Judge says teen who filmed himself raping a girl deserves leniency

Feb 2010
69,960
46,025
USA
#91
I'm always a bit shocked by this one way acceptance of both consent and responsibility. So she gets drunk and is completely excused from all her actions. He gets drunk and not only should be held accountable for his actions but tried as an adult.

The reasoning has to work two ways. If she couldn't consent to her actions because she was drunk then how can he be held liable for his actions when he was drunk?

Would you only press charges a period of time later (several months later) when the video was still being circulated instead of at the time of the alleged crime?

He is alleged to have raped due to her being unable to consent due to bring drunk. There was no age difference and both of them were drunk so if he is a rapist then so is she.
Except that he filmed it and CALLED it rape. That changes things considerably. She was clearly a victim not only because of the sex but because of the video. And while they were both drunk, she apparently was INCAPACITATED in a way he fully realized and took advantage of.

This isn't a "he said/she said" situation or a situation where consent was ambiguous in any way.
 
Jul 2013
4,495
5,215
Ohio
#92
Misogyny in real time.

Misogyny is the hatred of, contempt for, or prejudice against women or girls. Misogyny manifests in numerous ways, including social exclusion, sex discrimination, hostility, androcentrism, patriarchy, male privilege, belittling of women, disenfranchisement of women, violence against women, and sexual objectification.
 
Mar 2012
56,188
37,764
New Hampshire
#93
Then the answer is a change to the justice system that allows the consequences for juvenile offenders to last beyond their 18th birthday, at least in some cases. The adolescent brain isn't the same as the adult brain, particularly in regard to executive function--which is where decisions about criminal behavior come from.
Thats sort of a cop out isnt it at some point? Its not like the brain is a switch and turns on or off at a given age. Some might be at full function by age 22 and others not until 26. Plus if one is an adult at 18 legally, then that should be the age for everything. This arbitrary, cant drink until 21, cant rent a car until 25 is just postponing adulthood. Pick an age and stick with it. Most 16 year olds dont behave this way yet this one did. That tells me it is this individual that has the problem not the age.
 
Mar 2013
75,102
43,837
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
#94
Like the ability to hold juveniles beyond their 18th birthday. Like setting a different date for when a record is expunged. Like providing alternatives to adult-like incarceration for juveniles.
All this is not particularly distinct from treating him as an adult in the first place.
{I}s there evidence that this young criminal (or any others) has reached maturity simply because he's committed a heinous crime?
Not "simply because." He took responsibility for what he did, indeed bragged about it, and in fact published the video. The fact that he referred to what he did as "rape" indicates he was mature enough to know the difference between right and wrong. It just did not occur to him that he would get caught.
Decisions about how to try an adolescent should be based on an independent judgment about their level of brain development and the likelihood (or even possibility) of remediating their psychological deficiencies.
Maybe. I believe some states may even require this as part of determining whether to try him as an adult, whereas in others it is non-discretionary. But rehabilitation is not the only issue. He still caused an enormous amount of harm, and represents a danger to society.
 
Jun 2014
61,174
35,368
Cleveland, Ohio
#95
Hypothetical situation: If a 14 year old kills someone ,is the VICTIM any less dead because of the Perps age?
The homicide could be especially heinous and yet the killer is still innocent.

E.g., Andrea Yates, who drowned her 5 children.

The juvenile justice system (as to juvenile criminals) recognizes the value and vulnerability of young criminals. Records are sealed, courtrooms are closed, loads of social workers and psychologists are on offer, family studies are done, etc.

This (hopefully) preserves as many young criminals as can be rehabilitated.

However, MOST states judges and laws would send MOST 16 year olds accused of a serious crime to adult court.
 
Jun 2014
61,174
35,368
Cleveland, Ohio
#96
My point being that the LAW can be changed. And should be. Some "Children" ,are just wired wrong. The term is Psychopath ,I believe. These should NOT be allowed to roam the streets.
The American Psychiatric Society has ruled it is unethical to diagnosis psychopathy (antisocial personality disorder) in patients younger than 18.

