Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Location: Currently I physically reside on the 3rd planet from the sun
2,220 posts, read 1,879,528 times
Reputation: 886
Advertisements
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mrs.Bewitched
While I think it was wrong for the 14 year olds, and would want justice for my son if he was the victim....I too think the sexual offender verdict was too harsh. It was a stupid, harmful, bullying prank...suspend the kids, put a misdemeanor on their record...but not to label them as a sex offender.
I agree with everything you say except the blue italics, as a misdemeanor indicates this is a criminal act.
If I were a DA I would suggest 2 misdemeanor crimes, one for sexual assault and one for indecent exposure. 2 years probation and mandatory counseling to include an apology to the victim and his family, not some scripted BS in court but an actual apology after counseling where the little thug acknowledges the depravity of his crime.
I think registering as a sexual offender may be appropriate to his 18th birthday.
My point it this is a criminal action, not a prank.
That said, it does not justify labeling these little thugs for the rest of their lives.
People commit criminal acts every single day without first considering the consequences. If a burgular breaks into my house without considering the possible consequence that I will shoot him if I catch him, does that negate my right to do so? Should he not be shot because he was not aware when breaking in that I keep a loaded firearm handy for just such a situation? Or if he says "but I wasn't there to harm anyone" does that mean I should simply wait to see what he may do before deciding on a course of action, to shoot or not?
These boys knew it was wrong. That they were not aware of the consequences does not mean they should be in any way exempt from them. They were certainly old enough to know that their smelly asses and gentalia should be kept inside their pants rather than forcibly shoved into the face of an unwilling victim who was being forcibly held down.
I hope the sentence stands.
I wonder if anyone has asked the victim, or his parents, how they feel about the outcome.
"If one's life cannot be held up as an example for others, perhaps it's best purpose is to serve as a warning as to what may happen when the same path is followed."
There is a difference between failing to consider the consequences and not knowing the consequences. The person who breaks into your home knows it is wrong and that the consequences for doing so may be getting shot or going to prison. Based on the facts of this case there is ample evidence to suggest that the boys did not realize that they were committing a crime and that they also did not know how severe the penalty would be.
While ignoratia jurit non excusat provides that ignorance is not an acceptable defense, such ignorance can be considered in terms of sentencing. I'm willing to bet had these boys known that what they were doing constituted sexual assault with lifelong consequence, they probably wouldn't have done it.
There really is no point arguing legal aspects with you as you seem to view things solely as black and white. My guess is you would prefer the Chinese system of punishment where criminals are executed by firing squad immediately following the trial and the cost of the bullet billed to their family.
If you read the law you will see that sexual intent is not written into the law. If the intent is to humiliate it is still considered sexual touching.
There is not a definition that applies other than the strict legal definition. In this case it is the strict legal definition that needs to be changed. The judges have no choice but to apply the law as written, not as they would have liked for it to be written.
I do not think that this is a good outcome, but I do not see how the judges had any other choice but to apply this law. We cannot have judges applying the law according to their personal thoughts on the matter. They have to apply the law as it was written. If it's bad law blame the writers of the law.
I don't see how a person whose job it is to apply the law can find a way around the law. Their job is not to find a way around a law. Their job is to apply the law as written. This is a bad law, and this outcome illustrates exactly why it is a bad law.
How heinous an act is is not addressed by the law. The law is pretty simple and a reading of the law will show you that the law is what it is.
Someone else posted this at another point in this thread.
So we have sexual contact. The aggressor touched his penis to the other person. The intent was to humiliate. End of story. I do not see how the judge could "find a away around this" if he was doing his job properly. His job is not to mange the outcome.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think this is a good outcome. But the judges are not the villiains. The villains are the legislators who rush through legislation that sounds good when proposed (after all who could be against a registry of sex offenders) without taking the time to assess all the consequences of such legislation.
The only reason I even broached the topic of judicial discretion and interpretation is that the NJ law and the Megan's Law provision have in other cases not been held to such a strict definition.
I agree that the actual law as written is iron clad in that they committed a sex crime, however, judges do have discretion in sentencing. The exact question before this particular panel was whether or not the Megan's Law provision of registering on the offender list should apply. The judges felt that they were bound by the language of the law to apply it, but other judges in other situations have not seen it the same way.
I'm not laying fault on the judges for finding them guilty as that is based on the law as crafted by the Legislature. However, I do fault the judges for failing to use discretion in sentencing, which was well within their power to do.
I'm willing to bet had these boys known that what they were doing constituted sexual assault with lifelong consequence, they probably wouldn't have done it.
Depends on why they did it. If it was a "boyish prank", as you view it, maybe not.
However if it was a couple of punks intent on humiliating their victims they'd have done it. That mind-set doesn't stop and think. All they want to do is bully.
I'm still not picturing the smiling victim in the photo you posted. I picture a kid with fear on his face.
There really is no point arguing legal aspects with you as you seem to view things solely as black and white.
I'd be happy to debate legal precedent all night long. The law classes I took (yes, there were many related to my field and I have to understand how it all applies) were my favorites. But yes, I do see the world as black or white, with very few shades of grey.
There are laws, and there is justice. Our system favors the former over the latter, and the one with the best liar, er, lawyer, wins. Guilty or not. Justice is seldom served under our court system. I do think, however, that the two boys under discussion in this thread were dealt with appropriately.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NJGOAT
My guess is you would prefer the Chinese system of punishment where criminals are executed by firing squad immediately following the trial and the cost of the bullet billed to their family.
