Scholarship for sexual assault participant?

[NSL]

That doesn't make him in the right, though.

I think I've said that. He was wrong, but he's shown remorse. And, it's not like he actually sexually assaulted her. He physically attacked her. That's the equivalent of you getting in a rough fight with a boy in your area.

How do we definte whether he's rehabilitated though? I mean, there are cases where this is decided and then they've re-offended. I'm not against this idea - he'd at least have had 5 years locked up, instead of being allowed out like he'd done nothing.

I said in my first post, that I'm almost positive the school will have eyes on him, and cut ties at the first sign of trouble. This is another price he'll have to pay. He could live the rest of his life as a good citizen, but will always be second guessed, threatened, and tormented by what happened.

If you know any 17 year olds I'm sure you'll agree.

I do. And, trust me. You're not the most mature. I'm not saying you're a complete imbecile, but I know a lot of 17 years olds that make great decisions, and look at all the angles of a problem before taking a stance. Being open-minded is not a problem.

Even Chris Rock has said, that anyone that makes up their mind before hearing the facts, is an idiot.

 

[TheOneBigWill]

Seriously..so you wouldn't be closeminded if someone really hurt your wife or children? You'd wait..and listen for the reason why without really wanting to hurt this person?

Once again, different situation with similar results. You're now referring to something happening that would cause me to be more emotionally involved. My sense and understanding of proper judgment and time to concern myself would go out the window.

Would I be right in wanting to take revenge and seek out those who did harm to my Wife/Children's assailants? Through my eyes, of course. Through the eyes of logic and proper judgment? NO.

Why? Because situations happen for reasons, and not every single one is for a reason that's as cut and dry as "because they had no remorse" or "because they wanted to".

Why shouldn't they all die? Give me one good reason why we should keep these people in our society? Paying for their living at that?

Depending on the situation(s) at hand, thats the best logical reason I could give you. And it's the one the Government and everyone (not you) agrees in. It's taking the grim situation that's happened, and looking closer at why it happened. What brought it on. What took place in the course of events that lead to it.

Why do you think Murder investigations aren't solved in a single day? Because they have to be very careful, as to not convict and sentence an innocent person to death, or a great deal of life behind bars.

And? It's still the same principle. We weren't there so we can't judge. It's not how I feel, but how NorCal does.

I doubt that. NorCal isn't using the emotions of a teenager who is clouded in judgment and spouting off at the mouth, merely because he's vengeful.

And to even say "We can't judge because we weren't there, it's not how I feel, but someone else" shows exactly how old and immature you truly are. To take something so heavy as the 9/11 attacks, and compare them to one girl being raped.. is fucking bullshit.

Are they both unforgivable assaults? Yes. Did both events kill hundreds? NO. So please quit on this already, because you're starting to piss me off. Hundreds of people died, and you want to immaturely spout off in claiming a Military enlisted individual feels it'd be considered the same. Grow up, and act your age.

Oh lucky her, she didn't fucking die. Let's have a big celebration!

You're ridiculous at times, you know this? The situation has areas of uncertainty involved in it, and you just simply refuse to see that.. all because the word "rape" popped into your fucking head, like a damn word of the day that you have to just stop everything and key in on.

I'm the only person who seems to see sense. There is no physical reason why someone would do this that didn't deserve death.

Uhm.. being forced against your will, would be a pretty damn fucking good start.

We don't know if he was, but once again.. changing your ways, being apologetic for an act that YOU DIDN'T EVEN COMMIT, and still holding just as much pain knowing you took part, or were powerless to stop it from happening.

Now, I realise the boy in question didn't actually do it, so he isn't in the wrong as much as the guy that did, but he still condoned it, and then beat her.

He took part in beating her (first), and as NorCal said, for all we know didn't even know rape occurred. He could've just been forced in the group beatdown of this girl. For reasons he may or may not have even known.

And he clearly had to beat her. He was forced into it with the guy throwing punches for him and everything, right?

If you were thrown into a situation where you didn't know what to do, but was pushed and pressured into something at last minute.. you'd likely make a hastily, last second unthinkable decision, too.

