Judge sets aside rape charges so ex-athlete can "enjoy a college experience" - Polidicks

[url]http://www.rawstory.com/2016/08/judge-sets-aside-rape-charges-for-probation-so-ex-athlete-can-enjoy-a-college-experience/[/url] [quote]A former Massachusetts high school athlete will avoid serving jail time and registering as a sex offender after he was charged with sexually assaulting two unconscious women at a house party. David Becker, 18, had been charged with two counts of rape and one count of indecent assault and battery in connection with the April 2 incident after a party in Palmer, reported MassLive. Palmer District Court Judge Thomas Estes on Aug. 15 ordered Becker’s case continued without a finding for two years, and he was sentenced Monday to two years of probation.[/quote] [quote]The victims told the resource officer they had been drinking while a classmate’s father was out of town but stayed to help Becker and the classmate clean up. Police said the young women went to an upstairs bedroom, where they talked to Becker until they all three fell asleep. The victims said they awoke to find Becker sexually assaulting them, and he apologized to one of the women by text message the following day.[/quote] [quote]“He can now look forward to a productive life without being burdened with the stigma of having to register as a sex offender,” said his attorney, Thomas Rooke. “The goal of this sentence was not to impede this individual from graduating high school and to go onto the next step of his life, which is a college experience.”[/quote] Bonus source: [url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/massachusetts-student-accused-rape-receives-probation-article-1.2761497[/url] [quote]A police report seen by WWLP said that he denied touching one of the young women and thought that what he did to the other victim was fine because she did not stop him. The allegations eventually found their way to a police officer at East Longmeadow, and prosecutors recommended two years in prison after charging him with rape. One of the victims said that she had heard of Becker assaulting others and being called “David the Rapist,” according to MassLive, though the teen’s lawyer denied both allegations.[/quote]

And people wonder why more people don't report rape or sexual assault. Because shit like this happens, so why bother?

deja vu?

[QUOTE=Pascall;50934319]And people wonder why more people don't report rape or sexual assault. Because shit like this happens, so why bother?[/QUOTE] Not to mention the outright hostility directed at women who make rape claims based on the automatic assumption that they are lying.

before anyone jumps in, this guy already served some probation, so its not like the case was entirely ignored [QUOTE] David Becker, 18, had been charged with two counts of rape and one count of indecent assault and battery in connection with the April 2 incident after a party in Palmer, reported MassLive. Palmer District Court Judge Thomas Estes on Aug. 15 ordered Becker’s case continued without a finding for two years, and he was sentenced Monday to two years of probation. [I]During that time, the former East Longmeadow High School student was ordered to avoid drugs and alcohol, submit to an evaluation for sex offender treatment and stay away from the two 18-year-old victims. Becker, a three-sport athlete at the school, will be permitted to serve probation in Ohio, where he plans to attend college, and will not be required to register as a sex offender.[/I] No conviction will appear on his record if he complies with the terms of his probation.[/QUOTE] so essentially he is not being put on the sex offender list. [QUOTE]“We all made mistakes when we were 17, 18, 19 years old, and we shouldn’t be branded for life with a felony offense and branded a sex offender,” Rooke said. “Putting this kid in jail for two years would have destroyed this kid’s life.”[/QUOTE] but I do not like this reasoning. Yeah we all make mistakes, but sexual assault isn't a "mistake", its a crime, and it should be punished as such [editline]23rd August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934333]Not to mention the outright hostility directed at women who make rape claims based on the automatic assumption that they are lying.[/QUOTE] or the assumption that girls are always telling the truth and the guy is always guilty simply out of accusation (a la college kangaroo courts). I understand my given scenario is by no means as common as legitimate accusations, however it is very dangerous to jump on board any side before evidence can be reviewed. in this case evidence was reviewed, but the punishment seems to be flawed

[QUOTE=da space core;50934340]before anyone jumps in, this guy already served some probation, so its not like the case was entirely ignored so essentially he is not being put on the sex offender list. but I do not like this reasoning. Yeah we all make mistakes, but sexual assault isn't a "mistake", its a crime, and it should be punished as such[/QUOTE] i completely agree with you but at the same time being a registered sex offender is basically a slow death sentence for someone as young as him since he will never get into a college, never get a job, cant live anywhere without informing police and thats the start.

