60 Days Sentence for Child Rape in Vt.

[LauraR]

This kind of sentence drives me crazy. I think it reflects a judge who doesn't see a child as a "whole" human being. How can you value a child that little and discount the suffering the child went through that easily? It's like the child was victimized twice, by the perpetrator and the judge who refused to really stand up for justice.
I'm a classic liberal who thinks our government has been too harsh in sentencing for drug cases, but too lenient in violent crimes and sex crimes. I actually am for the death penalty, but with higher standards of proof if it is applied.
As for the issue of statutory vs. forcible rape, of course they are both wrong, but there is a big difference in severity and the sentences should not be as harsh for statutory rape. In some states kids as young as 14 can get married, which would mean the state is sanctioning repeated statutory rape. Something of a mixed message IMHO.

 

[cardaway]

Of course this is one of those things where individual circumstances of each case should be taken into consideration.

That about covers it.

 

[chobie]

That about covers it.

Just as an example, if it was a person in a position of authority over my child, like a teacher, I would probably press charges even if my child was "in love" with the person. That would be an abuse of power, which would negate any "consent" in my opinion.

 

[ford family]

Is this supposed to be some kind of insult?

Quod erat demonstrandum.

ford family

 

[yeartolate]

I completely disagree with the sentence, but someone please assure me that if he violates any aspect of his parole he will be required to do the 10 years to life that was the original sentence (before all but 60 days were suspended)

I really hope there is some provision for his parole officer to send him to serve the sentence for any break in parole. (I need to hold out some hope that this guy will be sent to prison for some real time)

This case is awful.

I haven't read the whole thread - what do the parents of the child think?

 

[WIcruizer]

And I don't see anywhere that "liberals are tolerant of pedophiles." Perhaps that ONE judge was way more tolerant than he should have been. And he's a liberal. Based on that evidence alone, however, you absolutely *cannot* conclude that all liberal judges would behave in the same manner.

I don't think anyone has said ALL liberal judges would have made this decision. We're saying a liberal judge is more likely to make decisions like this. Anyone who can't see the plain truth that liberal judges tend to be liberal in their decisions are not capable of honest discussion.

That doesn't mean liberal judges can't be tough on crime and give out long sentences. It also doesn't mean conservative judges never give a slap on the wrist. But in the big picture, with thousands of judges, how can anyone deny liberal judges are more likely to make liberal decisions?

 

[LuvDuke]

We're saying a liberal judge is more likely to make decisions like this.

And the basis for that opinion is:

1) Studies

2) Polls

3) Back passage

I pick #3.

Here's a fresh idea: Admit your opinion is based on nothing other than your own prejudices and, as a reward, you get back some of your credibility.

Looks like a win/win to me.

 

[LuvDuke]

Quod erat demonstrandum.

ford family

You call that an insult!

In my old NY neighborhood, we called that pillow talk.

 

[BuckNaked]

How about a 13 year old and a person in their 20's, 30's or older? As long as the teen "consents" to the sex you have no problem with it?

Of course not. But then again, I never said I wouldn't have a problem with my 16 year old having sex with an 18 year old. But I still wouldn't consider it rape, in either case. Sorry, to compare a situation where a girl says "yes, yes, yes" to one in which a girl is forced after saying "no, no, no" is ludicrous.

Adults should not have sex with children --end of story for me.

I agree, but that still doesn't make forcible rape and statutory rape anywhere near the same type of situation.

Of course this is one of those things where individual circumstances of each case should be taken into consideration.

I agree, and for me, the younger the child is or the bigger the age gap between the two, the clearer it becomes.

To pick up on something cardaway alluded to earlier, here is my pet peeve with the whole statutory v. forcible rape. You have a 15 year old whose parents have forbid her to see her 19 year old boyfriend. She sneaks around, sneaks out of the house, meets him in the park and they have consensual sex in the car. Then, the parents cry "My daughter was raped!"

Come on...is that really the same as that same 15 year old being dragged into a dark alley and forcibly raped? Maybe you see them as the same, but I don't.

As for the "she's not old enough to consent" issue...sorry, but if the girl in my example is old enough to consent to have an abortion, she's old enough to consent to the sex that made the abortion necessary.

 

[Trish Bessette]

I haven't read all the replies here but let me say, I'm from Vermont and this is BIG NEWS here! No one is happy with this judge. Looks as though he may have to lose his seat on the bench over this....no tears lost from me!

 

[Charade]

As for the "she's not old enough to consent" issue...sorry, but if the girl in my example is old enough to consent to have an abortion, she's old enough to consent to the sex that made the abortion necessary.

What? They want it both ways?

 

[CheshireVal]

Quod erat demonstrandum.

ford family

Ah, a pseudo intellectual! I suspected as much.

I stopped debating with those types when I stopped dating unemployed musicians, stopped hanging out at coffee houses and stopped wearing all black. Sorry.

 

[chobie]

Of course not. But then again, I never said I wouldn't have a problem with my 16 year old having sex with an 18 year old. But I still wouldn't consider it rape, in either case. Sorry, to compare a situation where a girl says "yes, yes, yes" to one in which a girl is forced after saying "no, no, no" is ludicrous.



