Remember when “Rape” used to be called “Rape”
Not this namby-pamby “assault” euphemism that it’s called today? Perhaps the reason sentences are so light is because we stopped using the offensive language to describe the heinous crimes.
I am taking this Toronto Star article and reprinting in full, to allow you to see just how much dancing around the facts is done to protect the easily offended, and how it ends up skewing the verdict and sentencing:
A young Mississauga man convicted yesterday of sexual assault disgraced himself and his family when he used his 16-year-old victim as his “personal plaything,” a judge said yesterday.
But by pleading guilty, Barton Reeder saved the girl from the pain of having to testify at a trial, Justice James Keaney said.
“I’m satisfied this was a one-time error in judgment, albeit of staggering proportions,” Keaney told Reeder, 19, before sentencing him in a Brampton courtroom to a 21-month conditional sentence, including house arrest for the first year.
Reeder pleaded guilty to one count of participating in a sexual assault with Philip Perry, also 19, an offence often described by police as a gang assault, in connection to an incident that occurred in the early hours of Feb. 25, 2007, at a Mississauga home.
Perry pleaded guilty to the same offence last month and received the same sentence.
Two youths remain before the court and appear headed for trial next year in connection with the case that attracted intense media and Facebook coverage when the arrests occurred.
The specific roles of the two convicted men — and the alleged participation by the youths – remain under a publication ban until evidence is presented at the youths’ trials.
Reeder, now attending college, refused to say anything before being sentenced.
But Keaney warned him he would be imprisoned if he broke any of the numerous court-ordered conditions imposed on him as well as on Perry previously.
The youths were 17 at the time of the incident. Their identities as well as the name of the victim remain protected by Canada’s youth laws along with any information that could lead to their identities.
Crown prosecutor Carrie Stoddart and Reeder’s lawyer Barry Fox yesterday submitted a joint submission on sentencing, which Keaney accepted.
At the time of the arrests, Peel police alleged the rape of the young girl had been videotaped on a cellphone and then shown to various students in the cafeteria of the victim’s high school.
Police also previously revealed that alcohol was involved and that the victim was unconscious and never knew she’d been sexually assaulted until the video of the incident surfaced at the school.
Following the first year of house arrest, Reeder will be under a strict 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. curfew for the remaining nine months.
He can leave home for one hour, three times each week for physical activity and three hours each weekend for personal shopping.
He can also leave for employment, school and health reasons.
He must also attend counselling and perform 100 hours of community service.
Perry is attending university so his house arrest is served in his dormitory, court previously heard.
Both were ordered to submit DNA samples. Their names have been put on Ontario’s sexual assault registry.
Disgusting. The gang-RAPE of a young girl is euphemized beyond recognition, till it sounds as if she merely had her pigtails pulled in the schoolyard. Her RAPE is videotaped and broadcast, further humiliating her. And her RAPISTS get house arrest and counseling? Heck, why don’t they just get a slap on the back from the boys club, and a cool “Atta boy!”?
Justice James Keaney must not have children, or must be a bit of a sadist himself, to take this so lightly. A “one-time error in judgment”?? A girl was gang-RAPED! He is neither “Honourable” nor “Just” for these actions he has taken in punishing RAPISTS. And for the Crown to be party to this sentencing request means that this girl never had anyone on her side.
The law is an ass if we have asses practicing it. Whatever happened to lynchings, anyway?
Can you believe some people don’t believe in the death penalty?
Comment by BillyHW — October 4, 2008 @ 12:22 pm
I dont get the premise of your argument.
This news story does explicitly state what the crime is, except it’s at the bottom of the story.
I would get your point if the article ended at the 11th pragraph, but it doesn’t.
But I did notice two things….
You support lynching
And the death penalty for 17 year old criminals.
Are you insane, or do you only act that way?
Comment by the Waif — October 4, 2008 @ 4:28 pm
[...] UK JUSTICE Judge releases heroin addict charged with 145 thefts; Canada: Remember when “Rape†used to be called “Rape†…. (novascotiascott, [...]
Pingback by Steynian 263 « Free Mark Steyn! — October 4, 2008 @ 7:21 pm
Hey there “waif” I`m a 70 year old man that grew up in a time and place where that kind of shit was not tolerated and assholes like you got damn little if any chance to say that the little jerks need to be coddled like they are today. They are not now or at the time of the RAPE little kids still learning right from wrong. They are young adults that know the difference between right and wrong and should have to pay the full price for their actions. They should also be thankful that the police caught them and not me. As for your comment about the death penalty if they commit a crime that warrants a death penalty (and I wish we had it) bloody right they should be put to death. I hope you notice that I am not ashamed of my opinion and signed my name here not a nick name so no one would know who I am.