I'm very sure you've done things you regret in your life. And if you haven't, then that right there proves you have no true voice on this matter.. as you haven't experienced knowing how to unfortunately be pressured and pushed into something you later regret doing.

 

[HBK-aholic]

I think I've said that. He was wrong, but he's shown remorse. And, it's not like he actually sexually assaulted her. He physically attacked her. That's the equivalent of you getting in a rough fight with a boy in your area.

But he'd deserve to go into jail for it. This guy instead spent his high school years actually getting an education. If someone beat me that much, I think he'd deserve imprisonment.

 

[NSL]

But he'd deserve to go into jail for it. This guy instead spent his high school years actually getting an education. If someone beat me that much, I think he'd deserve imprisonment.

If he were in prison, then yes, he'd be getting a great education, thanks to John Q Taxpayer. Considering how young he was, and the circumstances surrounding the situation, he could not be tried for an act he didn't commit. He was given a second chance, and one he made the best of. How do we know that he didn't go ahead, and become a great student, because he wanted to turn his life around from what happened??

 

[Lee]

The kid has paid his time, the victim has forgiven him, so why should he be refused entry to school because of something that happened six years ago?

 

[Uncle Sam]

I agree with Lee, though executing him is mighty tempting.

I don't think you can use the "he didn't know what he was doing" argument. I think I certainly knew "what I was doing" by that age. The victim forgiving him and claiming that the older one effectively forced him to do it is the key here.

 

[Slyfox696]

Yeah, so, I'm sure there was a mighty fine pissing match in here before my post, but I just don't feel like reading several arguments over trivial points. So, allow me my position, if you will.

I feel this scholarship is completely ridiculous. Because he helped rape a child? Well, maybe a little, but that's not the biggest concern I have with this, although I will use it. Here's the problem I have with it. If the guy couldn't play sports, would he still be receiving this scholarship? Would he still be going to college on a free, or greatly reduced, ride, especially knowing that he did have a criminal past?

I'm guessing no, and this is the biggest problem I have with it. We excuse those who entertain us for far more than we excuse those who actually need the help. I saw he had a 3.8 GPA, a very impressive mark. But, with his criminal past, would that 3.8 get him a free ride? Nope. I guess it's just lucky for him that he's good at sports. Really, I guess that's all it takes...just be good at entertaining us, and we'll let you do whatever the hell you want with no repercussions.

So, in closing, I just want to submit that I do have a problem with this scholarship, because it points, once again, to the fact that those who can entertain us are given far more leeway than those who don't. Hell, even without the criminal past, I bet he couldn't have gotten enough scholarships to pay for his whole college tuition. Isn't it sad that criminals who can play sports are given more chances than someone with a clean slate who is just trying to make the world a better place?

 

[LigerBomb]

Obviously he deserves if not out right needs an education (probably in ethics and morals). I'm of the believe that education in all it's forms is one of the primary sources we have to bring about lasting reform and permanent change be it cultural, societal, or personal. That said, I as the admissions officer of said University would never allow him to attend, let alone get a scholarship to, my institution. While that may come off as hypocritical is also just good business. And believe you me, at least here in the States, Universities are businesses.

Admittance to a place of higher learning is, and should, be about more than what score you got on test, what sports you played, what clubs you participated in, and as Sly stated your ability to entertain. It's about content of character, which can only be measured by examining behavior and actions. What does it say about a school, if for example they choose to deny or rescind admission for cheating on exams, yet proceed to give scholarships to people that participate in crimes the magnitude of sexual assault? That is a message I don't want to send to prospective students, their parents, or the public in general. From the University's point of view, he isn't what I would want my institution to be associated with. There's too great a potential for a great amount of backlash, from not only students and their parents, but by sponsors, boosters, and perhaps even faculty/staff. Let some other school be the home "second chances" and let him foot the damn bill.

 

[Ushiku]

A lot of the posters on here are being rather judgemental, fear is a powerful tool. And I'm sorry but in some situations it does come down to a me vs them mentality of self-preservation, and I doubt any of you have been judgemental are even capable of selfless acts.

