Stanford rapist serving only 3 months

Scroll to see replies

Well here it is, if you're privileged, expect short prison sentences for the worst of crimes. Because this boy was a good swimmer and academic his actions are somehow excused, abhorrent actions by the judge. What the judge has done is basically said its bad to assault unconscious people but it doesn't matter because if you've got the cash and the brains you'll get a light sentence. America's criminal justice system...

P.S please stop suggesting execution, no civilised society should have execution, it hurts innocents and is way too good for rapists like this guy anyway.

Agree. Just longer sentences in prison - not 3 or 6 months!!

Any idea why?
I bet his father paid judge to his son a light sentence

Reply 81

TheonlyMrsHolmes

Original post by Ano9901whichone

So I'm assuming that you don't think a woman that's had sex when she's drunk can claim she's been raped as she did have control? (obviously not wasted).

She can claim she has been raped if she has been raped.

If she is drunk and consented to sex, she cannot claim rape because it wasn't rape.

Reply 82

username521617

Original post by tanyapotter

What if it's not enough? What if he commits the crime again, because he's seen how easy it is for him to get away with it with little consequence?

The consequences for him were still significant. He can kiss his career goals goodbye, for instance. It's not simply time served in prison that's going to affect him.

If he does, however, then a harsher sentence would be in order, and we learn from this. But he doesn't yet fit the profile of a repeat sex offender.

And think of it this way: if we utterly destroy his life, his youth and future prospects now, what are we giving him to lose? It's why a lot of people re-offend. There's no evidence that harsher sentences for first-name offenders lower rates of re-offending.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 83

Josb

Original post by george_c00per

I can't believe that it's allowed in our society to be able to hire better lawyers if you're richer, it just means that richer people have a higher chance of getting released with no charge compared to poorer people who might not get a good lawyer (even if they're completely innocent) as the lawyers wouldn't be able to do as "good enough a job" to provide sufficient evidence if you don't have as much money. Wouldn't it just be more fair if the judicial system hired all equally experienced lawyers and supplied the person in review with one themselves?? This is only food for thought, though. There might be loopholes which I haven't encountered which prevents this from occurring.

That's the problem of the common law, as it gives a lot of power to the judge to decide the sentence.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 84

Josb

Original post by JordanL_

But that's exactly what it's about.

What justification is there for a punishment if it's going to make him more likely to commit crimes in the future, and less likely to ever again be a productive member of society? How is it going to benefit the victim or anyone else? What are you achieving by locking him up for several years that you aren't achieving by locking him up for several months?

It's not about him, but about the effect on other prospective rapists; some men are only hesitating because of the punishment they face. The six months sentence for rape in that case is going to have a terrible effect on this sort of man.

Reply 85

_Fergo

Original post by The Roast

Suddenly TSR turns into a courtroom...

Seriously though... Everyone knows everything apparently.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 86

Josb

Original post by Trapz99

But alcohol does lower your ability to control yourself and leads to reckless behaviour like assault or sexual assault. People do become criminals sometimes when they drink alcohol.

They shouldn't drink then. If you know that you cannot control yourself while drunk, you mustn't drink at all. Alcohol cannot be an excuse when you make the deliberate choice to drink it.

(edited 7 years ago)

Reply 87

saeed9751

hope he gets battered. and deep fried.

Reply 88

Another

Original post by Trapz99

But alcohol does lower your ability to control yourself and leads to reckless behaviour like assault or sexual assault. People do become criminals sometimes when they drink alcohol.

I'm not justifying what he has done- I agree that what he did was wrong- I just feel that people are inaccurately portraying as some sort of evil monster when, in fact, he was a perfectly normal guy who wrongly took the decision to drink large amounts of alcohol which caused him to commit this crime.

No excuse. If you turn into a danger for society because you can't control your actions while drunk, then don't drink. Would you give a lenient sentence to a driver who ran over someone on the road, because they were "drunk and couldn't take control of their actions"?

Original post by Dandaman1

The girl was horribly wronged, and needs emotional support and understanding. But what's done to her is done. It can't be taken back or righted with a harsher sentence for the perpetrator.

What the perpetrator needs is not necessarily retribution, but to be pittied and rehabilitated. Yes, the sentence seems oddly short, but satisfying an urge for revenge by having him 'rot in prison' does what exactly? If 3 months and a spot on the sex offenders register ends up being enough to set him straight and protect society, why not that?

It's a bit of a slap in the face for people serving 5+ years for possession of marijuana, and other minor crimes. The case shows that the legal system is not just at all

Reply 89

SmileyVibe

3-6 months is playtime to me. By the time anyone blinks, he'll be back on the streets. If a judge is getting paid to serve justice and give a reasonable time, he should at least receive 10 years.
That's is not right at all. The victim will suffer with what he did to her for the rest of her life while he gets off with 6 seconds in a prison cell. The father entire reasoning for a shorter time is because he only took 20 minutes raping her. You be surprised how many people can get murdered or injured in 20 minutes or less.

