An opinionated discussion of all things SFDebris
https://sfdebris.net/forum/
A US judge has found that two girls, aged 13 and 14, were partly to blame in a sex abuse case involving a 67-year-old man - and reduced his sentence.
I realize we continue to infantilize our society, but at 13 you should know better than to be selling your body to old men. That doesn't mean he shouldn't go to jail, and he IS going to jail, but I can see it being used as a sentencing factor. Especially since we don't know how many marbles the old man has left. Some men reach 67 and are still perfectly sharp - some are considerably less competent than most 13 year olds.The judge said the girls went to Soden's house voluntarily and had taken money for sexual favours.
"They were certainly selling things monetarily that it's against the law for even an adult to sell."
Good luck finding good guys here. The older sister is pimping out her siblings with the mother's knowledge, while they're trying to hire people to rob a guy who's suffering from senility and paying teens for sex. And nobody wanted to show up in court for any of this. (big surprise there!)In Soden’s case, the judge cited as reasons evidence that the 13-year-old and 14-year-old had voluntarily gone to Soden’s house and had taken money for sexual favors.
Soden’s lawyer, Clinton Lee, had requested the lower sentence, saying that giving Soden the prison time called for in the guidelines was essentially a death sentence.
The defense attorney also noted that the girls allegedly tried to have someone rob Soden and that their older sister had been the one who arranged for them to meet Soden.
Soden knew the girl’s mother and paid her for chores around his house, according to statements at the sentencing hearing. Through that connection, he knew the woman’s older daughter whom he described as the “pimp” for her younger sisters.
The judge took those things into consideration in the sentencing and cited other factors, including Soden’s age, poor physical health and low intellectual functioning.
Why?!LittleRaven wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:21 pm That doesn't mean he shouldn't go to jail, and he IS going to jail, but I can see it being used as a sentencing factor.
Why not? Let me guess, those sweet innocent 13 year olds, their pimping older sister and their clearly failing parents are only the victims, right? They did nothing wrong by making themselves readily available to a person who lacks control over his basic sexual urges.Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:23 amWhy?!LittleRaven wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:21 pm That doesn't mean he shouldn't go to jail, and he IS going to jail, but I can see it being used as a sentencing factor.
How does the behavior of 13 year olds relate to the sentencing of a man who fucks 13 year olds? Seriously, the whole "they were no angels" thing is...kinda irrelevant, because we aren't talking about the punishment of the children, but the punishment of the kid-diddler. The child fucker. You don't need to be pure as the driven snow to receive justice, and no amount of moral failings on the part of the UNDERAGED GIRLS makes what this man did any less illegal or immoral. Comprende?Madner Kami wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 4:28 amWhy not? Let me guess, those sweet innocent 13 year olds, their pimping older sister and their clearly failing parents are only the victims, right? They did nothing wrong by making themselves readily available to a person who lacks control over his basic sexual urges.Fuzzy Necromancer wrote: ↑Wed Feb 06, 2019 3:23 amWhy?!LittleRaven wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:21 pm That doesn't mean he shouldn't go to jail, and he IS going to jail, but I can see it being used as a sentencing factor.