White supremacist gets 26 years for killing molester
SACRAMENTO — A Northern California white supremacist convicted of killing a child molester was sentenced to 26 years to life in prison, while his wife — convicted of being an accessory — will be released from jail in about two months, The Sacramento Bee reported on Saturday.
Charles Francis Gaskins, 48, was sentenced on Friday after pleading no contest in March for the killing of Neil Hayes in 2009. A probation report said Gaskins was a member of a supremacist group that required its members to attack anyone with a history of child molestation.
Gaskins and his wife — Sandra Sheaves — were living in a home she owned in Carmichael, a Sacramento suburb, when they allowed the 66-year-old Hayes to move in. Gaskins had met Hayes while they were both serving time in prison, The Bee reported.
When Sheaves discovered on the Megan's Law website that Hayes was a registered sex offender, she told Gaskins.
Gaskins and Sheaves confronted Hayes in the garage of the home, with Gaskins killing him by repeatedly hitting him in the head with a large rock, prosecutors said.
As part of his no-contest plea, Gaskins insisted authorities go easy on Sheaves, who also was charged with Hayes' murder.
Prosecutors agreed, allowing her to plead no contest to accessory to murder. Sheaves, 43, was sentenced to eight years in prison.
With time served and other factors, Sheaves is expected to be released in 66 days, according to her attorney, James Warden.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Man caught jumping White House fence
- Judge orders W.Va. agency to release pollution data
- Coast Guard to seek billions to protect Arctic interests
- Academic scandal at University of North Carolina bigger than previously reported
- Social Security recipients to get increase in benefits
- Security at Capitol questioned
- Ferguson slaying of Brown reconstructed in county autopsy
- Immigration work permits could rise under contract
- Coburn’s final ‘Wastebook’ tallies $25B in what he considers ‘pork’
- Official’s job at cybersecurity firm vexes NSA
- Personal use of Secret Service agents on staffer’s behalf draws investigaton