The most misunderstand 60 day sentence for child rape and the judge who gave it.

[zendari]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: rudder

Originally posted by: techs

I equate what you said with a willingness to see other kids raped for lack of treatment because of your desire for vengeance on this one guy.
Edit: btw we are going to get both because the judge is now going to review the sentence and give this guy more time. I hope its the max. And we will now give low risk offenders treatment. Preventing at least some more kids from enduring this abuse.

i would not classify him as low risk. low risk is when you turn yourself in because you were having thoughts of molesting somone. This guy RAPED A 6 YEAR OLD GIRL!!!! and did it for 4 years. That is high risk. I dont care if that off all molesters he may be the least likely to repeat, he did it, he is high risk. Yeh treatment is important, but do it in prison and dont let him see the light of day till he is so old the only threat from him would be his electric wheelchair running over someones toe.

How should society react towards this guy? Even to the low life scum in prison, this guy is viewed as a bottom feeder. 60 days for repeatedly raping a child... sheesh.

I AGREE! I have no idea how this guy is low risk. The law obviously needs to be changed. But under the current law he and many others are considered low risk and not in need of treatment. THAT is the travesty. And this one judge changed that. What a hero.

We'll see how heroic he is when he sticks his wang into your son or daughter.

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: DonVito

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: qoou
If someone's sexuality causes them to be attracted to children then it's really no one else's business. The government should stay out of people's bedrooms.

Thats what people say about gays anyway.

Do you think homosexual sex between adults should be criminally prosecuted?

No. But it should not be recognized as proper or legitemate through marraige certification or other means.

What do you mean "recognized as proper?" You're the one who brought it up in the context of child molestation - how is it relevant to this discussion?

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou

Originally posted by: rahvin
Sex offenders repeat at somthing like 80%, pedophiles repeat at something like 98%. Rehabilitation has little chance of working, yes it should be given a chance, but the judge isn't a legislator so he doesn't get to make those decisions. This is NOT the authority of the courts and he is being an activist judge and unfortunately the girl is going to bear the brunt of this, molested for years and this guy gets 60 days in jail.

First of all, forget about the girl and her family. Nobody has the right to revenge, which is the crux of that argument.

This is about deterrence alone--or at least it should be. The 60-day sentence only affects this one man, not other potential offenders. Would he be more or less likely to re-offend had he simply been given a 10-year sentence? I don't think there's any way to answer that question, which means the sentence imposed makes no verifyable difference other than taking away the man's freedom.

Sorry but our criminal justice system is supposed to serve two purposes maybe three. 1) deterance in the first place with reasonable sentences and/or fines for cimminal acts 2) rehabilitation into society if possible. *3) punishment/"revenge" for some

60 days for a on-going 4 year child rapist fails to deter since the puishment does'nt fit the crime at all.

 

[AragornTK]

i think at the minimum he should recieve four years, he stole four from that child, so he should have four taken from him?

 

[Wheezer]

Originally posted by: AragornTK
i think at the minimum he should recieve four years, he stole four from that child, so he should have four taken from him?

No, he stole a lifetime from that child, she will live with the scars of this for the rest of her life. He should have to sacrafice the same.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Future Shock
NOW REPEAT AFTER ME - IT'S NOT A LAW, IT'S A PRISON POLICY. IT IS NOT LEGISLATED - THE HEAD OF THE DEPT OF CORRECTIONS SIMPLY MADE HIS MIND UP ABOUT IT.

And this judge simply showed him the errors of his ways.

Which, once again, is NOT HIS JOB.

 

[alchemize]

Originally posted by: qoou

Originally posted by: ModerateRepZero

sex is pleasurable , its not torture and is not in itself harmful in anyway. If people enjoy it then what's the problem with it? I guess if you think sex is evil then you reason perpetrating it on an innocent victim to be a terrible thing, even if they happen to enjoy it.

1) First of all we're talking about CHILDREN. If it was between two people above the statutory age then this point would be irrelevant but she wasn't.

2) Second, in focusing on pleasure and sin, you ignore the concept of "consent". There's a reason why people of a certain age are considered capable of agreeing to do something, versus an infant who is incapable of doing so. The victim was 6; I think it quite obvious that she had no concept of sex and was thus unable to 'agree' to the activity. Even IF she was, she would have no real understanding of the consequences and would be somewhat susceptible to cajolery/threats (to a certain extent this can apply to a mentally retarded person above the age of consent). You may think that the line being drawn is arbitrary but that's a different and debateable proposition than implicitly assuming one can give consent freely.

