26 year old male who sexually assaulted 10 year old girl will be housed in juvenile female facility.

[Metaphor]

Woman who sexually assaulted 10-year-old girl as teen will serve sentence in juvenile facility

A violent offender convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl will serve her sentence in a Los Angeles County youth facility, despite being 26 years old.

abc7.com

LOS ANGELES (KABC) -- A violent offender convicted of sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl will serve her sentence in a Los Angeles County youth facility, despite being 26 years old.

 

[Patooka]

What do you want me to do about it?

 

[Metaphor]

What do you want me to do about it?

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

 

[Patooka]

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

I think the real danger is rewriting policy in regards this one singular incident. An appeals process should sort this out. But you clearly want me to be outraged before the final analysis, so he's me with my pitchfork, brother. You and me against the system, let's go!

 

[Trausti]

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

I think the real danger is rewriting policy in regards this one singular incident. An appeals process should sort this out. But you clearly want me to be outraged before the final analysis, so he's me with my pitchfork, brother. You and me against the system, let's go!

What appeal? The prosecutor can’t appeal anything. And the DA is the reason this happened. The DA could have treated this predator as an adult but, as this is progressive DA, chose to instead favor the criminal over public safety.

 

[Gun Nut]

What do you want me to do about it?

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

The outcome of the Tubbs case is unsatisfactory. Judge Barrera's hands were tied today - due to the fact that the DA's office failed to file a motion to transfer Tubbs to adult criminal court, which is where she rightly belongs. Instead, we're left with a 26 year-old individual sentenced to two years in a juvenile facility in isolation, separated by sight and sound from the other juveniles.

That'it?
I mean, I get that it plays into the "my kids aren't safe from transvestites using public restrooms"... but more kids drown in a toilet than get harmed by a transvestite in a bathroom... and there is only one kid I know that is afraid of the toilet.

 

[Trausti]

What do you want me to do about it?

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

The outcome of the Tubbs case is unsatisfactory. Judge Barrera's hands were tied today - due to the fact that the DA's office failed to file a motion to transfer Tubbs to adult criminal court, which is where she rightly belongs. Instead, we're left with a 26 year-old individual sentenced to two years in a juvenile facility in isolation, separated by sight and sound from the other juveniles.

That'it?
I mean, I get that it plays into the "my kids aren't safe from transvestites using public restrooms"... but more kids drown in a toilet than get harmed by a transvestite in a bathroom... and there is only one kid I know that is afraid of the toilet.

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

 

[ZiprHead]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

 

[Jarhyn]

Ah, this old cannard again.

A: It is entirely reasonable to say "I do not want people housed alongside those for whom they may have a proclivity to rape, nor whom they have the ability to make or become pregnant thereby".

B: It is entirely UNreasonable to say "I do not want people housed because together because (assumptions about people with penises and vaginas)".

C: it is entirely UNreasonable to say "I want people housed together because (nonsense about "men" and "women" needing to be houses with "men" and "women" respectively)".

But the next 20 some odd pages of this thread will be Metaphor making every attempt to implying those who argue A are instead arguing C, as a justification to support B.

 

[Trausti]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

 

[ZiprHead]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

The perp was still a juvenile. Just because a crime offends your sensibilities doesn't mean you just willy-nilly throw out the fact that young people are not fully developed in their emotional and intellectual capacities like a true adult.

 

[Jarhyn]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

The perp was still a juvenile. Just because a crime offends your sensibilities doesn't mean you just willy-nilly throw out the fact that young people are not fully developed in their emotional and intellectual capacities like a true adult.

Even so, I would never house * who would rape or make pregnant °°° with °°°, whatever °°° happens to be.

Look how easy it is to NOT invoke or beg questions about sex, despite the OP making it about sex.

* = Anyone, including °°°

 

[Trausti]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

The perp was still a juvenile. Just because a crime offends your sensibilities doesn't mean you just willy-nilly throw out the fact that young people are not fully developed in their emotional and intellectual capacities.

Er, okay. So if we look at your posts for the Rittenhouse trial we’d see your criticism that he shouldn’t have been charged as an adult, “young people are not fully developed” and all that, right? I mean, if you really believe this.

 

[Keith&Co.]

I always find it cute how peopel rail against liberal SJW judges legislating from the bench, so they write more and more restrictive laws, limiting the judges' options in the future...
And when the judge follows those laws as written, people get upset that no one took an option that lawmakers made absolutely sure was not available.

 

[Trausti]

I always find it cute how peopel rail against liberal SJW judges legislating from the bench, so they write more and more restrictive laws, limiting the judges' options in the future...
And when the judge follows those laws as written, people get upset that no one took an option that lawmakers made absolutely sure was not available.

