Is there a time when Rape is not as bad?

[the_bob_delusion]

http://www.news.com.au/world/judge-jeanine-howard-sparks-outrage-for-saying-sexually-assaulted-14yea...

A TEXAS judge has sentenced a confessed rapist to just five years’ probation, implying his 14-year-old victim was promiscuous and “wasn’t the victim she claimed to be”. 

Sir Young, 20, pleaded guilty to raping the girl at their Booker T. Washington High School in Dallas when he was 18, even as she told him “no” and “stop”, according to the Dallas News .

But State District Judge Jeanine Howard stunned many when she opted for probation, which will include 45 days in jail, and also exempted him from standard sex-offender restrictions, such as staying away from children, attending sex offender treatment, undergoing a sex offender evaluation or refraining from watching pornography.

Judge calls rape victim 'promiscuous'

Howard told the News she made her decision partly because medical records showed the victim had had three sexual partners and had given birth to a baby — both claims the girl has denied.

“She wasn’t the victim she claimed to be,” Howard said. “He is not your typical sex offender.

Did the judge get it right?

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@joz*garage wrote:

---

@i-once-was-bump wrote:

reminds me of that joke that only men seem to find funny "how do you rape a prostitiute?"

I bet that judge laughed at that joke when he first heard it.

---

it was a female judge

how does the joke go, btw?

---

i wanted to kudos this post, but sisn't want to know the joke, so I'll just quote the post instead

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@matthew_mark_luke_and_bob wrote:

Something just doesn't sit right with me. I agree with the judge this just doesn't read victim to me and there's something about reading how the perpetrator explains himself just doesn't resemble a typical rapist. 

---

It's hard to explain, but I'm actually on your side of the fence on this one based on the info we have here.

Before i could comment further, we really need to know what evidence the judge relied on to reach their decision. But i doubt a female judge especially, when presented with strong evidence of rape and intent, would make the decision that they did unless completely corrupt.

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@matthew_mark_luke_and_bob wrote:

---

@imastawka wrote:

---

@alexander*beetle wrote:

Prey tell.  Just what is a typical rapist? 

---

Yeah, keep digging that hole, bob

---

I'm not saying what the guy did was OK. It's rape and he deserves some punishment but I do get the feeling the judge saw more into the case than what we can tell on the surface.

---

yep, me too

[the_great_she_elephant]

 But the judge identified as a mitigating factor the sexual history of the victim.  Rape may be bad or very bad but I cannot see how the seriousness of the offence can be mitigated by the characteristics of the victim.     

Thank you, Aftanas, that says it all. It also explains why the victim felt obliged to deny the truth of those medical records.

The judge found that the young man had no history of violence, but why did she not feel it necessary to enquire into his sexual history? After all, using her logic, if a man is sexually promiscuous, might it not give  him an exaggerated sense of entitlement? 

[*crikey*mate*]

---

@*pepe wrote:

---

@i-once-was-bump wrote:

---

@kopenhagen5 wrote:

For most part I think judges are terrific in seeing through to the truth.

But by George can they get it wrong sometimes.

I have also learnt over time that some girls can be very cunning and manipulative and full of carp appearing like angels, totally going against my upbringing and beliefs.

---

Well stay away from those types if you have a problem with them.

Also I am at a loss as to how that applies to a discussion about rape, are you suggesting that some girls are cunning and manipulative enough to get a man charged with rape when it wasn't rape?

---

Are you suggesting this never happens???
It happens all too frequently, which makes it much harder on real victims who have to go through the wringer to get justice.

---

yep, and I am wondering if the judge suspected something of this nature and made her decision accordingly.

[the_great_she_elephant]

I am wondering if the judge suspected something of this nature and made her decision accordingly.

But surely, even in Texas,  judges are obliged to make their decisions (including sentencing deciisions) based strictly on the evidence placed before them, not on their personal suspicions or sympathies.the guy did not plead guilty to statuatary rape - it was consensual but the girl was under age -  he pleaded guilty to rape: sexual peneatration without consent.

[*crikey*mate*]

exactly, so what evidence was there?

at this stage, based on what is reported here, i suspect sensationalist reporting, maybe a cherry picking of biased unsubstantiated facts.

Happy to admit my own prejudices here as i may view this differently if it were a male judge, but because it was a female judge, I would think they would be a little more - not sure how to say it

but the judges have to rule based on evidence and what the law permits. but because human emotion and other intrapersonal variables are present, interpretation can be a grey (otherwise there would never be any dissenting ratios in multi judge cases). So with what is here, and the fact it is a female judge, i think the evidence might have just been a bit lacking.

Could make up all sorts of scenarios, such as her not starting to say no until near the end of a previously consensual act....... however, that is not a job of the law, and I don't believe we know the entire unbiased black and white facts of the case.

[joz*garage]

no.... don't! no... don't!   don't! ......Stop!!!!

*puts on tin hat*

[bluecat*dancing]

Rape is always bad and should never be condoned or made excuses for.

[the_bob_delusion]

---

@bluecat*dancing wrote:

Rape is always bad and should never be condoned or made excuses for.

---

Sure, but that's different to saying all rape's are the same and of equal severity.