Ask a group of guys, who would speak honestly, if they would have had a problem with some hot older women wanting to get it on with them when they were 14. Remember the joke about how many men masturbate? “90%, the other 10% are liars”. Well, you’d probably get a response along the lines of, “Wow! That would’ve been great!”, from 90% of them. That’s why.
The average height for 12-year-old girls is 60-1/2 inches – about 5’1".
The news account says he had “sexual contact” with the girl over a couple of months – not a word as to whether it was consensual or not. It’s illegal and wrong either way, but is it so hard to imagine probation for a man who had an immoral – but consensual – sexual relationship with someone his own size?
I think another factor is that there is still a sizable portion of the population that cannot imagine how a woman can be a sexual predator, nor instigator in a sexual relationship. You and I can think they’ve got they’re eyes squeezed shut, their hands over their ears, and singing “I caaaaaaan’t hear you,” but they’re still out there.
I suppose if we were talking about a society in which 12-year olds routinely make life decisions for themselves and carry weapons as part of a civil war resistance movement…yeah, a 12 year old might be considered competent to make adult decisions. But this sort of society is at least 20 years in the future for the USA. At this time we consider 12 year olds to be children in body and mind. The munchkin would have known of and played upon this girl’s naivte and preyed upon it for his own ends. That’s wrong.
No joke.
my point…my point…uh, ever been to a car dealership where your ignorance of finances and vehicle prices was used against you for the gain of the dealership? We call this “swindling.” It’s the same thing.
It wasn’t just that he was short, it’s that he has a flat head and no teeth…
oh, and a pretty mouth too.
[hijack]
Do you seriously see this future for the US? Have you discussed it in detail on the board, and if so, can you provide links? If you haven’t had occasion to develop your hypothesis, would you be kind enough to open a thread in either GD or IMHO to talk about it?
[/hijack]
Partially because teen boys aren’t as traumatized as teen girls by molestation by the opposite sex due to the act not being invasive, and thus not carrying as much of the feeling of being “violated.” (Those aren’t irony quotes, they’re intended as regular quote quotes.)
I have no cite. This is from memory of a long ago SDMB post that did have cites. Take it for what it’s worth.
In other words: “I find your ideas intriguing and would like to subscribe to your newsletter.”
No links, no developments. I’m not enough of a political scientist…or even student…to present it here without having my ass handed to me for being a crackpot. 
I’m glad to see I’m not the only one who feels like this! (and I just wish I remembered this half the time when I post!).
From the Omaha World-Herald (registration required):
Sigh. I love it when my state makes the national news.
Why certainly, my dear friend! Just send £20 (none of your American dollar rubbish) in a stamped envelope to:
Happy Clam
Association for the Relief of Distressed Bivalves
Thames Bed
London
and I’ll add you to my list.
Jesus christ, the sheer mindboggling stupidity of the judge in this case is extraordinary. Aren’t prisons equipped with things like “guards” and “bars” (not to mention solitary confinement) exactly to address concerns of inmate-on-inmate violence?
Where in the article does it say that the Thompson raped his victim? All I found was this:
What defines a ‘felony sexual assault’ charge in the US? Does it necessarily include penetration (penile or digital) or are there other classifications?
From an earlier article published on the 26th:
Thus validating the simple fact that the criminals are, well, criminals. They are the punishees. They are in prison to serve out their lawfully-decided sentence. They are not part of the government’s enforcement arm.
And anyone who is outside of the prison is in danger of being harmed by those criminals when said criminals are ultimately released. Going by your “logic” those victims then have no gripe.
The prison officials are responsible for maintaining the safety of all of their charges, the prisoners. The prison officials are responsible for administering lawfully the actual sentence of the court.
That kind of goes against the idea that the prisoners are there for “all that prison implies,” doesn’t it?
And people who consider the law of the land to be a good thing don’t consider that the “prison justice” to which you refer is a good thing.
People sometimes get hurt outside of prisons. Tha’ts just the way things are. So, let’s just chuck out the whole idea of prisons and lawful justice, shall we?
Yes, Monty, if this were a perfectly structured world where the tiniest details were managed by formula, then the trains would run on time and all would be right with the world.
The truth is, however, that prison remains a more dangerous place than the average 7-11.
That the inmates do not serve as an arm of the government is legalistic wishful thinking – but hey, maybe you could talk with them and convince them not to shiv the next child-rapist they meet.
My “logic” holds: the victims of released inmates were not given prison sentences. An incarcerated person has been given one. Duh.
You want these caged animals – the most violent and lawless people we have – protected from the other caged animals? Great – now find a way to fund it. Which state and federal programs do you want to take money away from so that the letter of the law regarding their punishment is in no way undermined?
Nope. Prison implies a certain degree of danger. It also implies a certain amount of protection. Now then, if you were reading something more than that into what I said, then shame on you.
Yes, well, I think you and I both know where I stand on that. However, your statement doesn’t hold water, IMO. Many, many people (again, IMO) have no problem whatsoever with prison justice in certain cases. Besides, I never said that it was a good thing. I said that it is an unavoidable thing.
Got any other strawmen, Monty?
I agree that this man would be in more danger from other prisoners based on his size. After all, who would you rather attack: the child molestor who’s 6’2 and 250, or the 5’1 and 160?
However, didn’t we agree that the likelyhood of “prison justice” isn’t as high as is commonly thought? Prisoners attack the weak. If you’re a bank robber and a thin weedy kid, you’re meat. It’s not the crime that draws violence, it’s the person.
I would not cry if he suffered while in prison, However, he IS at a disadvantage. What if he was an amputee or had a severe birth defect? Would you then condemn him to general population, knowing he wouldn’t be able to defend himself?
From what I’ve read, he can request to be taken out of the general population at any time. I’m no expert on prisons, but certainly it’s in the guards’ and the prison administration’s best interest to keep everything as calm as possible, they are mostly successful at it, and all the commentary in the local press indicates that the judge’s fear is overstated.
I’m a big 'ole liberal and all, but if you can’t do the time…
There’s a huge difference between wishing that all were right in the world and actively supporting that which makes some the world not right.
Agreed. And part of the reason that the prison remains a dangerous place appears to me to be that the prison administration is not fulfilling its responsibilities, not only to the prisoners but also to the society which has sentenced those prisoners.
It’s not wishful thinking; it’s a recognition of a simple fact: the prisoners are not the police. As to convincing them not to shive the next child rapist they meet, why then are there laws to prosecute those prisoners who harm other prisoners?
Where, EXACTLY, in that sentence from the court does the judge say, “And part of this sentence is that you’re fair game for the other cretins in the Big House?”
I want the government to fulfil its obligations. The prison administration is responsible to society for ensuring its charges are treated lawfully.
I’m not reading anything more into what you typed. Your point is perfectly clear: the folks in prison are fair game for “prison justice.”
You’re certainly supporting it in this thread. That obviously implies that, to you, it’s a good thing.
Just yours.