Antisocial Personality Disorder | Psychology Today
 
Dec 2018
3,664
1,330
Florida
#97
Feb 2010
29,087
31,067
Sunny Bournemouth, Dorset
#98
I disagree. This kid is a danger to society. If he goes the juvenile route, like Ian said, his slate is wiped clean in two years. He showed no remorse for what he did proven by how he kept bragging and circulating the video. He will do this again in college to another woman. If he were 13, I would see your point, but a 16 year old who commits rape just stepped into adulthood by his actions. This case went beyond date rape, where both parties were smashed. He admitted to rape on video. He needs to be removed from society and provided help to prevent rapes like this in the future.
If he's a child, he's a child, with the limited cognitive functions of a child, unable to process the world as an adult can. There's no question. That's a valid reason why children are treated/punished differently to adults. To then punish a child as an adult for something they cannot do (think like an adult) is perverse.
Drop the age of legal adulthood by all means, but at least be consistent. A child cannot "step into adulthood", they can only age and grow there.
Heinous crimes like this can be catered for in the legislation, for example by ordering ongoing inpatient psychiatric treatment.
 
Jan 2012
899
288
SoCal
#99
Except that he filmed it and CALLED it rape. That changes things considerably. She was clearly a victim not only because of the sex but because of the video. And while they were both drunk, she apparently was INCAPACITATED in a way he fully realized and took advantage of.

This isn't a "he said/she said" situation or a situation where consent was ambiguous in any way.
There is no way you can prove that a drunk 16 year old can have the expertise to understand that she was incapacitated. Nor is there proof that she was incapacitated at the time in question. Also reverse the question...why do you permit her to claim this and not him? How do you prove he was not incapacitated?

Mary and her family decided to press charges several months later, after Mary learned that the defendant was sharing video of the incident among their social circles despite telling her that there was no video.


Please explain to me how someone waits several months to prosecute this and that it isn't about the video versus about the sex that happened.

All this is not particularly distinct from treating him as an adult in the first place.

Not "simply because." He took responsibility for what he did, indeed bragged about it, and in fact published the video. The fact that he referred to what he did as "rape" indicates he was mature enough to know the difference between right and wrong. It just did not occur to him that he would get caught.
Except kids use language this way all the time. So do adults. Someone can go get a set of tires on their car and say they were raped by the tire shop aka the price was criminal. Sadly using rape as slang is profoundly common as is saying something was "murdered".

Finally again this isn't about right or wrong but about the legal system and how it works. Look at the exact quote. It is the infamous sort of half-sharing the youngsters are very good at doing without conveying real information...

"[w]hen your first time having sex was rape."


Is it his first time having sex? Is it hers? Does he mean it is their first time together? Does he mean he is raping her or that she has jumped his bones and is raping him?

If someone is defending against this... what has he really admitted to there? He can't be forced to testify against himself. No one else will be able to say they saw the actual act. She will claim she doesn't remember it happening and she didn't press forward for charges until several months later after she found out about a video.

Please explain this part to me...

Mary and her family decided to press charges several months later, after Mary learned that the defendant was sharing video of the incident among their social circles despite telling her that there was no video.

How does this not come out to be a false rape charge as revenge for not handling a matter in the manner in which she preferred?

Again we don't have the video but the news sources describe it in a manner that makes it seem pretty anonymous. I would bet if we viewed it we will not see faces.

According to court documents, the boy filmed the encounter, the girl's bare torso exposed and her head repeatedly banging against a wall. He allegedly shared the video with friends, and it continued to circulate for months despite the girl's pleas for him to stop its dissemination.


So I'm not saying the guy is a great human being but this does not sound like rape. It sounds like consensual sex with an embarrassing video.

Obviously charges could be filed over that video but again I'd bet it shows a head of hair, a female torso which I would guess is her bare back, and some motions. It may have even used the boomerang effect. If it showed something else they could charge for something else.

I
 
After reading more, I've come to the conclusion this judge is a total moron. He implied it couldn't be a real rape since there was only one man and no weapons involved !!!!


The judge stated that the boy had not shown ‘calculation or cruelty’ during the alleged attack and dismissed his text message as ‘a 16-year-old kid saying stupid c**t to his friends’.
This sounds DANGEROUSLY close to the Sharian Law standard where, unless there are FOUR male witnesses, a woman CAN'T be raped, she is therefore an adulteress.

This kid dragged this very intoxicated girl into a basement. Apparently she is so drunk she can barely walk. He has to practically carry her. She hits her head on the wall as she is being dragged and stumbling down the stairs. He blocked the door with some sort of table. Turns off the lights. Then films the entire episode with his cell phone.

Luckily this case has been overturned and the little shit will face a grand jury as an adult. God help him if there's a parent of a teenage girl in that room !!!
 
Likes: Madeline