A man accused of kidnapping and masturbating on a woman got a ‘pass.’

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
Now don't go getting any ideas Slow..

Now people want the judge and prosecutor out.

"America, What a country!" -- Yakov Smirnoff

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nati...people-want-judge-out/?utm_term=.3d64fd11750c

Hours after Elizabeth Williams learned last week that Justin Schneider wouldn’t spend a day in jail, she turned to Facebook to channel her outrage.

The Anchorage social worker didn’t know Schneider, 34, before he was arrested in August 2017 after police said he offered a woman a ride from a gas station, stopped on the side of a road and asked her to step out under the pretense of loading items into the car, then choked her until she lost consciousness and masturbated on her.

Nor did Williams know the victim in the case, identified only as a 25-year-old Native woman who called police after the assault.

What she was familiar with was how the case ended: Schneider pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree felony assault in exchange for the dismissal of his other assault, kidnapping and harassment charges. He was sentenced Wednesday to two years in prison, the maximum for that charge, with one year suspended.

However, Schneider was given credit for a year under house arrest, meaning he would not serve additional time in prison. He will instead be required to continue wearing an ankle monitor and participate in a treatment program.

“I was just absolutely appalled,” she told The Washington Post.

Soon afterward, Williams learned that Alaska voters were slated to decide whether the judge in the case should be retained on the Anchorage Superior Court in the November elections. And so, Thursday morning, Williams started a Facebook page: “NO retention for Judge Michael Corey,” she named it.

“If you are horrified by Judge Corey’s brazen disregard for the victim in this case, then commit to voting NO on Judge Corey’s retention,” Williams typed in one of the page’s first posts, with a link to an article about the Schneider case.

It turned out that Williams, 24, wasn’t the only one who thought that Schneider’s sentence was too lenient — and who was casting blame on the judge. Within a day, the page had garnered 500 followers. Over the weekend, as news of the case circulated nationally, the page surpassed 2,700 followers.

Many in the group also directed their anger at Anchorage Assistant District Attorney Andrew Grannik, the prosecutor in the case, who said he had made the plea deal because Schneider had no prior criminal record and seemed amenable to rehabilitation, according to the Alaska Star.

Grannik said in court that he had “reasonable expectations” that Schneider would not offend again.

“But I would like the gentleman to be on notice that that is his one pass. It’s not really a pass, but given the conduct, one might consider that it is,” Grannik said then.

On social media, people seized on the “one pass” comment and demanded that Grannik be given the boot along with the judge.

Meanwhile, Alaska state officials have acknowledged the outrage but said that, while Schneider’s conduct was “very disturbing,” Corey and Grannik were constrained by sentencing laws.

“Both the governor and the attorney general think what occurred in this case was unacceptable in terms of the current state of the law,” said Cori Mills, a senior assistant attorney general in the Alaska Department of Law. “The law needs to be changed.”

Under Alaska statute, the definition of sexual contact encompasses only direct physical contact with genitals, buttocks, female breasts or the anus — not semen. In other words, despite the accusation that Schneider ejaculated on the woman, he could be charged only with harassment in the first degree, which is not a sex offense, according to state Deputy Attorney General Rob Henderson.

He reiterated what the Alaska Criminal Division director stated Friday, in the face of strong backlash over the sentence: State officials had feared that the kidnapping charge, the most serious of the counts, could not have been proved beyond a reasonable doubt if the case had gone to trial because Schneider’s victim had willingly entered his vehicle.

Given that, Henderson said, the prosecution would have been left to pursue lesser charges that, even if they had resulted in convictions, would not have forced Schneider to enter sex offender treatment.

“Because the state realized there was a need for sex offender treatment, the only way to obtain that requirement was to get him to agree to it" in a plea deal, Henderson said. “When you have sex offender treatment, you have to have some type of leverage or incentive to compel the person to complete the treatment.”

In this case, that “leverage” was the suspended year of Schneider’s two-year sentence.

“This conduct is very disturbing. That being said, both the prosecutor and the judge are bound by what the law currently is. It’s not about what they wish the law was,” Henderson said. “In this case, I would say that the prosecutor was successful in that he was able to negotiate sex offender conditions as part of the plea agreement that would not otherwise be available, even assuming Schneider went to trial and was convicted of all the charges.”

In the wake of the case, Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) said he planned to propose legislation that would make “causing unwanted contact with semen” a sex offense. If successful, the penalty for a first-time offense would carry jail time of two to 12 years and require registering as a sex offender.

However, the Alaska legislature does not convene until January, so any fix to the loophole would be months away at the earliest.