I know that personally I've been in a situation where I've aided + abetted criminals. Nothing serious, just stealing alcohol from a gas station. I was placed in a hostel at 18 by social services without consent, but the truth is it was either that or be homeless cos of how scummy the system is. I've always been a good judge of character, book smart and social smart, and very creative with art/poetry/prose/acting... yet when you're faced with 5 criminals who are bigger than you, older than you, and are constantly in and out of jail, you bet you'd do what they ask. I had no intention of getting another beating. I could handle myself well in a fight and was trained in boxing and bareknuckle street fighting since I was 11, but I was pissing in the sink cos I was that scared about using the communal toilet incase somebody jumped me, I only took a shit in college, and I even got stabbed the day before my biological grandmother's funeral. When you're dealing with fear, life and death, survival your usual morals go out of the window.

I don't agree with what this kid did, but he was afraid, and he was forced to help the 17 year old in the attack. And really, as a 13 year old kid... how many people would have to guts to fight back against somebody over 4 years older than them that is capable of rape? Unless you could handle yourself, and weren't afraid to take on an older guy, it wouldn't be advisable.

Its law of the jungle, simple.

Let this kid live his life and stop busting his ass, you hypocrites.

NorCal is one of the few people I haven't wanted to strangle reading this thread.

 

[Slyfox696]

A lot of the posters on here are being rather judgemental, fear is a powerful tool. And I'm sorry but in some situations it does come down to a me vs them mentality of self-preservation, and I doubt any of you have been judgemental are even capable of selfless acts.

I know that personally I've been in a situation where I've aided + abetted criminals. Nothing serious, just stealing alcohol from a gas station. I was placed in a hostel at 18 by social services without consent, but the truth is it was either that or be homeless cos of how scummy the system is. I've always been a good judge of character, book smart and social smart, and very creative with art/poetry/prose/acting... yet when you're faced with 5 criminals who are bigger than you, older than you, and are constantly in and out of jail, you bet you'd do what they ask. I had no intention of getting another beating. I could handle myself well in a fight and was trained in boxing and bareknuckle street fighting since I was 11, but I was pissing in the sink cos I was that scared about using the communal toilet incase somebody jumped me, I only took a shit in college, and I even got stabbed the day before my biological grandmother's funeral. When you're dealing with fear, life and death, survival your usual morals go out of the window.

I don't agree with what this kid did, but he was afraid, and he was forced to help the 17 year old in the attack. And really, as a 13 year old kid... how many people would have to guts to fight back against somebody over 4 years older than them that is capable of rape? Unless you could handle yourself, and weren't afraid to take on an older guy, it wouldn't be advisable.

Its law of the jungle, simple.

Let this kid live his life and stop busting his ass, you hypocrites.

NorCal is one of the few people I haven't wanted to strangle reading this thread.

I guess, using your theory, you have no problem with the hundreds of Gestapo who murdered the Jews during the 1930s and 1940s, right? After all, they were just following the law of the jungle too.

What an incredibly narrow-minded and totally unethical post. Ignoring for a moment that you totally seemed to miss the whole point of what I was saying, the fact that you're willing to excuse a willing participant in an act of violence is a little disturbing. But, I guess it's ok because you fight bare knuckled right?

The fact of the matter is that this kid is being given special treatment, and that's just wrong.

 

[Ushiku]

Why is it that anyone who knows they're losing an internet argument must reference the Nazis? I know UnCyclopedia is written tongue in cheek, but their article about this is still relevant.

But fine, if you'd really like a reply. The answer is no, that wasn't the law of the Jungle, that was an elective dictatorship. Germany were suffering hyperinflation, and they turned to the National Socialist Party, which where a reasonable party if you read their manifesto before Hitler came into power. They were fiscally and socially responsible, but they were bastardised by a crazy reject painter turned politician known as Hitler. He was very cunning, two-faced, and opportunistic internally within the party by destroying the SOCIALIST elements (I put that in capitals since everyone thinks Nazis were Fascists, they weren't, they were just taken over by an ideologically and socially warped man) of the party. He then moved onto the domestic and international arena. The German people who wanted a war with the French are as much to blame as the weak League of Nations, especially Britain and France who were selfish and shortsighted in their appeasement.

