Did the justice fit the crime?

bearmtnmartin wrote: I don't know if the punishment fit the crime. I did not hear all the evidence in court and I was not at the scene of the crime. So what I do know is, the judge took the available evidence and testimony into account and made a decision. It seems as if he would be as repelled as anyone and would not be on the side of a rapist unless someone paid him off. A lot of people do not like the decision he made and have done their best to stiffen the penalty. I am Canadian and I have seen three different Facebook postings with photos float past my screen, each with endless added condemnation and vitriol. So the public has added immeasurably to that kids sentence, rightly or wrongly. And I suspect a lot of the anger came from his dad's comment about a few minutes of action. Sounds like the apple does not fall far from the tree. In addition to time in jail, he is on a national sex offender registry. That doesn't wear off as far as I know. With that and the social media shaming, he is now a marked man for the rest of his life. Reporting to authorities when he moves or changes jobs, not allowed to be around kids, and whatever else is involved with that. I would say at this point he has been heavily punished.

The problem is that his sentence is NOT consistent with what others have been given for similar crimes, even in cases that were far less clear-cut (he got caught in the act). Six months- three if he behaves from what I've read (all while being 'escorted' for his protection BTW)- after being unanimously convicted of three felony counts with the jury themselves recommending a much heavier sentence based on the severity of what he'd done.

There are people his age serving longer sentences who are in jail for simple possession- something which at worst could negatively impact their own lives and certainly did not shatter the life of another person like this unrepentant affluent rapist did. The judge stated, "A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him. I think he will not be a danger to others." NO E36 M3, having a 'severe impact' is pretty much the point- and how is it remotely fair to try and shield HIM from this 'severe impact' given what he did clearly had a far MORE severe impact on his victim.

Sadly, I'm not sure there truly IS any punishment that can fit his crime. There being a way to transfer the hell that his victim has gone and is going through onto him would be nice. But a more appropriate prison sentence would be a good start.

In reply to RX Reven':

If I were ever in a dark alley with two men, I'd be running no matter what. The population of the USA is (very slightly) over half female. And sexual assault is committed by a vastly male majority. Sounds like men are the Shagdonians, doesn't it? That makes your example pretty awkward.

Please tell me the percent, per capita, that each race has committed. You're good with statistics, you should find it to be an interesting challenge or a simple walk in the park. Tell me what you find.

White males have the power. Rape is about power.

Katie, Margie, and Sarah:

Your voices and opinions are both strong and compelling. Your statistics are not.

I have been involved and supportive of efforts to combat human trafficking and sexual slavery for years. The statistics you are quoting don't even come close to ones I am familiar with, but a statistical pissing match seems truly useless and counterproductive, so I am refraining.

Suffice it to say that way too many people have been hurt, and continue to be, and that is unacceptable. I am doing my best.

The fear you have experienced is very disheartening. I am sorry you have had this. Thank you for sharing honestly.

I don't agree with that. Even if the shagadonians were 100 percent rapists, and the white guys 1%, but there are only 1000 shagadonians in the country, your likelyhood of running into a white rapist is far greater than even seeing a shagadonian. I'm not sure how many white males are in America, but I'm sure 1% is greater than 1000.

I'm just making numbers up, now, but say falling into a volcano is 100% fatal, and falling down the stairs is only 1% fatal. Even though falling into a volcano is far deadlier, I'm still much more likely to die falling down the stairs. I worry about my family falling down the stairs much more than I worry about them falling into a volcano. Just like I would worry more about them running into a white rapist than a shagadonian rapist.

Not to make a joke of all this with my silly examples but it's a valid analogy, I think.

RX Reven' wrote: Hi Katie, I haven’t personally verified any of the numbers presented here so I’m just speaking in general terms (I teach advanced engineering statistics BTW). Aircooled was normalizing the rape statistics to get a per capita value which is the appropriate thing to do. Let me share an example from Leonard Mlodinow’s (Ph.D. Statistician at Cal. Tech.) book “The Drunkards Walk”. Leonard once attempted to give blood but the screening process detected the presence of the enzyme associated with HIV. He met with a doctor who told him that the incidence of false positives and false negatives was exceptionally low. However, Leonard knew that he wasn’t in a high risk population (gay, IV drug user, etc.) so he insisted on being tested again and, not surprisingly, the results came back negative. So, the incidence of committing Type I and Type II error (concluding you have HIV when you don’t and concluding you don’t have HIV when you do) isn’t a constant but rather is a function of your likelihood of having it. In the same way, the probability of being raped by someone of a certain race isn’t derivative of the absolute number of rapes that race has committed but rather it’s the percent, per capita, that that race has committed. Conduct a thought experiment with me please. What if you were to encounter a guy from Shagdonia which is an odd little country that actually requires its citizens to rape at least once per day. There are only a few Shagdonians in the US so they only get a tiny little sliver on the bar chart you posted. Wouldn’t you be extremely nervous passing a Shagdonian in a dark ally…wouldn’t you be much better off walking the other way past a white guy even though he has a huge bar on your chart?

Paul, I quoted no stats. What, exactly, have I said that you are refuting? Why the overwhelmingly adversarial attitude? There is no pissing match here, only sadness and a willingness to dream of a better way.

To those of you who actually used this thread to talk to the females in your life, or to examine yourselves about how you've viewed the females in your lives, my sincere thanks.

Margie

SVreX wrote: Katie, Margie, and Sarah: Your voices and opinions are both strong and compelling. Your statistics are not. I have been involved and supportive of efforts to combat human trafficking and sexual slavery for years. The statistics you are quoting don't even come close to ones I am familiar with, but a statistical pissing match seems truly useless and counterproductive, so I am refraining. Suffice it to say that way too many people have been hurt, and continue to be, and that is unacceptable. I am doing my best. The fear you have experienced is very disheartening. I am sorry you have had this. Thank you for sharing honestly.

To be fair, you shouldn't be calling out others lack of quantifiable data whilst providing none of your own.

In reply to SVreX:

I put up a single graph from the rape hotline's website. Sarah said 9 in 10 victims are women (true). Margie gave no stats.

Just interesting to note.

I am not accusing anyone.

I was saying it would not be fruitful for ME to start a statistical pissing match.

In reply to z31maniac:

I am not calling out anyone. In fact, I am doing the opposite. I am trying desperate to avoid showing how badly the RAINN statistics have been twisted out of respect to the heartfelt positions of the posters.

I don't know what to think about the discussion of "statistics ain't right", "teach my daughters" or both (I'll get to these in second). They are factors, but never really gets to the root of problem.

Here we have a case where someone was caught in the act of committing a crime, tried, and found guilty by his peers only to receive a wrist slap, stand in the corner style punishment . . .

Statistics, IMHO, doesn't matter in this first part; one instance is too many. The punishment handed down by this judge makes it clear statement . . . Sexual assault will receive a slap on the wrist if you have the money and the power. There are several cases that proves this where someone underprivileged was tried and convicted of crimes they didn't commit or the underprivileged convicted received a harsher sentence.

Second, while talking to your daughters about rape and sexual assault is admirable and advisable, (here's where statistics should be applied) we should be focusing on the areas/people that are likely to commit the crime. Don't we do that for "high crime areas" (the hood, the ghetto)? Don't we have programs for high risk kids? Why are we continually subjecting the oppressed/underprivileged to speeches, programs, and other activities on how to function (walk, talk, dress, etc) in society? While those programs and activities are excellent, it should not be our only/sole focus . . .

Statistics only show us what we want see. The chart Katie posted said one thing . . . Sexual assault occurs way more frequent that it should.

Robbie, Margie and JG hit the nail on the head . . . Whomever holds the power can oppress at their whim with the support of others. The privileged isn't always the oppressor, but the oppressor is always the privileged.

I recently heard a powerful defense attorney comment on the sentencing in this case. His general conclusion is that is was not really out of line, and the outrage at the judge is likely misplaced. His primary points are that the a-hole in this case was not convicted of rape, he was convicted of sexual assault. The rape charges where thrown on in the preliminary hearing (where evidence requirements are less restrictive) for lack of evidence. Because of the vigorous defense (character statements etc.), the resulting sentence is not out of line in his opinion. It's not unreasonable to be upset at the influence of power and money in this case, but the lynch mob approach to the judge seems out of place.

The true tragedy of this trial though is that it was likely far more traumatic to the girl then the actual act. The requirements on her for the trial subjected her to things and information that she otherwise likely would not have been. This of course, has a known effect on people reporting these crimes.

Regarding the sentencing and the a-hole in this case: We should not get to concerned about this guy getting off easy. He has likely suffered one of the worst rape conviction in recent history because of the social result. He is a WELL know convicted sex offender for the rest of his life, and he is in his 20's! It would not be surprising at all if he did not live to 30 via his own hand.

KatieSuddard wrote: In reply to RX Reven': If I were ever in a dark alley with two men, I'd be running no matter what. The population of the USA is (very slightly) over half female. And sexual assault is committed by a vastly male majority. Sounds like men are the Shagdonians, doesn't it? That makes your example pretty awkward. Please tell me the percent, per capita, that each race has committed. You're good with statistics, you should find it to be an interesting challenge or a simple walk in the park. Tell me what you find. White males have the power. Rape is about power.

Katie, if you where able to commission a study based on your hypotheses, I feel very confident you will find your assumptions are completely wrong. I suspect you would find the exact opposite in fact.

Rape is about power, but that does not mean men of power are "about" rape. The fact of the matter is that powerful people (in this society) generally will have more motivation not to rape. They can either buy what they want or have far to much to loose to attempt it. Besides, women seem to flock to such people (plenty of examples of that). I do understand rape and sex generally differentiated, but there is some connection. Certainly there are those that feel above the law, but I feel confident that is a pretty small percentage (in the case of rape at least). You will likely find that those with less to loose are likely the more prone (e.g. +they have no power, that is a way to feel powerful).

I would also urge you to remove race from your equation. I think you are conflating race with money/power. As noted by Strike, there are some recent well know cases that clearly show having power and money are far more important then your skin color.

This case is just another example of how the justice system serves the wealthy, not the just.

I saw we were discussing stats, so I wanted to drop this here.

On the "Teach Men Not to Rape" topic...

Is rape really a specific thing that needs to be taught stand-alone? Seems to me that is covered as part of "Teach people to respect everyone." That "respect" includes personal boundaries and autonomy of self determination. "Everyone" means everyone, without limitations on race, gender, religion, or socio-economic status. Respect, empathy, and the "golden rule" cover "don't rape".

I didn't have to explicitly be taught to not rape, because I know sexual boundaries are about as personal of boundaries as you can get (short of mortality and morbidity). It would be worse to violate someone's sexual boundaries than to climb in someone's car at a classic car show and take it for a spin around the block without their permission.

The problem is, you get people who don't learn to respect others. Maybe they learn to be polite if they are worried about consequences (a bigger person can beat them up) or they want someone with wealth/power to give them something. So, of course these people are more likely to prey on women who are going to be physically smaller and probably less wealthy. Obviously, the perpetrator here was one of these people.

How do we change the behavior of these people who don't know to respect others - the ones who end up being rapists? People tend to associate with others similar to themselves. I don't associate closely with people who don't have respect for others, because they won't respect me. Because they won't respect me, they wouldn't listen to me anyway. The people they associate with will normalize disrespectful behavior and taking advantage of others however you can get away with.

The vast majority of us get it already. The ones who don't, aren't generally associating closely with those that do.

