More Judges Protecting Rapists

[Tsukasa Buddha]

The 16-year-old girl was visibly intoxicated, her speech slurred, when a drunk 16-year-old boy sexually assaulted her in a dark basement during an alcohol-fueled pajama party in New Jersey, prosecutors said.

The boy filmed himself penetrating her from behind, her torso exposed, her head hanging down, prosecutors said. He later shared the cellphone video among friends, investigators said, and sent a text that said, “When your first time having sex was rape.”

But a family court judge said it wasn’t rape. Instead, he wondered aloud if it was sexual assault, defining rape as something reserved for an attack at gunpoint by strangers.

He also said the young man came from a good family, attended an excellent school, had terrific grades and was an Eagle scout. Prosecutors, the judge said, should have explained to the girl and her family that pressing charges would destroy the boy’s life.

So he denied prosecutors’ motion to try the 16-year-old as an adult. “He is clearly a candidate for not just college but probably for a good college,” Judge James Troiano of Superior Court said last year in a two-hour decision while sitting in Monmouth County.

Now the judge has been sharply rebuked by an appeals court in a scathing 14-page ruling that warned the judge against showing bias toward privileged teenagers.

...

In the other case, the appellate division reversed another judge’s decision not to try a 16-year-old boy as an adult after he was accused of sexually assaulting a 12-year-old girl in 2017.

The second family court judge, Marcia Silva, sitting in Middlesex County, denied a motion to try the teenager as an adult and said that “beyond losing her virginity, the State did not claim that the victim suffered any further injuries, either physical, mental or emotional.”

The appellate judges also upbraided Judge Silva, overturning her decision and noting that the teenager could be culpable because the 12-year-old was not old enough to provide consent in the first place.

Linky.

At least we are hearing about the cases because the appeals courts overturned them.

 

[Darat]

Astonishing. I can understand there being an issue about whether they have to stand trial as an adult or juvenile but how on earth could any qualified judge make those comments regarding rape in a judgement? Surely that should be enough for disciplinary action against the judges?

 

[Belz...]

Wow, this sort of asshat should be disbarred.

 

[Dave Rogers]

I honestly don't understand the mindset that leads to rulings like this. It seems that neither of these judges understands even what the law is. Good that the appeals court is doing its job.

Dave

 

[cullennz]

Should probably start chucking some charges against the parents of the boys in cases like those two

Not sure what, but something big enough for parents to realise they have to actually teach their kids not to be scum.

 

[dann]

It is a very recent thing that all teenagers carry smart phones and can make video recordings of their own feats. Unfortunately, there was no such thing when Kavanaugh was that age.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Seem like the judge forgot that you are supposed to keep your absurd biases unspoken. Luckily for the public, this judge was dumb enough to document his reasoning for leniency, allowing for it to be easily challenged.

The classism of this is so gross. Surely this judge has handed down sentences that have derailed many lives. But to derail the life of someone with a "bright future" is somehow beyond the pale. Toiling in the criminal justice system is meant for the little people, not rich kids on their way to the top of society.

 

[cullennz]

It is a very recent thing that all teenagers carry smart phones and can make video recordings of their own feats. Unfortunately, there was no such thing when Kavanaugh was that age.

Personally think that it is better to try to sort out the now and current scum than worry about blokes there is no evidence against from years ago.

Fixation with one case tends to mean not putting enough effort in the current.

But then hey, I am not even a yank and have no skin in the game. Just an observer wondering why people like yourself are fixated with sides of the fence and not who is an actual crappy parent letting kids get off

 

[Puppycow]

The classism of this is so gross. Surely this judge has handed down sentences that have derailed many lives. But to derail the life of someone with a "bright future" is somehow beyond the pale. Toiling in the criminal justice system is meant for the little people, not rich kids on their way to the top of society.

Yeah, this.

I am reluctant to charge a 16 year old as an adult. But the judge seems to have a special standard that only applies to some special people and not a general rule.

Getting good grades in school is not an excuse. Should not be a consideration.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Sadly Judges are like the President in the sense that certain "checks and balances" were never written into the core DNA of how they are placed into power because the assumption was the at very least halfway decent people would be the only ones elected, so the kinds of misuses of offices you had to watch out for where specific and didn't cover every possible angle.

 

[bignickel]

"Her little tune is such a happy song
Her son is innocent, he can't do wrong
'Cos Dad's a judge and knows exactly
What the job of judging's all about"
- XTC, "No Thugs In Our House"

 

[ponderingturtle]

I honestly don't understand the mindset that leads to rulings like this. It seems that neither of these judges understands even what the law is. Good that the appeals court is doing its job.

Dave

They don't want to see the lives of these criminals ruined by one little mistake. I mean being a rapist shouldn't get in the way of your fun college experience after all.

I wonder who they sentence blacks for pot possession though.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Why exactly are rape cases being heard by a family court in the first place?

