If you were a judge

C'est Moi said:
But why shouldn't the jury be biased, if the defendant has a history of violent crime (or whatever)?? I don't get this. :confused:
Click to expand...
The jury should not be biased. That's the point. You could get framed because of prior incidents. You have to understand the law.A fair trial on the case at hand. It could work the other way as well. What if there are complaints of previous incidents which turned out to be false accusationations.
 

Camper6 said:
It's so easy to set up a guy and ruin his career . Just the accusations alone can do it.

Not rape. Just other stuff.
Click to expand...

All right, I consider that. What I would like to hear is for what reasons do you think that a woman would set up a guy that way?
 

Camper6 said:
The jury should not be biased. That's the point. You could get framed because of prior incidents. You have to understand the law.A fair trial on the case at hand. It could work the other way as well. What if there are complaints of previous incidents which turned out to be false accusationations.
Click to expand...

This is a critical point. Each charge must be examined on the evidence to determine guilt. Previous convictions only become relevant during sentencing and after only guilt is established. Without this principle the presumption of innocence is meaningless.
 
Warrigal said:
This is a critical point. Each charge must be examined on the evidence to determine guilt. Previous convictions only become relevant during sentencing and after only guilt is established. Without this principle the presumption of innocence is meaningless.
Click to expand...


Excellent point. Well said.
 
Sentencing for ANY crime varies widely. The rank and file of the American public is serious pissed off about this. "The people" want stiffer sentencing, especially for crimes of violence. Make no mistake about it. Rape IS a crime of violence.

In America, the average (national) sentence for rape is 9.8 years. With time off for good behavior, a convicted rapist serves, on average, 5.6 years. The recidivism rate for convicted rapists is quite high compared to other crimes of violence.
 
Good news. The 45 year old man (Esterly) who ran away with a 16 year old girl (Amy Yu) was just arrested in Mexico. Federal Marshalls will be bringing them both back to the U.S. in the next several days. The parents of Amy Yu have said that the girl went with Esterly willingly. BUT, I would point out that a 16 year-old girl is not mature enough to give consent. We don't know yet, but it can be assumed that Amy Yu has been sexually molested/raped. Once again, a 16 year old can not consent to sex with a 45 year old man. The law is very clear on this point.

In addition to any other charges, it is likely Esterly will be charged with kidnapping, a Federal felony. That charge alone will almost certainly keep him off the streets for the rest of his life.
 
SifuPhil said:
So would not a jury be instructed not to make such an assumption?
Click to expand...


I am assuming. I can do that because I am not on the jury. In court, however, there will not be any assuming. The young girl will almost certainly, with the help of a counselor, tell the whole story. If she says they had sex, that is rape. The law calls that statutory rape.
 
Traveler said:
I am assuming. I can do that because I am not on the jury. In court, however, there will not be any assuming. The young girl will almost certainly, with the help of a counselor, tell the whole story. If she says they had sex, that is rape. The law calls that statutory rape.
Click to expand...

And then they would need physical evidence, i.e. DNA, rape kit, etc. Just her word would not be enough.

Would not the fact that this allegedly happened in Mexico also have a bearing on the trial? Can a court charge an American for a crime committed in another country? I don't know.
 
SifuPhil said:
And then they would need physical evidence, i.e. DNA, rape kit, etc. Just her word would not be enough.

Would not the fact that this allegedly happened in Mexico also have a bearing on the trial? Can a court charge an American for a crime committed in another country? I don't know.
Click to expand...


When it comes to children being violated by an adult, entirely different standards are used. And, in my opinion, rightly so.
Additionally, the crime first occurred in Pennsylvania. He carried her across numerous state lines. That alone is a crime. There are so very many charges pending against that guy.
 
Traveler said:
When it comes to children being violated by an adult, entirely different standards are used. And, in my opinion, rightly so.
Additionally, the crime first occurred in Pennsylvania. He carried her across numerous state lines. That alone is a crime. There are so very many charges pending against that guy.
Click to expand...


I'm getting a bit off topic but just for general information the crime of carrying a woman across states line for "immoral purposes" is called the Mann Act, often referred to as white slavery. Due to the ambiguous wording of "immoral purposes" the Federal law has been amended. Once, any adult male who carried any female across a state line could be convicted under that law, even though she was an adult and wanted to go with him. Such notables as Frank Lloyd Wright and Charlie Chaplin were arrested for carrying an adult female across a state line for "immoral" purposes. In both cases the women were adults and wanted to be with their lover. The most infamous case, however, was that of Jack Johnson a black heavy-weight World Champion, who married a white woman. Quite naturally, they traveled together. He was arrested under the Mann Act when they crossed a state line.