OK, now I'm taking exception at what I perceive as a very unfair characterization! I absolutely think that the state can bear the cost of that one necessary bullet. Hmmm... maybe we can just start with some Chinese baliffs in the courtroom and work up from that.
Depends on why they did it. If it was a "boyish prank", as you view it, maybe not.
However if it was a couple of punks intent on humiliating their victims they'd have done it. That mind-set doesn't stop and think. All they want to do is bully.
I'm still not picturing the smiling victim in the photo you posted. I picture a kid with fear on his face.
The picture I posted was simply the most forum friendly/work safe picture I found. Most of the other ones out there show some bare butt and are more graphic. That exact photo was from some movie. It was for illustrative purposes only, not a literal image of what most likely happened. FWIW, I agree that the 12 year olds involved were most likely pretty scared. I also don't deny that this was more than a simple prank. This WAS bullying.
I'd be happy to debate legal precedent all night long. The law classes I took (yes, there were many related to my field and I have to understand how it all applies) were my favorites. But yes, I do see the world as black or white, with very few shades of grey.
There are laws, and there is justice. Our system favors the former over the latter, and the one with the best liar, er, lawyer, wins. Guilty or not. Justice is seldom served under our court system. I do think, however, that the two boys under discussion in this thread were dealt with appropriately.
lol, you must LOVE Dexter. If you are the type, which you apparently seem to be, that sees justice as only being served by a balancing of scales, aka an "eye for an eye" than all but the most extreme punishments will seem too little to you. In that light, I think the assertion that the punishment is too severe is pretty accurate based on you finding it acceptable.
Quote:
OK, now I'm taking exception at what I perceive as a very unfair characterization! I absolutely think that the state can bear the cost of that one necessary bullet. Hmmm... maybe we can just start with some Chinese baliffs in the courtroom and work up from that.
I can't say I'm necessarily against a little swifter resolution Chinese style when it's called for.
Here's my question; You are walking through the mall minding your own business, some strange man comes up to you, forces you to the ground, rips off his pants and sits on your face, how would you respond? Would you laugh it off as horseplay, say "boys will be boys"? I find it hard to believe, and yet it's okay when it happens to 12 year-old boys?
I have a question for you: If you were walking through the mall and an 80 year old man (presumably you're a woman) comes up to you and grabs your behind, what would your reaction be? Now same scenario but it is a 30 year old man. Now same scenario but with a 13 yo boy.
It is different because of intent. A 80 year old man probably just wants to grab your butt. A 30 year old man may be doing it for sexual reasons. A 13 yo is just curious. I highly doubt you'd turn around and smack the 80yo or the 13yo, but I'm sure you'd smack the 30yo.
The punishment should fit the crime. The boys intent was not sexual. They were just doing a "prank". I say, let a large man do the same back to them in front of all their classmates. THAT would teach them a lesson, not having their name on "some list" that they know nothing about.
This emphasises how we have become such a punative society. We concentrate on the punishment and for some reason once you are down we are going to keep you down.
I am more that happy to dish out punishment when someone does wrong but then get over it and move on. Appearing on some list somewhere does not help with moving on.
We need a way where we get love and compassion back into the system. People may moderate their behaviour because of punishment or fear of it but I think that inside they only change through long term loving relationships with others close to them.
The problem these days is that we are so disconnected as people that live isolated lives and fear pretty much everyone.
I have a question for you: If you were walking through the mall and an 80 year old man (presumably you're a woman) comes up to you and grabs your behind, what would your reaction be? Now same scenario but it is a 30 year old man. Now same scenario but with a 13 yo boy.
It is different because of intent. A 80 year old man probably just wants to grab your butt. A 30 year old man may be doing it for sexual reasons. A 13 yo is just curious. I highly doubt you'd turn around and smack the 80yo or the 13yo, but I'm sure you'd smack the 30yo.
The punishment should fit the crime. The boys intent was not sexual. They were just doing a "prank". I say, let a large man do the same back to them in front of all their classmates. THAT would teach them a lesson, not having their name on "some list" that they know nothing about.
Actually, I would smack them all- no one has the right to touch me in such a manner, and I do have the right to defend myself. Hopefully it would make the 13 year old think twice before ever trying it again. 13 in my opinion is plenty old enough to know better.
Now, if it were a 5 year old...I'd still probably squawk and throw a fit, again to make it comes across that this not appropriate. Then I'd throw the same fit at the parent. For the 30 year old, I'd call the police- sexual assault is a crime. For the 80 year old, it would depend on how coherent he was and if there was a caretaker nearby. If he was coherent, yeah, I'm still calling the police.
'Boys will be boys' because we ALLOW them to get away with offensive behavior that often crosses the line between teasing and violence. Holding a younger, smaller child down may not be a sexual act, but it is a violent one. Once they are old enough to grasp very basic concepts like you don't lay hands on another person, we should treat such acts seriously, not dismiss them as 'horseplay'. It continues to disturb me that boy on boy violence is accepted, but boy on girl is condemned. As many others have pointed out, WHY is this? Why do we send the dual message that girls are weak and in need of special protection, but boys will be boys and need to suck it up?
Even so, I don't believe putting on the list is appropriate. But then I think the sex offender registry is a terrible system used to spread fear and punish people who did not commit the dreadful crimes that people assume they did when they hear 'sex offender'.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Justice is seldom served under our court system. I do think, however, that the two boys under discussion in this thread were dealt with appropriately.
I absolutely think that the state can bear the cost of that one necessary bullet. Hmmm... maybe we can just start with some Chinese baliffs in the courtroom and work up from that. 
