Harshest sentence ever?

[The Atheist]

It was always going to be USA, wasn't it?

To me, this is on par with 1000 lashes for blogging.

Jennifer Fichter: sentenced to 22 years for having sex with three school pupils.

Where are the victims?

22 years?

In almost all of the rest of the world, 16 is deemed old enough to consent to sex and it is insane to have laws which send someone to jail for having sex with any number of 17 year olds.

Do US mommies still wipe their boys' bottoms at 17? What 17 yo isn't having sex? Or wishing he was?

In a nice counterpoint to the often-seen difference in treatment of males and females by the justice system, Bernabe Flores only copped 8 years for raping a 12 year old girl.

It ain't just guns that's wrong with USA.

 

[HumanityBlues]

I don't see why this seems overly harsh. She raped three students who were minors. If this were a man who did this to young girls, I'm guessing there wouldn't be a controversy over the sentencing. The sentence is however inconsistent with another similar case in Washington where a teacher had sex with three of her students and got less than a year. She plead guilty though.http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/08/29/3352396/former-tacoma-teacher-who-had.html

I was actually at the sentencing hearing. I can tell you the families of the boys she raped were not happy with such a light sentence.

 

[The Atheist]

I don't see why this seems overly harsh. She raped three students who were minors.

Sorry, but that's bollocks.

As stated, USA is one of very few countries where it's illegal to have sex with a 17 yo.

It doesn't fit any category of "rape" and demeans real rape victims by calling it rape. Note the charge doesn't mention rape either. The specific charge is "sex with a minor".

If this were a man who did this to young girls, I'm guessing there wouldn't be a controversy over the sentencing. The sentence is however inconsistent with another similar case in Washington where a teacher had sex with three of her students and got less than a year. She plead guilty though.http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/08/29/3352396/former-tacoma-teacher-who-had.html

Jennifer Fichter also pleaded guilty.

I was actually at the sentencing hearing. I can tell you the families of the boys she raped were not happy with such a light sentence.

I note her "victims" were 14 and 16, which makes the disparity even worse.

 

[roger]

Her first victim was in the 8th grade [1]. she was accused of it, left that school district, entered another, and had sex with another student within a month of starting her job. [2]

She got pregnant and had an abortion.

I guess it feels good to bray about America and 17yo boys, but let's not lose sight of the facts in the process.

[1] http://s3.documentcloud.org/documents/1146766/ocps-investigation-report-jennifer-fichter.pdf

[2] http://www.cbsnews.com/news/predator-teacher-gets-22-years-for-sex-with-students/

 

[The Atheist]

Her first victim was in the 8th grade [1]. she was accused of it, left that school district, entered another, ...

Note: it was sending inappropriate texts to an 8th grader. No sex was involved.

and had sex with another student within a month of starting her job. [2]

Does that make it worse than if she'd been there for a year or two?

She got pregnant and had an abortion.

To a 17 year old.

Pregnancy is indeed a possible outcome of having sex. It was the accused who had the abortion, not the victim, so I don't see the relevance.

I guess it feels good to bray about America and 17yo boys, but let's not lose sight of the facts in the process.

Couldn't agree more - the facts are exactly as presented: she had sex with three "boys" and has been sentenced to 22 years in jail for it.

I'd love to know who made the complaints: the boys or the mommies?

I have mommies at $1-01.

 

[Andy_Ross]

She was in a position of trust. She broke the law.
If you aren't happy with the law get it changed.

 

[Aepervius]

It was always going to be USA, wasn't it?

To me, this is on par with 1000 lashes for blogging.

Jennifer Fichter: sentenced to 22 years for having sex with three school pupils.

Where are the victims?

22 years?

In almost all of the rest of the world, 16 is deemed old enough to consent to sex and it is insane to have laws which send someone to jail for having sex with any number of 17 year olds.

Do US mommies still wipe their boys' bottoms at 17? What 17 yo isn't having sex? Or wishing he was?

In a nice counterpoint to the often-seen difference in treatment of males and females by the justice system, Bernabe Flores only copped 8 years for raping a 12 year old girl.