3) Continuing on the last point, enjoyment is beside the point. Whether or not the victim enjoyed it does not take away from the fact that the victim had no say in the matter of sexual activity which was undertaken against their will. You don't have to be a rabid religious fundamentalist or superstitous person to disapprove of rape, much less against a child. Applying this silly logic, you can say that kidnapping a victim is OK as long as they're into BSDM and would thus derive some sort of gratification from their situation even though they're clear-cut victims.

I respectfully say that you have a rather narrow view of sex and are ignoring other considerations.

Rape is one thing and certainly a truly heinous crime. Yes that is traumatic to anyone.
An activity that is willfully participated in and enjoyed can not be traumatic though. There is a certain stigma attached to sex and especially for young people that their enjoyment of sex would even amplify the guilt and shame they feel. It's not the sex that causes that but its the stigma they feel brought about by society's attitude towards sex. Its no different than say the first time you had sex with another man when you were 18 and felt ashamed of yourself afterwards, this is before you learned to deal with and accept your sexuality., just as an example even if fictitious
Take away the stigma by changing society's attitude towards sex and being more accepting that all people have some degree of sexual feelings and can take pleasure in sex and it's not wrong. Kids wont grow up thinking they are bad or sick if they enjoy sex or masterbaiting and their sense of self esteem is unbruised. In those circumstances willingly participating in a sexual encounter they enjoy would have no harmful effects whatsoever. So you see it is not sex that is traumatic, it's your attitude towards it that is traumatizing those kids.

By this site is really drawing in the fringe elements now.

qoou, what's your opinion on NAMBLA?* This sounds quite similar to their reasoning for pedophilia.


*I think this is an appropriate thread and appropriate post to ask this, now?

 

[Future Shock]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: Future Shock
NOW REPEAT AFTER ME - IT'S NOT A LAW, IT'S A PRISON POLICY. IT IS NOT LEGISLATED - THE HEAD OF THE DEPT OF CORRECTIONS SIMPLY MADE HIS MIND UP ABOUT IT.

And this judge simply showed him the errors of his ways.

Which, once again, is NOT HIS JOB.

That's probably what you say 9-5 when you are at work too...

And I would say that it IS his job - his job is to ensure that justice is meted out and protect the public. The current rules did NOT let him do both at once - he had to choose to either sentance a rapist harshly, OR take steps to protect the public from him when he gets out. So he made a case to have the rules re-examined, and now he can do both.

And he will - that 60 day sentance won't stand, and was never meant to.

I just sit here and wonder at how bad the anti-Cashman crowd is at chess - you guys are only looking at the last move, and planning one move ahead. Cashman is looking at years of history, and playing for a position several moves ahead...

Future Shock

 

[arsbanned]

Originally posted by: hurtstotalktoyou
I'm not sure I agree with harsh rape penalties. Its harm comes, in many cases, predominantly from emotional upheaval. I can't say I agree with jailing someone for hurting another's feelings.

Rape is a violent, physically traumatic act, but I don't believe it should be treated differently from any other form of assault.

I vote 5-6 burly, vicious fellows take you to the basement for a little fun. See what you think then. :disgust:

 

[CSMR]

Originally posted by: techsThe guy is a freaking hero. His courageous stand got the Department of Corrections to treat more sex offenders while they are in jail so they won't assualt kids when the get out. If it saves one kid then he gets a free pass to heaven, in my opinion.

In my opinion his decision is well-intentioned but wrongly gives himself too much power. It should not be the role of judges to pressure the state in its treatment policies, even if they are wrong. Judges should sentence justly.
And saving one kid does not give a free pass to heaven. I bet you have hardly thought about what heaven is at all.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Which, once again, is NOT HIS JOB.

That's probably what you say 9-5 when you are at work too...

And I would say that it IS his job - his job is to ensure that justice is meted out and protect the public. The current rules did NOT let him do both at once - he had to choose to either sentance a rapist harshly, OR take steps to protect the public from him when he gets out. So he made a case to have the rules re-examined, and now he can do both.

And he will - that 60 day sentance won't stand, and was never meant to.

I just sit here and wonder at how bad the anti-Cashman crowd is at chess - you guys are only looking at the last move, and planning one move ahead. Cashman is looking at years of history, and playing for a position several moves ahead...

See, *that's* the problem. His job isn't "a game of chess." His job isn't to take wild gambles in his sentencing, which is what he did. Would his sentence have been appropriate if it stood as given, and the Human Services Secretary *hadn't* issued his order? Would you have been supporting his decision?

BTW, gotta love your arrogance in ASSuming that I hadn't read the article because I disagreed with you.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: Future Shock

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee
Which, once again, is NOT HIS JOB.

That's probably what you say 9-5 when you are at work too...

And I would say that it IS his job - his job is to ensure that justice is meted out and protect the public. The current rules did NOT let him do both at once - he had to choose to either sentance a rapist harshly, OR take steps to protect the public from him when he gets out. So he made a case to have the rules re-examined, and now he can do both.

And he will - that 60 day sentance won't stand, and was never meant to.

I just sit here and wonder at how bad the anti-Cashman crowd is at chess - you guys are only looking at the last move, and planning one move ahead. Cashman is looking at years of history, and playing for a position several moves ahead...

See, *that's* the problem. His job isn't "a game of chess." His job isn't to take wild gambles in his sentencing, which is what he did. Would his sentence have been appropriate if it stood as given, and the Human Services Secretary *hadn't* issued his order? Would you have been supporting his decision?

BTW, gotta love your arrogance in ASSuming that I hadn't read the article because I disagreed with you.

If judges weren't meant to interpret the law, then there would be no such position, and all sentencing would be done according to a table.

 

[FuzzyBee]

Originally posted by: Meuge
If judges weren't meant to interpret the law, then there would be no such position, and all sentencing would be done according to a table.

"Attempting to change the law" isn't the same as "interpreting the law".

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: FuzzyBee

Originally posted by: Meuge
If judges weren't meant to interpret the law, then there would be no such position, and all sentencing would be done according to a table.

"Attempting to change the law" isn't the same as "interpreting the law".

The judicial branch has been instrumental in changing the law on many occasions, even if they were acting against the will of the majority (the Civil Rights movement, for instance).

 

[hurtstotalktoyou]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Sorry but our criminal justice system is supposed to serve two purposes maybe three. 1) deterance in the first place with reasonable sentences and/or fines for cimminal acts 2) rehabilitation into society if possible. *3) punishment/"revenge" for some

I don't believe that is appropriate. Some do.

 

[Specop 007]

The whole thing stinks. What happened to vigilante justice? I damn well gaurentee you, someone rapes my girl they wont be needing an attorney and judge, they will be needing funeral arrangements.

Happened back in the 70's I think, some guy took a gun into an airport anf waited for the guy who raped his daughter to come off the plane. The police escort passed him by, he turns around pulls the gun and ventilates the rapists head. Drops the gun and surrenders to the police.
Charges dropped.

Today? Sht1, you'd get a tougher sentence then the guy who raped children. This society makes me sick. SICK. The end of the free world, be it from God, nuclear war or poison gas cannot come fast enough for me. :|

 

[Zebo]

Co-sign 007. Jail time or not he would'nt have to worry about walking the streets ever again. My inkling would be to cut him up millimeter by millimeter from foot to head w/ a chainsaw Tony Montana style mang - just to feel a little pain before departing - but then you know they'd commit me. Head shots prolly the best.

The end of the free world, be it from God, nuclear war or poison gas cannot come fast enough for me. :|

Won't be long.. You should enjoy this.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: Zebo
Co-sign 007. Jail time or not he would'nt have to worry about walking the streets ever again. My inkling would be to cut him up millimeter by millimeter from foot to head w/ a chainsaw Tony Montana style mang - just to feel a little pain before departing - but then you know they'd commit me. Head shots prolly the best.

The end of the free world, be it from God, nuclear war or poison gas cannot come fast enough for me. :|

Won't be long.. You should enjoy this.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Why? You think I should be jailed because I dont support child rape, and I'm tired of criminals being "rehabbed" then put out on the streets to do it again and again and again?

Already well aware of that link, and a registered and active member on peakoil.com

Heres to hoping, should be good times. :beer:

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: Zebo
Co-sign 007. Jail time or not he would'nt have to worry about walking the streets ever again. My inkling would be to cut him up millimeter by millimeter from foot to head w/ a chainsaw Tony Montana style mang - just to feel a little pain before departing - but then you know they'd commit me. Head shots prolly the best.

The end of the free world, be it from God, nuclear war or poison gas cannot come fast enough for me. :|

Won't be long.. You should enjoy this.
http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Why? You think I should be jailed because I dont support child rape, and I'm tired of criminals being "rehabbed" then put out on the streets to do it again and again and again?

Already well aware of that link, and a registered and active member on peakoil.com

Heres to hoping, should be good times. :beer:

Yup all my freinds tell me I'm crazy for tying to pay off my primary residence ASAP.. along the lines "money could be use so much better elsewhere" uh huh we'll see. One thing in western civ is property rights are pretty secure even in calamity - even if it's only possees doing the enforcement. I'm pretty prepared as is - an ox - yoke and plow is all I need at this point.:beer:

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: rudder
I agree. Whats the problem with 60 days? I mean come on, it was a 6 year old he raped. She will just black out that part of her life and probably not ever remember it anyway. At least the guy will get treatment instead of getting his ass beat/killed in prison. Is that wise use of taxpayers money?

