The shortest sentence is two years, not two months.
WAG: The judge looked out at the crowd and saw that he was about to be lynched, so he’s reconsidering.
Pretty much. I wonder if this is an area that has elected judges.
In at least one of the stories, it was mentioned that the judge had run for the position several times, and had been unopposed. So yeah, elected judge. I’m guessing that there will be several contenders for that position during the next election…or possibly even earlier than the next regular election.
Not exactly correct.
As I read Montana Code Annotated § 46-18-222, several findings the judge can make allow even the first two years of a sentence to be suspended or otherwise deferred, notwithstanding the provisions of § 46-18-205 (sub-part (2) of that section gives rise to the two year minimum).
Here is an example. The judge can find that based on the findings of a sexual offender evaluation report, treatment of the offender while in a local community setting affords a better opportunity for rehabilitation of the offender and for the ultimate protection of the victim and society. See § 46-18-222(6).
I’m no expert on Montana law, so perhaps I’m missing something, but it reads pretty clearly.
Are the only two options, “Totally absolved of any guilt,” and “A crime on par with Ariel Castro?”
I certainly agree that a persistent high school freshman doesn’t absolve the older partner of criminal liability, but I wouldn’t sentence that offender to the same terms as I’d sentence a person who kidnapped the freshman and physically injured her in order to induce compliance to his sexual demands.
Would you?
Whoops! Mistyping!
Apparently the county attorney’s office is also appealing the sentence: Billings teacher rape sentence appealed
I think your reading of the statute is correct, but since there wasn’t a sexual offender evaluation report it would appear the 30 day sentence was contrary to the minimum sentence in the rape statute. I’d also guess that the chances of an evaluator suggesting an in-community treatment program are pretty slim considering his rather poor attendance at the program mandated by the original deferred prosecution deal.
Is that kind of training the reason I can never get anybody to take me at my word when I say, “No, thank you, I don’t want any.”? When I really, truly, don’t want anything?
Yeah, that’s pretty much it. Also see the “I don’t wanna dance” thread that’s going on. Some people believe that they have to coax everyone to dance, whether that person has declined or not.
Neither side wants to have the judge have another hearing and have filed motions to block it.
The defense says the sentence is lawful and appropriate.
The prosecutor believes the appeal on the sentence should be heard by a higher court and the old judge would be undermining the appeals process.
The fact that the culprit was handed a suspended sentence makes me think that the girl :
1)Was unusually persistent (the fact that she had to be removed from her mother’s custody being quite a good evidence of her stubborness)
2)Didn’t feel harmed by the experience (the fact that she testified in favour of the culprit two years later or so being quite a good evidence of her lack of regrets)
Now, assuming that, do you think that he would rather deserve, say, a 5 years sentence? 10 years? 20 years (I believe that would be the maximum in such a case)?
I understand the one year suspended sentence as meaning “No harm was done here, but I have to sentence you on principle”. What would be the correct sentence according to you?
(When I think of it, the age of consent being 15 in France, the girl, if I remember correctly her age as being 14, would have been between 1 day and 1 year shy of being legally able to give consent. That might have weighted too)
When I think of it (too late to edit) : statutory rape exists in order to protect minors against manipulation by adults. In this case, there was no manipulation, pressuring or whatever else as far as I can tell. And there was no harmful consequence for the victim, either, again as far as I can tell.
So, all things considered, I’m perfectly happy with the symbolic one year suspended sentence. It’s paradoxical that a post arguing against that leniency made me realize that.
So, let me rephrase my response to :
Adults are indeed almost totally absolved of guilt when they engage in consensual sex with minors if they did nothing to cause the situation and caused no harm. They should get a slap on the wrist, though, since these laws exist for a reason.
Exactly. Other than her death by suicide which the family says was caused by the actions of the suspect.
Now that I think of it, that’s a pretty big thing to overlook.
I’m pretty sure that ** clairobscur** is talking about the French case, not the case in the OP.
Frankly, the judge sounds like an idiot. I strongly suspect that the reason he blamed the victim for the relationship in his initial statement is because in his heart, he blamed the victim. I do not believe he should be allowed to serve on the bench if he’s THAT fucking stupid.
As Mister Rik mentioned, I was talking about the French case.