The sentences of an Amish cult leader and seven of his followers have been reduced after the eight were found guilty of being involved in a series of hair and beard-cutting attacks on fellow members of their community. The resentencing for Samuel Mullet, Senior, and his followers came after an appeals court in the United States overturned their sentencing in 2014.
In February 2013, ten men and six women from the Amish community had been sentenced by a federal court in Cleveland after they carried out attacks on a total of nine people from September 2011 to November 2011. The defendants, each of whom is part of Mullet’s extended family, decided to challenge the constitutionality of the federal Hate Crimes
Act on grounds of it being too broad. However, United States District Court Judge Dan Polster rejected that claim in 2012, even before their trials began.
Yet, on March 2, Mullet’s 15-year sentence was reduced to ten years and nine months. Additionally, the sentences of four others, who initially received seven years, were reduced to five years, and the sentences of the remaining three, who had earlier received five years, were reduced to three years and seven months. The remaining eight were resentenced to time already served.
The 2012 trial revolved around Mullet, who is the leader of an Amish offshoot in Bergholz, Ohio, where approximately 20 families live across his 880-acre farmland.
The Amish believe that the Bible expects men to grow their beards, women to grow their hair and both to refrain from shaving or cutting once they are married. Cutting off their beard or hair post marriage is considered a serious insult, as both beard and hair are considered sacred by the Amish.
In October 2011, Mullet said during an interview that he knew about the attacks but was not involved in them. But, as reported later, Mullet was convicted of seven charges, including conspiracy and lying to the Federal Bureau of Investigation about his alleged involvement.
Defense attorneys agreed that the attacks had taken place but denied that they were part of what the government had labeled as hate crimes. They said instead that the attacks were part of a personal family dispute, also commonly referred to as family feuds.
On Monday, prosecutors said that the former sentences should have remained unchanged, due to the defendant’s motivation behind the attacks as well as the fact that the former sentences were already lower than what federal guidelines expect to hand over.
While Mullet had not directly participated in any of the attacks, he was accused of exercising tight control over members of his community and hiding evidence.
Photo Credits: Amish Clothesline