Today, however, the law is only used when a minor is transported across a state line, OR any woman is transported for the purposes of prostitution. Thus, an adult man who meets an adult prostitute and takes her across a state line AND, she then engages in prostitution, the man can be convicted of violation of the Mann Act (ie white slavery).
 
SifuPhil said:
And then they would need physical evidence, i.e. DNA, rape kit, etc. Just her word would not be enough.

Would not the fact that this allegedly happened in Mexico also have a bearing on the trial? Can a court charge an American for a crime committed in another country? I don't know.
Click to expand...

Yes. When you enter another country you follow their rules.
 
Ok, let’s back up a bit. A judge will very seldom allow a defendant’s past crimes be brought up during trial due to biasing the jury. If a judge allows this to happen, more times than not, an appellate court will overturn the conviction and order a new trial, if the defendant is convicted.

As as for the age of consent and statutory rape laws and the information regarding the Mann, I have no idea where you get your information, but maybe only about 75% of what you wrote is actual. I’ll leave it at that. The Mann Act has been revised a number of times since its inception back around 1910.
 
911 said:
Ok, let’s back up a bit. A judge will very seldom allow a defendant’s past crimes be brought up during trial due to biasing the jury. If a judge allows this to happen, more times than not, an appellate court will overturn the conviction and order a new trial, if the defendant is convicted.

As as for the age of consent and statutory rape laws and the information regarding the Mann, I have no idea where you get your information, but maybe only about 75% of what you wrote is actual. I’ll leave it at that. The Mann Act has been revised a number of times since its inception back around 1910.
Click to expand...


I'm sorry to argue with you but everything I said about the Mann Act is fact. It can all easily be googled. 911, if you disagree, about anything in particular, please let me know and I'll be happy to give you the exact citation. As I said in my post the Mann Act has been amended several times.
 
SifuPhil said:
And then they would need physical evidence, i.e. DNA, rape kit, etc. Just her word would not be enough.

Would not the fact that this allegedly happened in Mexico also have a bearing on the trial? Can a court charge an American for a crime committed in another country? I don't know.
Click to expand...

We have laws in Australia that allow Australian men to be charged in Australia for pedophilia in other countries, typically Thailand, Indonesia and Malaysia. There is a sex tourism industry and underage boys and girls are the victims. The perpetrators are invariably men from other countries, including other Asian ones.

From Smart Traveller, a federal government website.

Australians who commit child sex offences while overseas can be investigated and prosecuted under Australian law.

http://smartraveller.gov.au/guide/all-travellers/laws/pages/child-sex-offences.aspx
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
C'est Moi said:
This is one issue that disturbs me greatly; many times a judge will not allow a jury to hear of previous charges or convictions. I do NOT understand this. If a jury can see that there is a pattern with a disturbed individual, why doesn't the jury get all the facts?
Click to expand...

Because the law in most states says previous charges cannot be brought up in the guilt phase of the trial. The judge is bound to obey the law whether he agrees with it or not.
 
Just because a person committed a crime 2 years ago, doesn't mean he/she is guilty this time. He /she is being tried for a particular recent crime - not on his/ her past. Knowing a person's past history could unduly influence a jury to erroneously convict for a crime he/she did not commit.
 
SifuPhil said:
I meant can an American court charge someone for a crime in another country?
Click to expand...


Yes, absolutely. Guys who are in the military are serving time in various U.S. Military prisons for crimes committed off base in other countries. Also, Americans who pass counterfeit money overseas. And, I think, but am not positive, that an American who kills another American, overseas. And , of course, any other crime against the U.S. Government.
 
C'est Moi said:
But why shouldn't the jury be biased, if the defendant has a history of violent crime (or whatever)?? I don't get this. :confused:
Click to expand...

O.K. what if the woman has a history of crying rape and is a loose cannon with her sex life and none of her claims of rape stood up in court. Should that be allowed to be brought out in court?

You are only looking at one side of the coin. Many, many, many, men have been falsely accused and their careers have been ruined. It doesn't even have to get to court. Just the accusation does the trick. The tendency now is to believe the accuser.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top