He wasn't a willing participant, he was forced to partake in the activity through fear. And he didn't exactly join in the rape himself, I think that in itself shows great courage in a horrible situation, because lesser boys (because at just turned 13 you can hardly be considered a mature teen either) would have given in to bullying and intimidation. Okay lets play the extreme logic game, you mention the Nazis, how about I reference Vietnam? Racism, rape, pillaging, drug taking was rife... oh and then there's Agent Orange and Napalm... oh yeah and most of the recruits were poor white people or blacks, I use the term recruits lightly because of the draft. Couldn't that be described as narrow-minded and unethical? In fact, I'd argue it is more so because they were at an age of adulthood. If Muhammed Ali could skip the draft regardless of consequences, why couldn't the rest of the Americans who were forcibly drafted?

So what would you do? Punish him for life? He was just a kid. I suppose you'd also hate the African child soldiers who were forced into armies out of fear or by brute force and invasion. But hey, they should know better right? The fact is sometimes there are situations where children are scared and in danger, so instead of sitting on your high horse and being judgemental, try putting yourself in their shoes. I bet you wouldn't last 5 minutes in a non-Western country with all your luxuries, and little world with no grey areas where everything is black and white.

 

[Ty Burna]

"I had a good friend tell me I should go as far west as possible," Hood told the newspaper. "But I don't think that it's a situation that I should try to avoid. It was heinous. It was awful. Any bad thing you could say about it would probably fit it. But I think it's not trying to put it in a corner and forget it ever happened. I think you have to take it and learn from it and grow from it. ... I've got a debt to [the victim] that I can never repay, just trying to throw it away like it never happened would be the worst thing I could do for her."

Knoxville Catholic principal Dickie Sompayrak did not return a call from The Associated Press seeking comment.

According to court records, Hood and another teenager were charged in 2003 with assaulting a 14-year-old girl. The victim's legs and wrists were tied and her eyes and mouth were covered with duct tape before she was raped at the Sullivan County home of Hood's father.

Robert Sanico, then 17, pleaded guilty in adult court to charges of aggravated kidnapping and aggravated rape and is serving a 10-year prison sentence.

Hood's case went through juvenile court, where he was found delinquent and ordered into a rehabilitation program at the Mountain View Youth Development Center in Dandridge. While in state custody, he enrolled at Knoxville Catholic High School.

I posted this to give a little more insight and maybe even give an example of this kid's character and to show that he went through a lot of shit after the incident went down.

Now to the matter at hand, Yes this kid deserves his scholarship, he's obviously changed his life around since the incident, and I believe everyone is entitled to a second chance. Now I"m not going to go on the what if tangent here, but what I will say is that what he did was wrong, but it's obvious that he realizes what he did was wrong and has tried to make amends for his actions. It has been 6 years since the incident went down, and based on this quote from the victim:

Tennessee received a letter of support for Hood from the victim.

"He is becoming a very mature adult and will be a great asset to any college and to society as a whole," the letter read.

It is clear that whatever had happened, the victim obviously feels that he could be forgiven for his actions and to show support for him tells quite a bit. This is obviously not on the same level as aiding in sexual assault, but for example let's say you got caught up in doing drugs etc when you were around that 13-14 range due to being around older kids doing it, and you got caught with it. How would you feel if you were denied the right to try and improve your life just because of some stupid peer pressure bullshit that happened 6 years ago? 6 years of trying to make amends for what you did wrong, 6 years of trying to become a better person and do something with your life, all down the drain because of one mistake made when you were barely a teenager?

People change and it's obvious to me that this kid has changed for the better, so why should he be denied a chance to make something of his life because of one incident? I can understand murderers not getting a chance, but how many 13 year old murderers do you know? Hell, how many 13 year old Sexual Assault participants do you know? Seriously in my case if I went back 8 years to when I was 13, I'm pretty damn sure that I would have done anything to get in with the older crowd, and in my opinion I think that's exactly what happened here.