[QUOTE=da space core;50934340]before anyone jumps in, this guy already served some probation, so its not like the case was entirely ignored so essentially he is not being put on the sex offender list. but I do not like this reasoning. Yeah we all make mistakes, but sexual assault isn't a "mistake", its a crime, and it should be punished as such [editline]23rd August 2016[/editline] or the assumption that girls are always telling the truth and the guy is always guilty simply out of accusation (a la college kangaroo courts). I understand my given scenario is by no means as common as legitimate accusations, however it is very dangerous to jump on board any side before evidence can be reviewed. in this case evidence was reviewed, but the punishment seems to be flawed[/QUOTE] Two years probation for two counts of rape and indecent assault in battery is absolutely laughable, no matter which way you put it. Christ, that whole 'if you're white, you can get away with anything' joke is starting to become less of one lately.

What the hell is this judge's problem? He should be thrown out of court and banned from legal work altogether. [QUOTE=Sableye;50934357]i completely agree with you but at the same time being a registered sex offender is basically a slow death sentence for someone as young as him since he will never get into a college, never get a job, cant live anywhere without informing police and thats the start.[/QUOTE] Unfortunately that's what happens when you're a freaking sex offender. I mean thats the point right? Don't be a sex offender and this wont happen to you.

[QUOTE=Sableye;50934357]i completely agree with you but at the same time being a registered sex offender is basically a slow death sentence for someone as young as him since he will never get into a college, never get a job, cant live anywhere without informing police and thats the start.[/QUOTE] That's a bit of a problem with the sex offender registry in the first place. It's a blanket label rather than a gradient that reflects the severity of their crime. Someone who gets caught pissing in a public bush gets put on the same list as a child molester with a lot of the same types of repercussions after any sentencing has been carried through. This teenager wasn't caught pissing in a bush though.

Yup, that sure is THE model of college experience these days, apparently...

[QUOTE=Sableye;50934357]i completely agree with you but at the same time being a registered sex offender is basically a slow death sentence for someone as young as him since he will never get into a college, never get a job, cant live anywhere without informing police and thats the start.[/QUOTE] Probably should've thought about that before he committed sexual assault.

I don't think it should be up to a judge to decide that someone shouldn't be registered as a sex offender. He was found guilty of sexual assault, this should be an absolutely automatic process. The concept of a sex offender registry is that you put all sex offenders in it. I mean I think the system has problems but no one should be getting preferential treatment.

Additional source: [url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/massachusetts-student-accused-rape-receives-probation-article-1.2761497[/url] [quote]A police report seen by WWLP said that [B]he denied touching one of the young women and thought that what he did to the other victim was fine because she did not stop him.[/B] The allegations eventually found their way to a police officer at East Longmeadow, and prosecutors recommended two years in prison after charging him with rape. One of the victims said that she had heard of Becker assaulting others and being called “David the Rapist,” according to MassLive, though the teen’s lawyer denied both allegations.[/quote]

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934410]and thought that what he did to the other victim was fine because she did not stop him.[/QUOTE] I'm about to blow massive chunks over this

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934410]Additional source: [url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/massachusetts-student-accused-rape-receives-probation-article-1.2761497[/url][/QUOTE] Even if that was the case, look at the tea analogy when it comes to consent. "Unconscious people don't want tea." Either he's feigning ignorance or is really that stupid.

Things to consider: 1) The perpetrator was 16 at the time (going by the wording of the article. "continued without a finding for two years,"). 2) They had all been drinking. All 3 of them. [B]3) One of the victims themselves stated that jail time was unnecessary.[/B] 4) If he does not comply with his probation, the offense will stay on the perpetrator's record. I feel like you had omitted some very key facts from your snippets there, BDA. Pretty disappointing.

[QUOTE]thought that what he did to the other victim was fine because she did not stop him.[/QUOTE] What in the hell, how did he only get probation with [i]this[/i] mindset? He's 18, he's more than old enough to understand the concept of consent (with or without sexual context). I can bet you if he weren't an athlete he'd get the idea of only being put on probation thrown out the window.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934410]Additional source: [url]http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/massachusetts-student-accused-rape-receives-probation-article-1.2761497[/url][/QUOTE] And people will still say consent education is useless, jesus on a fucking burning bicycle.

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436]Things to consider: 1) The perpetrator was 16 at the time (going by the wording of the article. "continued without a finding for two years,"). 2) They had all been drinking. All 3 of them. [B]3) One of the victims themselves stated that jail time was unnecessary.[/B] 4) If he does not comply with his probation, the offense will stay on the perpetrator's record. I feel like you had omitted some very key facts from your snippets there, BDA. Pretty disappointing.[/QUOTE] He was eighteen. The "two years" bit is saying that the judge elected to place a hold on the charges for a period of two years, placing him on probation instead. Furthermore, my snippets including the fact that they were drinking (which doesn't excuse sexually assaulting an unconscious woman), that he denies touching one of the victims, and that is true of probation in general. What are you trying to suggest? I included as much relevant info as I could without just outright quoting the entire article.

Furthermore, examining the charges shows something interesting. First, he was charged with one count of "Indecent Assault and Battery." [quote]Examples of Indecent A&B are: touching a person’s buttocks, breasts, or genitals without consent; and a tongue kiss without consent. To be convicted on Indecent A&B, the Commonwealth must prove the following: That the alleged victim was at least 14 years old; That the defendant touched the alleged victim without justification or excuse; That the touching was “indecent.” An indecent act is on that is fundamentally offensive to contemporary standards of decency. That the alleged victim did not consent.[/quote] Then, he was charged with two counts of rape. Under Massachusetts criminal law: [quote]Comm. v. Blache , 450 Mass. 583 (2008) In a rape case in which lack of consent due to intoxication is an issue, the prosecution must prove not only intoxication, but 1) that the intoxication rendered the complainant incapable of consent and 2) that the defendant knew or should have known that the condition rendered the complainant incapable of consenting. Comm. v. Mountry , 463 Mass. 80 (2012) Under the Blanche test, above, where there is evidence of the defendant's mental impairment, "not only must the Commonwealth prove that the defendant knew or reasonably should have known of the complainant's incapacitated state, but [B]the defendant also is entitled to have the jury instructed that they may consider credible evidence of his mental incapacity, by intoxication or otherwise."[/B][/quote] Specifically the highlighted section above (and my previously mentioned points) is probably why the judge came this short in his sentencing. [editline]23rd August 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934459]He was eighteen. The "two years" bit is saying that the judge elected to place a hold on the charges for a period of two years, placing him on probation instead.[/quote] My mistake. [quote]Furthermore, my snippets including the fact that they were drinking, that he denies touching one of the victims, and that is the same with probation in general. What are you trying to suggest?[/QUOTE] [quote]"Police found no evidence of previous sexual assaults, and one of the victims told the court that she did not believe jail time was necessary,"[/quote] A lie by omission, maybe?

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436]Things to consider: 1) The perpetrator was 16 at the time (going by the wording of the article. "continued without a finding for two years,"). 2) They had all been drinking. All 3 of them. [B]3) One of the victims themselves stated that jail time was unnecessary.[/B] 4) If he does not comply with his probation, the offense will stay on the perpetrator's record. I feel like you had omitted some very key facts from your snippets there, BDA. Pretty disappointing.[/QUOTE] 1.) Age isn't an excuse for sexual assault. 2.) Being drunk isn't an excuse for getting/performing sexual assualt 3.) That would be an unwise decison all around. 4.) Don't you find it weird how easy a proven rapist is getting a second chance?

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436]1) The perpetrator was 16 at the time (going by the wording of the article. "continued without a finding for two years,").[/QUOTE] 16 is still old enough to understand the repercussions of your actions. Either way you took things out of context, that 2-year mark would be hit in 2018, the guy was 17 when it happened. [QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436]2) They had all been drinking. All 3 of them.[/quote] That doesn't absolve anyone of responsibility for their actions. [QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436][B]3) One of the victims themselves stated that jail time was unnecessary.[/B][/quote] What about the other victim? Why does only 1 of them get a final say in that? Hell, he only apologized to one of them after the assault and "thought that what he did to the other victim was fine because she did not stop him." That's really dangerous. [QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934436]4) If he does not comply with his probation, the offense will stay on the perpetrator's record.[/quote] This part I am fine with. But the conditions of the probation seem lenient.

[QUOTE=Gray Altoid;50934461]A lie by omission, maybe?[/QUOTE] Okay, for real, what's going on with you dude? You are acting very strangely right now, and I don't understand why. This is a minor and curious point you have latched onto, and your insistence that I'm somehow a [B]disappointment[/B] and a [B]liar[/B] for not including that quote is a bit absurd. Okay, one victim doesn't feel the need to press charges. The other one, apparently, does. The lack of any formal charges for [I]previous[/I] sexual assaults also seems pretty irrelevant. You don't get a free pass for being a first-time rapist.

[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;50934477]Okay, for real, what's going on with you dude? You are acting very strangely right now, and I don't understand why.[/QUOTE] Don't you know? You're pushing an agenda right now. What is that agenda? Why are you pushing that agenda, BDA!?

[QUOTE=axelord157;50934501]Don't you know? You're pushing an agenda right now. What is that agenda? Why are you pushing that agenda, BDA!?[/QUOTE] Alright, you caught me. Here is my agenda: [I]Molesting unconscious girls makes you a sex offender, and sex offenders should face a fair amount of prison time and be made to register with the sex offender database.[/I] I would have gotten away with my devious scheme if it weren't for you meddling Facepunchers.

Fucking despicable.

You're telling me that a convicted sex offender is getting off free(probation is nothing for this) while people with shabby evidence go to jail? This blows my mind. The judge should be fired permanently from practicing law and the guy should be behind bars, not enjoying college life. Disgusting.

The rape/sentencing, not BDA's agenda, he posted that right when I was posting, merge killa. [editline]23rd August 2016[/editline] So much merge murder

[QUOTE=Pascall;50934319]And people wonder why more people don't report rape or sexual assault. Because shit like this happens, so why bother?[/QUOTE] As opposed to what? The low reports of rape stems from a variety of effectively unavoidable problems. 1.) The only time you could even POSSIBLY obtain physical evidence of sexual assault, would be in the hours immediately following the assault. This requires the victim basically go get sexually assaulted again with a rape kit. It also requires that the victim even realizes the problem within about three days to even have a hope of recovering any viable evidence. 2.) With very few exceptions, sexual assault is one of the few crimes that, barring physical assault, looks identical to perfectly normal human activity in every fashion. Even with a rape kit, you still have to jump the barrier of proving that the sex wasn't consensual. As far as the state is concerned, this is likely the smarter move. A deferred sentence keeps his life from being ruined, which is what happens to sex offenders. He goes from a shitlord who probably made a mistake, to a permanent pariah. His life is over completely. What do depressed people with no options to succeed in life do? They commit crime. Or kill themselves. Pretty sure the courts are there to prevent further tragedy. Meanwhile one of the victims specifically requested that he NOT go to jail. [quote]Not to mention the outright hostility directed at women who make rape claims based on the automatic assumption that they are lying.[/quote] As opposed to automatically assuming they are telling the truth? Meanwhile the courts have to assume they are lying because they need physical evidence in order to act. You want healthy skepticism from the public but, when it comes to crime, the public is incapable as a whole of expressing anything of the sort. It only has extreme settings, which does nobody any good.

[QUOTE=GunFox;50934564]As opposed to automatically assuming they are telling the truth? Meanwhile the courts have to assume they are lying because they need physical evidence in order to act. You want healthy skepticism from the public but, when it comes to crime, the public is incapable as a whole of expressing anything of the sort. It only has extreme settings, which does nobody any good.[/QUOTE] You're making some ugly and unfair assumptions right now. My problem is with the disgustingly prevalent trend of [B][U]hostility[/U][/B] towards women making rape claims, not of skepticism towards certain rape claims on a case-by-case basis. I'm all for "[I]innocent until proven guilty[/I]," but that does not translate into, "[I]innocent because your accuser is lying attention whore[/I]." As you just pointed out, collecting adequate evidence for a rape conviction is extremely difficult. Being skeptical of claims is one thing, but automatically lambasting any woman who fails to see her alleged rapist convicted is despicable.