• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Judge under fire for rape sentence, implying victim was promiscuous

Top Cat

He's the most tip top
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 4, 2011
Messages
32,844
Reaction score
14,465
Location
Near Seattle
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
(CNN) -- She could have sentenced him to 20 years in prison after he admitted to raping a 14-year-old girl in her high school.
Instead, a Texas judge gave the defendant a 45-day sentence and probation after implying that the victim was promiscuous.

Judge Jeanine Howard told The Dallas Morning News that she based the sentence, in part, on medical records indicating that the girl had had three sexual partners and had given birth.

Critics fear the decision could discourage other victims from reporting rapes.

She told the newspaper that the victim "wasn't the victim she claimed to be" and said the defendant, 20-year-old Sir Young, "is not your typical sex offender."

"We're certainly concerned about the message that's being sent to victims of sexual assault," said Andrea Moseley, chief prosecutor for the Dallas County District Attorney's Office.


But it wasn't just the sentence that drew criticism; it was the type of community service Young was also sentenced to.
Young, who was a schoolmate of the victim's when the rape occurred in 2011, was ordered to serve 250 hours of community service at a rape crisis center. The center later said he was not welcome there.

Judge under fire for rape sentence, implying victim was promiscuous - CNN.com


A very bizarre story.
 
Stupid is as stupid does. Just because.
 
So I didnt see it but he's not being charged with statutory rape? I guess because he was also a minor at the time. Was he charged because the laws states he must be charged because he had sex with a 14 yr old (like lots of 16 yr olds might do, for ex) or did he rape her?

If it was actually consensual sex (even if not legally consensual), then the fact that the girl was already sexually active may just have influenced the judge into choosing not to ruin the kid's life by sending him to a hard-core facility where he'd end up coming out a criminal. Just a possibility, I can only speculate.

Edit: Not consensual:
"Allen further claimed that the victim had agreed to have sex with Young, just not on campus, and "upon making this bad judgment, he admitted that he proceeded over her objections to stop, and he admitted that to the police.""
 
So I didnt see it but he's not being charged with statutory rape? I guess because he was also a minor at the time. Was he charged because the laws states he must be charged because he had sex with a 14 yr old (like lots of 16 yr olds might do, for ex) or did he rape her?

If it was actually consensual sex (even if not legally consensual), then the fact that the girl was already sexually active may just have influenced the judge into choosing not to ruin the kid's life by sending him to a hard-core facility where he'd end up coming out a criminal. Just a possibility, I can only speculate.


According to the article she said no and he didn't stop...by his admission. But then the public service at a crisis center for women? THAT was really strange.
 
Allen further claimed that the victim had agreed to have sex with Young, just not on campus, and "upon making this bad judgment, he admitted that he proceeded over her objections to stop, and he admitted that to the police."

"We don't think that he qualifies as your typical sex offender. This is not somebody who has preyed on some young kids or unsuspecting people."

He's not a typical sex offended because he didn't do it before?

Umm - first time for everything. Does that make rape any less bad?

And who gives a **** about her sexual history - like that denies her the right to say no.
 
"What we have here is an 18-year-old high school student who was very talented, very gifted," Allen said, adding that Young had scholarship offers from a "couple of universities."

I wonder if he was an athlete, they tend to get away with a lot. I wonder if the victim was black or Hispanic. And how did the judge get the victims medical records?

There was good news:
"[The judge] removed herself from the case Friday and the case has been assigned to a different court. Prosecutors also filed a motion Friday asking that the new judge overseeing the case order 20-year-old Sir Young to follow the standard requirements for a sex offender – some of which are legally required."
North Texas judge's sentence, comments in case of teen's rape spur outrage | khou.com Houston
 
I can see good cause for a lighter sentence, though maybe not that light. The age of the two individuals is a factor as both were teenagers and classmates at the time. Him confessing to the crime should also generally lead to a lighter sentence. You also have the statement that she had actually consented to having sex with him, just not in the school. This being a first-time offense always suggests a lighter sentence is appropriate. Essentially you have a teenager who, in the heat of the moment, made a bad decision that hurt another person and then confessed to his actions. While a harsher sentence might have been appropriate, given that it is quite possible a harsher sentence would have included various things that are basically life-destroying measures under our current system I can understand the reluctance. The rape crisis center part was ill-considered, though I do at least get what she was thinking in suggesting it. Were this young man sentenced to 20 years and treated as a child sex offender then that would have been worse, from my perspective, though obviously that is how some would prefer it be handled.
 
Yeah, there's been a lot of this kind of judicial nonsense regarding rape going around lately. Disheartening as hell.
 
I mean, we have judges for a reason. If we just want automatic sentencing, we can make robots for that.
 
Watching this on CNN right now and one of the commentators - Sunny Hostin, a former prosecutor of sexual offenders - felt the sentence was right. She cited the fact that the kid admitted his guilt the day of the incident and was apparently contrite. She also noted that registering as a sex offender for the rest of one's life is a pretty harsh punishment in and of itself.

She also thought the community service at a rape crisis center was sensible and likened it to drunk drivers being forced to confront victims of drunk driving.