It ain't just guns that's wrong with USA.

Even in countries like sweden or germany having sex with one of your pupil is forbidden. We have other threads about that. That leads to the paradox that if you have sex with any 15 years old you are safe, but if it is somebody you are in position of pwoer (e.g. tutor) then you better off waiting for 18+.

 

[The Atheist]

She was in a position of trust. She broke the law.
If you aren't happy with the law get it changed.

No need, it isn't the law where I live.

I agree on the abuse of trust and that it's unethical. Not worth 22 years in jail, that's for sure.

Even in countries like sweden or germany having sex with one of your pupil is forbidden. We have other threads about that. That leads to the paradox that if you have sex with any 15 years old you are safe, but if it is somebody you are in position of pwoer (e.g. tutor) then you better off waiting for 18+.

Same here.

However, in neither NZ or Europe do teachers go to jail when the pupils are over the age of consent.

 

[HumanityBlues]

Sorry, but that's bollocks.

As stated, USA is one of very few countries where it's illegal to have sex with a 17 yo.

It doesn't fit any category of "rape" and demeans real rape victims by calling it rape. Note the charge doesn't mention rape either. The specific charge is "sex with a minor".

It fits the category of statutory rape, as set out by the legislature that makes the laws. Crimes are defined in the criminal codes, so yes, it was rape, per Florida's statutory rape statute. Anyway, where do you draw the line? 16, 15, 14? Clearly you are using your own definition or rape, so at what age do you consider sex with a minor non-consensual?

You emphasize that the charge is "sex with a minor" not "rape". Well, it is still a felony in her state under Florida's statutory rape statute. Now, just because it is a law doesn't make it just, I will give you that. That being said, I'm curious if you think what this woman did anything punishable at all.

I note her "victims" were 14 and 16, which makes the disparity even worse.

How much worse is 16 than 17? I am not much for retributive punishment in the first place, and I doubt if this woman was sentenced to 5 years instead of 22, she would be much of a threat to minors anymore once she got out.

What would you change in the law if you could?

 

[The Atheist]

It fits the category of statutory rape,...

If you don't understand the difference between statutory rape, which is neither forceful nor coercive, and rape, which is, then I probably can't help you.

Anyway, where do you draw the line? 16, 15, 14? Clearly you are using your own definition or rape,...

No, I'm using the yardstick of 16, which is by far the most-prevalent age of consent.

... so at what age do you consider sex with a minor non-consensual?

I don't know, because each case is individual. That's why we draw a legal line, and in most developed nations, that is 16.

That being said, I'm curious if you think what this woman did anything punishable at all.

In law, no. In ethics, 100%.

She should never be allowed to teach again, and that's what her punishment would have been in most other developed nations.

How much worse is 16 than 17?

None at all; it was the 14 that makes a difference.

What would you change in the law if you could?

Obviously, the age of consent.

65,280 girls* aged under 18 have abortions annually in USA. They can't all be immaculate conceptions, and they can't get pregnant in every case, so I'm guessing quite a few kids under 18 are screwing.

*1.7% of women aged 15-44 have an abortion each year = 1,020,000

6.4% of them are aged under 18 - 65,280.

 

[HumanityBlues]

If you don't understand the difference between statutory rape, which is neither forceful nor coercive, and rape, which is, then I probably can't help you.

You fail to recognize a few things. The premise of statutory rape laws in the United States is that minors of certain age, even when they choose to engage freely in sexual acts with others of legal age, cannot legally deemed to have consented to the sexual act. Your argument implies there's no difference here and that statutory rape can never be rape unless the minor is physically forced or coerced into a sexual act. The law in Florida says that the sex is not consensual until the age of 18. You may argue that the age limit is too high, and fair enough, but as far as the law is concerned, statutory rape and rape are the same thing.

No, I'm using the yardstick of 16, which is by far the most-prevalent age of consent.

The age of consent is 14 in Italy, Germany, Austria, and Portugal. 15 in France, Denmark and Greece. These are all developed countries.

I don't know, because each case is individual. That's why we draw a legal line, and in most developed nations, that is 16.

