• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rape a student and only get 30days in jail!

herenow1 said:
What is wrong with this judge? Who over-rules a judge when their ruling is so far out in left field?
Click to expand...

From the ruling, sounds like he's far out in right field, where the rape may have been "legitimate."
 

I'm not sure about the American system of justice or particular state laws, but if this was to happen in a Canadian court, the prosecution would appeal the sentencing decision and let a higher court review the matter.
 
I wonder how the family treated the girl when they found out. While the responsibility of the relationship falls on the teacher, high school girls are somewhat crazy. The facts of the case may be that both parties sought out the relationship equally. Don't get me wrong, the teacher's job is to NOT do that, and he is ultimately responsible. However, if the girl sought out the relationship and felt responsible I can see it turning ugly quickly when family find out and police get involved. I haven't seen statements from the student regarding her role/thoughts on the situation before her suicide. For all I know (and I am largely in the dark here), the girl could just as easily committed suicide because she got someone she cared about in deep trouble and she was ashamed of how everything played out. Perhaps the girl was already very sexually active with other individuals as well and knew exactly what she was doing. That could be one reason she was referred to as older than her chronologicle age.

None of this lets the guy off, but considering the plea agreement already in place, I can see where the judge is coming from.
 

Quite right. That was all settled five years ago and if the guy hadn't screwed up in his treatment program, we would never have heard about it.
 
lolabird said:
People of Montana unite and unseat the judge who is obviously a moron.
Click to expand...

Fox News had a report from the demonstration outside the courthouse today. It seems the local folks are quite upset.
 

Personally, I think that judge should be held in contempt of humanity.
 

What her role/thoughts were is irrelevant. That's why there is statutory rape in the first place.
 
This is disgusting.
 
This makes me sick to my stomach. I can't believe something like this could happen in the US.
 

Nothing is ever as simple as FOX News likes to make it. Let's look at the facts and then make some informed comments about the judge's decision:

The female juvenile was below the age of consent at the time of the incident. However, it seems she was willingly involved at the time of the incidents, but she cannot legally give consent, hence "sexual intercourse without consent." That is typically known as statutory rape. However, most current laws consider it rape when a teacher or other authority figure uses their position to finagle sex with juveniles under their care even where the juvenile is under 18 but still considered of legal age of consent.


Protest in Montana over 30-day sentence in rape - CNN.com

Next, the juvenile did not commit suicide until she was 16 “a few weeks shy of her 17th birthday,” and so according to reports nearly three years after all this was made public. Losing their sole witness compelled the prosecution to enter into a deferred prosecution agreement.

This meant that all charges against Rambold would be dismissed if he completed a sex-offender treatment program and met other requirements.
Click to expand...

He did not engage in new sexual misconduct with a minor, nor did he have a prior offense on his record. He simply had normal relations with adult women which he did not report to his counselor, and also attended a couple of family gatherings where nieces and nephews were present with an opportunity to be alone with them.

Finally, all the suspended sentence means is that he pled guilty in exchange for probation requiring sex-offender treatment. He was sentenced to 15 years and ALL 15 years would be the punishment if he violated the terms of his probation period. For a felony conviction, probation is typically 5 or more years.

Even FOX news (with its hostile conservative slant) shows these points.
Montana judge defends 30-day sentence for teacher in teen girl's rape | Fox News

Those are the facts. So, faced with a trial where the prime witness is deceased and there is apparently not much other supporting evidence which prompted the prosecutor to offer a deferred prosecution agreement for a plea of guilty; then get a plea agreement to a 15 year conviction "suspended" for a period of probation? OR try to proceed to get a fair trial with little or no evidence but a lot of bad press and no plea agreement?...

The man was convicted of a sex offense with a minor after pleading guilty. He was sentenced to 15 years. He is facing at least 5 years probation with lots of conditions including sex offender counseling and if he violates probation at any time he can then be sent to prison for all 15 years. He has to register as a sex offender for 25 years. He has no prior record. So why harp on the "30 days in jail" part??
 
Last edited:
solletica said:
From the ruling, sounds like he's far out in right field, where the rape may have been "legitimate."
Click to expand...

Well THIS was a dumb partisan hack statement. Can you offer some evidence of this?
 
Your Star said:
This makes me sick to my stomach. I can't believe something like this could happen in the US.
Click to expand...

The judge's actions are SOP in red state America (AL, MS, MT, . . .)
 

Good analysis. The harp on the "30 days in jail" is what sells newspapers, and the judge's ill-advised comments were the match to start the fire. If the guy hadn't bungled the end of his "treatment" program, we would never have heard about this.

With regard to the 15 years: Some years back, Montana passed the absurdly titled "Truth In Sentencing" act which requires that an inmate get one day knocked off the sentence for each day of good behavior. That automatically cuts every sentence in half, and the inmates are eligible for parole at half of the reduced time. So if you want to know when they will be back on the street, divide the sentence by four.
 

This judge should be handed over to the father of that little girl and let him do what he may. As Thomas Sowell said, "It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong."
 

Thomas Sowell is clearly the wisest observer of the American scene now alive. The statement you quoted is exactly why the federal government fails every time it tries to compete with private enterprise in the delivery of retail goods and services.
 

Need more facts about the case before I make a decision. Why did the judge feel that the girl was in control? Was it consensual?

Before you say something that I know with certainty that somebody is going to say, let me preempt that attempt. Making a law saying that something cannot be consensual (statutory rape) does not mean that it isn't consensual, understand?
 

You're asking if it was forced, the answer appears to be no, but the guy is definitely a predator if we look at his past history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…