In this era of correctness, when criminals are cast as victims and the most disgusting behavior is rationalized and excused, it’s reassuring when a voice of authority speaks clearly and steadily for the rest of society.

Handing down a total 19-year sentence Friday on convicted child abuser William N. Sampson, Judge Andrew Meade announced to the Hancock County Superior Court that the accounts of Sampson’s actions were “chilling to read and difficult to repeat.” They were part of a case so “extreme and egregious” that as an attorney and judge he had not seen its equal in an almost 20-year-long career spanning hundreds of child-abuse cases.

The details of Sampson’s actions won’t be repeated here. The acts of cruelty and mental and physical torture were so severe that the 6-year-old boy, now in foster care, will require therapy indefinitely to address the damage inflicted by Sampson. A young life is in fragments. Youth, innocence, gone forever. Love and security have been ripped away. In their place are fear, anger, abandonment, betrayal. That would be a burden for an adult. It’s a backbreaking load for a child.

Weighing the crime against the possible punishment, Meade did something that is not done often enough: he imposed consecutive terms, a judgment call for which victims and their families frequently argue, in vain. When he added Sampson’s 10 years for aggravated assault and the nine for gross sexual assualt, the judge observed that the sentences were “extraordinarily lengthy, but I can find no way to impose a lesser sentence.” Given the opportunity to sit behind the bench last Friday, neither could the public.

This case is useful because it illustrates important issues, some of which are a source of chronic frustration over resources, policy and intentions.

Sampson’s case is extreme, but tragically, is not unusual. He was out on parole for a nearly identical charge when the injuries to the 6-year-old were brought to the attention of authorities. It is part of an ugly pattern of recidivism that is common in the conduct of those who sexually and physically abuse children.

For his part, the convicted abuser might do just 60 percent of his time, 11-plus years. He gets credit for time in jail awaiting trial. A third of his sentence (10 days of every 30) comes right off the top for good behavior. In addition, he can accrue good time, three days a month and an additional two days a month toward the end of this sentence. He could be out and walking around at about the time his young victim becomes an adult. This is not the fault not of the judicial system. Jails are packed. It is a societal and political decision why some categories of criminals are locked up and for how long. A new statute affecting crimes committed after October 1995 may extend the time served by those convicted of serious offenses.

Not everything can be fixed. And some things can’t be averted. An appropriately strict punishment in this case probably won’t deter undesirable behavior by child abusers or pedophiles, but the sentence is valuable as an honest expression of commonly held values. It is one way for society to grasp that there are people who commit wrong and do evil.

Judges, when they do their jobs well, give prominence and visibility to the thoughts of society. They speak for the rest of the community. Judge Meade did in this case.