Montana judge defends 30-day sentence for rape

[garbon]

Well Meri, wasn't the suggestion that she was a whore, 'had knowledge of sexual matters' or something like that.

[merithyn]

Well Meri, wasn't the suggestion that she was a whore, 'had knowledge of sexual matters' or something like that.

No, apparently I'm the only one claiming that. Well, me and the judge, but he gets a wash because he said he didn't actually mean it like that.

[Berkut]

Wow. Just... wow.

A 54-year-old teacher has sex with his emotionally unstable 14-year-old student, who later commits suicide, and you all are perfectly fine with him getting a whole 30 days in jail for it.

That is just blatantly not true, and actively dishonest on a couple of levels.

1. Her later committing suicide is irrelevant to his sentencing, of course.

Uh, no.  If her suicide can be linked to having been abused by the teacher it is very, very relevant to sentencing.

Sure, but from what we know there is no such link.

[merithyn]

Wow. Just... wow.

A 54-year-old teacher has sex with his emotionally unstable 14-year-old student, who later commits suicide, and you all are perfectly fine with him getting a whole 30 days in jail for it.

That is just blatantly not true, and actively dishonest on a couple of levels.

1. Her later committing suicide is irrelevant to his sentencing, of course.

Uh, no.  If her suicide can be linked to having been abused by the teacher it is very, very relevant to sentencing.

Sure, but from what we know there is no such link.

The victim's mother testified that the relationship was "a major factor" in her decision to take her own life, The Billings Gazette reported.

[Ideologue]

I'd have been happy with a few years behind bars instead of the poor little old man having to admit he fucked kids.

You have an odd definition of scot free.  Mr. Miracle this guy is not.

I wasn't really suggesting that you were suggesting we should kill him, but he's already subject to something close to a civic life sentence, if not the death penalty.

I would not be upset with two years, but judges have discretion and I don't see this, without knowing more (i.e., having read the sentencing order and the trial transcripts), as an abuse of that discretion.

[Berkut]

Well Meri, wasn't the suggestion that she was a whore, 'had knowledge of sexual matters' or something like that.

No, apparently I'm the only one claiming that. Well, me and the judge, but he gets a wash because he said he didn't actually mean it like that.

Your right, you should absolutely not listen to what he says about what he means. Surely you know better than he does what he thinks about things like this.

Why are so many people unwilling to ever modify their perceptions about people when it comes to things like this? Someone says something that can be interpreted badly, you get outraged, he actually states that isn't what he meant, even apologizes for any mis-understanding, clearly states that he does not think what you think he thinks in no uncertain terms....


and the response is to go back to his original statement and be outraged some more.

Why even ask for clarification, if you are so married to your outrage that him coming out and stating baldly that he does not think what you are ascribing to him won't actually make you budge one inch from your perception of his views?

[Berkut]

Wow. Just... wow.

A 54-year-old teacher has sex with his emotionally unstable 14-year-old student, who later commits suicide, and you all are perfectly fine with him getting a whole 30 days in jail for it.

That is just blatantly not true, and actively dishonest on a couple of levels.

1. Her later committing suicide is irrelevant to his sentencing, of course.

Uh, no.  If her suicide can be linked to having been abused by the teacher it is very, very relevant to sentencing.

Sure, but from what we know there is no such link.

The victim's mother testified that the relationship was "a major factor" in her decision to take her own life, The Billings Gazette reported.

Like I said, there isn't any evidence that there is any such link.

[The Brain]

Testimony isn't evidence? Non-rhetorical.

[merithyn]

Well Meri, wasn't the suggestion that she was a whore, 'had knowledge of sexual matters' or something like that.

No, apparently I'm the only one claiming that. Well, me and the judge, but he gets a wash because he said he didn't actually mean it like that.

Your right, you should absolutely not listen to what he says about what he means. Surely you know better than he does what he thinks about things like this.

Why are so many people unwilling to ever modify their perceptions about people when it comes to things like this? Someone says something that can be interpreted badly, you get outraged, he actually states that isn't what he meant, even apologizes for any mis-understanding, clearly states that he does not think what you think he thinks in no uncertain terms....

and the response is to go back to his original statement and be outraged some more.

Why even ask for clarification, if you are so married to your outrage that him coming out and stating baldly that he does not think what you are ascribing to him won't actually make you budge one inch from your perception of his views?

It's not his views that are in question. It's his sentencing. And there's no question that he firmly believes that she was culpable in the relationship. He didn't say otherwise. He was only apologizing for the way that he said it, not for what he said.

[Berkut]

Now, she's dead,

By her own hand. He didn't kill her.

and he is off pretty much scott free.

That is simply not true at all. At least, there is no reason to believe it is true. He is a registered sex offender, almost certainly lost his job, and was sentenced in court. You might find the sentence inadequate, but to say he is "scot free" is simply false.

Trying to see how justice was served, and just not able to.

Justice is not served all the time. There are much more egregious examples out there than this one, that is for sure.

[merithyn]

Like I said, there isn't any evidence that there is any such link.

Since when isn't a statement in court evidence?

Auliea Hanlon testified earlier at the hearing that her daughter's relationship with Rambold was a "major factor" in her suicide, and she begged the judge to order Rambold to prison.

"Please put him behind bars," the woman said.

Chief Deputy County Attorney Rod Souza had asked the judge to order Rambold to serve 20 years in prison, with 10 years suspended.

Souza said Rambold targeted a troubled young girl and violated his position of trust as a teacher by engaging in a sexual relationship with a student.

Read more: http://billingsgazette.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/former-senior-high-teacher-gets-days-for-rape-of-student/article_b1f84190-ef23-5868-8799-b779c0421dc1.html#ixzz2dIjVBLJS

[frunk]

Testimony isn't evidence? Non-rhetorical.

No no, rhetorical testimony is evidence!

[Berkut]

Well Meri, wasn't the suggestion that she was a whore, 'had knowledge of sexual matters' or something like that.

No, apparently I'm the only one claiming that. Well, me and the judge, but he gets a wash because he said he didn't actually mean it like that.

Your right, you should absolutely not listen to what he says about what he means. Surely you know better than he does what he thinks about things like this.

Why are so many people unwilling to ever modify their perceptions about people when it comes to things like this? Someone says something that can be interpreted badly, you get outraged, he actually states that isn't what he meant, even apologizes for any mis-understanding, clearly states that he does not think what you think he thinks in no uncertain terms....

and the response is to go back to his original statement and be outraged some more.

Why even ask for clarification, if you are so married to your outrage that him coming out and stating baldly that he does not think what you are ascribing to him won't actually make you budge one inch from your perception of his views?

It's not his views that are in question. It's his sentencing. And there's no question that he firmly believes that she was culpable in the relationship. He didn't say otherwise. He was only apologizing for the way that he said it, not for what he said.

So him stating that it was not relevant to the sentencing doesn't actually matter in the issue of "his sentencing".

Gotcha. Rage on.

[merithyn]

By her own hand. He didn't kill her.

I think this is where we differ the most. I believe - as does her mother - that this man's relationship with this girl was a huge factor in her deciding that she'd rather be dead that alive. His actions were a cause in her death.

[Ideologue]

It's impermissible evidence.  It's hearsay.