Williams, who started the Facebook page calling for the judge’s ouster, said she agreed with the proposed loophole fix and understood the sentencing constraints the judge and prosecutor were under. However, she wished that the judge had sentenced Schneider to some jail time — or that the case had been taken to trial, even if it meant risking that Schneider would be acquitted of all charges.

“We need to trust that our judges have the discretion to reject outrageous plea deals. I don’t think judges should always reject plea deals, but this was an extreme case,” Williams said. “I think we need to fight. I think you can’t just give up like that. At the very base level, this is about values."

She said she was also taken aback by what she described as the “fatherly” tone in which the judge had addressed Schneider.

“This can never happen again,” Corey told Schneider in court Wednesday, emphasizing each of the last three words.

In return, Schneider said he appreciated the personal growth he experienced in the past year. There did not appear to be any mention of the victim.

“I would just like to, um, emphasize how grateful I am for this process,” Schneider said in court. “It has given me a year to really work on myself and become a better person and a better husband and a better father. And I’m very eager to continue that journey.”

“All right. Thank you, sir, I appreciate those comments,” the judge replied.

“I think their overall tone and the fact they did not have the victim be a part of that process … very clearly showed he did not value the victim,” Williams said.

State officials have said they tried to contact the victim but could not reach her.

The Alaska Star reported that Schneider’s victim was not at the hearing and had, according to police, been traumatized “to the point where she couldn’t hardly speak” after the assault.

Details about the case were graphic enough that some local news outlets placed editor’s notes at the tops of their stories warning readers.

The victim “said she could not fight him off, he was too heavy and had her down being choked to death,” Anchorage police Detective Brett Sarber wrote in a criminal complaint obtained by KTVA News last year. “[She] said she lost consciousness, thinking she was going to die.”

When she regained consciousness, the man zipped up his pants, gave her a tissue and “told her that he wasn’t really going to kill her, that he needed her to believe she was going to die so that he could be sexually fulfilled,” Sarber wrote in the complaint.

The victim reported the assault — as well as a license plate number — to police and identified Schneider from a photo lineup. Schneider was arrested at his job as an air traffic controller at Ted Stevens Anchorage International Airport, KTVA reported.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Bitek
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Sounds like the problem here is with the applicable state laws more than with the judge or prosecutor.

As in the jail time sentence thresholds for the crime aren't enough?

I guess I can understand that - but god damn no jail time for this shit? It's like a combo of kidnapping, assault/battery (choking), and rape.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HurleyBird

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
As in the jail time sentence thresholds for the crime aren't enough?

I guess I can understand that - but god damn no jail time for this shit? It's like a combo of kidnapping, assault/battery (choking), and rape.
Where's the rape? There was no penetration of any sort.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
As in the jail time sentence thresholds for the crime aren't enough?

I guess I can understand that - but god damn no jail time for this shit? It's like a combo of kidnapping, assault/battery (choking), and rape.

Per the OP's article, under Alaska law jerking off on someone isn't a sexual assault because of the lack of contact with genitals. It is only "harassment in the first degree" which is a lesser felony.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Where's the rape? There was no penetration of any sort.

I guess - but how do we really know the woman was passed the fuck out and the guy was alone with her and not fucking her mouth? Honestly masturbating on a passed out womans face really blurs the line. If that isn't rape, what would you call it? Assault by bodily fluids? I mean I see they charged him with "harassment" for it - but yeah, that is totally fucked up.

The only reason he will register as a sex offender is because he did a plea deal - on the charges alone they wouldn't have been able to. Seems like it was a trade of less jail time but forcing him to register as a sex offender.
 
  • Like
Reactions: HurleyBird
Jan 25, 2011
16,591
8,674
146
So they don't charge the fact he choked her into unconsciousness? We couldn't have gone to some degree that resulted in jail time?
 
  • Like
Reactions: sandorski

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
"In the wake of the case, Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) said he planned to propose legislation that would make “causing unwanted contact with semen” a sex offense. If successful, the penalty for a first-time offense would carry jail time of two to 12 years and require registering as a sex offender. "

you boys in Alaska better start wearing two and three condoms, otherwise you're looking at some serious jail time.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
"In the wake of the case, Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) said he planned to propose legislation that would make “causing unwanted contact with semen” a sex offense. If successful, the penalty for a first-time offense would carry jail time of two to 12 years and require registering as a sex offender. "

you boys in Alaska better start wearing two and three condoms, otherwise you're looking at some serious jail time.

Do they not even have one for indecent exposure? That's what gets some guys a lot of times that just piss in public... Which basically means, anytime you whip out a sex organ you're now a registered sex offender...