Leave the kid be, he manned up to his mistakes and now he's making something of his life. In my life, I've commited crimes I'm not proud of, but I commited those crimes when i was 18-20, not crimes on a sexual assault level, but probably enough serious ones where I should have spent time in prison if I were caught. I reformed now, I'm doing good and my life is great. Everyone that knows me doesn't hold my previous actions against me because I stood up and said: yes I made mistakes, I fucked up, I am going to do my best to correct or move on past those mistakes and make a better life for myself. Shall you condemn me too for dealing drugs? For trying to hustle and steal when I had no money and I had no outs available to me? I hurt people by my actions, and I am very aware of this fact. The people I hurt then, I have made amends with and tried my very best to make it up to those people. How is this related to the story? Because I was very conscious about what actions I was doing when I did the shit I did. At 13, he did not have the experience or the knowledge of an 18-20 year old but yet some of you want to hold it against him like he did have the knowledge and experience that we have at our ages, only 6 years before we ever had a fucking clue what we were doing.


NorCal EDIT: Also, it was said in a news article that the 17 year old was known to carry guns, and had a gun on him at the time of the assualt. Just sayin.

 

[Slyfox696]

Why is it that anyone who knows they're losing an internet argument must reference the Nazis?

First, I'm not losing this argument, because you haven't even addressed my argument. So, instead of dancing around Godwin's Law, you should first start with actually addressing what I said. Second, the reason I bring Nazi Germany into it is because the parallels of what you said are illustrated clearly with the persecution and execution of the Jews. And if you are going to excuse one criminal act, then why wouldn't you excuse another criminal act which were performed in the same manner of pressure?

But fine, if you'd really like a reply. The answer is no, that wasn't the law of the Jungle, that was an elective dictatorship.

The people of Germany elected to murder the Jewish people? I'm afraid you need to go back and read your world history. Sure, they put into power the Nazi party, but that doesn't mean that the people elected to murder innocent people.

The actual murdering was done by people who had no choice in the matter; either they kill the Jews or they probably die themselves. Law of the jungle, right?

So, if we're ok with the good athlete doing it, I guess we're ok with an officer of the German military doing it. Right?

He wasn't a willing participant, he was forced to partake in the activity through fear.

Really? Where did you get this from? Because, according to the following source, Hood "initially 'rationalizes the offense with little guilt or remorse,". That doesn't sound like someone partaking through fear, but rather doing something he thought was a good time.

http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/may/05/catholic-star-gets-ut-football-scholarship-despite/

And he didn't exactly join in the rape himself, I think that in itself shows great courage in a horrible situation, because lesser boys (because at just turned 13 you can hardly be considered a mature teen either) would have given in to bullying and intimidation.

Guess this is pretty irrelevant now, wouldn't you say?

Okay lets play the extreme logic game, you mention the Nazis, how about I reference Vietnam? Racism, rape, pillaging, drug taking was rife... oh and then there's Agent Orange and Napalm... oh yeah and most of the recruits were poor white people or blacks, I use the term recruits lightly because of the draft. Couldn't that be described as narrow-minded and unethical? In fact, I'd argue it is more so because they were at an age of adulthood. If Muhammed Ali could skip the draft regardless of consequences, why couldn't the rest of the Americans who were forcibly drafted?

What the fuck does this have to do with anything? First of all, that was YOUR logic, not mine, and second of all, we're not talking about troops, we're talking about a person who was part of the rape of a child and who "rationalizes the offense with little guilt or remorse".

So what would you do? Punish him for life?

I don't give a fuck what happens to the kid. Here's the problem I have, and the problem I've had for the last two (now three) posts I've made. If the guy couldn't play sports, would he be receiving a full ride, especially with his criminal past?

THAT'S my point. Why don't you try actually addressing it for a change?

EDIT: Oh yeah, apparently the rape happened at Hood's house. Damn them bulliies. Not only can they make someone enjoy raping a girl, they can also make you do that at your own house.

http://www.cbssports.com/collegefootball/story/11715673

 

[TwistofRKO]

I don't see anything fairly obvious about this at all. He helped someone commit one of the worst acts you can because of peer pressure??? Listen to how stupid that sounds.