Dave

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Why exactly are rape cases being heard by a family court in the first place?

Dave

Juvenile offender. Unless he is charged as an adult, they get kiddie court.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Juvenile offender. Unless he is charged as an adult, they get kiddie court.

Seems to be assuming a conclusion in both these cases.

Dave

 

[Bikewer]

During the recent sexual-assault seminar I’ve mentioned before, it was mentioned that these “privileged young men” are very likely to be repeat offenders and to continue this activity into adult life.

Likewise, that adults being investigated for such crimes should be scrutinized as to their past behavior as well.

 

[TragicMonkey]

During the recent sexual-assault seminar I’ve mentioned before, it was mentioned that these “privileged young men” are very likely to be repeat offenders and to continue this activity into adult life.

Likewise, that adults being investigated for such crimes should be scrutinized as to their past behavior as well.

Almost as if getting away with a crime encourages repetition.

 

[JoeMorgue]

Juvenile offender. Unless he is charged as an adult, they get kiddie court.

I'm not sure if that's the case.

I'm trying to find details and yet again I'm being reminded that local court websites are the literal worst designed things ever, but it seems like Juvenile Court and "Family Court" aren't the same thing in Jersey.

The "Family Practice Division" the New Jersey Court system deals marriage and divorce and annulment and and child support and adoptions and all that jazz, although they do mention a vague "juvenile delinquency" on their home page, so.... I have no idea.

The New Jersey Court's "Juvenile Justice Commission" seems to be the one to deal with actual like crimes committed by juveniles.

Like I said I'm a hard time finding like an actual clear breakdown of any of this and it could the article misspoke / was worded badly so all this should be taken with a grain of salt.

 

[JoeMorgue]

I don't particularly want to open this can of worms but both participants in the sex act being minors and intoxicated does raise a few questions for me.

 

[Craig4]

I wonder how Brett Kavanaugh would rule in cases like these.

Before or after he had a few beers?

 

[pharphis]

Seem like the judge forgot that you are supposed to keep your absurd biases unspoken. Luckily for the public, this judge was dumb enough to document his reasoning for leniency, allowing for it to be easily challenged.

The classism of this is so gross. Surely this judge has handed down sentences that have derailed many lives. But to derail the life of someone with a "bright future" is somehow beyond the pale. Toiling in the criminal justice system is meant for the little people, not rich kids on their way to the top of society.

well said

During the recent sexual-assault seminar I’ve mentioned before, it was mentioned that these “privileged young men” are very likely to be repeat offenders and to continue this activity into adult life.

Likewise, that adults being investigated for such crimes should be scrutinized as to their past behavior as well.

Privileged or not, iirc most rape are repeat offenses ie there are many more rapes than rapists.

Almost as if getting away with a crime encourages repetition.

yup

 

[Bouncing Bettys]

I don't particularly want to open this can of worms but both participants in the sex act being minors and intoxicated does raise a few questions for me.

 

[TragicMonkey]

[qimg]https://www.dailydot.com/wp-content/uploads/f7f/2a/jakejosie.jpg[/qimg]

That raises a question, too.

 

[3point14]

That raises a question, too.

The answer seems to be that women have no agency. According to the image.

That's a joke image, I assume?

 

[lomiller]

I don't particularly want to open this can of worms but both participants in the sex act being minors and intoxicated does raise a few questions for me.

I was leaning that way the first couple of lines, but the detailed description made it clear the degree of intoxication were vastly different between the two. She was near unconscious while he was fully capable of planning his actions.

 

[ponderingturtle]

The answer seems to be that women have no agency. According to the image.

That's a joke image, I assume?

No it is that men shouldn't be held accountable for raping women who are passed out because they had a few drinks as well. At least if you want to get into what the laws actually say.

 

[JoeMorgue]

That raises a question, too.

The answer seems to be that women have no agency. According to the image.

That's a joke image, I assume?

It's a well debunked "joke" image.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I honestly don't understand the mindset that leads to rulings like this. It seems that neither of these judges understands even what the law is. Good that the appeals court is doing its job.

Dave

You don't?

These men blame the girls for getting drunk, they see it as two kids drunk at a party, not a creepy guy or guys treating girls atrociously.

This was some good news in the NYT article:

One of the most notorious was in 2016, when a judge in California sentenced a Stanford University student to six months in jail after he was found guilty of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman. After an intense public backlash, California voters recalled the judge.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Is that the geezer that was accused with hardly any evidence, or another one?

It is hard to keep up

No, that was the one where the GOP legislators covered up and refused to actually look into all of the evidence.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

It is a very recent thing that all teenagers carry smart phones and can make video recordings of their own feats. Unfortunately, there was no such thing when Kavanaugh was that age.

He couldn't get her bathing suit off.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Personally think that it is better to try to sort out the now and current scum than worry about blokes there is no evidence against from years ago....

