Larry Nassar gets 175 years.....

MikeG said:
I am absolutely sure that if a judge in the UK spoke to a defendant the way this one did to Nassar that there would be a successful appeal and a re-trial. For example: Judge Aquilina said. "I wouldn’t send my dogs to you, sir" and "I just signed your death warrant."

I also think it utterly ridiculous to sentence people to terms of imprisonment longer than any human has ever lived. Wouldn't "rest of your natural life" do?
Click to expand...

Yes, it would, but the laws in question often don't allow that sentence for a particular crime. Also, for some crimes in some jurisdictions, even somebody with a life sentence may be eligible for parole after some term, and very long sentences may make that term longer. So, even though it seems ridiculous when taken at face value, there are practical reasons for prosecutors to seek, and judges to impose such sentences.

When there are multiple offenses, judges often have the option to impose them concurrently or consecutively. When imposed consecutively, they can add up to some pretty absurd numbers. Also, sometimes, you will hear of "consecutive life sentences"being imposed, which really doesn't make sense unless reincarnation is real, but, again, may effect how soon the person is eligible for parole.
 
tyr_13 said:
He sexually assaulted more than 150 women and girls.

His actions were especially egregious just by number of assaults.
Click to expand...

Doesn't stop the prison sentence handed down to him from being absurdly long. I mean he got 60 years in prison for possessing child pornography alone. That prison is like one or even two orders of magnitude higher than he'd receive in Sweden, and it's quite likely he'd simply receive day fines instead of prison for the child pornography.
 
MikeG said:
Did he actually confess to rape? That's a simple yes/ no question, and the reason for asking it is that this is precisely what you claimed.

You've just committed a really silly logical fallacy. Let's see if an analogy would help.

Man walks into a police station and says "I confess to a driving offense".

Policeman says "Death by dangerous driving is a driving offense, so I'm charging you with that".
Click to expand...
The charges to which he pleaded guilty were first-degree.

From Michigan law:
1st degree (felony): A sexual act involving penetration (broadly defined) and any of the following:
  • Victim is under 13 years old;
  • Victim is 13-15 years old + is a blood affiliation to the defendant, lives in the defendant's household, or the defendant is in an authority position to the victim;
  • Multiple actors are involved and force/coercion was used to accomplish the sexual penetration or the victim is incapacitated (physically helpless, mentally incapacitated or mentally defective)
    weapon involved;
  • Personal injury + force/coercion;
  • Personal injury + victim incapacitated (Unable to consent to due age, mental challenged or due to intoxication, date rape drug, etc); or
  • Defendant is in the process of committing another felony.
Click to expand...
Now, are you really going to continue to quibble about calling him a confessed rapist just because the charges have a different title?
 
Babbylonian said:
........Now, are you really going to continue to quibble about calling him a confessed rapist just because the charges have a different title?
Click to expand...

Yes.

From your own link:

Includes vaginal, anal or oral intercourse or putting a finger or other object into another person’s anal or genital opening.
Click to expand...

A finger in a child's anus is disgusting, but it isn't rape.

Did he plead guilty to rape? That was your claim. Do you want to withdraw it?
 
There is no crime called "rape" in Michigan. Rape can be charged, depending on the details, as one of a variety of types of Criminal Sexual Conduct. He was convicted on 15 counts of 1st degree CSC. The statutory minimum for 1st degree CSC is 25-years, and the maximum is Life. By statute 1st degree CSC is also eligible to consecutive sentencing with other crimes. Thus the judge could have said "I'm going to give you the statutory minimum of 25-years on each count, but you are going to be serving them consecutively for a grand total of 375 years".

The judge doesn't actually have to use the statutory minimum. Just based on what little I know of the case, I'd say the minimum from the Michigan sentencing guidelines would be, being very very very generous to Nassar, 81 months per count.

edit: I should also point out that since most of his charges are qualified with the victim being under 13, he qualifies on each of those charges for not just a life sentence, but a life without parole sentence.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
Did he actually confess to rape?
Click to expand...
Yes.

That's a simple yes/ no question
Click to expand...
Not really.

A more complete answer is that in Michigan law, the technical legal term for some of the kinds of things we call "rape" is "Criminal Sexual Conduct in the First Degree". Which is what he confessed to.

Are you seriously trying to argue that if someone confesses to using force to coerce someone into unwanted sex, in a Michigan court, they haven't actually confessed to raping someone? You really seem to be straining for a semantic DOK attack here.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
Tell Babbylonian. He claimed that this guy confessed to rape.
Click to expand...

I could care less if it was rape. He confessed to 1st degree CSC. Whether or not what he did conforms to someone's idea of what rape is, it does conform to Michigan's idea of what the most egregious form of sexual misconduct is.
 
Last edited:
MikeG said:
Tell Babbylonian. He claimed that this guy confessed to rape.
Click to expand...
Because he did, and no amount of semantic quibbling can change that. Sexual penetration - whether by penis, digit, or plunger handle - of another human being without consent is rape. That Michigan doesn't use that word in their criminal code doesn't mean the word is not applicable.
 
theprestige said:
Yes.


Not really.

A more complete answer is that in Michigan law, the technical legal term for some of the kinds of things we call "rape" is "Criminal Sexual Conduct in the First Degree". Which is what he confessed to.
Click to expand...

Which legally includes adultery as adultery is a felony. So technically adultery and raping a child are the same in the eyes of the law in michigan.
 
MikeG said:
You don't see how a judge expressing personal repugnance at a defendant prior to handing down an enormous sentence doesn't present the defendant with an opportunity to appeal? Well, OK, I probably can't help any more with that, other than just keep repeating the same thing.
Click to expand...

If a judge does not fell personal repugnance on what Nassar did, that judge should not be on the bench.
 
Arcade22 said:
Doesn't stop the prison sentence handed down to him from being absurdly long. I mean he got 60 years in prison for possessing child pornography alone. That prison is like one or even two orders of magnitude higher than he'd receive in Sweden, and it's quite likely he'd simply receive day fines instead of prison for the child pornography.
Click to expand...

Glad I don't live in Sweden where you apparently let sexual predators off with a slap on the wrist.....
 
Last edited:
theprestige said:
. . .
Click to expand...

Ha, you edited between the time I first saw your post and click reply. You've clearly already figured out ponderingturtle is crazily enough correct. Now, no one gets charged with Adultery in Michigan, and it is very likely any such charge would lead to a Supreme Court decision ultimately striking down the statute in question. So just looking at the laws on the books, yes adultery is a felony and sex while committing a felony is 1st degree CSC. However when you consider that the law is de facto not in force, and likely unconstitutional to boot, it isn't really a felony.
 
Babbylonian said:
Because he did, and no amount of semantic quibbling can change that. Sexual penetration - whether by penis, digit, or plunger handle - of another human being without consent is rape. That Michigan doesn't use that word in their criminal code doesn't mean the word is not applicable.
Click to expand...

For god's sake already. This is why it's impossible to take people seriously when they complain that women disclosing "not that bad" sexual misbehavior isn't fair to victims of what they call real rape. It's a laughably absurd complaint when I can click over into the very next thread and watch someone argue that it's unfair to call a guy who repeatedly shoved his fingers into children's anuses and vaginas during bogus "medical treatments" a rapist. Oh, but that's not the exact term the statute gives it - well congratulations, I guess that has to mean that literally no one can ever possibly be a rapist in the State of Michigan.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom