[news] Judge gives rapist 6 months

[Max Peck]

California lawmakers pass rape bill inspired by Stanford case

California lawmakers, responding to outrage over the six-month jail term given to a former Stanford University swimmer after his conviction for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman, passed legislation on Monday closing a loophole that allowed the sentence. The bill now goes to Democratic Governor Jerry Brown for his approval. He has not indicated whether he will sign it into law. The measure was introduced in response to the sentence given to 20-year-old Brock Turner by Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky in June, which was widely condemned as too lenient. Prosecutors had asked that Turner be given six years in state prison. He is scheduled to be released on Friday from jail in Northern California. "Sexually assaulting an unconscious or intoxicated victim is a terrible crime and our laws need to reflect that," Democratic Assemblyman Bill Dodd, a co-author of the legislation, said in a written statement following its passage. Turner was convicted of assault with intent to commit rape, penetration of an intoxicated person and penetration of an unconscious person in the January 2015 attack. Under California law, those charges are not considered rape because they did not involve penile penetration. The uproar over the sentence, fueled in part by the victim's harrowing letter in which she detailed the assault in graphic terms, comes amid growing outrage over sexual assault on U.S. college campuses. “This bill is about more than sentencing, it’s about supporting victims and changing the culture on our college campuses to help prevent future crimes," Dodd said. The case has also led to efforts to remove Persky from the bench. Earlier this month, the judge asked for a transfer to civil court. According to the legislators, current California law calls for a mandatory prison term in cases of rape or sexual assault where force is used, but not when the victim is unconscious or severely intoxicated and thus unable to resist. The bill, which faced no serious opposition in the Democratic-controlled legislature, would eliminate a judge's discretion to sentence defendants convicted of such crimes to probation. Under its provisions, Turner would have faced a minimum of three years behind bars.

[Isgrimnur]

Why do you hate paragraph breaks? #<p>tagsmatter</p>

[Max Peck]

Why do you hate paragraph breaks? #<p>tagsmatter</p>

Like most articles on the web, that one didn't have paragraphs, it had vertical whitespace between sentences. If I was feeling more unlazy, I'd try to organize it into proper paragraphs, but I'm not so I didn't.

[Isgrimnur]

My copy/paste from the link with no formatting.

California lawmakers, responding to outrage over the six-month jail term given to a former Stanford University swimmer after his conviction for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman, passed legislation on Monday closing a loophole that allowed the sentence.

The bill now goes to Democratic Governor Jerry Brown for his approval. He has not indicated whether he will sign it into law.

[El Guapo]

Well, it's a hastily passed measure to respond to intense public outrage over a particular set of bad facts. What could go wrong?

[Paingod]

Well, it's a hastily passed measure to respond to intense public outrage over a particular set of bad facts. What could go wrong?

That depends on the scope. Does it cover just true potential and actual sexual assaults, or did they slip in language about unwanted hugging?

[Max Peck]

My copy/paste from the link with no formatting.

California lawmakers, responding to outrage over the six-month jail term given to a former Stanford University swimmer after his conviction for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman, passed legislation on Monday closing a loophole that allowed the sentence.

The bill now goes to Democratic Governor Jerry Brown for his approval. He has not indicated whether he will sign it into law.

Yes, a sentence followed by vertical whitespace followed by a sentence. Do you have a point, other than being supercilious?

[Isgrimnur]

I've made my point. Whether you take anything away from it is up to you.

[El Guapo]

I've made my point. Whether you take anything away from it is up to you.

If I'm reading this right...Hillary should go to prison for treason.

[naednek]

I've made my point. Whether you take anything away from it is up to you.

If I'm reading this right...Hillary should go to prison for treason.

quit flipping me off and stop photocopying your nut sac

[Alefroth]

unwanted hugging?

Would that be assault, and not sexual assault?

[Punisher]

I've made my point. Whether you take anything away from it is up to you.

If I'm reading this right...Hillary should go to prison for treason.

quit flipping me off and stop photocopying your nut sac

hmm. I saw a very weird, very sad bunny..

[McNutt]

It's a koala flipping you off, but with his index fingers. Because he's a koala.

[LordMortis]

I see Piccard's head in hands. Something like



Only more like thinking than frustrated

intense public outrage over a particular set of bad facts.

I can't speak to the measure but what bad facts are there, in particular?

[El Guapo]

intense public outrage over a particular set of bad facts.

I can't speak to the measure but what bad facts are there, in particular?

I mean it's not really "bad" facts so much as "outrage-inducing facts", but basically that you have a douchey-defendant, a judge overly sympathetic to the rapist rather than the rapee, and no real doubt (that I'm aware of) as to the defendant's guilt. Because it's so outrageous the legislature rushes to address this specific (outrage inducing) situation.

But "bad facts make bad law" is a truism for a reason. The legislature rushes to address these specific facts without (necessarily) considering the broader situation. So this gets closed, but then the next judge's hands are tied when an overzealous prosecutor is trying to put a sympathetic defendant away for decades for something that might merit a much lesser sentence.

[LordMortis]

intense public outrage over a particular set of bad facts.

I can't speak to the measure but what bad facts are there, in particular?

I mean it's not really "bad" facts so much as "outrage-inducing facts", but basically that you have a douchey-defendant, a judge overly sympathetic to the rapist rather than the rapee, and no real doubt (that I'm aware of) as to the defendant's guilt. Because it's so outrageous the legislature rushes to address this specific (outrage inducing) situation.

But "bad facts make bad law" is a truism for a reason. The legislature rushes to address these specific facts without (necessarily) considering the broader situation. So this gets closed, but then the next judge's hands are tied when an overzealous prosecutor is trying to put a sympathetic defendant away for decades for something that might merit a much lesser sentence.

Gotcha

[El Guapo]

Relatedly, this article sums up a lot of my concerns with the response to Turner's sentencing. It also gets at the tension between "lock 'em up!" sentiments, which are justified at least in particular instances, and the general desire to reduce mass incarceration.

[Isgrimnur]

I'm fine with us not shortening sexual assault convictions. The president is handing out sentence leniency and commutations for nonviolent drug offenders.

[Scuzz]

So in my town there is a neighborhood in uproar because the state is placing a 5 time felon (sex crimes with kids) in a $370k house in their area. Down the street from a park and not far from a school.

This begs many questions, such as...

Do they do this for every criminal released?
Why such a nice place?
Five times....why is he even getting out?

[hepcat]

I'm guessing there's more to the story than what you're hearing.

[LordMortis]

I'm fine with us not shortening sexual assault convictions. The president is handing out sentence leniency and commutations for nonviolent drug offenders.

I would love to see the prisons reduced in their populations for non violent crimes and even seen a good deal of those non violent felonies turned into civil infractions but violent crimes are different story. Emotional response or not, I want them removed from the general population. There is something completely unfair about a victim's live being changed horribly forever, while the perpetrator is seen as being in need of the legal ability to move on to a better life as quickly as possible.

...

I'm not a progressive but I do concur that we need to reduce the poor in the country by lifting them up and it's my belief that this would be best done short term by increasing taxes on everyone and dedicating the next decade or longer to rebuilding and expanding public works infrastructure. That where I strongly diverge from traditional conservative or libertarian talking points.

[El Guapo]

I'm guessing there's more to the story than what you're hearing.

Indeed. State governments are not in the business of buying homes for ex-felons (or anyone, for that matter). It's possible that they are *permitting* him to buy a home in an area that he might not otherwise be allowed to live under sex offender rules (e.g., within X distance from a school), with his own money.

Either way, the facts as presented are almost certainly not the actual facts.

[Scuzz]

I'm guessing there's more to the story than what you're hearing.

Indeed. State governments are not in the business of buying homes for ex-felons (or anyone, for that matter). It's possible that they are *permitting* him to buy a home in an area that he might not otherwise be allowed to live under sex offender rules (e.g., within X distance from a school), with his own money.

Either way, the facts as presented are almost certainly not the actual facts.

Possibly, the radio report was pretty hysterical. Sadly my local newspaper requires me to pay to see stories on-line now. What is with newspapers? It's like they want to see how fast they can screw themselves over.

I did find this but..

http://www.yourcentralvalley.com/news/v ... ighborhood

[Isgrimnur]

And that article is all over the place with little to back up its assertions.

Rape is enabled by cultural norms

Nothing to back that up. I'd love to see some research that our culture fosters it. Because I'm sure it's totally out culture and not other things. Iceland doesn't exactly seem like they have their issues resolved either.

To end mass incarceration, progressives will need to persuade their fellow citizens that we can reduce penalties for violent crime without reducing our concern for its victims.

Our media sure likes to tell me that punishing the perpetrator of a crime is good for closure for the victim. And our society is much more about devoting resources to easy fixes. I'm all for increased support for the victims, but we can't get paid parental leave or better mental healthcare for those that need it. Getting better long-term support for sexual assault victims isn't going to sell well to red-staters, either.

There is a culture of rape; but also, an economics. Women are disproportionately represented among our nation’s poor. And impoverished women suffer a disproportionate share of our nation’s sexual violence: Women at the bottom of the income ladder are six times more likely to be sexually abused than those at the top. Policies that reduce the number of low-income women who are economically dependent on their partners will do much more to prevent rape than increasing jail sentences for offenders like Brock Turner.

What the...? I'm pretty sure that this incident had nothing to do with the victim being financially reliant on anyone.

