I think the real question is whether or not he deserved this lenient sentence. I am going to assume that he does not have any priors and continue from there. Using a baseball bat to attack someone is not just assault it is assault with a deadly weapon, which no matter the justification is taking it too far. I do not think that violence is necessarily justified here because the court is not supposed to care about subjective emotions. The court is supposed to determine whether the defendant is guilty or not guilty and give a fair sentence based on the verdict which I do not think was done here. This kind of impulsive violence is dangerous and setting a precedent like this is very dangerous.
Yes, the sentence of probation was appropriate and not that unexpected for a husband who assaulted his wife's heoin dealer. Probation for assault is not that uncommon if there was not a significant prior history of violence, and protecting a family member from harm is a pretty good justification for using violence.
Yes, it looks like the husband who assaulted his wife's heroin dealer probably got off easy with probation, but maybe that's not a bad thing. The judge likely looked at the motivation behind the assault and felt the husband was justified in his anger. The punishment is for the actual act, rather than the motive.
No, a husband who assaults the person that is supplying a deadly drug to his wife is not getting off easy by receiving probation. Assuming the assault was based on concern for his wife, the circumstances justify a lighter punishment than an unprovoked attack. Probation ensures physical harm is properly condemned, but also acknowledges the extenuating circumstances of the assault.
In this case I am going to speak in support of the fact that Edwin Sobony II of Ohio who beat his wife's heroin dealer with a baseball bat received probation only as opposed to up to eight years in prison. The judge presides over a community riddled with drug problems. He also received numerous letters of support for the defendant providing reasons that made it clear the defendant would be unlikely to repeat the crime.