Yeah, good thing the appeals court overruled the judge's decision.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I'm not sure if that's the case.

I'm trying to find details and yet again I'm being reminded that local court websites are the literal worst designed things ever, but it seems like Juvenile Court and "Family Court" aren't the same thing in Jersey.

The "Family Practice Division" the New Jersey Court system deals marriage and divorce and annulment and and child support and adoptions and all that jazz, although they do mention a vague "juvenile delinquency" on their home page, so.... I have no idea.

The New Jersey Court's "Juvenile Justice Commission" seems to be the one to deal with actual like crimes committed by juveniles.

Like I said I'm a hard time finding like an actual clear breakdown of any of this and it could the article misspoke / was worded badly so all this should be taken with a grain of salt.

Since the appellate court ruled the judge went against the prosecutor, I think what happens is when a juvenile is charged with certain crimes, the prosecutor makes a recommendation in juve court to move the case to adult court.

If you think about it, someone has to decide. The prosecutor cannot decide on their own to try a juvenile in adult court. They must have to get a judge to rule on it. So it makes sense they go to juve court and petition for a ruling to move the case. The defendant then has a chance to object. In this case the prosecutor appealed the ruling.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

I don't particularly want to open this can of worms but both participants in the sex act being minors and intoxicated does raise a few questions for me.

He was sober enough to make a video of it that he then showed around. She was too drunk to remember anything.

The case is based on her not consenting. Obviously he did and was the initiator.

And the case has not been tried yet, only moved to adult court. He gets a chance to defend himself.

The bottom line is these guys need to know this is not OK. We resolved a long time ago that claiming it was the rape victim's fault is also not OK.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

That raises a question, too.

The only question I have is why the poster dismisses rape as "they hooked up".

There are plenty of teens and young adults having sex after a few drinks. Very few of these rape cases are about two people "hooking up". They are about boys and young men raping passed-out girls and women.

The poster sounds like it was produced by some adults trying to scare kids into behaving. It not only doesn't work, it repeats the stereotype that the guys aren't guilty, they are being called rapists when those girls were responsible for getting drunk at a party. There skirts were too short, evil temptresses, it's OK for boys to have sex but the girls they have sex with are whores.

I'm sure more than one girl has falsely accused a guy of raping her after they had sex. But that's not usually the case. Teens have sex. They drink.

This was rape.

 

[dann]

Personally think that it is better to try to sort out the now and current scum than worry about blokes there is no evidence against from years ago.

Fixation with one case tends to mean not putting enough effort in the current.

But then hey, I am not even a yank and have no skin in the game. Just an observer wondering why people like yourself are fixated with sides of the fence and not who is an actual crappy parent letting kids get off

I think that you're the one with the fixation. I mentioned him once, and you keep asking about him.

 

[Venom]

Should probably start chucking some charges against the parents of the boys in cases like those two

Not sure what, but something big enough for parents to realise they have to actually teach their kids not to be scum.

Really. How is it any less likely that that behavior is inherited? What are you going to charge for that?

He should be charged as an adult if it's rape.

 

[cullennz]

Really. How is it any less likely that that behavior is inherited? What are you going to charge for that?

He should be charged as an adult if it's rape.

It is young blokes with crap parents who don't teach their kids how to respect other people

 

[carlitos]

The judge is clearly in the wrong here, but I'd vote against the judge even having the discretion to charge a 16 year old "as an adult." A 16 year old isn't an adult. Unless we are going to have judges judging case-by-case when someone becomes an adult for voting, drinking or contracts, we should not have judges judging individual cases as to when someone becomes an adult for raping.

 

[JoeMorgue]

The judge is clearly in the wrong here, but I'd vote against the judge even having the discretion to charge a 16 year old "as an adult." A 16 year old isn't an adult. Unless we are going to have judges judging case-by-case when someone becomes an adult for voting, drinking or contracts, we should not have judges judging individual cases as to when someone becomes an adult for raping.

I'm not a fan that, outside of very rare on-off cases like parental emancipation, that in our legal system the only time a minor magically becomes an adult is when they did something wrong.

Please note that not trying them as an adult does not mean letting them get away with things or not getting justice to any victims of any crimes they might commit.

But yeah there is something off about someone committing rape (legally) when they couldn't have legally had sex. You can't go before a judge and go "I think I'm old and mature enough to bang" so it should work inverted in the opposite direction.

 

[Venom]

It is young blokes with crap parents who don't teach their kids how to respect other people

A large majority of our personality is inherited. Parents can teach certain behaviors or habits, and kids have varying levels of receptivity to that, often based on how open their parents themselves once were!

And actually this is primal universal behavior of men anyway. It doesn't magically come up at a legal age, like we like to pretend in the back of our minds.

I bet if he looked a tad bit scruffier in the face and was 365 days older, he'd be charged as an adult.