Please turn on javascript in your browser to play chess.
Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. 12 Aug '16 02:04 / 1 edit
    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/11/campus-sexual-assault-university-colorado-austin-wilkerson

    "'Inspired by Other Survivors': Campus Rape Victim Demands to be Heard"
    --Sam Levin (11 August 2016)

    Austin Wilkerson, a white man who's a student at the University of Colorado,
    was convicted of sexually assaulting a young woman. According to the
    prosecutors, "This defendant raped a helpless young woman ... tried to
    cover up his crime, and then repeatedly lied about what he did--including
    under oath." (to quote an article yesterday from 'The Guardian' ).
    Judge Patrick Butler decided that Austin Wilkerson should *not* spend
    any time in state prison, sentencing him to serve two years of 'work release'.
    This means that he's free to work or attend school during the day
    before spending the night in country jail.

    This sentence already has been widely criticized for being too lenient.
    I suspect that the usual suspects here will be pleased with the sentence.

    Now the victim has made a statement (quoted in the article) to the court.
    (Some of the usual suspects here might blame her for appearing 'too articulate'.)
    "...As the victim of this sexual assault, my life has been ruined socially,
    psychologically, academically, and financially. ... About a month after the
    assault, I tried to kill myself because of the impact of the sexual assault.
    Some days I can't even get out of bed ... But worst of all is the victim-blaming ...
    In conclusion, the rapist CHOSE to ruin his life. But like the sexual assault
    itself, my life has been ruined without my consent."
    --a young woman who was sexually assaulted by Austin Wilkerson

    I don't believe that 'the rapist *chose* to ruin his life' because I suspect
    that he never get expected to get caught and convicted.

    Based upon the responses in earlier threads, I don't expect men here
    (with perhaps a few exceptions) to have much empathy for the victim.
    But someday--sadly after many more victims have had to speak out--
    we may be able to make recovery easier for the victims of sexual assault.
  2. Standard member sonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    12 Aug '16 02:34
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/aug/11/campus-sexual-assault-university-colorado-austin-wilkerson

    "'Inspired by Other Survivors': Campus Rape Victim Demands to be Heard"
    --Sam Levin (11 August 2016)

    Austin Wilkerson, a white man who's a student at the University of Colorado,
    was convicted of sexually assaulting a young woman. According to ...[text shortened]... ve had to speak out--
    we may be able to make recovery easier for the victims of sexual assault.
    Seems like he now thinks he can rape with impunity.

    I wonder if he is caught raping again, and gets the same judge, would that judge be as lenient again?

    It is unconscionable he got such a light sentence, that is obvious.
  3. 12 Aug '16 11:37
    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/austin-wilkerson-boulder-rape-prison_us_57abb86ce4b06e52746f3b22?section=&

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1DT945saWl0

    no point in having two different threads and reading excuses for the rapist in two different places.

    or excuses for the judge who let the rapist go free in the case of a certain someone.
  4. 12 Aug '16 18:32 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Seems like he now thinks he can rape with impunity.

    I wonder if he is caught raping again, and gets the same judge, would that judge be as lenient again?

    It is unconscionable he got such a light sentence, that is obvious.
    This is not the first thread about an apparently lenient sentence in a sexual assault case.

    "Seems like he [Austin Wilkerson] now thinks he can rape with impunity."
    --Sonhouse

    I don't know exactly what he thinks. And I don't know what men in his position think
    about their chances (or hopes) of raping women and avoiding severe punishment.
    But women already know that it can be dangerous to be a woman in a sexist society.

    "It is unconscionable he got such a light sentence, that is obvious."
    --Sonhouse

    The white men here who have approved of 'light sentences' for another white man convicted
    of sexual assault might hurl less sexist abuse at Sonhouse, a white man, than they have at me.

    P.S. The 'thumbs down' for my original post and this one corroborate my point.
  5. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    12 Aug '16 20:10 / 1 edit
    The same people who said two years in jail would have been an appropriate sentence for Brock Turner are screaming that a two year jail sentence here is too light. Prisoners on work release are still incarcerated and can leave the facility only for " work, school, legal obligations, religious services or medical appointments". (A typical program's info is here: http://www.larimer.org/cjs/asd/ASDWorkReleaseProgram.pdf).

    Of course, the defendant will also be on probation for at least 20 years and quite possibly for life, be labelled a sex offender and have to receive court mandated treatment. While the sentencing transcript isn't available yet, this is another case where the Judges' sentence is in line with the recommendation of the local Probation Department.

    As I have said before in normal circumstances, I am loathe to criticize sentences handed out by judges who have more information regarding a case than I or other internet posters do. I see no reason to vary from that sensible principle now.
  6. 12 Aug '16 21:30 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by sonhouse
    Seems like he now thinks he can rape with impunity.

    I wonder if he is caught raping again, and gets the same judge, would that judge be as lenient again?

    It is unconscionable he got such a light sentence, that is obvious.
    Sonhouse, a self-described white American man, has condemned this sentence in much
    harsher terms than I have done. I referred only to it as an 'apparently lenient' sentence.

