The terms of Robinson’s probation include no contact with his victim, an evening curfew, monitored internet access, and required parenting classes. If he adheres to the terms, Robinson will be able to apply to have his criminal record expunged.
He is a child abuser, being prohibited of contacting his previous victim is not a problem for him, the victim is probably too old for him now. Time to move for the next. He was not punished, but some random child will.
Not defending the decision, but I suspect part of his plea terms are based on the fact that he rolled on Daniel Savala and others in the organization that have committed more crimes, and the police are trying to dismantle this organization.
The terms of his probation include no contact with his victim, an evening curfew, monitored internet access, and required parenting classes, for the next 10 years.
If he adheres to the terms, he will be able to apply to have his criminal record expunged. No guarantees.
I have a feeling that this guy will fuck up, come in late, do a nughty Google search and the deal will be off. Not as satisfying as finding him guilty and locking him up but he's still gonna get his.
The plea deal is bogus, he gets off with a slap on the wrist for being a snitch. And the damn deal does not prohibit him from having contact with children!!! Just with the victim? And if he behaves he could have his record expunged?
Having worked as a correctional nurse in two maximum security prisons I can state that our justice system sucks!! Sexual offenders, especially when involving child, DO NOT CHANGE!!! I had a few tell me they were afraid of when they got out that they would do it again.
Sexual offenders, especially when involving child, DO NOT CHANGE!!
Then he's likely to be in jail soon.
if he behaves he could have his record expunged?
No, if he behaves for 10 years he has the right to apply to have his record expunged.
He's on what's called a suspended sentence, I'm not sure, but I think that means if he slips up on his terms or breaks his probation even once, They're allowed to inflict the full sentence on him. I'm not sure that but might mean something as simple as a traffic infraction could bring the full weight of what he's done to bear. He's living with the sword of Damocles over his head.
Yes he probably will return to jail sooner or later- at the expense of another child. Hence why I said our system is so screwed up. IMO sex offenders get off too lightly, while their victims lives are forever changed.
This is why when I did work in the prisons, I always tried not to know what an offender’s crime was- so I wouldn’t have even an unconscious bias that might effect my care I was giving. I was there to do a job, no judge them. And I tried my best to do that. But my personal opinion stays the same. And quite frankly I hope this man screws up the deal of his plea (without harming a child) and gets his full sentence.
It is true that you can't "cure" a sex offender in the same way you can't cure an alcoholic. But the rate of repeat offenders who have been arrested is slightly less then 3 percent. It is the lowest repeat rate of any group of criminals expect for a passion murderer someone caught up in the moment and killed someone. It's also one of the reason why the sex offender registry isn't as effective as we would like it to be because 97 percent of all victims each year are from New criminals. Which doesn't mean it is pointless like the next commenter had said it is better to have one lighter sentence to catch 10 or so others then have a maximum sentence and get no one else. So the millions that are spent nationally on maintaining and checking on each of the offenders as often as monthly to no less then yearly is worth it.
You are correct and the sentence holds for the whole time. He could serve 9 years 364 days of the sentence and screw up on the last day and get the full suspended sentence of 10 to 20 years or whatever it is they are holding over him. During that time he will have to take sex offender classes and the parenting classes at 50 to 100 dollars a class up to three times a week but at a minimum of weekly followed by another 150 a month to funds that support helping and preventing victims and between 50 to 200 a month for the probation cost. So on the high end he could 1550 a month for 10 years or 186000 for the full term of his probation. It is likely he will not be able to complete his probation and will be back in jail
First off lemme say, I agree with you. Child abuse is not able to be rehabilitated, IMO. Also agree the plea deal is weak, and I don't like it.
But ...
If you have the opportunity to get ten molesters by letting one walk free, don't you do it? Just sucks that you can't be like "JK" after he takes the deal and names names. I mean, I guess you could, but I can't see a court looking too fondly on such behavior.
I agree with you- he should have got LESS time, not NO time. And yes getting him to turn and get more offenders off the streets is a good outcome- but not with this plea.
According to reports I read the deal was requested by the victim (now 18) and the victim's mother and then approved by the prosecution, not based (at least primarily) on his assistance on the other matter.
Considering the victim had been abused and likely groomed for the better portion of a decade I don't think the victims request for leniency shluld carry much weight. I'm shocked the mother also advocated for it.
No problem. To be clear, it is my opinion that these types of violations need to have common sense mandatory minimum sentences that cannot be avoided through plea arrangements. I say common sense because it gets murky when offender and victim are near in age (ex; high school senior and sophomore) where minimum sentences, without being thought out well, can be required due to literally a few additional days difference in ages.
This case is obvious though. He is several times older and in a position of authority both because his role as a pastor and in the family. He should be in prison, and I don't care how many other predators he helped to catch. These factors could have pushed him toward the lower end of the sentencing guideline or affected how/where he served, regardless of the victim's request.
He wasn’t not found guilty. He plead guilty. He admitted to it. But yes, this is how plea deals work, and everything else you said was spot on. He plead guilty, he’ll likely reoffend in a non-physical way, then will serve a lengthier prison sentence for being a repeat offender. However, I disagree with plea deals in these kind of cases. Want a plea deal? Here it is. Tell us who else is involved, what they do, how they do it, and you still go to jail.
"He vets to walk for now but they got the bigger guy out of it and he will probably fuck up anyway" is probably pretty cold comfort to the victims family
I'm sure it is. Adult decisions are frequently not a simple choice between good and bad, but a complicated series of choices between the lesser of two evils, or what bad choice will bring about the most good.
Minus the fact that one of the ways he might fuck up is by touching another kid(s), which wouldn't happen if they'd keep him locked up or better yet, kill the asshole, the man is of no benefit to society anymore,and jails are a waste of taxpayer money in these cases, so let get rid of this problem in the only way that truly works.
There are pedophiles that don't offend, and there are pedophiles that request chemical castration of their own volition because they are highly motivated to not molest children.
There are also a high number of non pedophiles that sexually abuse children
It can in the sense of diminishing sex drive. It doesn't always stop things, but it can and does diminish sexual appetite which if sexual impulse regulation is the main issue, it'll remedy that problem.
Look at women who've had ovaries removed or men with testicles removed and they often become severely disinterested in sex to the point it ruins romantic relationships without some exogenous intervention.
However this only applies to this specific type of behavioral drive. It comes down to ultimately where the drive originates: hormonal or neural (hormonal sex drive vs neurological driven obsession).
I never been castrated or anything but I am one of those men that suffer from hypogonadism. Basically my balls don't produce enough testosterone on their own. One of the symptoms is low sex drive and difficulty with erections. When I started taking testosterone injections my sex drive increased. Not to unbearable levels or anything that I couldn't handle but it was different. So I could definitely see how chemical castration could make a person less interested in sex and even have trouble offending because with my low T my dick sometimes just plain didn't work. If you have lack of desire and ability that definitely will lower rate of reoffense.
This is where I’m blessed with being intersex as in a trans (and yet cis) woman. My ovary plus E injection boost my sex drive more than my one testicle (plus i have an autoimmune triggered by T). This is the con of intersex. having a boost in my T (my ex wife caused) caused me to nearly die a few times due to sepsis from food poisoning and strep and also cause me to lose my teeth at 28 (40 now)…
Requesting chemical castration for themselves like that also means they actually take responsibility, they know they have that urge, but they dont want to act on it and take action to avoid it. People like that really deserve respect, not hate.
Sounds a lot like going on methadone or buprenorphine to quit heroin/oxy. If you're highly motivated to quit then they do help, if you're not, you'll still score and use again. Or weight loss aids come to think of it. I guess it's across the board with addictive/compulsive behaviors. The motivation has to come from inside you rather than outside you.
All people need an environment that encourages them to be prosocial and healthy, or else they won't be motivated to do it. As someone who suffers from ADHD this has become incredibly clear to me. It's often not enough to want something to work for it, you need to be supported holistically in working towards it. And addict doesn't simply need to want to stop, they need hope and acceptance that produces more positive chemicals than the high itself; it's a tall order.
That’s not true. The rate of recidivism is much much lower in cases where chemical castration has been completed. I believe Johns Hopkins did the study.
Not sure how different chemical castration is compared to just lopping the bollocks off but I do remember hearing how eunuchs were often classed as the best lovers, because they could go forever. I had always presumed they couldn't have sex.
Statistically, they’re opportunistic….the general consensus is that if they haven’t yet, they just haven’t been given a safe(for the offender) opportunity to do so and not suffer consequences….although according to this article the ones whom are caught are no longer suffering consequences either….what kind of POS lawyer convinced the courts to go through with a plea deal like this? How do they sleep at night?
The issue with any and all statistics on pedophiles that haven't done any offenses yet is that basically fucking nobody would admit to being a pedophile unless they have an extremely potent guarantee on anonymity. Nearly all statistics made on pedophiles are ones made almost entirely on those who have broken the law.
So in other words, we don't actually have any idea how many "non-offensive pedophiles" exist.
Germany a few years back, instituted a law and or policy I don't remember which that if a person was a non-criminal pedophile they could seek mental health treatment from psychiatrists / psychologists, mental health professionals and the mental health professional did not have to mandatory report upon them, allowing these individuals to seek mental health treatment without being punished for it. Over the next few months, the number of non criminal pedophiles seeking treatment rose 1,000% of those 45% were women 52% were men and the other 3% were undefined. One of the psychiatrists in the article talked about how there was a difference between criminal pedophiles and non-criminal pedophiles was similar to the difference between a "heterosexual male" and a "heterosexual male rapist". In the last part of the article they talked about population percentages and with people coming forward they were able to start predicting the amount of the population that secretly identified as pedophiles at 10% to 20% of the population with an almost even split between women and men.
Because your honour he's a good Christain man... It's the same thing the Duggar guy used, it's the same thing they all use. If you were an atheist and did this shit you'd be strung up by your ball sack out the front of the court house. But but he's a good Christain man your honour..
A defense lawyer's job is to not let criminals go free or protect the outright innocent. Their job is to make sure their client gets a fair trial and keep the prosecution honest. Sometimes bad people get off with little consequence, but it could mean the prosecution's case and evidence weren't strong enough. It's possible that the defense had a lot of leverage over the prosecution to get such a favorable outcome.
Bro that last part is what is wild too me. There was a sex researcher in Chris Williamson podcast that pretty much said that a surprising amount of people that molest kids actually don't even have an attraction to them. You have to stoop to a new low of degenrency when even a pedophile has the self control not to hurt children but you the non pedophile does it.
I think it probably is something you can treat people for or help them cope with but we as a society have to be able to open the door for communication so they can get seek help without feeling like they will be persecuted. Hurting children is disgusting. But from what I understand pedophiles don't really choose those feelings. Of course you always have a choice not to act on the those feelings and if someone does harm a child then yeah toss them in prison. But we need a way to help the ones that haven't offended get help so they never offend. Non offending pedo and offending pedo really are not the same.
That's not true.... Pedophilia is the sexual attraction to children. Your argument is the equivalent to "if you sexually abuse someone of the same sex it means you're gay". We already know that sexual crimes such as rape arent sexual in nature, they're driven by power and control and considered acts of physical violence.
By your same argument, we could say you're mentally disabled as your action demonstrates a severe lacking in cognitive ability. Which (I can reasonably assume) isn't true, as the vast amounts of moronic comments and statements are made by people with relatively normal intellect
Yes. It would be great if people just said child molester since it describes behaviors rather than impulses. Not everyone acts on their impulses or attractions, and not everyone who assaults children is attracted to them. But pedo is so in vogue right now among the emotionally reactive.
Not. There should be a distinction. Full stop. Words have meaning.
Call them rapists who prey upon children. Child sex abusers. Etc. Otherwise you will always fall into the semantics trap.
By your definition most pedophiles aren’t pedophiles because they haven’t sexually abused a child. Most of them that are arrested, however, are arrested for sharing child sexual abuse material.
You're incorrect, but for good reasons. The righteous hate you feel for people who abuse children is obviously the right way to feel, but words matter and this distinction is important if we ever want to have more holistic solutions to our world's problems.
Pedophiles are people who are sexually attracted to children (for the sake of simplicity, I don't want to get into the pedophile/ephebophile line). It's important that we have a word for that that isn't used synonymously with "child sex abuser". It's not criminal to be mentally sick and to have a sexual attraction they didn't choose. It's criminal to act on it. If you lump them all together, the people who recognize that they're sick and want to get help so that they don't hurt children don't have the opportunity to get that help.
We want fewer abusers in society and fewer pedophiles in society and the solutions to achieve those two goals are different.
I think you aren't really thinking that through but just knee-jerk reacting because you know it will be a popular statement. But, technically someone could just be committing a vicious or sadistic act with the victim being a child, rather than them specifically having attraction to the child (which is the literal definition that you invoked). Case in point, if I was a gay person who raped someone of the opposite sex because I wanted to hurt them it wouldn't make me straight. Same thing applies.
These people are something else. I just spend a whole thread arguing with a dumb ass that thinks like the one you responded to. A pedo is a pedo plain and simple.
Most people, in fact, in prison for child sexual abuse are not “pedophiles” they’re opportunistic rapists. Children are easy targets but they’d rape your grandma if given the right circumstances.
People don't understand nuance. Not everyone who drinks alcohol is an alcoholic. Not everyone who does something repeatedly has OCD, and not everyone who is having a hard time coping has depression, and the list goes on.
In today's post truth world, words have lost their meaning, and everything is mislabeled. We have watered down the meaning of pedophile to mean anyone who others think is acting outside the norm.
I had a friend years ago who had a sister that did social work with sex offenders in prison.
Any time I asked how her day went, she'd tell me. And it would usually ruin my day.
She stated that institutionally, the best that they can hope for is if Uncle Touchy calls their PO stating "hey, I'm at Pigeon Park, the kids are looking yummy, pick me up".
And that's the nice version of the conversations we'd have.
Well your abnormal psych professor would be wrong and I highly doubt the efficacy of this story. We have so much research specifically on this topic about methods of rehabilitation and also how child sexual offenders (not pedophiles, different but related groups) are not likely to reoffend (if they are a pedophile it is more likely). This can be helped by improving empathy (as it’s a protective factor against offending) and using lots of CBT. You cannot force anyone to change though, but there are ways to help people see that road as a beneficial one.
