NJ Judge Says Teenager Accused of Rape Deserves Leniency Because He's From a Good Fam

[stalwarth]

on february 6, 2009, robert richards admitted to raping his 3-year-old daughter. “i feel horrible,” he told the judge, according to court documents. “there’s no excuse for what i’ve done to her.”

his lawyer, calling the 6-foot-4, roughly 300-pound richards “a somewhat gentle person,” argued he “would not fare well” in jail. Hours later, richards walked away from delaware superior court a free man. He pleaded guilty to a charge of rape in the fourth degree, paid a fine of $4,395 and promised to attend a high-end treatment center in massachusetts.

Judge jan jurden, who presided over the case, had initially considered sentencing richards to eight years in prison; ultimately she gave him eight years of probation. “i have concerns about this, because arguably, you should be [in jail] for what you did,” jurden said during the sentencing. “but i think you have significant treatment needs that have to be addressed, and you have very strong family support. So unlike many unfortunate people who come before me, you are lucky in that regard, and i hope you appreciate that.”

richards did have support that most convicts lacked. Upon his release, he went back to living on the proceeds of his multimillion-dollar trust fund, the result of being a member of one of delaware’s most powerful families, the du ponts. While he never worked for or had any affiliation with the dupont company, he still benefits from the family fortune, which forbes valued at $14.3 billion in 2016, and dates back 200 years in the state.

Go USA! Best paedophiles ever!

[Rennadrel]

Another thing to keep in mind.

Interesting, but I find that to be a pretty shitty excuse. I think there's a point in your life when you can distinguish between right and wrong. For most individuals, assuming they have any modicum of decent parenting as children, should be around 5 or 6 when you start to develop that behavioral pattern, and by the time you are a teenager you should understand the concept very well. I know I did, I guess that's why I didn't get into trouble as a teenager, because I learned in the years prior what was acceptable behavior.

[Themius]

And i feel bad for the people that get put on that registry for things like urinating in public.

I don't feel quite so bad for rapists.

- - - Updated - - -



Is the girl any less raped because the rapist is under 18?

No which is why I support maximum under juvie. How bad the crime affected someone still does not make one an adult.

Sex is an “adult” act yet we don’t say it is okay for eleven year olds to have sex with adults because they wanted to. That is not an excuse.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Another thing to keep in mind.

The judge didn't denying the request to try the accused as an adult because he doesn't believe that the boy was mentally mature enough to understand his crime....but because he has good test scores.

The article itself states why neuroscience is and should be of limited use in the courts.

- - - Updated - - -

No which is why I support maximum under juvie. How bad the crime affected someone still does not make one an adult.

And yet, there is a case to be made that he was well aware of his actions and their consequences. The girl has to live with those consequences for the rest of her life...so should her attacker.


Should the prosecution have to make a strong case in order to prosecute a 16 year old as an adult? Absolutely.

Should a judge rule that the 16 year not be tried as an adult because he's got good grades? Absolutely not.

Are you also against the emancipation of minors?

[Techno-Druid]

The judge didn't denying the request to try the accused as an adult because he doesn't believe that the boy was mentally mature enough to understand his crime....but because he has good test scores.

Yeah, that comment was more of an extension of the discussion I was having with Themius, rather than related to the court ruling. I'm pretty much in the same league as you are when it comes to this.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Yeah, that comment was more of an extension of the discussion I was having with Themius, rather than related to the court ruling. I'm pretty much in the same league as you are when it comes to this.

Fair enough.

[Themius]

The judge didn't denying the request to try the accused as an adult because he doesn't believe that the boy was mentally mature enough to understand his crime....but because he has good test scores.

The article itself states why neuroscience is and should be of limited use in the courts.

- - - Updated - - -



And yet, there is a case to be made that he was well aware of his actions and their consequences. The girl has to live with those consequences for the rest of her life...so should her attacker.


Should the prosecution have to make a strong case in order to prosecute a 16 year old as an adult? Absolutely.

Should a judge rule that the 16 year not be tried as an adult because he's got good grades? Absolutely not.

Are you also against the emancipation of minors?

Whether he was aware or not is not the point though. We know factually that children of that age behave differently than adults so punishing them as though they are adults, when they're not, is silly.

A 16 year old should not be charged as adults because they're not adults.

Emancipation is given very rarely and under very specific circumstances. Often reserved for more extreme cases.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Emancipation is given very rarely and under very specific circumstances. Often reserved for more extreme cases.

