Juke Joint Jezebel
Member
Did the father seriously just call a rape "20 minutes of action"? Looks like we know where he may have gotten it from then!
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Rapist gets 6 months because prison sentence would have a severe impact on him
- Thread starter excelsiorlef
- Start date
- Status
Alcoremortis
Member
Wow, from his dad???
No wonder this kid doesn't feel any remorse. His parents have clearly taught him that he doesn't need to.
Vicetrailia
Member
Father says that 20 minutes shouldn't ruin his sons life, neglects that son committed a felony. Even if it was one minute it's still a fully commited major crime. But hey, only sluts get raped so its cool.
Mental Atrophy
Banned
Rapist insists it was consensual. Parent believes and defends their child. This isn't really surprising or disappointing or infuriating--it seems pretty normal and I don't really hold it against the father.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Interesting logic. So if someone took a semi-automatic rifle and killed a bunch of people at a school, it wouldn't be fair for his life to be ended for seconds of actions. Because after all, no serious crimes are committed quickly.
The father makes serious implications that rape isn't a big deal. He also essentially accused the victim of being a slut. Son's gonna educate people on drinking? On sexual promiscuity? On conse-- lol no
The father is trying to tell us that rape is ok.
Mental Atrophy
Banned
You're reading into it too much. It's just a parent being protective of their child. I don't expect it to always be rational.
A Link to the Past
Banned
I think you're reading into it too little. :v
The letter goes beyond defending his son and goes into downplaying the theoretical (according to him) rape that occurred as well as trying to blame the victim for being sexually promiscuous and drunk.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Yep. If the judge is not willing to apply an appropriate punishment for raping someone, I certainly hope that an appropriate punishment is given to this judge.
Of course, he'll probably stay on because it would have a severe impact on him to lose his job
Not surprised. When you have money your almost invincible. If I recall the heir to the Du Pont family did the same thing just more vile and despicable.
Morrigan Stark
Arrogant Smirk
I'd LOL except... this is too depressing and true to be funny
This reminds me of when I used to work retail a few years ago. All of my colleagues were in their early 20s except for one (rich) 16-17 year old kid. This one time at night when we were closing the kid who's at a party shoots us a whatsapp group message asking if it's ok to fuck his crush at the party if she's drunk. There must have been dozens of responses immediately along the lines of "if you have to ask..." and "breh, no". News stories like this make me wonder how close this kid was coming to being like the rapist in the story.
Wonder if sex ed is actually taught better in public schools overall due to lack of direct religious influence.
The fact that he asked at all is mercifully thanks to (probably) the sex-ed that at the time touched upon consent. AFAIK, it's far more robust now so it'd be less likely a normal kid would even need to ask.
I don't care. I'm not going to have respect for some one when he can't realize when his kid is so obviously wrong. That shows bad parenting cause you can't teach them how to be moral when you turn a blind eye to things they do. I respect parents who own up to that their kids can be evil. I'm more likely to believe the fault didn't start with their parenting when they do such.
A Link to the Past
Banned
Yeah seriously lol. It's one of those jokes that no good person can laugh at :v
He's trying to teach people how to avoid getting raped by him
Don't be drunk, don't be slutty, and you're a-okay by him!
BrutishMrFish
Member
Yeah. I don't think most colleges would give him the time to tell their students "don't get caught," because at this point it's the only thing that asshole could have learned.
Plus, you just know he would get heckled and never try to "help" students again, because that would require self-improvement and effort.
Hmm...your on to something here. Brb gonna take a dump in my boss office then shoot her daughter and probably the whole office if I can do it fast enough. To lose my job and my freedom would be too severe of an impact. Too severe.
Andrew Korenchkin
Member
If my dad found out I raped someone, he would (correctly) disown me and call me something along the lines of a fucking POS.
Pretty sure I'd be justifiably ostracized by my entire damn family and extended family for this.
It's insane when he talks about all the positive impact his son could have if they would just let him out so he could teach everyone about the dangers of alcohol and "promiscuity" (aka have him go around telling women not to be such sluts if they want to avoid rapists like him). There is not a thing in the world his son could do that would have a more positive social impact than being made an example of by having the book thrown at him for this shit.
old manatee
Banned
What if someone was like 101 years old and so far they had lived a super positive, productive life, but then ONE TIME they pulled out a handgun and a knife and shot their spouse in the head and ate a piece of their flesh, but they did it lickety-split and it only took like 5 minutes. Wouldn't you have to step back a step and put your hands on your hips and stack those bad 5 minutes up against a whole lifetime of good minutes and go hey now whatsit?
LudicrousSpeed
Member
You're reading too little into the letter. You'll notice that he doesn't actually deny that his son actually committed a rape. If he was in denial that his son had done it, that's one thing.
Here, he accepts the premise that his son is guilty, but goes on to advocate that his son shouldn't be punished because rape is just "20 minutes of action". He goes well beyond defending his son into "Rape isn't a real crime" territory.
Seeing this news actually makes me happy that my country is actually pushing for chemical castration for rapist especially after the insanely brutal gang rape by fourteen rapist against a single girl which end up killing her.
I absolutely hate this kind of people and hope that their actions is punished as heavy as possible.
I absolutely hate this kind of people and hope that their actions is punished as heavy as possible.
He apparently thinks that his son can teach girls how to not be sluts and then falsely accuse people of rape. They're both garbage.
EDIT: The judge is also garbage for thinking that someone who doesn't understand why they were convicted of these charges isn't a danger to society.
ClayKavalier
Banned
Sorry if this has been answered somewhere, but is the judge not accountable to anyone? He clearly went directly against the jury's decision.
