Girl provoked pedophile - judge

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

"Put an end to relativism" is a jargon phrase in search of a meaning.

"Relativism" is inevitable with regards to the law. Otherwise we wouldn't bother with lawyers to interpret points of law across different contexts.

Lawyers are for representing defendants and the state. Judges are for applying the law. Appellate courts are for interpreting the laws.The laws need to be thought out enough to remove the ambiguity that requires relativism.

Judges apply the law to the arguments made by lawyers - so they should have a better understanding of the law than lawyers do. However in no ways can you claim that it is, or should be an exact science.

As I said, minimum sentencing already exists - so all you'd be doing is removing is the judges ability to use his discretion based on the idiosyncracies of an individual case. For example - a first time offender convicted of DUI would likely get a fine, warning and/or licence ban; whereas a 2nd or 3rd timer would go to jail.

Similarly Judicial review processes already exist - this decision will not stand. So I'm not sure what is really required beyond that. A judge can make an honest mistake... or he can be ####### at his job. They are only human after all...

[rclouse 0]

/I'm so bad

//hotlinked from da Bucket

[Heracles 417]

The judge should solely interpret the law and apply it to the case. Yet the judge does not represent the people. The people should have a right to decide the appropriate punishment for the crime. In this case the girl has no one to support here. Therefore it is up to the people to support the most vulnerable and demand the appropriate justice. A 24 year old male not being able to distinguish the difference between a minor is utter rubbish.

You're assuming that the law is a matter of absolute, indisputable fact - when in most cases its open to some degree of interpretation. Isn't that why, for example, there's all that wrangling in the US over whether or not abortion is constitutional & legal?

As I said - I don't see why you're so offended by this to the extent that you think an extreme case like this is reason to rubbish the justice system - when this decision will be subject to a judicial review (the purpose of that mechanism being to catch just that sort of thing). I'm not sure why you're so surprised that a judge could make a bad decision. Would you be equally surprised if I told you that there are good judges as well as (gasp) bad ones...?

I think the misuse of the constitution to suit everyone's own agenda is where I butt heads and differ in views from other people. That is, when everything is compared to something enacted and written hundreds of years ago. To me it is all about right and wrong. What is ethical and what is not. What is civilized and what is not. A 24 year old abusing the innocence of a naive abandoned 10 year is not acceptable. I don't care if she looks like Jenna Jameson. As someone said before rape is rape.

Irrespective of religious beliefs or lack of, if another more advanced being was to visit earth they would be shocked at the way we are abandoning each other and humanity in our hunger for instant pleasures and treasures. I think they would point out that even primitive animals are protective of their young. What excuse do we have at the top of the food chain in abandoning each other?

The relevance of this is that it is our duty to protect each other and our most vulnerable. This judge was appointed to do so. If the law is weak it needs to be changed accordingly. Any judge who does not represent the views of the public should be disbarred. While no case is similar or black or white; we need to draw the line somewhere and set boundaries. Otherwise we are no better than the dark ages.

Edited June 29, 2007 by Infidel

[almaty 19]

a terrible decision..the judge is a dumbazz chopf##k ..

[Mark&Steph 0]

a terrible decision..the judge is a dumbazz chopf##k ..

I don't know which is worse, this ruling, or the one where he gave a suspended sentence and ordered GBP250 compensation with the claim that "If it buys her a nice new bicycle, that's the sort of thing that might cheer her up."

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The judge should solely interpret the law and apply it to the case. Yet the judge does not represent the people. The people should have a right to decide the appropriate punishment for the crime. In this case the girl has no one to support here. Therefore it is up to the people to support the most vulnerable and demand the appropriate justice. A 24 year old male not being able to distinguish the difference between a minor is utter rubbish.

You're assuming that the law is a matter of absolute, indisputable fact - when in most cases its open to some degree of interpretation. Isn't that why, for example, there's all that wrangling in the US over whether or not abortion is constitutional & legal?

As I said - I don't see why you're so offended by this to the extent that you think an extreme case like this is reason to rubbish the justice system - when this decision will be subject to a judicial review (the purpose of that mechanism being to catch just that sort of thing). I'm not sure why you're so surprised that a judge could make a bad decision. Would you be equally surprised if I told you that there are good judges as well as (gasp) bad ones...?

I think the misuse of the constitution to suit everyone's own agenda is where I butt heads and differ in views from other people. That is, when everything is compared to something enacted and written hundreds of years ago. To me it is all about right and wrong. What is ethical and what is not. What is civilized and what is not. A 24 year old abusing the innocence of a naive abandoned 10 year is not acceptable. I don't care if she looks like Jenna Jameson. As someone said before rape is rape.

