No prison time for teen who raped baby

boing
62

No, there is nothing easy or gleeful about it. To the absolute contrary, it’s nauseating to encounter someone so worthless, because I very much want to live in a world where every person has worth. But in the balance, whatever worth this person has is far outweighed by the evil he has done.

And he is human, which is why I called him such. He is responsible for his actions. I very deliberately did not and will not call him an animal, save insofar as all humans are animals and being in the larger category of animal is no evil. To use terms like animal would be to attempt to remove him from us, to dehumanize him. I refuse to do that. We must recognize his humanity so we can fully appreciate his evil. He is garbage, but he is human garbage.

Again, read above. You are making incorrect assumptions about my feelings and views. And you do not have to dance around addressing me with generalities. You can say you are disturbed by “you” (as directly addressing me). I won’t think less of you or take offense. I respect your compassion, I simply do not share it. We have a fundamental difference of values here.

Oh no, let’s very well not. Let’s not shirk from what we’re capable of at our worst. To do so would make us accomplices to every such act of evil. It is the one thing we must never do, regardless of what we as a society do with this person.

I do not think they are.

I have zero compassion for this person. It takes an act of incredible depravity to lose all compassion from me, but he has accomplished that no mean feat. I make no judgement on those who still have compassion for him, but I do not and make no apologies for it.

This is why, in the balance, I am still basically against capital punishment for him (in fact anyone). But I am for his permanent isolation in a medical asylum. Human rights carry responsibilities. He irreversibly and permanently ruined the life of (at least one) young child. As I said, an act worse than cold-blooded murder.

I don’t know if he can be rehabilitated. I am not a doctor. I believe he deserves to be punished by permanent removal from society, but I don’t believe ordinary prison is the proper place for several reasons. He has lost any responsibly I feel to support his rehabilitation materially or emotionally. Think whatever you will of me for that.

Opinions of condemnation are not in any way, shape or form tantamount to a physical lynch mob. I have not at any point advocated extrajudicial punishment, despite this miscarriage of justice so endemic of racist judges, nor would I ever do so. I would have to re-read the thread to see if anyone here has, but I would thank you not to imply I hold a position I most emphatically do not. I am for the rule of law, in spite of its systemic imperfections. Disagree, despise or be saddened by my beliefs if you will, but please do not mischaracterize them.

4 Likes
63

I’m sure if he were black he would have received the same sentence.

65

The rapist obviously needs something, but Em City with a target on his back probably isn’t it.
For what crimes though would he have been tried as an adult and locked up for life without parole?

66

I have read it in its entirety.

I am also glad I waited a while for the truth to come to light.

2 Likes
67

It seems the real question is what is the goal of our Justice system?

Is it
A: To Punish Perpetrators in a fashion that fits the crime and makes the Victim feel they have been Avenged?

B: Remove dangerous criminal elements from society in a fashion that ensures the maximum safety with minimum impact on all parties?

C: The rehabilitation of the Perpetrators so that they may rejoin society as welcome and productive members?

D: Some other I can’t think of right now?

With that said how about banishment, is that an option?

68

Thank you very much for posting this for a well rounded account of the actual story.

It’s a shame that this wasn’t a part of the original blog post before people starting brandishing pitchforks and screaming about their desire to murder this guy.

2 Likes
69

You seem to be taking very personally what was directed at an entire host of people, and a larger idea reflected through the discussion of this subject. For example, your defense that I was referring to you with the “throw evil into an abyss”, when that comment was directed at the people who literally said that “this guy could be thrown in a hole for life” along similar sentiment, and who are quoted in my post. Though if it comes to that, the phrase “he deserves to be locked in an asylum for the criminally insane and left to rot” is pretty damn close.

You were one voice in many, which is why you were quoted alongside a good number of commentators. So most of what you were just defensive about was not directed at you in any way, which is again made clear by your various positions as you list them. But I do appreciate you clarifying your position.

1 Like
70

The goal of the justice system is to replace interpersonal violence with state violence.

2 Likes
71

I thought because you used the same word I did, that that part was directed chiefly at me. I apologize for my own assumption. Thank you as well for clarifying.

I just sometimes fear that people might, understandably wary of the way discussions so often break down on the internet, elide direct rebuttals for fear of being flamed. I don’t blame them for their caution, but you’ll never get that from me.

I may not have used very civilized language, but it is basically what I believe he deserves. That said, I would find any form of incaneration for any meaningful length of time vastly superior to the reprehensible and racist leniency he was shown, but I suspect we agree at least on that much, or at least that what he got (or rather didn’t get) was unjust.

1 Like
72

I would say B and C mostly.

73

Absolutely.[quote=“GulliverFoyle, post:71, topic:85416”]
I just sometimes fear that people might, understandably wary of the way discussions so often break down on the internet, elide direct rebuttals for fear of being flamed.
[/quote]

These fears are well-justified, and I’m glad I was able to clarify in an accepted manner. I want to further apologize for setting anything off-balance, or indeed seeming to or actually attacking your expression. Conversations are hard, and I only say that as a reminder to myself to do better in the future at expressing a more open position.

1 Like
74

Okay, there were multiple inaccuracies. I’ll accept that.

That’s a bit of a gotcha on your part, I think. If the multiple inaccuracies didn’t exist and the story stood as originally displayed here, then I stand by my response also.

So, I’m wrong if I’m on a jury and hang this guy without the complete story. That said, I reacted to what I thought was the complete story. Also, if this was my baby, I’m sure I would have the complete story.

That said, I’m really not buying this bit

" While the abuse Grooms committed is disturbing, it would not be accurate to describe it as ‘raping a toddler’ as it has been described on certain webites. The child was not injured, no pain was inflicted, and the child was too young to even be aware of what was happening."

What was the disturbing abuse Grooms committed then? I’d like to know. It was disturbing though, yes? The thing about the child being too young to be aware sounds like the possibility of a lot of misunderstanding and underestimating the potential effects of the disturbing abuse. Maybe no physical injuries or pain, but an act of “disturbing abuse” may show up very unpleasantly at a more mature stage for this child.

It was also stated in your linked article “it was not Grooms’ idea to commit the abuse, and he did not know the abuse was being recorded.” That’s some defense! He couldn’t have meant any harm because he didn’t know he was being recorded? I’m not sympathetic here either. I feel the same about the statement that he would not have committed the act of his own volition without being coaxed.

You are absolutely correct to point out the slanted outrages originally stated. So, he isn’t Hitler, but to my thinking, he’s still Mussolini.

I’m glad you posted the reply though.

75

I’m not quite sure what this means. The child was barely 1 year old when the incident occurred; if he didn’t actually penetrate the baby or cause any physical harm, then I kinda doubt that a 1 year old will internalize deep, lasting emotional conflicts over whatever he did in front of a camera. The baby likely had no idea what was going on. That doesn’t make sexual abuse any less wrong, but I don’t think we should read that much into the inner thoughts of a baby.

2 Likes
76

That’s a bit of a gotcha on your part, I think. If the multiple
inaccuracies didn’t exist and the story stood as originally displayed
here, then I stand by my response also.

I wasn’t meaning to pull a gotcha. I just found your post to be an appropriate place to point out that the victim’s parents in this particular case specifically didn’t want the perpetrator sent to prison

That said, I reacted to what I thought was the complete story.

I think a lot of people were reacting to what they thought was a complete story. But to me “rape” is a pretty specific act, and from what I’m reading (and have heard from another private source), it is not an accurate word to use here.

That said, I’m really not buying this bit

" While the abuse Grooms committed is disturbing, it would not be
accurate to describe it as ‘raping a toddler’ as it has been described
on certain webites. The child was not injured, no pain was inflicted,
and the child was too young to even be aware of what was happening."

Based on another article I read (and I’m honestly not trying too hard to visualize what his abuse was), he may have been fondling the child while he masturbated? Or ejaculated on the child? I’m trying to imagine what a teen boy might possibly believe a teenage girl would actually want to see.

There was a case a few years back where (WARNING–GROSS!) a teacher was blindfolding his students and then holding spoons with his semen in them up to their faces and taking photos. There might have been more, but I really don’t want to google this story right now. And in that case it was true that although the abuse committed was disgusting, the children were not harmed, they were never in pain, and they were not aware of what was happening because they thought it was a game.

I think it’s possible to have such cases, but also, I mean, who knows what a child will remember or feel years later when remembering or reflecting on that abuse?

It was also stated in your linked article “it was not Grooms’ idea to
commit the abuse, and he did not know the abuse was being recorded.”
That’s some defense! He couldn’t have meant any harm because he didn’t
know he was being recorded? I’m not sympathetic here either. I feel
the same about the statement that he would not have committed the act of
his own volition without being coaxed.

I think that the line about not knowing that the abuse was being recorded goes toward explaining why he wouldn’t be charged with producing child porn. He didn’t know it was being recorded, therefore he was not knowingly making a sexual video with a child.

As to the coercion element–it makes me think a lot of those fast food managers who were convinced over the phone to strip search their female employees. And those were grown adults.

I do think that there has to be something seriously wrong with you (emotionally or intellectually) to think that it’s okay to commit a sexual act with a child. But without knowing exactly what he did, it’s hard for me to judge.

Like, imagine this scenario. The “teen girl” (aka the pedophiles) say something to the effect of “It would be so hot to watch you masturbate. I wish you could hold me while you did it. Hey–that kid wouldn’t even know what you were doing. Pick him/her up while you do it and pretend it’s me.”

If, on the other hand, he went further (such as having the child’s hands on his genitals or something) my sympathy goes down a notch. I really hope that the research cited in the article is accurate, and that with therapy and intervention this man does not reoffend.

Ironically, just a few hours before I posted here I helped a child call 911 because a man who (it seemed) had committed some inappropriate act toward her (and apparently has a court order not to be near any of the schools in our town) had followed her in his car, at a crawl, as she walked down the town’s main street. So having just been comforting a shaking, crying girl who was clearly terrified and distraught, my sympathy toward sex-offenders was at a particularly low ebb. Still, I feel like the headline on this site (and the attempts to lump this man in with the likes of Brock Turner) is misleading.

2 Likes
77

As opposed to black guys in old robes who are getting sent to jail.

82

Re: nuked post/replies.

My guess is alt right trolls are pretending to be techno feminist witches already.

I’ll give them one thing: they do know what’s happening online.

13 Likes
83

That was a seriously weird-ass attempt at trolling, yo.

7 Likes
84

Somehow changing society so that this type of predator/abuser is spotted early and his or her reasoning brought back on track so to speak. A lot of family will protect their offspring even if they know they are doing wrong, this guy has form and some ones ignored it to someone else’s suffering.

85

D would be societal or state vengeance. Sometimes, like in this case, it’s an attempt to blot out a horrendous crime. In other cases, the purpose of state vengeance is to maintain the state’s monopoly on legal violence.

86

CMYK sounds like something on offer from an escort service that caters specifically to graphic designers.

RGB sounds like a class of people being persecuted, probably by a system of monochrome supremacy.

Pantone must be the prison-for-profit system.

Gee, that’s not helping my understanding much. Maybe we should go to a car analogy. Everything can be explained with a car analogy.