Productive citizen? Eugh. From the grades you pointed out at the beginning he obviously isn't stupid, therefore should have known how wrong this was.

Wow, terrible logic. First off, nobody condoned his actions. You have to actually apply understanding here though. Peer pressure? Not at all. The kid was 17 years old and was known to carry a gun. He was probably scared half to death. Your peers usually aren't 4 years older than you. Doing what he did is still sickening, but he wasn't there for the actual rape, he's been forgiven by the victim, he made a dumb mistake- I seriously doubt he's been bragging about it to anyone who will listen. It's a horrible thing but everyone involved have been working to put it past them. Why would you take someone's life for that?

And his GPA was 3.8, in high school. He had time to mature, and the two are pretty unrelated anyways. Street smarts, maturity, and book smarts aren't going together in perfect harmony.

I think I'm A LOT 'older' than most 17 year olds.

Really? Well I can say I'm more attractive than Brad Pitt, and really believe that, but does it really mean anything if nobody else believes that? Nope.

 

[It's...Baylariat!]

Look, I've read most of the posts on this thread and to be honest, I wanted to stay away from it. But I can't. Because stances and opinions are what make this world go 'round. So I'll do my best to state my position on the whole thing.

Look at the facts. The kid in question was barely 13 at the time this happened. Now, some but not all young kids at this age are going through puberty. So did he think something bad was going to happen? Maybe, maybe not. He probably thought it was a prank until he realized what was going on. And if it hasn't occurred to you, a 17 year old can be WORLD'S older than a 12 year old. When I was 12...people that were 17 were in a major league level from where I was mentally in my book. If a 17 year-old anyone threatened me with bodily harm if I didn't do what he said, well, I'd fuckin' do what he said.

The kid has a nearly spotless GPA, has had no run ins with the law since this happened, and has been a model citizen. Now, the reason for his scholarship is sports, so that's a whole 'nother issue. The issue we're debating is that whether this guy deserves to have the same freedom as everyone else four years and a lot of growing up later. I think he does. He's not a repeat offender, he's not a rapist, he's not a bad kid. He was scared and personally, you can't fault that. He didn't take part in the assault because he may or may not have had no knowledge of what was going to happen.

And on a personal note...close mindedness doesn't show intelligence. I mean, far be it for a female to want to shoot a participant in a sex crime in the head. So we should shoot a 13-year-old, who was probably scared to death in the head, for helping duct tape a girl for some unknown reason at the time? Really? I'm just flabbergasted, because I did some real shitty things back in the day. Nothing related to sexual assault and stuff, but most people wouldn't like me. Oh well...I finished school at the top 10 percentile in my class, graduated with a Bachelor's degree, and I'm already being considered for a management position at my job six weeks into being on the job. So I think I did well for myself. And this kid has, too.

It's called second chances, not Arabic justice, Becca.

 

[Tastycles]

I have two things to say on this. Firstly, Slyfox hit the nail on the head completely when he pointed out that the real injustice was that this kid got to go to college because he was good at sports. The fact that he's a criminal aside, what kind of system is it where to be able to excel academically, you have to be good at sport first. Ridiculous. Said the malcoordinated bright child.

Anyway, I don't think there is anyone in their adult life who is the same now as they were at 13. I am 21 now, but when I was 16, I was disrespectful, disruptive, and I'd go out on the piss every week in the village park near school. Looking back now, I can see that I was a bit of a fool, but at the time, I thought I was the purveyor of injustices towards me and that I deserved to behave the way I did.

After two suspensions, my promotion being taken away(navy school, we had ranks), my equally disruptive room mate being moved and probably a coupleofother things that I've forgotten, I started to behave myself. That's what discipline is for. Nobody normal takes pleasure in smacking or shouting their child, but they still do it because they want the child to learn. Nobody likes putting people in prison either, it's extremely poor value for money, but they do it so people get better and to keep them out of society while they do.

In some cases, it doesn't work, but here it evidently has. Let ye without teenage sin cast the first stone. At 13 this guy may not have even hit puberty, and you want him punished as an adult folks? Sorry, but no.

Before I get to my next point, I'll chirp up with this and say that I don't see abortion as murder, but I don't really support it. It should exist, there is a social need for it to do so, but barring cases of medical emergency or rape, it is pretty much just an irresponsibility curing operation. I'd say I was pro-choice, but anti-abortion as it were.

The next point is that of capital punishment. It is a bad idea on so many levels, I'll give you a couple. Firstly, miscarriages of justice. Just the other week a guy was released 27 years after being wrongly convicted of murder when he was 17. That he has spent his entire youth behind bars is bad enough, but had this happened 30 years ago, it would have been far far worse.

You wouldn't be ridding yourself of the real scum of the earth anyway. Ian Huntly, Peter Sutcliffe, Myra Hindley, Fred West... All of those are mentally ill. They can't be sentenced to death as a result, because it is wholly unacceptable to send someone who actually isn't responsible for their own actions to die. By all means lock them up in a hospital for ever, but don't kill them.

As for rapists. Well, we've discussed before how guys can get falsely accused of this and how the figures of conviction are low, but lets analyse this a second. The figures are low because most rape victims know their attacker and don't report them because they fear what will happen if they don't get convicted. Now, would you be more afraid of a man that you tried to send to jail for 15 years, or that you tried to have killed?

Becca, I think your getting some unfair criticism here, to be fair, but I am struggling to understand how you can be against smacking children, but for having them be strung up for being coerced into something. Children make mistakes, and at 13 you're a child, simple as. Particularly boys who are about 2 years behind girls in the maturity stakes.

But I digress, the case at hand isn't very hard for me to get a position on, morally. Should this guy be given a second chance? Yes. Should it be because he is good at sport? No. The guy's turned his life around, as I'm sure many people on here respect has happened in their own lives.

To paraphrase Jesus. Maybe not Jesus, but someone in the Bible anyway. We can all judge this kid, we can tie him up and we can stone him. But let ye who has never made a mistake in their childhood that was detrimental to someone else cast the first stone. I can tell you I certainly wouldn't be throwing any fucking stones.

 

[48.7 is Approximately 49 Times Better Than You]

Becca, I read most of the posts in this thread, and I must say that you have shown that you are incredibly close-minded a lot more immature than you first appear. Your consistent refusal to listen to other's opinions and arguments is frustrating, to say the least.

Now, I don't have a problem with this scholarship. SlyFox brought up an interesting point, which is mostly true. Case in point:

No person with a mere 3.8 Grade Point Average (which is quite good) is going to get a full ride to any good college. You need a four-point, more often then not. But, who's to say that he wouldn't have gotten an good academic scholarship with a 4.0, even with his past? If his grades are there and he's truly made a change, I say he'd get a scholarship if he deserved it.

--

I don't condone what he did. It was a horrible, horrible thing. But, at twelve or thirteen, you can hardly fault him. When I was in 6th grade, I would have done whatever a Junior or Senior in high school told me to do were he threatening me physically. He was being manipulated by a much older, smarter, stronger man. There was not really anything he could do.

What really made my mind up on this is the fact that he was forgiven by the victim. We all make mistakes. He made a big one. Everyone deserves another chance if they're willing to make the change.

 

[Razor]

First of all, this person was tried as a child. We shouldn't know what he did/was tried for as a young child. Especially if he was acquitted of said charges. And if we are to know what he did, we shouldn't hold being forced into beating and bonding a woman against him. It makes no sense. Are we going to tell a person who is carjacked by a bank robber that he can no longer get a good paying job because he was forced to help a thief get away? Or are we next going to tell the child of an abusive mother that he can't graduate high school because he was ordered to help his mother beat his sister, or suffer the beatings himself?

Now, say we do want to hold the transgression against him. Should he not be able to make himself a better man? That's like keeping people fresh out of jail from jobs. It just creates a fierce circle of crime and punishment that no one wins in. I mean, he's not a serial killer. Rape is a horrible crime, sure, but this college student is no rapist. Besides, the girl who was raped has forgiven him, and it is all but proven, (I'm taking Norcal's word on this), that he was forced to beat and bond that woman. If she doesn't hold it against him, we have no right to do so for her.

Once you get past that, it's all based on merits. A 3.8 GPA, and a football player good enough to play for a scholarship? Hell, I've got a full ride to the University of Arkansas with a 3.67 and a 32 on the ACT. I say he deserves it more than I did, especially considering he worked very hard to make up for the horror that is his teenage mistake.

 

[Big J]

Norcal, not bashing you just asking, Are you willing to bet YOUR LIFE that this guy will not do this again? Ted bundy, the mendez boys, jeffrey domier, etc were all extremely bright and had NEVER been arrested for doing anything wrong when they were kids. If they were tthey were let go and weren't punished enough.

Ted Bundy RAPED and killed 15-20 women, Mendoez boys KILLED THEIR PARENTS and Domier killed AND ATE his victims.

This kid may have just made a mistake and will go on to be a great productive,person who might cure cancer, OR he might someday go on a killing spree. You (and I)don't know.

How many times has a judge let someone go because it was just a "mistake" and that person goes on to do it (or worse) again.

Willie horton, let out of prison, raped and killed a guy and his girlfriend. Lots of other examples.

How many drunk drivers who kill someone, have been convicted before? Lots.

What do you think about holding JUDGES responsible for someones action if they let them go with out proper punishment?

If someone were to hurt my family and that person had done it before and been let off without prison time, I will hold the guy AND THE JUDGE responsible, (whatever that means! hehehe)

 

[Razor]

Norcal, not bashing you just asking, Are you willing to bet YOUR LIFE that this guy will not do this again? Ted bundy, the mendez boys, jeffrey domier, etc were all extremely bright and had NEVER been arrested for doing anything wrong when they were kids. If they were tthey were let go and weren't punished enough.

Ted Bundy RAPED and killed 15-20 women, Mendoez boys KILLED THEIR PARENTS and Domier killed AND ATE his victims.

This kid may have just made a mistake and will go on to be a great productive,person who might cure cancer, OR he might someday go on a killing spree. You (and I)don't know.

How many times has a judge let someone go because it was just a "mistake" and that person goes on to do it (or worse) again.

Willie horton, let out of prison, raped and killed a guy and his girlfriend. Lots of other examples.

How many drunk drivers who kill someone, have been convicted before? Lots.

What do you think about holding JUDGES responsible for someones action if they let them go with out proper punishment?

If someone were to hurt my family and that person had done it before and been let off without prison time, I will hold the guy AND THE JUDGE responsible, (whatever that means! hehehe)

Are we to start prosecuting people for what they might do? This isn't that shitty movie Minority Report with Tom Cruise. We don't have people in tanks that can predict a crime before it's committed.

By your reasoning, any criminal every imprisoned should never be let out of jail again. Not just murderers, everyone. Because, I mean, they could kill. Everyone could kill. So the minute they show any tendency to break the rules they should be locked away.

Either that, or you're blaming judges for not being able to tell the future, and sentencing the crime in front of them. ..Which is their job. So I don't see the problem.

Once again, we can't punish this kid for being forced by gun point to help beat and bound a chick so that the guy holding the gun to his head could rape her. He could be forced to help another rape. But we can't refuse to let him make a life for himself because of something that might happen. It's not fair to anyone.

 

[Big J]

I never said that no criminals should ever be let out. My point was that in to many cases the person ISN"T sent to jail and he doesn't learn and does it again. To many times the judge is to leanient and doesn't follow the minimum sentence laws and lets people out early. I have a personnal example i don't want to get into.

I also think that for some people prison isn't really a bad punishment. For most people it is scary and would be terrible, but for some it isn't that bad. They get 3 meals a day, cable tv, they get to workout and still can have sex with their wives or girlfriends.

Prison should be tougher, NO TV, 23 hours a day in your cell, no wieghts, no benefits.