Ok great. I can understand that view. But what is the actual justification of those developed nations for that age of consent and why are they right?

In law, no. In ethics, 100%.

The law of her jurisdiction says it was rape and I'm sure as a teacher she probably had knowledge of that law. Was it really so hard for this woman to just not have sex with someone under the age of 18?

She should never be allowed to teach again, and that's what her punishment would have been in most other developed nations.

Obviously, the age of consent.

65,280 girls* aged under 18 have abortions annually in USA. They can't all be immaculate conceptions, and they can't get pregnant in every case, so I'm guessing quite a few kids under 18 are screwing.

*1.7% of women aged 15-44 have an abortion each year = 1,020,000

6.4% of them are aged under 18 - 65,280.

Most kids are screwing in the United States. Age of consent laws don't forbid youngsters from screwing each other. They prevent older people from screwing youngsters.

 

[Samson]

I don't see why this seems overly harsh. She raped three students who were minors. If this were a man who did this to young girls, I'm guessing there wouldn't be a controversy over the sentencing. The sentence is however inconsistent with another similar case in Washington where a teacher had sex with three of her students and got less than a year. She plead guilty though.http://www.thenewstribune.com/2014/08/29/3352396/former-tacoma-teacher-who-had.html

I was actually at the sentencing hearing. I can tell you the families of the boys she raped were not happy with such a light sentence.

1. What is the minimum time she will serve?
2. What is the maximum time she will serve?
3. What is the probable time she will serve?

 

[The Atheist]

You fail to recognize a few things.

Nope.

I understand the legal position.

The law is an ass.

Ok great. I can understand that view. But what is the actual justification of those developed nations for that age of consent and why are they right?

I'm not saying they are right, and as to why they pick that number, go ask.

As you point out, some countries have lower ages.

Most kids are screwing in the United States. Age of consent laws don't forbid youngsters from screwing each other. They prevent older people from screwing youngsters.

I don't quite understand how that makes a difference, actually. Sex is sex, isn't it? An older person might be more coercive, but so might a teenager.

 

[Samson]

Nope.

I understand the legal position.

The law is an ass.




I'm not saying they are right, and as to why they pick that number, go ask.

As you point out, some countries have lower ages.



I don't quite understand how that makes a difference, actually. Sex is sex, isn't it? An older person might be more coercive, but so might a teenager.

Slightly odd case. In the way back machine , I am not certain how we should feel in that event. I have little doubt there is a fearsome asymmetry to consider, rather than a clinical denouncement of any such encounter.
But I would not dear even discuss it in our ridiculous country, where PC means you can't say 30% of recent Auckland house purchases are by non resident Chinese without being called racist. Wut??

 

[funk de fino]

22 years in insane. Looney tunes stuff.

 

[Samson]

22 years in insane. Looney tunes stuff.

We are waiting for Humanitarian Blues to explain how long she will be, er, jumping the fence.

 

[The Atheist]

Slightly odd case. In the way back machine , I am not certain how we should feel in that event. I have little doubt there is a fearsome asymmetry to consider, rather than a clinical denouncement of any such encounter.
But I would not dear even discuss it in our ridiculous country, where PC means you can't say 30% of recent Auckland house purchases are by non resident Chinese without being called racist. Wut??

Funniest of all was Phil Goff's attempt to clear the mess up with some common sense changes to the law. The way the whole thing got twisted in the public's minds to it being a law that would allow dirty old men to bonk 13 yo girls was hysterically funny.

The subject of sex causes such a frenzy you'd wonder anyone ever gets born.

22 years in insane. Looney tunes stuff.

I expect that is most people's reaction.

 

[HumanityBlues]

We are waiting for Humanitarian Blues to explain how long she will be, er, jumping the fence.

I don't get this.

 

[Monketi Ghost]

Nice of OP to take the opportunity for a snide anti-US comment.
Never miss an opportunity, people.

 

[The Atheist]

Nice of OP to take the opportunity for a snide anti-US comment.
Never miss an opportunity, people.

It's like dairy cows - so easy, so many opportunities and every now and then it feels good to shoot one.