- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 29,957
- Reaction score
- 14,683
- Location
- Netherlands
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Moderate
A drunk woman kissed a 13 year old and put his hand on the clothes over her breast, she was found guilty and got a minimum sentence, what do you think is the appropriate punishment for someone who has been diagnosed as having low chances of doing something like this again and was the victim of sexual abuse as a child herself.With all due respect, I have no clue who you are talking about.
No, because that would state which punishment she got.Perhaps a link to the story would be helpful
1. beyond any doubt, the woman in this question is a total moron for kissing a 13 year old and having him touch her breast
2. this state has minimum sentences for this offens, something I disagree with
IMO, she should have been given a long home arrest with ankle bracelet or a minimum security jail for a year or so, hell even 2 years if need be.
Now there is this addional information:
+ she was drunk (not an excuse but a contributing factor) so banning her from drinking alcohol during her sentence was also very logical.
+ she is unlikely to re-offend
+ she is herself victim of sexual abuse as a child
So what do you think that she got as a mandatory minimum sentence, if you know that the minimum sentence for first degree murder with no aggravating facts is 50 years with probation after 20 years.
Please first vote in the poll what you think is the appropriate sentence and then look below for the sentence she got in that state (again murder is 50 with possible probation after 20 years.
Life in jail with possible probation after 10 years, which was her punishment and she got probation after 10 years
No, because that would state which punishment she got.
It was stated during the court case that she has a low chance to re-offend. And drunk giving a 13 year old a kiss is not a raging pedophile. Let her get registered as sex offender, but this is about the mandatory minimum sentence she got and what you think was appropriate for this minor offense with zero nudity.BS on her not being likely to reoffend. She's a pedophile. If she likes little boys that's not going to change and she's going to act on it again. I don't know if locking her up is the answer but it's an easy solution to keep her from preying on children.
I blurred it out to give people the chance to give their view (in the poll) as what the punishment would have been appropriate for this specific case.You already did that
It was stated during the court case that she has a low chance to re-offend. And drunk giving a 13 year old a kiss is not a raging pedophile. Let her get registered as sex offender, but this is about the mandatory minimum sentence she got and what you think was appropriate for this minor offense with zero nudity.
Her lawyer, and I am pretty sure they are not allowed to lie in court.Stated by who? Like I said if she is attracted to young boys that isn't going to change and she will do it again.
Her lawyer, and I am pretty sure they are not allowed to lie in court.
Are they allowed to lie in court? That sounds insane. Now if there is no report from probation about the re-offending odds and she would make such a claim, well that should be prosecuted IMO. I might be a liberal social democrat, but lying in court about factual things like a medical report about re-offending sounds like a violation of their oath of office.
You owe me a coke because you just made me spit mine out. That's a great line.
An adult sexually interacting with a minor is .. mind blowing. Why would one care about leniency with this type of scenario? Lucky youth ... unlucky adult.1. beyond any doubt, the woman in real story is a total moron for kissing a 13 year old and having him touch her breast
2. this state has minimum sentences for this offens, something I disagree with
IMO, she should have been given a long home arrest with ankle bracelet or a minimum security jail for a year or so, hell even 2 years if need be.
Now there is this additional information:
+ she was drunk (not an excuse but a contributing factor) so banning her from drinking alcohol during her sentence was also very logical.
+ she is unlikely to re-offend
+ she is herself victim of sexual abuse as a child
So what do you think that she got as a mandatory minimum sentence, if you know that the minimum sentence for first degree murder with no aggravating facts is 50 years with probation after 20 years.
Please first vote in the poll what you think is the appropriate sentence and then look below for the sentence she got in that state (again murder is 50 with possible probation after 20 years.
Life in jail with possible probation after 10 years, which was her punishment and she got probation after 10 years
It is stupidity of the woman, but leniency is not the issue here, it is the mandatory prison sentence she got and what you think should have been given for a minor offense like this one.An adult sexually interacting with a minor is .. mind blowing. Why would one care about leniency with this type of scenario? Lucky youth ... unlucky adult.
I believe it's stupid for an adult to engage with a minor.... take advantage ... and in this case ... probably provide great grades. Stupid .. dumb ... immature and the adult needs to suffer their consequences for those decisions.It is stupidity of the woman, but leniency is not the issue here, it is the mandatory prison sentence she got and what you think should have been given for a minor offense like this one.
Yes, but the issue is how long is appropriate.I believe it's stupid for an adult to engage with a minor.... take advantage ... and in this case ... probably provide great grades. Stupid .. dumb ... immature and the adult needs to suffer their consequences for those decisions.
Are they allowed to lie in court? That sounds insane. Now if there is no report from probation about the re-offending odds and she would make such a claim, well that should be prosecuted IMO. I might be a liberal social democrat, but lying in court about factual things like a medical report about re-offending sounds like a violation of their oath of office.
Does this woman have a name?1. beyond any doubt, the woman in real story is a total moron for kissing a 13 year old and having him touch her breast
2. this state has minimum sentences for this offens, something I disagree with
IMO, she should have been given a long home arrest with ankle bracelet or a minimum security jail for a year or so, hell even 2 years if need be.
Now there is this additional information:
+ she was drunk (not an excuse but a contributing factor) so banning her from drinking alcohol during her sentence was also very logical.
+ she is unlikely to re-offend
+ she is herself victim of sexual abuse as a child
So what do you think that she got as a mandatory minimum sentence, if you know that the minimum sentence for first degree murder with no aggravating facts is 50 years with probation after 20 years.
Please first vote in the poll what you think is the appropriate sentence and then look below for the sentence she got in that state (again murder is 50 with possible probation after 20 years.
Life in jail with possible probation after 10 years, which was her punishment and she got probation after 10 years
I oppose minimum sentences because no legislative committeewas sitting in the trial or that sentencing hearing, listening to defense cousel and the DA's office recommendations and arguments, or the testimony of mental health experts, or witnesses or the victim, or the perpetrator herself. We literally train and pay judges to weigh all these factors as part of their jobs and then remove them as relevant factors in the result.1. beyond any doubt, the woman in real story is a total moron for kissing a 13 year old and having him touch her breast
2. this state has minimum sentences for this offens, something I disagree with
IMO, she should have been given a long home arrest with ankle bracelet or a minimum security jail for a year or so, hell even 2 years if need be.
Now there is this additional information:
+ she was drunk (not an excuse but a contributing factor) so banning her from drinking alcohol during her sentence was also very logical.
+ she is unlikely to re-offend
+ she is herself victim of sexual abuse as a child
So what do you think that she got as a mandatory minimum sentence, if you know that the minimum sentence for first degree murder with no aggravating facts is 50 years with probation after 20 years.
Please first vote in the poll what you think is the appropriate sentence and then look below for the sentence she got in that state (again murder is 50 with possible probation after 20 years.
Life in jail with possible probation after 10 years, which was her punishment and she got probation after 10 years
I blurred it out to give people the chance to give their view (in the poll) as what the punishment would have been appropriate for this specific case.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?