    I don't expect Sonhouse, on account of being a white American man, to be the target of
    nearly as much of the usual hate from other white American men (typically sexist trolls).
    Women already know that they tend to be treated more harshly in this male-dominated forum.
  7. 12 Aug '16 21:39
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    Sonhouse, a self-described white American man, has condemned this sentence in much
    harsher terms than I have done. I referred only to it as an 'apparently lenient' sentence.

    I don't expect Sonhouse, on account of being a white American man, to be the target of
    nearly as much of the usual hate from other white American men (typically sexist trolls).
    Women already know that they tend to be treated more harshly in this male-dominated forum.
    Just out of interest did you read the court transcripts?
  8. 12 Aug '16 21:57 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    Just out of interest did you read the court transcripts?
    I don't have the time to read the complete court transcripts before writing one post in
    a non-legal forum that links to a reputable newspaper's article about a criminal case.
    I note with absolute disdain that many trolls (such as Robbie Carrobie) often do *not*
    even bother to do minimal fact-checking before spewing their offensive nonsense.

    And, in contrast to the men here who seem concerned only about what happens to the
    man (convicted of sexual assault) in this case, my focus is on what happens to the woman.
    She has described the sexual assault's impact upon her life. As the victim, she believes
    that the sentence was too lenient and will not help her feel safe or recover in other ways.
    Some men here may sneer at her or put her down, but she has the right to express her views.

    I am more concerned about the victim's life being 'ruined', as she claims it has been,
    than about her sexual assaulter's life supposedly being 'ruined'. I expect that many
    sexist men here will empathize *only* with the man in this case.
  9. 12 Aug '16 22:03
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    I don't have the time to read the complete court transcripts before writing one post in
    a non-legal forum that links to a reputable newspaper's article about a criminal case.
    I note with absolute disdain that many trolls (such as Robbie Carrobie) often do *not*
    even bother to do minimal fact-checking before spewing their offensive nonsense.

    And, in ...[text shortened]... 'ruined'. I expect that many
    sexist men here will empathize *only* with the man in this case.
    So that would be no you did not familiarise yourself with all of the facts prior to posting. Thankyou thats all I needed to know.
  10. 12 Aug '16 22:09 / 2 edits
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    So that would be no you did not familiarise yourself with all of the facts prior to posting. Thankyou thats all I needed to know.
    It's absurd to expect anyone (particularly a non-lawyer) to take the time to read the complete
    court transcripts before writing one post about a criminal case mentioned in a newspaper.
    I would do that *if* were a lawyer being *paid* to express my considered opinion on this case.

    I note with absolute disdain that the sexist troll Robbie Carrobie has a general reputation
    in several forums for tirelessly spewing nonsense without doing any basic fact-checking.

    And even No1Marauder has just written that the *sentencing transcript is not available yet*
    for members of the public to read. That's a fact ignored by the arrogant troll Robbie Carrobie.
  11. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    12 Aug '16 22:10 / 1 edit
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    I don't have the time to read the complete court transcripts before writing one post in
    a non-legal forum that links to a reputable newspaper's article about a criminal case.
    I note with absolute disdain that many trolls (such as Robbie Carrobie) often do *not*
    even bother to do minimal fact-checking before spewing their offensive nonsense.

    And, in ...[text shortened]... 'ruined'. I expect that many
    sexist men here will empathize *only* with the man in this case.
    From your OP:

    This sentence already has been widely criticized for being too lenient.
    I suspect that the usual suspects here will be pleased with the sentence.


    As it seems quite doubtful that a harsher sentence could do anything to help her "feel safe or recover" (unless you want to impose life in prison or death sentences for such crimes, people who commit sexual assaults are going to be eventually released), and you have implicitly criticized the sentence, I suspect you are being disingenuous.

    I seriously doubt that any any men on this forum, no matter how "sexist" in your view, would empathize with Mr. Wilkerson.
  12. Subscriber no1marauder
    It's Nice to Be Nice
    12 Aug '16 22:12
    Originally posted by robbie carrobie
    So that would be no you did not familiarise yourself with all of the facts prior to posting. Thankyou thats all I needed to know.
    To be fair, the article did mention the sentencing transcript is not yet publicly available.
  13. 12 Aug '16 22:14
    Originally posted by no1marauder to Robbie Carrobie
    To be fair, the article did mention the sentencing transcript is not yet publicly available.
    Robbie Carrobie's already on No1Marauder's side, of course, why discourage his usual trolling?
  14. 12 Aug '16 22:18
    Originally posted by no1marauder
    To be fair, the article did mention the sentencing transcript is not yet publicly available.
    Ok I undertsand.
  15. 12 Aug '16 22:23
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    It's absurd to expect anyone (particularly a non-lawyer) to take the time to read the complete
    court transcripts before writing one post about a criminal case mentioned in a newspaper.
    I would do that *if* were a lawyer being *paid* to express my considered opinion on this case.

    I note with absolute disdain that the sexist troll Robbie Carrobie has a ...[text shortened]... for members of the public to read. That's a fact ignored by the arrogant troll Robbie Carrobie.
    Not really, I don't think it is unreasonable, not if you are interested in justice and how the court arrived at the decision and especially if you are commenting on the leniency of a sentence. Infact is it not incumbent upon us to familiarise ourselves with as much of the details as possible.