You want to make that point in a different article, knock yourself out. But this paragraph has almost nothing to do with the case at hand in terms of eliminating the 'culture' that caused this crime.

[Isgrimnur]

Yale

Dr. Amir studied rape and rapists in Philadelphia between 1958 and 1960. He found the median age of the Philadelphia rapist was 23 but the largest age group among rapists was the 15-19 year olds.
...
Amir theorized rapists fell into 2 categories which he labeled “criminal” and “psychiatric”. The criminal rapist he viewed as a poorly educated man from the lower socioeconomic level who had a criminal record of offenses such as exhibitionism, fetishism, etc. He saw him as generally antisocial and easily influenced by his peers. The psychiatric rapist was viewed as a well educated man from a higher economic bracket. He was believed to rape because of some personal problems or inadequacy and he may feel remorse after the assault. However, these are not generally accepted theories but are considered a stepping stone to more indepth research. A more widely accepted theory is that most rapists seem to come from a subculture of violence whose values may be different from those of the dominant culture. Therefore these adolescents and young men may be demonstrating their toughness and masculinity in a more violent and antisocial manner.

Lumping the two groups together is not likely to generate good results in either of them.

[El Guapo]

And that article is all over the place with little to back up its assertions.

Rape is enabled by cultural norms

Nothing to back that up. I'd love to see some research that our culture fosters it. Because I'm sure it's totally out culture and not other things. Iceland doesn't exactly seem like they have their issues resolved either.

To end mass incarceration, progressives will need to persuade their fellow citizens that we can reduce penalties for violent crime without reducing our concern for its victims.

Our media sure likes to tell me that punishing the perpetrator of a crime is good for closure for the victim. And our society is much more about devoting resources to easy fixes. I'm all for increased support for the victims, but we can't get paid parental leave or better mental healthcare for those that need it. Getting better long-term support for sexual assault victims isn't going to sell well to red-staters, either.

There is a culture of rape; but also, an economics. Women are disproportionately represented among our nation’s poor. And impoverished women suffer a disproportionate share of our nation’s sexual violence: Women at the bottom of the income ladder are six times more likely to be sexually abused than those at the top. Policies that reduce the number of low-income women who are economically dependent on their partners will do much more to prevent rape than increasing jail sentences for offenders like Brock Turner.

What the...? I'm pretty sure that this incident had nothing to do with the victim being financially reliant on anyone.

You want to make that point in a different article, knock yourself out. But this paragraph has almost nothing to do with the case at hand in terms of eliminating the 'culture' that caused this crime.

Generally I think you are reading stuff into the article and then arguing against it.

As for the first part, the article's not saying that culture is the sole or main cause of rape. Just that cultural norms surrounding rape can enable rape (e.g., norms around consent, around expected sexual roles of men and women, etc.). You are right that the article doesn't really go into any detail about the degree to which American culture may or may not disproportionately enable rape, but the basic notion that cultural norms are connected to rape (and, you know, to pretty much everything) seems uncontroversial. Nor does the article come anywhere close to arguing that culture caused the particular rape at issue in the Turner case.

As for the last point, you're kind of arguing against the opposite of the article's point. The article's not really about Turner, it's about the public and policy response to Turner's sentencing, and how that will effect other people. The point being that it's unclear (per the links in the article) that increasing the mandatory minimum is actually going to help rape victims, that increasing mandatory minimums (as to this crimes and as to other crimes) is at tension with reducing mass incarceration (which people tend to support these days), and that there are other things that may help rape victims more.

[Blackhawk]

I don't know what the solution is, and I do think this sentence was a travesty, but at the same time I think a lot of Americans confuse 'justice' with 'vengeance.' They don't care about the end result, they just want to see the guilty suffer.

[hepcat]

I have to admit, you have a good point.

[Isgrimnur]

I probably shouldn't read editorials. All I end up doing is this:

[Chaosraven]

I don't know what the solution is, and I do think this sentence was a travesty, but at the same time I think a lot of Americans confuse 'justice' with 'vengeance.' They don't care about the end result, they just want to see the guilty suffer.

Not confused, I do want to see Vengeance.

[Bad Demographic]

So what, exactly, is justice?

[Scuzz]

http://www.fresnobee.com/news/local/art ... 01187.html

Here is a an article on the "pedophile housing" I was talking about above. Paid for by the state, with only one guy scheduled for the house.

The neighbors managed to get it stopped though.

[Blackhawk]

So what, exactly, is justice?

It is based on the concept of 'fairness', so I suppose that the exact answer is going to depend on the society. I think it is just as necessary to ask what the end goal of justice is. If we all agree that it is nothing more than retribution, then all of this is moot.