Comment by Bob Devine — October 4, 2008 @ 10:54 pm
Just a little PS to my prior post. I know it has nothing to do with this instance but I wonder how many of you out there notice how the instance of rape and a lot of other intimidation type crimes go up along with the growth of the islamic or Moslem or whatever you want to call them population in any given area. Those people are really good at that and blowing up people in shopping malls etc then they go and hide in or behind a school or hospital and holler how mean we are if an innocent gets hurt when we go after them. The people of Canada really need to do a whole lot of homework on law, order, and what they really want our country to be.
Comment by Bob Devine — October 4, 2008 @ 11:57 pm
As a resident of the Great White North, I can only add two things. Firstly, I don’t know anyone who is proud of the Toronto Star. It’s a disgraceful bird cage liner masquerading as a daily newspaper. Secondly, there is little doubt that our “system” will minimize the appearance of disgusting criminal acts whenever possible and that we will also minimize the impact of punishment for young adults’ criminal acts.
Unfortunately, unless appealed and I guess the Crown agrees with the sentencing, these false penalties will act as precedents. It will take a judge of far sterner demeanour to correct this travesty.
It just doesn’t look good for your future. (Mine’s within sight of the end.)
Regards.
Comment by George Smith — October 5, 2008 @ 9:00 am
The premise of the argument is extremely clear to me, and to most normal thinking folks who would read it. The penalties for this case are appalling.
Waif, you seem to indicate that you disagree with the death penalty and call the writer insane. Strange that you see a harsh penalty as “insane” but think this incredibly light, mean nothing penalty as not insane? If you take from the article that that author supports the death penalty for 17 years olds, then I take from your comment that you support legalization of gang raping children.
You said it yourself - why does it take until paragraph 12 for the word “rape” to be used? If the justice system is watering down these crimes like the article does, its no wonder these are the results.
Comment by daryl — October 6, 2008 @ 8:02 am
[...] I’ve had conversations with my wife that basically involve us saying this sort of thing to eac…: Disgusting. The gang-RAPE of a young girl is euphemized beyond recognition, till it sounds as if she merely had her pigtails pulled in the schoolyard. Her RAPE is videotaped and broadcast, further humiliating her. And her RAPISTS get house arrest and counseling? Heck, why don’t they just get a slap on the back from the boys club, and a cool “Atta boy!”? [...]
Pingback by The grass is seldom greener. Try watering the lawn instead. » Preach it, sister! (Time Immortal) — October 6, 2008 @ 12:07 pm
Dion says we need to trust the courts. So trust them vote dion or err don’t.
Comment by dinosaur — October 6, 2008 @ 12:41 pm
Huh, you think this is disgusting,,,just wait a decade or so, if this country continues on its present course…and the lunatic left wing liberals maintain any leadership…we will have more and more of these types in positions of power, already in police, law, administration in the infrastructure…the extreme islamics that hold their religious beliefs above the laws of the land and believe there cult is superior to all laws and other positions and religions…the tide will turn even more…and womens rights will be laughable,,,similar to the other countries around the world…where women have no rights…
Gang rape and humiliation…the sentence is sickening.
Comment by cosmos — October 8, 2008 @ 8:39 am
I live in the U.S. and while I admire Canada for many reasons, I feel sorry for young girls who have to grow up in a system where the greater community puts so little importance on their health, safety, dignity and overall well being. Do Canadians value men that much compared to women? If so, who decided this, and when and why? The girl will never fully be able to trust another human being, and she may never heal from the humiliation she’s suffered at their hands. Will she ever have a moment’s true peace living in that town and knowing that they’re out on the streets? Meanwhile these men are free to marry women who have no idea of their perversity and sadism and they will likely start families of their own. I fear to think about the helpless daughters that may one day be born into their homes.
Comment by mrss — October 14, 2008 @ 2:10 pm
well you could go into a lot of interesting things on this subject. Here is how it should be, punishment is humiliating, it should be anyway, otherwise a criminal never learns. A victum should be considered a divorced wife… recieve payments for the rest of her life, if she has a child… then he should pay for a major part of their education, as well as support.
-sighs- in todays world people worry about cruel and unusual punishment. -um- as opposed to what? nice punishment?!
sure we could imprison them all… but then what? they provide little use then, better to just inflict harm and let them go.
People pay attention to a few things. their pocketbook, and their hide. Hit them up for money, and give them stripes.
not hidden in a closed room, let their crimes be publically displayed, and their punishment be public as well.
And yes revive truth in court. If the judge says 20 years, lets not see this BS about good behavior.
A set of stripes has never cause permanent harm. and the person will remember, damn it hurt, i wont do that again. why is this so hard?
Comment by Karl — January 22, 2009 @ 10:23 pm