Fine, he really got 15 years, but all but 31 days were suspended and he got credit for 1 day served.
You’re telling me a young teenager was in as much control of a situation as a person placed in authority over her?
This isn’t even statutory rape where she was a consenting minor. This was a man forcing himself unwanted on her. How is she in control of that?
Can someone please explain how a right thinking person could ever say what that judge said, because I just can’t fathom how you can so flippantly blame a minor victim like that and still have the character needed to be a judge of others.
The trouble with this “oh what’s the matter, can’t take a joke about about rape?!” crowd is you have forgotten that jokes are at least supposed to aim in the general fucking direction of funny.
I’m not offended by this nonsense because rape is a sacrosanct topic of conversation. I am, however, outraged by how goddamned stupid it is. Congratulations, you pointed out the subject matter at hand. Sweet joke bro.
Even if it were an 18-year-old student and the sex were (superficially, at least) consensual, this would still be all kinds of wrong (and I’m pretty sure also illegal). Regardless of the age difference, the teacher is still in a position of authority over the student.
And arguing the high maturity of a girl who went on to commit suicide is also bizarre.
Perhaps the DA cut a deal to get a confession. Maybe, too, there was substantial witness testimony about the victim bragging about getting the teacher to have sex with her? God knows, I don’t.
Sounds very very odd to me. Is this all confirmed?
You got it all backward. Someone is supposed to get outarged about my rape comment, THEN I’m supposed to respond with the “oh what’s the matter, can’t take a joke about about rape?!” response, THEN you’re supposed to weigh in calling such comments stupid.
Please be more careful in the future. It almost seems as if you’re outraged at yourself.
I’ve now read the reporting. NO doubt at all that the judge is ignoring all the law and precident, but there is an implication that the defendent had already been judged and sentenced to a sex offender treatment program as a ‘deal’, then, later, the girl killed herself, several years later, and people wanted him blamed for it. Perhaps the judge knew the legal grounds were shaky for reopening the case. The girl seemd to him to be completely able to decide for herself whether or not to have sex with the teacher three years earlier. he took that into consideration as to whether the teacher was to blame for her death.
still, a very screwed up situation that demanded a heavy hand 5 years ago and one wasn’t used.
Yes, the case was reopened because he was kicked out of his treatment program for not following the rules of the program.
The part I can’t understand is how you can say a 14-year-old victim is as much in control of a situation as a 30-year-old offender? I just can’t imagine a scenario, unless you count the movie Wild Things. But in that case, the guy wasn’t actually guilty of rape.
If the judge had left that part out, I wouldn’t be all .
No, it appears the teacher had originally been placed in a treatment program as a legal condition and he had now been kicked out of the program for non-compliance. So he was eligible to be resentenced. And apparently the judge chose to give him a very lenient sentence.
“Sexual intercourse without consent” is just the title of the whole rape statute. In the case of statutory rape, it may only be without consent because the minor victim cannot legally consent. Not to say that this was the situation here, but that headline doesn’t give any indication one way or the other.
.