[Defiant]

Aaron Persky, the judge who handed down the controversial six-month sentence for the sexual assault conviction of former Stanford swimmer Brock Turner, compared his decision to school desegregation on Tuesday.

https://www.buzzfeed.com/amphtml/blakem ... ll-defense

[Isgrimnur]

Buzzfeed

"California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders," Perky says in the letter. "It's not always popular, but it's the law and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor."
...
Though Persky's letter does not explicitly mention Turner or the Stanford sexual assault case, it does cite an Associated Press review of his rulings, which found the judge had closely followed recommendations from probation departments in similar cases. The AP report's findings suggested that Turner did not receive special treatment, as many of Persky's critics have alleged.

[LordMortis]

Buzzfeed

"California law requires every judge to consider rehabilitation and probation for first-time offenders," Perky says in the letter. "It's not always popular, but it's the law and I took an oath to follow it without regard to public opinion or my opinions as a former prosecutor."
...
Though Persky's letter does not explicitly mention Turner or the Stanford sexual assault case, it does cite an Associated Press review of his rulings, which found the judge had closely followed recommendations from probation departments in similar cases. The AP report's findings suggested that Turner did not receive special treatment, as many of Persky's critics have alleged.

Izzy do your magic for me. What percentage of first time convicted rapists (not "sexual assaulters") get 6 months probation or less in California?

[Isgrimnur]

WaPo

The majority of convicted rapists in the United States go to prison. The average sentence length is 11 years, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics
...
Turner, to be sure, was not convicted of rape. The two rape charges he originally faced were dropped. But at least two of the three remaining charges — assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated woman, sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object and sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object — fall under the Justice Department's definition of rape
...
The United States Sentencing Commission, which establishes sentencing guidelines and policies for federal courts, recommends between eight and 20 years for convicted rapists, depending on the age of the victim, the extent of their injuries and whether they were kidnapped.
...
About 84 percent of convicted rapists in 2009 were sentenced to prison, according to the most recent BJS analysis of America’s 75 largest counties. Five percent went to jail, which often serves as a more temporary holding space. Eleven percent received probation or “other.”
...
In 2014, a Dallas County judge sentenced a man who admitted he raped a 14-year-old girl to five years’ probation. State District Judge Jeanine Howard said the sex offender didn’t deserve prison because the girl was not a virgin and “wasn’t the victim she claimed to be,” according to the Dallas Morning News.

[LordMortis]

<3

[noxiousdog]

When you are young the first time you have sex with your date she might very well resist to some degree - i.e. pulling your wandering hand away while you are making out, etc. People don't always come to a mutual agreement to have sex at the same time and the guy might have to sell it. Most of us have enough sense to know when a girl means no and stop pursuing it.

In other words, I can understand where Pyperkub was going.

I know this is two years old, but it needs another response. When your date resists to ANY degree, you stop. Period.

[Isgrimnur]

WaPo Opinion

John Pfaff is a professor of law at Fordham University. He is the author of "Locked In: The True Causes of Mass Incarceration and How to Achieve Real Reform."
...
California voters last week recalled a judge for the first time in more than 85 years. The politics of punishment are already pathological; the recall will make them worse.
...
As an academic who studies criminal justice, I have opposed the recall effort since I first heard about it because of potential consequences that reach well past Persky’s now-former courtroom: The recall will make judges more punitive, thwart progress toward scaling back mass incarceration and — though Turner and Persky are both white — hurt minorities disproportionately.

A central reason the United States punishes its citizens more than any other country is that actors in our criminal justice system face more political pressure than they do elsewhere. Only this country allows judges to be elected, which 39 states choose to do. It’s a consistent theme: We are also the only country that elects its prosecutors. While a concern in the Andrew Jackson era about corrupt appointment processes drove the decision to elect judges, more recent concerns about the costs of a politicized judiciary have led to increasing calls to return to appointing them.

In criminal justice, the costs of politicization are unambiguous: They make judges more punitive. The empirical studies on judges and crime tell a consistent story. Judges sentence more aggressively as their election dates near and as their elections become more contested. Elections make judges nervous, and nervous judges are harsh judges.
...
Defenders of the recall dismiss this concern by pointing out that recalls are rare. But the lesson here isn’t only about recalls. The Persky case makes clear to judges and their detractors alike that judges can lose their jobs — in a recall, in a primary, in a general election — if just one or two decisions anger someone with sufficient political capital to oppose them. The Persky recall campaign highlighted only five decisions out of thousands that the judge handed down. Persky was cleared of any wrongdoing by California’s Commission on Judicial Performance, and public defenders in Santa Clara were quick to argue that he was a fair judge. Even the prosecutor in Santa Clara opposed the recall. Dauber, however, is a politically well-connected professor at a nationally acclaimed law school with strong media ties. The success of her campaign tells judges, and the politically powerful who are unhappy with their decisions, that these campaigns can work even with little evidence, as long as there are one or two bad cases to point to.