Irrespective of religious beliefs or lack of, if another more advanced being was to visit earth they would be shocked at the way we are abandoning each other and humanity in our hunger for instant pleasures and treasures. I think they would point out that even primitive animals are protective of their young. What excuse do we have at the top of the food chain in abandoning each other?

The relevance of this is that it is our duty to protect each other and our most vulnerable. This judge was appointed to do so. If the law is weak it needs to be changed accordingly. Any judge who does not represent the views of the public should be disbarred. While no case is similar or black or white; we need to draw the line somewhere and set boundaries. Otherwise we are no better than the dark ages.

But what exactly are you suggesting? The decision will be reviewed and overridden - according to the judicial oversight procedures already in place. As I see it - barring the wrong decision being made in the first place there is no issue here.

[Queen Jenn 0]

So what if she looked 16? Rape is rape and 16 is still a child. These are grown men!!! OMG!!!! Unbelievable!

I totally agree. It doesn't matter how old she "looked." It was still rape, and she is still a child.

[almaty 19]

/I'm so bad

//hotlinked from da Bucket

not bad..just a public service announcement

[GaryC 7]

I guess it comes down to your preference. Someone that was a "little bit bad" getting a minimum sentence or someone like this getting off. Since both by definition had to be convicted in a court to get any sentence I would rather see the really bad always get what they deserve.

[featherB 1]

When I saw this thread title, I thought it must be this story from a few months ago...

... but nope, an entirely different judge, offender, and 10-year-old victim.

I can't see how anyone could imagine a 10-year-old to be over the age of consent.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

I guess it comes down to your preference. Someone that was a "little bit bad" getting a minimum sentence or someone like this getting off. Since both by definition had to be convicted in a court to get any sentence I would rather see the really bad always get what they deserve.

The justice system IMO is already designed to do just that. The flip side is when the judge does apply the sentence required by law there are those who complain that the punishment is not enough. In which case the fault is with the law rather than the judge. But I'm totally not for stripping the judge's power to apply the law to the idiosyncracies of a particular case.

I've heard those arguments before from the Bush lot re: the Supreme Court - and the desire intended or not, appears to be the weakening of that particular institution.

[gabby4ever 1]

[Heracles 417]

When I saw this thread title, I thought it must be this story from a few months ago...

... but nope, an entirely different judge, offender, and 10-year-old victim.

I can't see how anyone could imagine a 10-year-old to be over the age of consent.

Yes that is right this happened before. Unbelievable.

There must be a lot of 10 year olds who look like they are 16 and over. not!

[CountryBoy 0]

I've heard those arguments before from the Bush lot re: the Supreme Court - and the desire intended or not, appears to be the weakening of that particular institution.

Should have known as I saw the direction that this thread was going in that the spin would bring it back to Bush Bashing at some point ..

Jeez

I do feel sorry for the little girl and all she has gone thru. My daughter is 10 and I know what I would want to do if it happened to her, but then again I would never let her dress like the victim in this case reportedly did.

I don't feel that dressing in this manner makes the criminals actions justified, I do however feel that it may invoke this type of crime from an already sick individual, more so than conservative dress would.

That being said, rape is rape .. I'm sure that the judge in this case was far too lenient, but as stated earlier in this thread the LAW determines the minimum and maximum sentences for crimes.

In my personal opinion raping a child is pretty much the worst crime that can be committed. The psychological affects of the crime last the child's entire lifetime. I also feel that the minimum sentence for raping a child should be public drawing and quartering. To top that off I think the punishment should be televised during prime time on all the major networks in the city where the crime took place (I wouldn't have a problem with it being broadcast nationally). Maybe then the sick individuals that mess with kids would get the hint. The problem is .. getting the legislators to write up the bill and then getting it signed by all the other legislators.

Guess I'll just have to live with the law the way it was written.

Just my opinion,

CB

[Heracles 417]

I don't feel that dressing in this manner makes the criminals actions justified, I do however feel that it may invoke this type of crime from an already sick individual, more so than conservative dress would.

That being said, rape is rape .. I'm sure that the judge in this case was far too lenient, but as stated earlier in this thread the LAW determines the minimum and maximum sentences for crimes.

Can you imagine a rapist used the same excuse after raping a woman... He would never get away with it.

At least if this had happened in the US the appropriate justice would be served.

Edited June 29, 2007 by Infidel