Trust me on this guys – all of you know someone who has experienced something similar to this. Consider yourselves lucky that it's something you rarely think about. It's an inextricable part of our makeup, unfortunately. I've never walked across a darkened parking garage after a late flight, without constantly looking over my shoulder. A car slows down when I'm out on my bike, my horse, on foot... I'm in flight mode. Just finished Cheryl Strayed's "Wild" and the only thing I could think about wasn't that she might've encountered wild animals... but a psycho. This woman wasn't an irresponsible victim, she made the mistake of what? Relaxing? Imagine if this nasty little swimmer guy had passed out at a frat party, and one of his fraternity brothers had raped him. What do you think the headlines would say?

KatieSuddard wrote: In reply to RX Reven': If I were ever in a dark alley with two men, I'd be running no matter what. The population of the USA is (very slightly) over half female. And sexual assault is committed by a vastly male majority. Sounds like men are the Shagdonians, doesn't it? That makes your example pretty awkward. Please tell me the percent, per capita, that each race has committed. You're good with statistics, you should find it to be an interesting challenge or a simple walk in the park. Tell me what you find. White males have the power. Rape is about power.

Hi Katie,

First, please know that I’m focusing on the math aspect here because that’s what I do for a living, not because I don’t get what a horrifically inhumane crime this is. Still, I’m getting a creepy sense that my posts may at some level serve to sanitize or whitewash this human tragedy with seemingly benign numbers. Thoughts???

Second, what you’re asking of me only calls for simple descriptive statistics (averages, standard deviations, graphical representations, etc.). Honestly, anybody can compile a basket of these things from leading, reputable sources and advocate for whichever one consistently produces the most middle of the road numbers relative to the other leading sources.

What I actually do for a living is what’s called inferential statistics (regression analysis, measurement system analysis, process capability, tolerance design, sample size determination, power calculation, design of experiment, etc.) Again, not to minimize this horrific topic, but I can’t help but imagine a MEME right now for “What GRM thinks statisticians do – what my parents think statisticians do…”

It is in this area of statistics (probability theory specifically) that I would like to focus.

The moment before you walked out into the alley, assuming you were in an area with demographics representative of the overall population, you were at greatest risk from a white guy. However, the moment you walked out into the alley, the probability wave representing the likelihood of encountering various ethnic groups collapsed; it’s now behind you and with it went the low probability of there being a Shagadonian.

In plain language, the comfort you could previously take in knowing that there aren’t a lot of Shagadonians around is now gone…that low probability existed in your past – in your present, regrettably, you’ve got one in your current reality. At this point, your best option is to walk towards the white guy because a lower percent of them are rapist than Shagadonians.

Let’s turn to joey48442’s analogy about stairs and volcano’s.

We can construct a FMEA (Failure Mode and Effects Analysis) to produce a RPN (Risk Priority Number) by multiplying the frequency, severity, and detectability of various threats.

Most people will walk up and down 1000’s of flights of stairs for each time they visit a volcano. As a result, in the present, joey48442 is correct in focusing his attention on stair safety. However, should his current reality change by winning an all-expense paid vacation to Hawaii for instance, the term for volcano frequency in his RPN calculation would increase astronomically…it would now be appropriate for him to start focusing on volcano safety.

So, in not sure I understand, but wouldn't it then only make sense to worry about shagadonians if I won an all expense paid trip to shagadonia, but focus my attention on the greater likelyhood of a white rapist until then?

Thanks Joey. I was thinking on those same lines.

Winning an all expense paid vacation to Hawaii would introduce a volcano, but does NOT mean the death by falling into it is of concern. Wouldn't you actually have visit the volcano to fall to create an instance to fall in? I would think there are more stairs in Hawaii than volcanos to fall in.

IMHO, this has the appearance of deflection. 10000 x's and 5000 y's . . . Apply the same percent to each, throw them in a room, and you'll still run into more x's than y's.

This is the underprivileged experience. They run into more chances of being oppressed by the privileged since there are more privileged. Underprivileged/privileged covers all status (economic, racial, sexual, religious, gender). As much as we would like to remove "take your pick from the list", we cannot due to how our system has been built to operate. If I have to spell it out any further, then you may be part of the privileged.

