In this task, you are given news articles and you need to generate a highlight, i.e., a short summary, with a maximum length of 10 lines.

Input: Consider Input: (CNN) -- In 2009, du Pont heir Robert H. Richards IV, 47, was convicted of raping his 3-year-old daughter and served no jail time because, a judge said, he would "not fare well" in prison. You are only just hearing about this travesty thanks to a civil suit filed recently by Richards' ex-wife, Tracy Richards, alleging that he also sexually abused his 19-month-old son during the same period. How does this happen? Lady Justice wears a blindfold that's supposed to represent objectivity. Unfortunately, it seems to blind her in some cases, especially when a defendant is wealthy and connected. And Richards is wealthy and connected -- he's the heir to not one, but two fortunes provided to him by his predecessors. In 2008, Richards was indicted on two counts of second-degree child rape for sexually penetrating his daughter repeatedly from 2005 to 2007. Those two counts would have carried mandatory minimum sentences of 10 years each. He was released on $60,000 bail. Richards is unemployed, but with a trust fund and apparently had plenty of cash to hire one of the state's top law firms. His lawyers pushed until Delaware prosecutors offered a deal allowing him the fourth-degree rape plea -- normally reserved for statutory rape cases -- and Richards admitted the assault. At the sentencing, Superior Court Judge Jan Jurden ordered Richards to attend a sex offender rehabilitation program and pay a whopping $4,395 to the Delaware Violent Crimes Compensation Board. (That'll teach him!) She then sentenced him to eight years in prison, but suspended the prison time and put him on probation instead, writing: "Defendant will not fare well in Level 5 setting." Translation for the rest of the world: The rich rapist will "fare well" living as a free man in a house where he raped his own daughter. A few points here: . 1. The purpose of prison is twofold -- to keep criminals segregated from their victims and the rest of society, to punish them by denying them the freedoms that law-abiding citizens enjoy and to rehabilitate them. Prisons are loaded with pedophile rapists who are incarcerated regardless of their ability to deal with the prison environment. If Richards was a relative of the Dipshots, instead of the du Ponts he'd probably be behind bars now. 2. And if the rapist doesn't "fare well" in prison, how is he a good fit for society? As far as I'm concerned, a sex offender who rapes his own child will never "fare well" in society. You can't cure sex offenders of their sexual urges, you can only teach them to try to control them. In the meantime, we have a duty to keep rapists like Richards contained in a location where they have no contact or opportunity to hurt another child for a good long time -- and that place is in jail. 3. The Delaware justice system appears to have also lost sight of Richards' victim -- his own kid! Think she'll "fare well" knowing her rapist was sent home to his mansion and never properly punished? The sentence was outrageous, but blaming the judge is too easy. The truth is the entire system is to blame. People with zero resources to properly defend themselves are funneled into the prison system, while rich rapists like Richards can buy an excellent criminal defense team and secure a deal no public defender could ever dream of getting. But Tracy Richards has not given up. She filed a suit last month seeking compensatory and punitive damages on behalf of her children. In addition to detailing the abuse of his daughter, the lawsuit also alleges that while Roberts was on probation, he admitted to the sexual abuse of his toddler son. It cites probation reports from two different probation officers notifying the Courts in 2010 and 2012 about that suspected abuse. According to the lawsuit, which is supported by paperwork from the earlier criminal case, Richards went into his daughter's room while she slept and penetrated her with his fingers while he masturbated. The suit also alleges that Richards then told the girl "to keep what he had done to her a secret." The girl eventually told her grandmother, who informed Tracy Richards. The girl then recounted the abuse to her pediatrician and New Castle County police, who arrested him. Given all this background, it may seem like a slam dunk of a civil suit, but societal factors -- the advantages of money-- can play a large role in the justice system. You can be certain that if Richards lives off a trust, it's one that du Pont family attorneys have painstakingly set up, and it's probably going to be remarkably hard to pierce. Likely knowing she's in for a fight, Tracy Richards has hired law firm Jacobs & Crumplar, attorneys more than capable of going after people who think they are untouchable. This is the firm that won victims $77.4 million in a settlement with the Catholic Diocese of Wilmington over sex abuse by a priest. I've got my fingers crossed that a civil jury will award jaw-dropping damages in this case and strip Richards of the trust fund and the wealthy status that allowed him to avoid jail -- where he really belongs.