Reply 90

Nerol

3 months in prison is only the beginning of his true punishment. Maybe you forget that now this guy will be a registered sex offender, and will be viewed as a criminal. His future at Stanford is basically over, his working future will be difficult at best. Let's not forget that his face is now all over the internet, all over the world. People know who he is and what he did, and he's going to have to deal with public abuse and possibly threats and violence for a long time. I'm not sympathizing with him, just pointing out that he will be punished for a long time out in the world, probably more so than while he is in prison. Prison isn't always the best punishment,and especially for a rich, young, athletic guy, being put back into the world to face his future will be a far harsher sentence for him.

Reply 91

hezzlington

Original post by Nerol

errr I don't know how you reached this conclusion.

Reply 92

Nerol

Original post by hezzlington

errr I don't know how you reached this conclusion.

When he gets out, it will be extremely difficult for him to reintegrate into his normal social circles. He will be alienated. Probably expelled from college, his once bright future will be ruined. This will be on his criminal record forever. As a young man who had such a bright future ahead of him, he has a lot to lose. I do want to point out that I don't agree with his sentence, I and believe it should have been longer. I just wanted to point out that the punishment doesn't just end when you leave prison, and everything goes back to normal, especially with a sexual offence.

Reply 93

Twinpeaks

Original post by Don Joiner

I literally quoted some facts and statistics without even adding my own opinion onto them and you call me a troll. Okay :smile:

Posted from TSR Mobile

They were a load of bollox.

Firstly, you didn't even provide the study. Please provide.

Secondly, you made an explicit link between rape fantasy and rape in real life. Somehow suggesting that because some women fantasise about rape that they must want it in real life? Why else would you quote the "statistic"?

You know absolutely nothing about this topic. You are completely ignorant on the psychological effects of rape and sexual assault. But I'm sure that if you were given a choice between either being raped through anal penetration by a man larger than yourself. Or receiving the same amount of pain intensity through a non-sexual physical assault, you would choose the latter.

Because whilst the pain severity is the same, you know that the psychological implication of yourself being raped is a lot stronger. If you deny that, then you must be solely incapable of empathy, because you lack the ability to put yourself in other shoes. Even your own shoes in each given scenario.

So if you lack empathy, at least go on google scholar and research the psychological implications of being raped.

Reply 94

Twinpeaks

Original post by Nerol

That's elitism. You shouldn't give a criminal more consideration because he has a "bright future". He shouldn't be given preferential treatment over say an unskilled factory worker. Having talent and/or intellectual ability shouldn't put you above others who received less opportunities in life and are less skilled.

Reply 95

Nerol

Original post by Twinpeaks

I know. I never said he should be given preferential treatment. I agree his sentence should have been longer. I was simply pointing out that the time he spends in prison won't be the only punishment he receives. And it just so happens that because this case went viral and because he had so much to lose, it'll probably be much harsher on him. The law should be blind to race, money, gender etc. but it's not. Normal people like us don't get to decide how long these people go to prison for, but we can control how we treat the guy for the rest of his life.

Reply 96

Twinpeaks

Original post by Nerol

I definitely agree with the last sentence haha.

I remember reading that he wants to go to schools and educate people on college drinking culture and promiscuity upon release. Which is not only victim blaming but such an example of privilege. Only a white, upper middle class person would even consider that as an outcome from imprisoment for sexual assault.

Reply 97

melisss22

Original post by Trapz99

The guy had a clean criminal record, he had a bright future ahead of him, he only sexually asualted the girl because he was drunk, the girl was unconscious during the incident and he is still so young. I don't see why he deserves anything more than a light sentence. Having to go to prison has already ruined his life- he is unlikely to get a good job or find a wife. Six months is more than enough imo

Also, he is not a 'rapist'. The crime is sexual assault, which is separate to rape.

it doesnt matter if he had a bright future ahead of him, it doesnt matter if he was drunk. im sorry but what you just said is bs. yeah his life will be ruined because of going to prison, boo hoo then he shouldnt have raped an innocent girl! she has to carry on with her life knowing that someone took advantage of her whilst she was unconscious.

'he is unlikely to get a good job' well why should i care? its not my fault, he should have acted like a decent human being then. 'or find a wife' hopefully he doesnt find anyone.

Reply 98

ADGWrigley

Original post by JordanL_

This just isn't true, though. It can quite often have the opposite effect.

He'd be less significantly less likely to rape again if he were rehabilitated, but then people would kick off about prisons being "too soft" and all that *******s.

Rehabilitation should be the severe impact prison has on him. That goes without saying for me. Sorry if was not clear.

Reply 99

username1204031

Original post by melisss22

Maybe you should care because when you ruin someone's life you make them significantly more likely to reoffend?

What purpose does ruining his life serve? How does it benefit the victim? How does it benefit society? "He deserves it" is hardly the kind of reasoning we should base our justice system on.