I don't often agree with her and while I'm not sure about the last she seems on target otherwise.
 
Watching this on CNN right now and one of the commentators - Sunny Hostin, a former prosecutor of sexual offenders - felt the sentence was right. She cited the fact that the kid admitted his guilt the day of the incident and was apparently contrite. She also noted that registering as a sex offender for the rest of one's life is a pretty harsh punishment in and of itself.

She also thought the community service at a rape crisis center was sensible and likened it to drunk drivers being forced to confront victims of drunk driving.

I don't often agree with her and while I'm not sure about the last she seems on target otherwise.

I mean, that's kind of what judges are for. They weigh the crime and evidence and hand out punishment appropriately. It is possible that one need not punish this individual for the full 20 years and on registries to ruin his life and all sorts of other unreasonable and infinite punishments we come up with in our revenge fueled society.
 
In Arkansas he would receive a sentence of ten to forty years, or LWOP. And people say Arkansans are stupid.
 
He's not a typical sex offended because he didn't do it before?

Umm - first time for everything. Does that make rape any less bad?

And who gives a **** about her sexual history - like that denies her the right to say no.

Giving out a probation before judgement on an admitted rape charge is completely insane but to announce (falsely?) that the victim, a minor, was promiscuous and had given birth should be grounds for prosecution. The judge involved is a demorat and is running unopposed. Fortunately this case is no longer hers - we will see what happens.

Texas judge recuses self after saying rape victim, 14, 'wasn't the victim she claimed to be' | Fox News
 
None of you know this kid or the accuser, so you are speaking from the hole where **** is supposed to come out of.
 
Giving out a probation before judgement on an admitted rape charge is completely insane but to announce (falsely?) that the victim, a minor, was promiscuous and had given birth should be grounds for prosecution. The judge involved is a demorat and is running unopposed. Fortunately this case is no longer hers - we will see what happens.

I was wondering who would try and make this political.... :2wave:

Should we mention that the 'Affluenza' case was also in Texas and heard before a RepubliCON judge???? :doh

Jean Boyd, 323rd Family District Court. Just a small matter of killing 4 people while drunk driving....

To me it would appear that in Texas the political affiliation matters little... :peace
 

Not just bizarre but also a moron of a judge. I could care less if a woman slept with 50 men voluntarily but if she is assaulted by someone who forces her to have sex even after saying no several times and stop and the guy is still forcing himself on that woman that he is guilty of rape.

He even admitted to doing that (having sex with someone who did not want to have sex with him) and is getting off almost completely with no punishment.

That would be bizarre and moronic enough, but this is also a case in which the victim is only 14 years old.

This judge needs to be committed to a mental institution for her insanity. Because not only did she give him virtually no punishment, she also gave him community service at a rape crisis center, what kind of moronic judge does that. You force a rapist on rape victims? How idiotic is that. This lady needs to have her judgeship taken from her.
 
None of you know this kid or the accuser, so you are speaking from the hole where **** is supposed to come out of.

Do we need to?

Since when does shaping opinions based on facts given regarding a criminal trial a matter of personal knowledge of the individual? I think that's the problem: people think that 'he was a good kid' amounts to something, here.
 
No means no. Doesn't matter how many partners the girl has had. Doesn't matter how old they are.
 
Since when does shaping opinions based on facts given regarding a criminal trial a matter of personal knowledge of the individual?

That's, uhh, kinda what judges do.
 
In a bizarre way, I kind of like it. Not that the part about the judge trying to slut shame a 14 year old. That's messed up as hell. But this boy having to see firsthand the kind of pain that his actions cause, maybe that's how you scare someone straight. Perhaps we should be putting boys to work in this way before they hurt anyone?
 
That's, uhh, kinda what judges do.

Is rape a matter of opinion or fact?

Judges are supposed to critically apply the law. That's not the same as people sitting down and forming their own opinion and interpreting events in various ways based on a small number of facts.
 
Is rape a matter of opinion or fact? Judges are supposed to critically apply the law. That's not the same as people sitting down and forming their own opinion and interpreting events in various ways based on a small number of facts.
Judges are supposed to form opinions and interpret events based on a small number of facts. That is pretty much what being a judge is about. She did not overstep her authority in any fashion. You simply disagree with the exact opinions she formed and how she interpreted events. One point I just thought about is that the defendant plead guilty, but there is no mention that this involved any agreement on sentencing. If that is true then this young man essentially gave the court carte blanche to do with him as they willed. That would be another indicator of sincere remorse and thus cause for imposing a lighter sentence.
 
Judges are supposed to form opinions and interpret events based on a small number of facts. That is pretty much what being a judge is about. She did not overstep her authority in any fashion. You simply disagree with the exact opinions she formed and how she interpreted events. One point I just thought about is that the defendant plead guilty, but there is no mention that this involved any agreement on sentencing. If that is true then this young man essentially gave the court carte blanche to do with him as they willed. That would be another indicator of sincere remorse and thus cause for imposing a lighter sentence.

Well here's the frustration: when it comes to cases involving minors the public is not privy to all the details of the trial.
 
Back
Top Bottom