I would say he definitely whipped it out here.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UsandThem

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
"In the wake of the case, Alaska Gov. Bill Walker (I) said he planned to propose legislation that would make “causing unwanted contact with semen” a sex offense. If successful, the penalty for a first-time offense would carry jail time of two to 12 years and require registering as a sex offender. "

you boys in Alaska better start wearing two and three condoms, otherwise you're looking at some serious jail time.

Yeah that strikes me as potentially overbroad if that is how it is worded.
 

Jaskalas

Lifer
Jun 23, 2004
33,446
7,508
136
Choking someone out should be filed under attempted murder. The serious nature of it needs to be present in law.

What's the difference between that and strangling? A few seconds longer, an extra tight grip? That's far too close to actually killing someone.
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
Do they not even have one for indecent exposure? That's what gets some guys a lot of times that just piss in public... Which basically means, anytime you whip out a sex organ you're now a registered sex offender...

I would say he definitely whipped it out here.

Sex with a condom, by its very nature, implies that contact with semen is unwanted. So, should the condom break, that's automatic jail time and registration.

Even if the condom DOESN'T break and a little dribbles on her leg during removal...
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
Choking someone out should be filed under attempted murder. The serious nature of it needs to be present in law.

What's the difference between that and strangling? A few seconds longer, an extra tight grip? That's far too close to actually killing someone.

I agree that the act is similar but for attempted murder you have to prove a specific intent to kill beyond a reasonable doubt. Tough to prove.
 

Bitek

Lifer
Aug 2, 2001
10,647
5,220
136
It sounds like AK has really weak laws. Hard to believe you only would get a yr of house arrest for this psycho-perv crap.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
Sex with a condom, by its very nature, implies that contact with semen is unwanted. So, should the condom break, that's automatic jail time and registration.

Even if the condom DOESN'T break and a little dribbles on her leg during removal...

Warning: my comments are not safe for work or kids.

Or suppose a fairly common scenario. He's getting a BJ. She doesn't want him cumming in her mouth or on her face. He doesn't want to either, is saving himself for intercourse. But she's vigorous enough with mouth and hand that he inadvertently squirts. Now she's pissed. Calls the cops.

Maybe there's an intent requirement in the statue such that an accidental discharge wouldn't qualify. I would hope so.
 
Nov 8, 2012
20,828
4,777
146
Warning: my comments are not safe for work or kids.

Or suppose a fairly common scenario. He's getting a BJ. She doesn't want him cumming in her mouth or on her face. He doesn't want to either, is saving himself for intercourse. But she's vigorous enough with mouth and hand that he inadvertently squirts. Now she's pissed. Calls the cops.

Maybe there's an intent requirement in the statue such that an accidental discharge wouldn't qualify. I would hope so.

Pre-cum is a myth .... just like the female orgasm
 

Viper1j

Diamond Member
Jul 31, 2018
4,169
3,645
136
Warning: my comments are not safe for work or kids.

Or suppose a fairly common scenario. He's getting a BJ. She doesn't want him cumming in her mouth or on her face. He doesn't want to either, is saving himself for intercourse. But she's vigorous enough with mouth and hand that he inadvertently squirts. Now she's pissed. Calls the cops.

Maybe there's an intent requirement in the statue such that an accidental discharge wouldn't qualify. I would hope so.
In that same vein.. (pun intended.)

https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/27/health/stealthing-sexual-assault-condoms/index.html

Some call it 'stealthing,' others call it sexual assault

Some people call it "stealthing" -- a practice where men secretly remove or damage condoms without their partners' knowledge. Others call it sexual assault.

But giving it an official name could be a major support for survivors of sexual assault, many of whom face an uphill battle in the legal system, according to an article in the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law. Taking action may also add a new layer to the ongoing discussion about consent and sexual assault, the author said.

"I worry that victims (of stealthing) might struggle in court using current laws," said Alexandra Brodsky, who authored the article when she was a student at Yale Law School. She is currently a fellow at the National Women's Law Center.

Survivors of sexual assault may face a number of "myths and biases" in court, Brodsky said. For example, jurors may refuse to see a crime as "serious," or simply not believe the victim, in cases where the victim has had a relationship with an alleged rapist, or when their prior sexual activity is called into question.
In her article, Brodsky advocates for a new civil law that would specifically name the practice "in order to hopefully cut through some of those biases" and provide a clearer legal path for victims, she said.

The National Sexual Assault Hotline has received calls about stealthing, according to Brian Pinero, vice president of victim services for the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, which operates the hotline.

"If someone's a victim, it's not their job to prove something," said Pinero. "It's our job to receive that person ... and then treat them with dignity and with respect."
It's impossible to say how common stealthing might be, Pinero said. What is certain, he said, is that it is clearly a breach of consent.