So, you think a minor can be deemed to be legally responsible for themselves....except for when they commit a crime?

Again, I'm not talking about blanket prosecution of children as results. I'm talking about a prosecutor making a strong legal case that allows a minor to be prosecuted as an adult.

[Polyxo]

Oh, prosecutors. You know you can't try a kid as an adult if they're white.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

Oh, prosecutors. You know you can't try a kid as an adult if they're white.

Well, according to the appeals court...you can.

The appeals court determined the prosecution’s request for adult charges was valid, and chided Troiano for his ruling.

“Rather than focusing on whether the prosecutor’s consideration of the statutory factors supported the application, the judge decided the case for himself,” the appeal court decision said.

[Themius]

So, you think a minor can be deemed to be legally responsible for themselves....except for when they commit a crime?

Again, I'm not talking about blanket prosecution of children as results. I'm talking about a prosecutor making a strong legal case that allows a minor to be prosecuted as an adult.

No I don’t believe so. But the question of emancipation is whether the child is better off

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

No I don’t believe so. But the question of emancipation is whether the child is better off

The question of child emancipation is about legal competency. Same as the question of charging a minor as an adult.

[Techno-Druid]

Whether he was aware or not is not the point though. We know factually that children of that age behave differently than adults so punishing them as though they are adults, when they're not, is silly.

A 16 year old should not be charged as adults because they're not adults.

Emancipation is given very rarely and under very specific circumstances. Often reserved for more extreme cases.

Once again, you're overstating the neurological differences between adolescents and people over the age of thirty (when myelination stops and the brain starts to decline). By the time you turn 15, you will more or less have full cognition—attention, memory, processing speed, organization and metacognition are all developed—and while is true that the brain does not finish myelination until around your late 20s-30s, this process is likely more linked to your brain's ability to retain learn. During your adolescents and twenties, you're at your peak capacity to learn new information. Of course all of this information is dependent on individual variation, just like your genes or your fingerprint or your face, your brain's functions are attuned to your genes and environment.

Now there are some aspects of neuroscience that can help us on adolescent crime, for example, adolescents are more likely to be influenced by peer pressure, but the way you talk about 16 year olds, as good as your intentions are, teeters on dehumanization. You talk about teens as if they're closer to chimpanzees than fledgling young adults.

[Phon]

Puberty is honestly the catalyst of much violence.

The most violent time in a person life is often their teen years, the period of peak criminality, are the teen years because of how the brain functions. This idea of "full intelligence and executive function" is entirely bullshit. Already have studies on this, already disproved this, already showed that pre-frontal cortex development is nowhere near complete at 16. The brain isn't even fully mature until about 25.

Funny how there was absolutely no violence in my teen years then nor my friends or people at school except the occasional fist fight because someone got pissed at the other where they punched each other one or two times at most and then made up afterwards and were friends again.

Oh, wait. Teenagers aren't inherently violent, some people are just violent assholes whether they're teens or adults.

[Polyxo]

Well, according to the appeals court...you can.

Yeah, but local judges are still going to try this kind of bullshit all over the place.

[Themius]

The question of child emancipation is about legal competency. Same as the question of charging a minor as an adult.

The end result is always a question around whether the child is better off than if they were with their guardian.

- - - Updated - - -

Once again, you're overstating the neurological differences between adolescents and people over the age of thirty (when myelination stops and the brain starts to decline). By the time you turn 15, you will more or less have full cognition—attention, memory, processing speed, organization and metacognition are all developed—and while is true that the brain does not finish myelination until around your late 20s-30s, this process is likely more linked to your brain's ability to retain learn. During your adolescents and twenties, you're at your peak capacity to learn new information. Of course all of this information is dependent on individual variation, just like your genes or your fingerprint or your face, your brain's functions are attuned to your genes and environment.

Now there are some aspects of neuroscience that can help us on adolescent crime, for example, adolescents are more likely to be influenced by peer pressure, but the way you talk about 16 year olds, as good as your intentions are, teeters on dehumanization. You talk about teens as if they're closer to chimpanzees than fledgling young adults.

What you are talking about is not what I am talking about, the issue with teen brains is that they lend themselves to being more rash without long term thought for consequences and a not fully developed pre-frontal cortex which is very directly tied with behavior. I am not talking about attention memory processing speed but instead about the behavior of the person and how that depends on their development.

We have the data that shows the height of criminality and grand decisions are often in those teen years and die down quickly after.

