) on December 15, 2006 at 5:05 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Marion, come on now. if you are going to post a blog for people to read, it would [ or should i say that it ought to be ] taken a little more seriously if you at least spell checked your blogs. another problem with our society- people eager to open their mouth without thinking or at least without a simple click of a button to have a computer correct the mistakes in grammar. no offense intended, but in this world we are judged and or respected by our production. if we produce; if we produce effectively; and most of all if we check our work... or at least the finished product.

===================================

The same can be said about proper capitalization, punctuation, sentence and paragraph structure, etc.

alongtheway 8 years, 4 months ago

The same can be said about proper capitalization, punctuation, sentence and paragraph structure, etc.

blah, blah, I'm just glad that people are held accountable for their actions in federal court.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.