And aren't sentences supposed to be first and foremost based on precedent? Can't the girls lawyers be like "Wait, hold on, a majority of rape cases in which the jury unanimously declares a guilty verdict end in x amount of jail time, what makes this different?
I understand stuff like this happens and maybe it's because I don't pay much attention to many individual cases but I really don't understand how the judge can just get away with doing something like this so flagrantly. What is the point of the whole jury of your peers, reviewing the facts process if the judge gets to solely decide the punishment at the end?
I wonder what this will do the guy's life. Will he be unemployable or will daddy and mommy's connections get him through? A couple decades ago I could see people getting away with something like this, but now it seems like shit like this would haunt you now that the story is a Google search away, regardless of who your parents are.
And aren't sentences supposed to be first and foremost based on precedent? Can't the girls lawyers be like "Wait, hold on, a majority of rape cases in which the jury unanimously declares a guilty verdict end in x amount of jail time, what makes this different?
I understand stuff like this happens and maybe it's because I don't pay much attention to many individual cases but I really don't understand how the judge can just get away with doing something like this so flagrantly. What is the point of the whole jury of your peers, reviewing the facts process if the judge gets to solely decide the punishment at the end?
I wonder what this will do the guy's life. Will he be unemployable or will daddy and mommy's connections get him through? A couple decades ago I could see people getting away with something like this, but now it seems like shit like this would haunt you now that the story is a Google search away, regardless of who your parents are.
perfectchaos007
Member
So it was ruled that traditional sex ( penis insertion in vagina ) didn't occur? I imagine that was why it was difficult to get him the max for rape. 6 months is not nearly enough though
natsuyasumi
Member
Judge Aaron Persky is up for reelection, with no opposition.
It is possible to file a complaint, however, and it doesn't take much effort. Here's how.
(In case this hasn't been posted yet.)
It is possible to file a complaint, however, and it doesn't take much effort. Here's how.
(In case this hasn't been posted yet.)
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Lets not forget that his dad is arguing against a severely shortened sentence, either.
It sounded like he got stopped by the cyclists before it got that far.
Mental Atrophy
Banned
If his son says it's consensual and he believes his son over the accuser out of parental instinct, then that 20 minutes of action was just that in his mind: consensual and not rape. I don't know what in that letter makes you think the father believes his son is a rapist, because he straight up says that he thinks his son isn't violent, even on the night of the rape... meaning the father doesn't believe his son is a rapist, so any extrapolation with the premise that the father believes his son is a rapist isn't valid. All evidence points to his son being a rapist, but it is not that crazy or indefensible of an idea that family irrationally sides with family against those odds, and I don't think that kind of loyalty makes somebody a bad person--only the perpetrator.
excelsiorlef
Member
Call his rapist son's victim essentially a slut makes him a bad person.
It's part of a letter the rapist's father wrote prior to sentencing
http://www.slate.com/blogs/xx_facto...s_why_his_victim_had_to_write_her_letter.html
I feel like if he truly believed that his son was innocent, then instead of the "20 minutes of action" thing, he'd have said something about "unfounded accusations" or whatever. But in that note, the dad doesn't say anything about his child being innocent. He goes on and on about his son's snacking habits, but not once does he say, "My child is being accused of a crime he did not commit." I mean, if I were a father, and my son was being accused of something that he swore to me he did not do, then that would be pretty much the first thing I'd put in a note meant to defend him.
The fact the he uses the "20 minutes of action" argument instead of arguing that his son is innocent sounds like he knows his son did it, but thinks it's just not a big deal.
Mental Atrophy
Banned
If he believes it's consensual based on his son's testimony, then he doesn't believe she is a victim, so from his perspective he is not calling a rape victim a slut. Rather, from his perspective his son is the victim of accusations. Again, he is wrong and his son is a rapist, but you can't extrapolate much more about the father's character when his position is warped by familial loyalty, which is pretty normal.
But he doesn't say that he believes his son was accused wrongly. He says it was wrong to punish him over 20 minutes of action. If he was denying the charges, he'd outright say it (my son did not do it and has been falsely charged). He'd be saying it was a false charge and it is wrong to ruin his life over an "accusation". Not 20 minutes of action.
Mental Atrophy
Banned
His son was already deemed guilty at this point. Saying, "no he's not," isn't going to change the sentencing. This is why he spends the majority of the letter talking about the ramifications of the judicial proceedings, the ramifications of any sentencing, and proposes lighter alternative sentencing, and barely a sentence about the crime itself. Sentences aren't decided based on whether or not the judge believes the accused is guilty or not. I think this case speaks much more about the judge than it does the father--I expect family to behave this way, but I expect a judge to make rational, impartial decisions.
excelsiorlef
Member
I really don't care.
Calling a rape victim a slut is garbage and I can and will judge him plenty.
Also both father and son speak the same language of alcohol and "promiscuity"
It's clear the apple doesn't fall far from the tree.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Let me ask you this.
If he didn't think his son was guilty of something, then why did he spend the entire last portion of the letter saying it was the victim's fault?
Mental Atrophy
Banned
He didn't. He spent two sentences of a 3-page letter implying that his son and the victim had sex because of alcohol.
HP_Wuvcraft
Banned
Then he spent the rest of it talking about the evils of alcohol and promiscuity.
What the fuck do you think he was talking about there?
Mental Atrophy
Banned
No, that "rest of it" is the two sentences I'm referring to. It's like 2.5 pages of him talking about what a kind person his son is, followed by a paragraph about how he thinks his son has already been punished enough, and then those two sentences about alcohol and promiscuity.
That article didn't really answer my questions, but it lead me to a couple answers on the Twitter of this Michelle Dauber:
So we presume it was addressed to the court, and was in the record prior to sentence. Seems it was after verdict, tho(?).
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked