Serial rapist may only serve 9 years

[Light Cleric]

So former NFL safety Darren Sharper took a plea deal yesterday to resolve all the charges pending against him in 4 states. A while back I had figured they were going to lock him up and throw away the key because I don't know about the other states but in Louisiana the penalty for aggravated rape is automatic life without parole. It turns out he managed to reach a "global" plea deal which I thought was weird because I'd never really heard of that and, indeed, some legal analysts I've been reading have said it is unusual.

I heard he was going to be serving sentences in the 4 states, with 20 in Louisiana and 9 in the others adding up to 39 years. I thought anything less than life without parole was an injustice, but at least as a practical matter it was a life sentence because he would be 86 years old if he managed to live it out. Still disappointing but not nearly as bad as it could have been.

Welp, turns out I misread the reports. The sentences were concurrent, not consecutive. What's worse, the 20 years in Louisiana is probably also going to only result in 9 years in actual time served because he gets credit for a year served and is apparently only going to be required to serve half the term with conditions on the other half.

My hope is that one of the judges will say 'screw this' and refuse to sign off on it.

EDIT: It should be probably noted that Sharper was accused of drugging at least nine women across 4 states before sexually assaulting or raping them. That's an important detail I thought I put but apparently did not.

Unfortunately I haven't seen exactly what evidence they had because there was no actual trial, although when the Arizona judge held him without bail he said there was "proof evident and presumption great" with regard to one of the rapes.

Is there any defending this outcome? I don't see any possible way to do so, unless there was an absolute derth of evidence and none of the witnesses would testify, and even then the latter would point to an entire other problem.

 

[nc-1701]

In general I think it's very hard to defend prison sentences in excess of ten years, especially for crimes other than murder.

In general plea deals happen in cases like this because the prosecution sees some chance of losing. So may as well get him to admit guilt and be sentenced before it all goes tits up UVA style.

 

[warpus]

I agree that anything over 10 years for rape seems incredibly excessive, but if this guy is a serial rapist.. 20 years sounds about right to me. 9 though is skirting on not being enough.

I also think it's obvious his very marketable name and his money is what helped him get off the hook here. A nobody who did the same thing would probably be in jail for life, or whatever.

 

[galdre]

Ten years should be the minimum for rape, more if it is particularly violent, much more if there are multiple victims.

 

[Light Cleric]

I agree that anything over 10 years for rape seems incredibly excessive, but if this guy is a serial rapist.. 20 years sounds about right to me. 9 though is skirting on not being enough.

I also think it's obvious his very marketable name and his money is what helped him get off the hook here. A nobody who did the same thing would probably be in jail for life, or whatever.

In general I think it's very hard to defend prison sentences in excess of ten years, especially for crimes other than murder.

In general plea deals happen in cases like this because the prosecution sees some chance of losing. So may as well get him to admit guilt and be sentenced before it all goes tits up UVA style.

I guess we disagree here, I personally think rape should be a minimum of 20 years and frankly probably result in life in most cases. Raping is the closest you can possibly get to taking someone's life away actually killing them.

But putting that aside, everything I have read indicates that a conviction in Louisiana for aggravated rape(I did not put "aggravated" originally) is a mandatory life sentence. It actually used to be a mandatory death penalty before SCOUTS struck that down. Regardless of what we think the punishment should be, the laws on the books dictate a severe punishment. As Warpus said, Joe Blow would have been locked up and thrown away without a second thought. IMO his sentence should be looked at through that prism as well rather than in a vaccuum. His former teammate, Scott Fujita, came out and said it was way too short and an "absolute shame".

The other detail I left out of the OP is that Sharper drugged the women before sexually assaulting or raping them. He was accused of raping at least nine women across four states.

 

[IglooDame]

Has there been any indication why the sentence would be so light, relative to the crimes?

 

[warpus]

If you give someone 20 years or life in prison for rape, that sort of prevents you from being able to hand out appropriate sentences for things like murder and mass murder. 20 consecutive life sentences.. okay.. great.. Doesn't work for me.

I mean, I don't mean to make light of rape of all things, and I'm not, but I think 20 years is crazily excessive. I mean, we send people who have committed fraud in the millions or billions.. well, they usually don't get charged with anything, but if they were, what do they get.. 5-8 years max? 2 years house arrest?

And I realize it's often impossible to compare crime A to crime B, and maybe I'm not at all familiar with the American judicial system, but .. yeah. How are any of these people supposed to rehabilitate back into society? Are we saying that we never expect them to? Heck, murderers get more of a chance than that.

 

[Farm Boy]

Given the state of the employment landscape and registries, I'd say we do a pretty good job, independent of prison sentences, of ensuring that people convicted of sexual offenses do not rehabilitate back into society. In the light of that reality, we might as well own up to it and incarcerate them for the punishment rather than cut them loose and pretend they have the tools to reform and refrain from winding up in the system again at stupidly high rates.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

I agree that anything over 10 years for rape seems incredibly excessive, but if this guy is a serial rapist.. 20 years sounds about right to me. 9 though is skirting on not being enough.

If you give someone 20 years or life in prison for rape, that sort of prevents you from being able to hand out appropriate sentences for things like murder and mass murder. 20 consecutive life sentences.. okay.. great.. Doesn't work for me.

I mean, I don't mean to make light of rape of all things, and I'm not, but I think 20 years is crazily excessive. I mean, we send people who have committed fraud in the millions or billions.. well, they usually don't get charged with anything, but if they were, what do they get.. 5-8 years max? 2 years house arrest?

And I realize it's often impossible to compare crime A to crime B, and maybe I'm not at all familiar with the American judicial system, but .. yeah. How are any of these people supposed to rehabilitate back into society? Are we saying that we never expect them to? Heck, murderers get more of a chance than that.

What is your opinion of how the Paul Bernardo/Karla Homolka sentences were handled? He's a serial rapist who tortured and murdered at least three of his victims, and yet he's eligible for parole in 2020. However, due to his dangerous offender status, he's unlikely to ever be released. Karla Homolka, who also raped and participated in murdering these victims, got off with a mere slap... 12 years. She's free now, and I can't imagine how anyone could think she's truly rehabilitated.

 

[warpus]

What is your opinion of how the Paul Bernardo/Karla Homolka sentences were handled? He's a serial rapist who tortured and murdered at least three of his victims, and yet he's eligible for parole in 2020. However, due to his dangerous offender status, he's unlikely to ever be released. Karla Homolka, who also raped and participated in murdering these victims, got off with a mere slap... 12 years. She's free now, and I can't imagine how anyone could think she's truly rehabilitated.

I don't like the deal she got one bit, but to be fair I don't really know that much about the details of the case.. aside from how brutal it was.

I don't mind keeping Bernardo locked up for life - I think he's shown that he has no place in our society.

But I would also like to reiterate that I'm fine with 20+ years or life for something brutal like this. But for a single offense that does not involve murder, it seems wayyyyy over the top.

In the case of the serial rapist who's in the OP I would say 20 seems appropriate - even if he'll likely be able to get out after 9. I don't like that part, but..

 

[Light Cleric]

If you give someone 20 years or life in prison for rape, that sort of prevents you from being able to hand out appropriate sentences for things like murder and mass murder. 20 consecutive life sentences.. okay.. great.. Doesn't work for me.

Many states still have capital punishment. I realize that sparks another discussion entirely, but it does mean there's another step to go above a life sentence in those cases.

I mean, I don't mean to make light of rape of all things, and I'm not, but I think 20 years is crazily excessive. I mean, we send people who have committed fraud in the millions or billions.. well, they usually don't get charged with anything, but if they were, what do they get.. 5-8 years max? 2 years house arrest?

That's a problem, too. We end up sending people to jail who shouldn't be there and letting off people who need to be in there. It blows my mind to see people commit financial crimes so ridiculous that their companies get 10-figure fines and yet no one serves a minute of jail time for it and yet people end up in jail for petty offenses.

And I realize it's often impossible to compare crime A to crime B, and maybe I'm not at all familiar with the American judicial system, but .. yeah. How are any of these people supposed to rehabilitate back into society? Are we saying that we never expect them to? Heck, murderers get more of a chance than that.

My question is: how can you rehabilitate a rapist? Is it possible?

In the case of the serial rapist who's in the OP I would say 20 seems appropriate - even if he'll likely be able to get out after 9. I don't like that part, but..

That boils down to what, a bit over 2 years per woman raped? That's pretty insane. It would be different if the sentences weren't being served concurrently which is something I've never been able to get my head around.

 

[Crackerbox]

The average sentencing in the USA is 5.4 years since they most often get paroled early. But they might only get 1.8 years because it's extremely difficult to get a rape conviction. It's reduced down to a lesser charge. But then you have to consider that only a small percentage of rapes go to trial. Then on top of this, most are not reported.

It's a horrendous crime, should be considered torture, and punished accordingly.

Many rapists are serial rapists. There have been cases where rapists actually pretended to be law enforcement by identifying themselves in this manner to stalled motorists or inebriated ones, and then committing their crimes.

 

[warpus]

My question is: how can you rehabilitate a rapist? Is it possible?

Why wouldn't it be?

That boils down to what, a bit over 2 years per woman raped? That's pretty insane. It would be different if the sentences weren't being served concurrently which is something I've never been able to get my head around.

Yeah, I don't like that part either, but either way, I don't think jail's main purpose should be to punish. It should be to rehabilitate.

 

[Crackerbox]

Warpus, other than castration for male rapists, and especially perpetual chemical castration, then it really isn't possible to rehabilitate a serious sex offender. We're beginning to see a high amount of female sex offenders, particularly school teachers. Obviously that's not likely to work by chemical methods alone.

Try looking up the recidivism for sex offenders and you'll be shocked by the statistics.

Then if you live in the USA, try this. Go to a sex offender state registry. Type in your street address. Note how MANY appear within a mile of your home. It's unfathomable how many sex offenders live in the USA. It's such a problem that given the way the laws are written about housing them within a set distance of schools, that special housing projects for former sex offenders have been tried.

Rape and the vast amount of sex offenses are just innumerable, often committed by the same perpetrators, and society as yet has no answer. In the USA, we have a vast prison population, often drug offenders, which means less and less space for violent criminals.

The only reasonable solution is banishment to Antarctica.

It's a misnomer to view rape and sex offenses as purely about sex. They're often marked by extreme violence and about dominating the other. As such, victims are battered, have been blinded, mutilated, and so forth.

 

[Farm Boy]

Also, bear in mind, in some states of the union you can get landed on that registry for life by being a normal irresponsible teen in a relationship, or you can be a dude that takes a leak in his side yard.

 

[Crackerbox]

Also, bear in mind, in some states of the union you can get landed on that registry for life by being a normal irresponsible teen in a relationship, or you can be a dude that takes a leak in his side yard.

Yes, that is true. Statutory rape can land you in the sex offender database as can lewd conduct. It depends upon the state and the laws there plus there are ways to expunge your record. Some in these categories have had their records removed based upon their age at the time of the conviction.

I'm far more concerned at the innumerable rapes and serious sex offenses compared to the relative handful of these minor offenses though. We know we're likely getting a tiny portion of convictions. When we do get convictions, they get knocked down to small sentences, and then the very same people commit a new crime...if they're caught at all.

 

[warpus]

If it's possible to rehabilitate murderers, then it's possible to rehabilitate rapists. Not ALL of them mind you... but that's not what I'm saying.

 

[Farm Boy]

There's a lot of guys that had younger girlfriends in their teens, not drastically younger, and that lands in full blown "serious sex offenses" and "rape." My wife is 3 years younger than I am. If our romantic relationship had started 4 years earlier(also known as, if I wasn't such a dork in highschool) and we'd been different people, I very well might have been a "rapist" in much of the country.

I'm not discounting that girls and guys, children and the elderly are getting abused sexually. They are. But using the Scarlet A branding lists to show anything other than anger and the desire to punish is hugely problematic.

 

[classical_hero]

Yeah, I don't like that part either, but either way, I don't think jail's main purpose should be to punish. It should be to rehabilitate.

Really? If that is the point of the justice system to simply rehabilitate, then why have jail at all?

 

[Crackerbox]

If you want a topic on the unjust sentencing of a handful of statutory rapists who were 18, then why not start a topic on that, and not further muddy the topic which is not on this but serial rapists.