- - - Updated - - -

Funny how there was absolutely no violence in my teen years then nor my friends or people at school except the occasional fist fight because someone got pissed at the other where they punched each other one or two times at most and then made up afterwards and were friends again.

Oh, wait. Teenagers aren't inherently violent, some people are just violent assholes whether they're teens or adults.

Exactly what the fuck is the point you're trying to make here?

are you now every teen?

statistics don't give a fuck about what your personal life statistically teen years are the height of criminality which sharply die off after.

age crime curve:



And let's have a look at what the national institute of justice which is the research and development side of the doj has to say:

The researchers concluded that young adult offenders ages 18-24 are more similar to juveniles than to adults with respect to their offending, maturation and life circumstances.
Changes in legislation to deal with large numbers of juvenile offenders becoming adult criminals should be considered. One possibility is to raise the minimum age for referral to the adult court to 21 or 24, so that fewer offenders would be dealt with in the adult system.

Seems like the research, evaluation, and development side of the DOJ who... researches these issues feels that there is a fundamental issue at hand here regarding crimes and ages and how people should be treated.

I mean even suggesting that the age be raised to 21-24!

Meanwhile people want to charge 13-14 year olds as adults...

[Phon]

The end result is always a question around whether the child is better off than if they were with their guardian.

- - - Updated - - -



What you are talking about is not what I am talking about, the issue with teen brains is that they lend themselves to being more rash without long term thought for consequences and a not fully developed pre-frontal cortex which is very directly tied with behavior. I am not talking about attention memory processing speed but instead about the behavior of the person and how that depends on their development.

We have the data that shows the height of criminality and grand decisions are often in those teen years and die down quickly after.

- - - Updated - - -




Exactly what the fuck is the point you're trying to make here?

are you now every teen?

statistics don't give a fuck about what your personal life statistically teen years are the height of criminality which sharply die off after.

age crime curve:



And let's have a look at what the national institute of justice which is the research and development side of the doj has to say:



Seems like the research, evaluation, and development side of the DOJ who... researches these issues feels that there is a fundamental issue at hand here regarding crimes and ages and how people should be treated.

I mean even suggesting that the age be raised to 21-24!

Meanwhile people want to charge 13-14 year olds as adults...

Funny, most teens aren't criminals. Seems like it's an issue of assholes being assholes rather than due to being a teenager. Teenagers are well aware of what they're doing.

[Evil Midnight Bomber]

The end result is always a question around whether the child is better off than if they were with their guardian.

But the answer is that they can make their own decisions and be responsible for their own well-being. Otherwise, they are put into the care of another guardian.

The process is very similar to determine if a minor can be charged as an adult. The Prosecutor needs to make a strong case and the judge needs to consider all sides of the issue.

[Techno-Druid]

What you are talking about is not what I am talking about, the issue with teen brains is that they lend themselves to being more rash without long term thought for consequences and a not fully developed pre-frontal cortex which is very directly tied with behavior. I am not talking about attention memory processing speed but instead about the behavior of the person and how that depends on their development.

I literally wrote paragraphs addressing the faults of the dual model systems hypothesis of adolescent brain development. Namely, that there currently exists a lack of substantial correlation and that newer evidence and experiments on adolescent impulsivity challenges the idea of adolescents having an 'imbalanced brain'.

Experiments conducted by Dr. Dan Romer found that the majority of adolescents do not act impulsively, rather they are simply more likely to take risks in the face of a greater reward. Both adolescents and older adults examine risk in the same way, but adolescents are more likely to place more stock on an outcome. This is because the adolescent brain is hardwired to seek out novelties and sensations, however, when informed of the negative consequences of an action, adolescents only scored negligibly lower than the adults tested in avoiding that outcome, implying that adolescents do have the cognitive controls and executive functions to regulate impulse. In fact, teenagers who took more risks on average were actually better at prolonging gratification than their peers.

Now, Romer did notice that there was a subset of teens which displayed less cognitive control of impulses and these teens were shown to be at a heightened risk of addiction and issues throughout adulthood, but these were a minority and displayed symptoms similar to ADHD.

Romer and a few other researchers now propose an alternate hypothesis based on how the acquisition of experience and wisdom change the brain. As adolescents are taking risks, they are learning from them, which leads to the brain changing in response.

I'm probably not explaining all of it right, but I would encourage you to view my citation on it.

[Cosmic Janitor]

Yea.. you know the whole "maybe it was a slip up" thing only works if you don't record yourself and later boast about it. At that point you are just a degenerate whose only path in life should lead to the chopping block.