Output: Mel Robbins: Du Pont heir Robert Richards did no jail time in rape of his toddler daughter .
Sentencing judge said, in part, he "would not fare well" in prison. This is not justice .
Robbins: Wealth shouldn't shield him from justice .
Robbins: Civil jury should award big damages strip him of wealth that helped him avoid jail .


Input: Consider Input: (CNN) -- A most awkward and revealing situation has emerged in the heart of Europe, forcing European governments to choose between their principles and their fears, and drawing an uncomfortable gap between Europe's words and its actions. Last July, a bus carrying tourists about to start their vacation suddenly exploded outside the airport in the Bulgarian city of Burgas. The bombing killed five Israelis -- including a pregnant woman -- and a Bulgarian driver. This week, Bulgaria's foreign minister blamed  Hezbollah, saying an investigation showed the attack was carried out by two members of the Iran-linked Lebanese organization. Hezbollah denied the accusation. But Bulgaria says it discovered strong links, with "data showing the financing and connection between Hezbollah and the two suspects." The news shines a light on a most surprising fact: Hezbollah has been conducting business rather comfortably in much of Europe over the years, openly raising money for its operations. Those operations, according to countless investigations in a growing number of countries, include plotting and attempting to kill tourists, diplomats and others. Washington, which labeled Hezbollah a terrorist organization in 1995 after a series of attacks in Lebanon and elsewhere that killed hundreds of Americans, has been pressuring the European Union to do the same. But the EU has resisted. The "terrorist" designation is more than a symbolic label. The label would allow European authorities to freeze funds, control the travel of Hezbollah operatives, and otherwise do what it can to prevent more loss of life. The new secretary of state, John Kerry, urged the EU to "send an unequivocal message to this terrorist group" now that Hezbollah has been linked to an attack on European soil. American officials have told Europe that their inaction is "making it harder to defend our countries." U.S. officials accuse Iran and Hezbollah not only of conducting attacks against civilians around the world, but also of actively supporting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad's brutal repression at home in a conflict that has already left more than 60,000 dead. Opinion: Why Obama is going to Israel . According to a new report from the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, authorities in various countries have uncovered and disrupted nearly 30 different terror plots by Hezbollah or Iran's Quds Force, an arm of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps, in the last couple of years. But Europe, incredibly, continues to waver. EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton reacted to the news from Bulgaria with a clammy statement that there is a "need for reflection." Hezbollah operates in Lebanon as a powerful Shiite political party, social services organization and an intimidating, heavily-armed militia. It has strong support among the country's Shiite population and bitter opposition from Sunnis. EU officials say they fear destabilizing Lebanon, a country perennial teetering on the edge of sectarian violence. They also worry about angering Hezbollah, fearing attacks on European peacekeepers in Lebanon or terrorist attacks on European soil. Judging by recent events, that particular outcome was not prevented by their timid approach. France, in particular, has resisted upsetting Hezbollah. Paris has taken the lead in fighting extremism in Africa, sending troops against militants in Mali and declaring that it is committed to "a relentless struggle against terrorist groups." But it is somewhat less relentless when it comes to Hezbollah. The French take a special interest in protecting their influence in Lebanon, a former colonial holding. A firm Western stance against the group, however, could strengthen Lebanon's struggling pro-Western opposition, which blames Hezbollah for the assassination of many of its members, including former Prime Minister Rafik Hariri. A U.N. tribunal set up to investigate Hariri's 2005 assassination indicted four Hezbollah members. The pattern is well established. Argentinean prosecutors accused Hezbollah of carrying out and Iran of planning and financing the worst terrorist attack in that country, the 1994 bombing of a Jewish Community Center, which killed 85 and injured 300. Western experts generally agree with the assessment of the former U.S. homeland security secretary, who describes Hezbollah as "the most potent terrorist organization in the world." The government of the Netherlands already declared it a terrorist group and Britain named its militant wing a terrorist entity, as if it were separate from the rest of the organization. It is funded by Iran and closely coordinates