That’s part of it. But if the rapist had been charged as an adult at the start there’d be no impediment to sending him to adult prison.

 

[Gun Nut]

What do you want me to do about it?

Discussion boards are about discussion, aren't they?

Do you think it's right that a 26 year old male who sexually assaulted a 10 year old girl should be housed in the juvenile female estate?

If not, where should he be housed?

It seems obvious to me that an adult male should be housed in the adult male estate (even though he committed the crime when he was a minor), and that there are multiple problems with California's legal system for this to happen.

The outcome of the Tubbs case is unsatisfactory. Judge Barrera's hands were tied today - due to the fact that the DA's office failed to file a motion to transfer Tubbs to adult criminal court, which is where she rightly belongs. Instead, we're left with a 26 year-old individual sentenced to two years in a juvenile facility in isolation, separated by sight and sound from the other juveniles.

That'it?
I mean, I get that it plays into the "my kids aren't safe from transvestites using public restrooms"... but more kids drown in a toilet than get harmed by a transvestite in a bathroom... and there is only one kid I know that is afraid of the toilet.

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

That is false. The Legislative body of the state required the Judge to act as he did. It's right there in the part YOU QUOTED:

Judge Barrera's hands were tied today

What was supposed to happen was the prosecution file a motion to transfer the now-adult convict from his then-child holding facility. But the DA failed to do that... so a fantastic sounding story could be written.... by people like you who quote:

the DA's office failed to file a motion to transfer Tubbs to adult criminal court, which is where she rightly belongs. Instead, we're left with a 26 year-old individual sentenced to two years in a juvenile facility in isolation, separated by sight and sound from the other juveniles

.. and then be outraged at the millions of trans raping thousands of children every day, and the liberal judges are helping them!

 

[ZiprHead]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

The perp was still a juvenile. Just because a crime offends your sensibilities doesn't mean you just willy-nilly throw out the fact that young people are not fully developed in their emotional and intellectual capacities.

Er, okay. So if we look at your posts for the Rittenhouse trial we’d see your criticism that he shouldn’t have been charged as an adult, “young people are not fully developed” and all that, right? I mean, if you really believe this.

I don't remember if I criticized him being charged as an adult but I did state several times that he was a stupid kid that got in over his head.

 

[TomC]

I don't know any more about this than I've read on this thread, nor do I want to know.

But I could see this as a vicious punishment for the perp. I'm not an expert on jail, much less juvenile female facilities. But I could easily see the perp having no access to the other inmates, so they're safe. And the staff has access to the perp and might go out of their way to make "his" life a living Hell.

Putting "him" in this facility might be the ugliest thing the judge could legally do.

Tom

 

[Trausti]

The issue is that the DA chose to prosecute in juvenile court rather than as an adult. That’s a policy choice. Elections have consequences.

Why do we have juvenile courts if we aren't going to treat juveniles like juveniles?

He committed a violent rape of a child just shy of his 18th birthday. Juveniles can be and are prosecuted in adult court for heinous crimes. Here, the DA chose not to do that. That’s a policy choice.

The perp was still a juvenile. Just because a crime offends your sensibilities doesn't mean you just willy-nilly throw out the fact that young people are not fully developed in their emotional and intellectual capacities.

Er, okay. So if we look at your posts for the Rittenhouse trial we’d see your criticism that he shouldn’t have been charged as an adult, “young people are not fully developed” and all that, right? I mean, if you really believe this.

I don't remember if I criticized him being charged as an adult but I did state several times that he was a stupid kid that got in over his head.

Well, okay. But my understanding is that the risk/benefit portion of the brain doesn’t mature until late, not the right/wrong or moral/immoral part. School kids know that murder is wrong. Teenagers know that rape is wrong. Surely, at age 17 you knew rape was wrong. If not, when did you first appreciate that rape is wrong? In your 20s, 30s, 40s? Or are you still not sure?

 

[Trausti]

I don't know any more about this than I've read on this thread, nor do I want to know.

But I could see this as a vicious punishment for the perp. I'm not an expert on jail, much less juvenile female facilities. But I could easily see the perp having no access to the other inmates, so they're safe. And the staff has access to the perp and might go out of their way to make "his" life a living Hell.

Putting "him" in this facility might be the ugliest thing the judge could legally do.

Tom

My reading is that the rapist will be put in isolation. So the placement in a girls facility is kind of inconsequential. But had he been charged as an adult for the violent rape of a child, he’d face a long prison term and sex offender registration.