Here's  yet another excuse for giving a break to adult female rapists of minor boys.  (Someone should compile a list.  Criminal defense attorneys would pay a bundle for it, I'm sure.)  The boy had "raging hormones."

Yep, that's what the judge said when he gave the woman rapist, 38-year-old Robin Mowery, a lenient sentence for her multiple assaults on the 15-year-old boy.  So apparently, because of his "raging hormones," the boy pursued the woman.  Or at least that's her story, er, make that, one of her several stories.  So why didn't she just say 'no'?  The article doesn't say.

Better yet, the judge added, "like it or not, an underage boy having sex with an older-aged girl is viewed differently than the other way around."  Well, no it's not.  At least not in the law which a judge, you know, might think is important.  Apparently not in this case.

Is it just me or does that statement by the judge sound a lot like something from our recent past?  Can't you just hear a judge in Texas or Alabama in the 50s say "like it or not, a black man having sex with a white woman is viewed differently than the other way around"?  Of course he was right; it was viewed differently.  And it was the role of the law not to extend those racist attitudes to the courtroom. 

Remember that odd concept "Equal Justice Under Law"?  The words are literally etched in stone on the face of the U.S. Supreme Court building.

With any luck, in a few years, misandric words like this judge's will be viewed with the same opprobrium as the racist ones in the 50s. 

This entry was posted on Friday, January 2nd, 2009 at 9:43 am and is filed under Boys/Boy Crisis in Education/Schools, Children's Rights, Crime/Criminal Justice System/Police, Misandry, Child Abuse, Rape/Sexual Assault/Statutory Rape. You can trackback from your own site.