its moves with Tehran. Over the years, it has been accused of carrying out attacks throughout the world, often in collaboration with Iran. In recent months, as tensions have risen between Iran, on one side, and Israel and the West on the other, Tehran and its Lebanese ally have stepped up their activities to a feverish pace, targeting Israelis diplomats and tourists in India, Cyprus, Thailand and elsewhere. Hezbollah and Iran were linked to a plot to kill the Saudi Ambassador in Washington. Hezbollah's protective ally, Iran, is enduring harsh economic sanctions from the West over its controversial nuclear program, and a number of Iranian nuclear scientists have been assassinated, as have a few key figures in the Hezbollah hierarchy. The circumstances of these assassinations have all been murky, but there is nothing vague about the bombing of buses full of tourists. By any definition of the word it qualifies as terrorism. And clearly, the question is not just symbolic. Europe is letting Hezbollah operate on its soil. By some counts, there are 950 Hezbollah-affiliated individuals in Germany alone. Europe wants to treat Hezbollah as a legitimate political organization, but the group's actions place it squarely outside the realm of legitimacy. As long as Europe closes its eyes to this reality and allows the group to organize, fundraise and hold meetings, it is guilty not only of hypocrisy, but also of passive complicity in Hezbollah's attacks on innocent civilians. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Frida Ghitis .

Output: Frida Ghitis: Bulgaria blamed Hezbollah in bus attack, yet EU still won't call group terrorists .
She says doing so would let EU freeze group's funds, control its travel, averting attacks .
But EU fears angering group, destabilizing Lebanon; let's Hezbollah raise funds in Europe .
Ghitis: In letting group claim legitimacy, EU passively abetting a terrorist organization .


Input: Consider Input: Washington (CNN) -- Equal pay for women, raising the minimum wage, immigration reform, combating climate change and virtually swearing off extended wars. All are catnip for the political left, and all were highlighted by President Barack Obama this week as he informally launched the November election campaign for 36 Senate seats and a new House of Representatives. By flying the Democratic banner so high in Tuesday's State of the Union address and subsequent road show to four states, Obama tried to signal unity with his liberal base and provide the party's candidates with ammunition for elections certain to be "spirited" -- the Washington euphemism for fierce and nasty. "The president wants to highlight differences between the parties and show that Democrats are on the side of ordinary people," said Darrell West, the vice president for governance studies at the Brookings Institution. "That's how he won in 2012, and that's the strategy in 2014." Focus on women, minorities . Hence the emphasis on policies that benefit women and minorities and appeal to younger voters. On Tuesday and in subsequent speeches in Maryland, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin and Tennessee, Obama called for equal pay for women and made sure to include references to the popular first lady. "When women succeed America succeeds," he said Thursday in Waukesha, Wisconsin. "And by the way, when women succeed, men succeed. I don't know about all the guys here, but you know when Michelle is doing good and happy, I am happy, too. I'm just sayin'." The President also called in his State of the Union speech for raising the minimum wage from $7.25 an hour to $10.10, taking the first step himself by announcing he will unilaterally give the raise to workers under federal contracts. Republicans oppose the move in allegiance to their business supporters. According to Brown University political scientist Wendy Schiller, Obama is focusing "on all the things that can help folks immediately, even if the impact is small." "Positioning the Democrats as the party of the working man and woman is old school but absolutely necessary if they are going to successfully counter the Republican resurgence among working class and independent voters, especially women," Schiller told CNN. Obama's 'Mad Men' remark . She cited a remark from Obama's speech Tuesday that received prolonged applause from legislators jamming the packed House chamber -- the President's call for ending unfair workplace policies for women "that belong in a 'Mad Men' episode." "When both the Democratic and Republican members of Congress stood up and applauded after the famous 'Mad Men episode' quote, it was clear that each party sees women as the crucial swing factor in the 2014 elections," Schiller said. On the GOP side, she described the choice of Rep. Cathy McMorris Rodgers of Washington to deliver the party's formal response Tuesday night as "smart politics." Obama's re-election victory in 2012 owed much to a solid majority among women voters, including independents turned off by hardline anti-abortion