I think I'll stop right here . . . I'll end with . . . No, the punishment does not fit the crime. The fact rape was whittled down to sexual assault for a reduced sentence displays how broken the system is.

In reply to Strike_Zero:

I wouldn't call it broken, I would call it imperfect. The deck is stacked in the defendant's favor to keep the government from locking up the innocent, and I'm OK with that. Even when it means some of the crooks go free.

I would agree that in this case, I don't think the punishment fit the crime, but for whatever reasons the judge didn't agree with me. Hopefully someone is asking him some very pointed questions. I would love to hear his answers. Maybe he should have recused himself for the Stanford connection. That would be worth looking into.

The original rape charge was dropped because the prosecutor thought he couldn't win that case. So he went after other charges he knew he could win. That happens sometimes. Al Capone and tax evasion comes to mind, rather than the truly heinous crime he allegedly committed.

Relevant:

"But those (rape) indictments were dropped at a preliminary hearing, reportedly after prosecutors received the results of DNA testing."

"As such, the case continued on the basis of ‘lesser’ charges: assault with intent to commit rape of an intoxicated or unconscious person; penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object; and penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object. In essence, Californian state law defines rape as penetration by the penis. Since that did not occur Turner is a criminal, a sex offender– but he isn’t, according to the law, a rapist."

Link

Possibly these charges carry lesser sentences in California.

It is a unfortunate truth that money does matter when it comes to being prosecuted for crimes. The overworked public defender isn't going to spend much time keeping you out of jail, whereas the $400/hour lawyer will happily spend all of your money making sure you are set free. I don't know of a good way to fix that. Life just isn't fair sometimes, and I'm OK with that as well.

In all honesty, public outcry will do far more damage to this kid than jail will. No amount of jail could equal it.

Five pages... can't we just blame a minority or named (e.g. millennials, privileged, berkeleying hipsters ) group of some kind and move on already? No one wants to hear all this ugliness. Assign blame. Feel better. Move on. It's the american way. I wonder what hijinks the Kardashians are up to right now. Did you hear that Johnny Depp is getting a divorce?

Huckleberry wrote: In reply to JG Pasterjak: We also make the best serial killers. In fact, I'm genetically predisposed to excel at almost the entire spectrum of violent crime as well as a mastery of tactics leading to world domination. The pointless rapey/murdery end of the line tend to be those without the discipline to work at a genocide effort or crime syndicate. Slackers if you will.

Lmfao, made my day.

I hate it when discussions turn to statistics, I mean....I can provide statistical proof that lack of pirates causes pollution but how real do you think that is?

Huckleberry wrote: Five pages... can't we just blame a minority or named (e.g. millennials, privileged, berkeleying hipsters ) group of some kind and move on already? No one wants to hear all this ugliness. Assign blame. Feel better. Move on. It's the american way. I wonder what hijinks the Kardashians are up to right now. Did you hear that Johnny Depp is getting a divorce?

Im a little surprised no one brought up affluenza. Too rich to know better.

joey48442 wrote: So, in not sure I understand, but wouldn't it then only make sense to worry about shagadonians if I won an all expense paid trip to shagadonia, but focus my attention on the greater likelyhood of a white rapist until then?

No, it wouldn’t…any good criteria needs to be both specific (low risk of type one error) and sensitive (low risk of type two error).

Unless you’re willing to needlessly run for it every few minutes, your strategy is a poor one as it lacks specificity.

Let “A” represent the probability of encountering a white male in a dark ally, let “B” represent the probability of encountering a Shagdonian male in a dark ally, and let “C” represent the probability of being raped given that there is a male in a dark ally. Expressed as P (C|A) and P (C|B) respectively and is read as “probability of C given A and probability of C given B respectively.

Once “C” has been realized “you’re in a dark ally with a male”, the only thing that matters is the per capita incidence of rape for “A” and “B”…the absolute number of rapes by race which is what the bar chart Katie posted reflects is of no value at this point.

Please refer to “conditional probability theory” for further study.