"You only consent to however far you want to go," he said, adding that people can suffer real psychological and physical harms after having something like that happen to them.
These harms may include sexually transmitted infections, unwanted pregnancy and emotional distress, Brodsky wrote in her article. The emotional distress can be especially difficult for people who have experienced sexual assault in the past, Pinero said.
Brodsky could not determine how often it happens either, but she conducted a handful of interviews with women about their experiences. She also wrote about dark corners of the internet where perpetrators brag about stealthing and share tips on how to get away with it.
Since her article was published, she said women and men have reached out to Brodsky in droves.
It's both affirming and terrible to write about an under-acknowledged form of gender violence and hear a chorus of "me, too" in response
— Alexandra Brodsky (@azbrodsky) April 24, 2017
"I've heard from a startling number of people, both men and women, who say this has happened to them," she said. "A lot of people just didn't know what to call it."
Brodsky prefers the term "nonconsensual condom removal."

"I don't like the word 'stealthing.' It sounds like something tricky and distasteful, but kind of like a fad," said Brodsky. "By calling it nonconsensual condom removal, we make clear what the harm is."

Brodsky said that some people have responded with a more hostile message, saying that men and women hoping to avoid it should avoid sex in the first place.
"That's exactly the kind of bias and sexism that I worry about victims facing with current laws," Brodsky said.

Someone is sexually assaulted every 98 seconds in the US, according to RAINN. But only six out of every 1,000 perpetrators wind up in jail.
There is no record that a US court has ever been asked to review a case of nonconsensual condom removal, according to the journal article. But Brodsky noted that she has heard of criminal cases in several foreign countries, like Switzerland and Canada, that have prosecuted men who have removed or broken condoms unbeknownst to their partners.

The issue came up in the extradition case and rape allegations lodged at WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange. The president of the UK's Queen's Bench Division said that removing or tearing a condom without a partner's consent would violate a 2003 law.
"It would plainly be open to a jury to hold that if (the victim) had made clear that she would only consent to sexual intercourse if Mr. Assange used a condom, then there would be no consent if, without her consent, he did not use a condom, or removed or tore the condom," the judgment read.

Assange has denied the sexual assault allegations.

But Brodsky said that these criminal cases are very different from what her article covers: a civil route, or a means to sue, in the US, where state laws may differ in how they treat sexual assault.
"There are survivors who find meaning in the criminal justice system," Brodsky said. "But I think that for many, the chance to have control over a case, to stand up in court, to receive financial restitution from the person who wronged them can be very meaningful to them."

Brodsky said she is also focused on the bigger picture.

"Marital rape used to be legal in a lot of states," she said. "The shift away from that not only meant that there was recourse (for victims)... but it also meant that we as a society reconceptualized women's rights to their own bodies in marriages.

"Law can be a powerful tool for shaping social norms," she said.
***

Kind of like cooking, yet refusing to eat the food?
 

interchange

Diamond Member
Oct 10, 1999
8,017
2,860
136
I guess - but how do we really know the woman was passed the fuck out and the guy was alone with her and not fucking her mouth? Honestly masturbating on a passed out womans face really blurs the line. If that isn't rape, what would you call it? Assault by bodily fluids? I mean I see they charged him with "harassment" for it - but yeah, that is totally fucked up.

The only reason he will register as a sex offender is because he did a plea deal - on the charges alone they wouldn't have been able to. Seems like it was a trade of less jail time but forcing him to register as a sex offender.

There's this thing called evidence that's required to prove a case against someone.

I agree that it seems like they were in a position to either get prison time or get the man registered and treated as a sex offender. I don't really have a problem with their choice. They took what they felt was most appropriate under the law and clearly would have pursued both if it were possible.
 

SMOGZINN

Lifer
Jun 17, 2005
14,202
4,401
136
Sounds like the problem here is with the applicable state laws more than with the judge or prosecutor.

I don't think the problem is with the laws, the problem is that they dropped all the higher charges leaving only the lesser charge. Per the article they dropped the first degree assault, kidnapping and harassment charges in exchange of him pleading guilty to second degree assault. The problem here is that the prosecutor and judge accepted that plea instead of taking it to trial. If they had found him guilty on any of those greater charges he would face significant jail time.
 

woolfe9998

Lifer
Apr 8, 2013
16,188
14,092
136
I don't think the problem is with the laws, the problem is that they dropped all the higher charges leaving only the lesser charge. Per the article they dropped the first degree assault, kidnapping and harassment charges in exchange of him pleading guilty to second degree assault. The problem here is that the prosecutor and judge accepted that plea instead of taking it to trial. If they had found him guilty on any of those greater charges he would face significant jail time.

Could be, though the kidnapping charge was very likely a non-starter because she entered his car willingly. And that is the most serious of the other charges.