policies of Republicans. The Democratic-fueled accusation of a GOP "war on women" gained traction with infamous missteps by Republican candidates such as former Rep. Todd Akin of Missouri, who claimed that women rarely get pregnant from "legitimate" rape. Akin lost his bid to unseat Democratic Sen. Claire McCaskill in the Show Me State. Now a concerted Republican outreach to women voters means Democrats "can't just count on another Todd Akin to save the Senate in 2014," Schiller said, adding that "they all have to work to produce federal policies that help working families in order to sustain that advantage." GOP must walk the talk . West said Republicans must follow stated intentions with action when it comes to diversifying their policies and supporters. "They have to become something other than the party of angry white men," he said, adding the GOP also must make "meaningful changes in public policy" because "they can't spin their way out of political problems by highlighting women and minorities." While specifying issues advantageous to Democrats, Obama also has jabbed at Republicans this week on another matter that resonates with voters -- the perception that political intransigence led by tea party conservatives stymies progress in Washington. Republicans got the blame for last year's highly unpopular 16-day government shutdown when conservatives led by GOP Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas tried to link a funding measure to dismantling the 2010 health care reforms they detest. To Obama, Republicans must decide "whether they're going to waste time creating new crises that slow things down, or whether they're going to spend time creating new jobs and opportunity," he said Thursday. In what he depicted as a presidential declaration of independence from congressional dysfunction, Obama said "I want to work with them, but I can't wait for them." Immigration reform . Another topic: reforming the immigration system, with Obama and Democrats seeking a path to legal status for the millions of people living illegally in the country. Republicans are desperate to reduce the Democratic advantage among Hispanic Americans, the nation's largest minority demographic. But House Republicans remain unlikely to support a comprehensive Senate plan that passed with bipartisan support and has Obama's backing. Instead, House Speaker John Boehner and other Republicans call for a piecemeal approach to try to show empathy with Latinos while avoiding a backlash by conservatives that would worsen an already damaging internal GOP rift. On other issues, Obama reiterated his push for unspecified action against climate change and made clear that with the Afghanistan war finally winding down, he has no intention of committing America to another prolonged engagement. "I will not send our troops into harm's way unless it is truly necessary; nor will I allow our sons and daughters to be mired in open-ended conflicts," he said. "We must fight the battles that need to be fought, not those that terrorists prefer from us." He also refused to back down from withering criticism from the political right about the health care reforms known as Obamacare, offering a strong defense of the benefits and telling Republicans to quit trying to undermine the law. Democratic unity? Schiller said Democrats need to remain unified on Obamacare and other issues, to run as a national party as much as possible even though the November elections are at the state and district level. "When Obamacare was brought up in the State of the Union, they all stood up and applauded, even Democratic senators who could be in trouble on the issue in their re-election races," she said. "If there are any cracks in that united front for the Democrats as champions of middle class and working folks, it undermines not only their 2014 chances, but the remainder of the Obama presidential agenda." While unity may exist in policy, some Democratic candidates facing tough elections don't want to campaign with Obama due to public opposition to Obamacare and slower-than-desired economic growth and job creation. On Thursday, Republican Gov. Scott Walker welcomed Obama to his state with an airport handshake, but Walker's Democratic challenger, Mary Burke, was nowhere to be seen. Republicans believe they can win control of the Senate by taking six seats from Democrats in November. The House is likely to remain in Republican hands, with the outcomes of 90% of the races considered safely predictable and Democrats needing to win most of the others to regain the majority, according to West. "It's an uphill battle for Democrats to retake the House," he said, calling the situation "pretty much a matter of arithmetic."


Output: President Obama's road show informally launches the mid-term election campaign .
Obama sounds themes benefiting Democrats in his State of the Union address .
The goal: highlight differences with Republicans on issues important to ordinary Americans .
Both parties seek to strengthen their support among women voters .