I agree, but that still doesn't make forcible rape and statutory rape anywhere near the same type of situation.



I agree, and for me, the younger the child is or the bigger the age gap between the two, the clearer it becomes.

To pick up on something cardaway alluded to earlier, here is my pet peeve with the whole statutory v. forcible rape. You have a 15 year old whose parents have forbid her to see her 19 year old boyfriend. She sneaks around, sneaks out of the house, meets him in the park and they have consensual sex in the car. Then, the parents cry "My daughter was raped!"

Come on...is that really the same as that same 15 year old being dragged into a dark alley and forcibly raped? Maybe you see them as the same, but I don't.

As for the "she's not old enough to consent" issue...sorry, but if the girl in my example is old enough to consent to have an abortion, she's old enough to consent to the sex that made the abortion necessary.

Forcible doe not mean held down, beaten up or with a gun to head. Depending on the age difference between the two and if the adult was in a position of authority then forced can be be using undue influence or duress to get the child to say "yes".

Depending on the situation, an abuse of trust and power may very well be as psychologically damaging as being "dragged into an ally". To limit "real" rape to having been dragged into an ally or having a gun to your head is an insulting to rape victims as stretching the definition to include sex between a boyfrien/girlfriend where one is under the age of 18.

And what does abortion have to do with it? Save that for another thread.

 

[BuckNaked]

Forcible doe not mean held down, beaten up or with a gun to head. Depending on the age difference between the two and if the adult was in a position of authority then forced can be be using undue influence or duress to get the child to say "yes".

I agree, that's why I said that age of the child and the age disparity make a difference

To limit "real" rape to having been dragged into an ally or having a gun to your head is an insulting to rape victims as stretching the definition to include sex between a boyfrien/girlfriend where one is under the age of 18.

I totally disagree. Just answer yes or no - in the example I gave earlier, do you really consider both cases to be real rape? Do you consider them to be equally bad?

And what does abortion have to do with it? Save that for another thread.

Why the ? It is a perfectly legitimate point. To say that a 15 year old girl is too immature to truly consent to have sex with her 19 year old boyfriend, but mature enough to consent to have an abortion is completely illogical. Either she is mature enough to consent both or too immature to consent to either.

 

[chobie]

I agree, that's why I said that age of the child and the age disparity make a difference



I totally disagree. Just answer yes or no - in the example I gave earlier, do you really consider both cases to be real rape? Do you consider them to be equally bad?



Why the ? It is a perfectly legitimate point. To say that a 15 year old girl is too immature to truly consent to have sex with her 19 year old boyfriend, but mature enough to consent to have an abortion is completely illogical. Either she is mature enough to consent both or too immature to consent to either.

An abortion is a medical procedure. Statutory rape is about the abuse of power and the concept that adults should not have sex with children.

As, I said it is about the differences in each case. Should a rapist who beat a woman recieve the same sentence as one who just threatened to hurt them?

And no, I don't think that a 15 year old sneaking around to see a 19 year lover is real rape unless there was an abusive, controlling aspect to the relationship on the part of the adult.

However, in general I think there is something predatory about 19 or 20 something year olds that go without jr high students. JMO

 

[ford family]

I stopped debating...

The problem with your contributions on this thread is that you never started.

ford family

 

[dcentity2000]

The problem with your contributions on this thread is that you never started.

ford family

ford family, once again you fail at the art of debating. Sorry.



Rich::

 

[ford family]

ford family, once again you fail at the art of debating. Sorry.



Rich::

Perhaps, but at least I managed to grow up.

ford family

 

[Mariposa]

The problem with your contributions on this thread is that you never started.

ford family

Seriously, the entirety of your current contributions to this thread amount to, 'Haha, you're stupid!' Yeah, you're definitely on safe ground when it comes to challenging the intelligence and relevancy of someone else's post.

Before you even bother, ford family, let me respond for you.. 'You're dumb 'cause you didn't use Latin in your post and I'm better than you because I know conservative people are right.' I know, I didn't fancy it up for you, but that's about the bulk of it, right?

If we're just going to be randomly and pointlessly insulting people who disagree with us, so be it, I just thought I'd join, too.

---------------------
As for the real issue.. I think what happened to this child is horrific.

I will say this on the liberal judge issue- Yes, liberal judges are more likely to go outside of the traditional vein of sentencing (not outside the guidelines usually, just outside what people expect in a sentence) when traditional sentencing does not seem to be serving as a deterrent for the crime in question. While this has, IMHO, been a good thing in some areas (check the numbers on relapse in drug use in people who were sentenced to long term rehab vs. prison), this judge was clearly applying this in a situation that I, and most everyone, feel is terribly wrong. I completely disagree with what the judge did, but agree that prison does not serve as a future deterrent for pedophiles. Considering the recitivism rate of these offenders (which is ridiculous), combined with the heinous nature of the crime (as opposed to drug abuse which often mainly effects the abuser his/herself), I'd think the logical response would be a life term in either a prison or a state hospital. While I tend to think getting to the root of the problem and fixing it is a good idea (yes, I know, how liberal of me), that does not apply to these offenders and keeping the public safe from them should be the first priority in these cases.

 

[dcentity2000]

Perhaps, but at least I managed to grow up.

ford family

Debatable



Rich::