I swear, I thought this was a joke. But then I read it again and realized you were being serious.

I weep for the future generations... seriously, good luck with your children :roll:

 

[Trevelyan]

Originally posted by: NeoV
I've been on AT for 5 years now....and this is the worst thread I've ever seen.

This man repeated molested a little girl over a period of 4 years - and he gets a 60 day sentence so he can get treatment? Are you kidding me? How many sex offenders, particularly child molesters, are effectively 'healed' by such treatment? How about practically none? You can't cure these people! This guy, almost for sure, will do this again. He'll be 'closely monitored'? Give me break. How is the community safer, with this guy back on the streets after 2 months, than it would be if this guy was in prison for the next 10 years?

Next, I have to comment on "hurtstotalktoyou" - perhaps the most ignorant posts I've ever seen, congrats on that. Rape is no different than assault? Ok, picture this. I'm going to commit 2 crimes - One, I punch you in the face, knocking you out and breaking your cheekbone after we get into a fight at a bar. That is assault. Two, I grab a woman walking home from class, throw her down to the ground, rip off her clothes and rape her. You are telling me that those crimes are the same in your eyes? You are either a complete idiot or just someone trying to spark things up. Nevermind the fact that this girl was 6 years old!!

Finally, there is Rudder, who makes the single most blatantly stupid post I've ever read - in fact it may be the most ignorant thing I've ever seen anyone say, anywhere...let me remind you what he said: "I mean come on, it was a 6 year old he raped. She will just black out that part of her life and probably not ever remember it anyway".

Two things - First, he molested her repeatedly over a 4 year period - she's going to remember it every day for the rest of her life you idiot....2nd - even if you are talking about a single rape, you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Children who are molested/raped have significantly more problems for the rest of their lives - drug use, depression, droping out of school, becoming single parents, welfare, etc, etc, etc. These are life-altering events, not falling off of a swing. Please get a clue.

If anything, the exact opposite is true in this country - we need far more strict sentencing for sexual offenders, and if it involves children, the risk of repeat offenses is even worse. If our judicial system is meant, in part, to deter crimes, this is the absolute worst message to send.

As much as it pains me to agree with Bill O'Reilly, he couldn't be more accurate on this one. This is an outrage.

THANK YOU! I can't believe I had to read this far into the thread until I got an intelligent response... I swear, I can't believe people who have posted so far even exist in the real world!

And yes, Rudder is responsible for the single most disgusting post I've ever read in my life. Thank you for lowering the bar yet again. Another day in AT P&N.

 

[raildogg]

Treatment? WTF??? Do you really believe these insane people heal? That their inner self can resist? Treatment has been tried for many people and has ultimately failed. We cannot take a risk of the potential of treatment working. If it doesn't work, another child's life will be ruined.

These criminals deserve the harshest of punishment. We have seen too many times where a sex offender has been released from jail and goes back and commits the same crime. No, treatment or no treatment, these maniacs deserve a long jail sentence.

But yes, according to some, a rapist's rights come before a child's rights. I'm sorry for being so rude to the rapist, please send me to tolerance and acceptance classes where they teach us how to be more understanding towards rapists and how to not use bad words for them. Maybe toss in a few diversity classes and I'm all set.

 

[Specop 007]

Originally posted by: raildogg
Treatment? WTF??? Do you really believe these insane people heal? That their inner self can resist? Treatment has been tried for many people and has ultimately failed. We cannot take a risk of the potential of treatment working. If it doesn't work, another child's life will be ruined.

These criminals deserve the harshest of punishment. We have seen too many times where a sex offender has been released from jail and goes back and commits the same crime. No, treatment or no treatment, these maniacs deserve a long jail sentence.

But yes, according to some, a rapist's rights come before a child's rights. I'm sorry for being so rude to the rapist, please send me to tolerance and acceptance classes where they teach us how to be more understanding towards rapists and how to not use bad words for them. Maybe toss in a few diversity classes and I'm all set.

I think "rehabilitation" should be done with 230 grains of lead myself.

 

[AragornTK]

no, there are far better ways 007... for example, there are certain drugs that render a person immobile and at the same time intensify the signals from there nerves... kinda like reverse anesthesia... inject them with that... then you just get a scalpel and slowly... like over hours make incisions and pull out what they don't need... it'll hurt like hell and they will suffer immensely...

that would probably cure one of them...

 

[KK]

Anybody that agrees with this pathetic judge must not have any kids. If they do, then I hope they get raped by one of these "rehabilitated" rapists.