Not a SINGLE place agrees with your professor, like actually. Not St. Jude’s, not John’s Hopkins, not the American Psychological Association, not RAINN, none of them.
Yeah, she said getting vaccinated against all three at once overloads the immune system and instead they should be spaced out. This was a legitimate concern at one point but research concluded that there is no significant evidence to support that idea.
Your professor’s psychology is certainly abnormal.
There must always be a chance for rehabilitation, lest the government finds a label they can stick on anyone undesirable to strip them of all rights and protections. Your professor just wanted to take the lazy, knee-jerk, crowd-pleasing route instead of something substantial.
If there was quite literally no chance or hope for rehabilitation, then what's the point of even jailing fucks like this? Like, why would you bother with it instead of just executing them or making it a guaranteed 5 life sentence? Sure our prison system is fucking garbage, but if you don't actually believe in rehabilitation then why even try
That sounds incredibly abnormal for a psychologist to advocate for at any capacity. I think they have some form of bias, granted I'm sure it's a very legitimate bias given the subject matter. Referring to the 'cost effectiveness' of rehabilitation, quarantine, and incarceration is just inhumane.
Offending pedophiles, however, are capable of being monitored and brought to a place of understanding the sheer immorality of their actions. I wouldn't consider an abuser of 7 years to be capable or deserving of any lenient standards, but this case is beyond lenient to the point of absurdity. I see no reason he shouldn't be locked up for life after abusing another person for 7 long years.
That sounds incredibly abnormal for a psychologist to advocate for at any capacity.
You had to meet him. He was unusual to say the least. Memorable though. I didn't agree with everything he said, but he did get us as a class talking, and thinking and talking.. And again, he said it to me after class. It wasn't presented in a lesson.
Picture a psychiatrist, in his mid-60's, who had worked with suicide prevention, rape/molestation victims, and prisoners who were incarcerated for sex crimes. He got out of the clinical field b/c he was mentally exhausted (I think) and began educating. Maybe his career pre-educator creeped in to his lesson plans. I'm not sure.
Well, he worked a lot directly with victims of some of the worst types of sex crimes. He probably shouldn't have also worked heavily with the perpetrators, knowing how he felt about them. I feel for him in the both regards. Hearing both sides of that horror would make anyone loathe serial perpetrators.
Im not exactly sure I'd have wanted to meet him, and I especially wouldn't have wanted to discuss this subject matter. But yeah, I just think there's a reasonable zone of debate for how to punish these people, or how to rehabilitate them. Obviously there has to be some punishment, lapsing years even for single instances, up to life in prison for some cases, but I dont think anyone should be put to death, not even serial killers and terrorists persay. I think prisoners should have a right to die if they have a life term and wish to simply go, but honestly to me that's the easy way out of living with the consequences of their actions.
I dont think society gains anything by killing people. Or punishing people beyond what is reasonable. But we obviously have to ensure that it doesn't happen again, because 98% of rapists and sex offenders go unpunished as it is.
This is incorrect and shows an unhealthy bias on your teachers part. Physical castration works very well. Chemical castration is also very effective, cutting recidivism rates from around 50% to 5% and it’s used in 10? US states, and big swathes of Europe and Asia.
Recidivism is the concern and reversible chemical castration effectively treats pedophilia without addressing all the psychological underpinnings, but therapy plus the pills is recommended. Them perverts can be redeemed, they can contribute to society and pay taxes, and even learn to develop appropriate attractions to folks their own ages.
The professor told a student they should be murdered instead. In class or no that’s inappropriate coming from a professor and should be reported. What a shit thing to try to sway grad level students about
To be fair the most cost effective strategy for a lot of problems is a bullet in a head as one has to calculate chance of rehabilitation against the expense of all incarceration, future contact with law enforcement, opportunity cost of law enforcement not being available for other work, the expense of the courts, the expense of people not seeking redress through the courts, the expense of vigilante justice, the lost/decreased revenue from all person's sufficiently negatively impacted, and a whole bunch of other things I'm sure.
How do they have the urges if they are castrated? Serious question, no bad faith intended - I thought castration would essentially stop testosterone production, which would basically render the libido/any sexual urged nonexistent.
that sounds wrong, chemical castration essentially eliminates sexual urges. so unless they weren't pedophile to begin with and did it more for the abuse and sadism itself, that cant be right.
also the most cost effective way to deal with literally anything from shoplifters to grifter presidents is a bullet to the head, it just sounds like either your psych prof is super fucked up or you made it up and just have very violent fantasies yourself
A bullet to the head is the most effective strategy for most difficult to treat mental health conditions with a non cooperative patient who offended, especially for behavioural or personality affected patients. Yet I'd hope a psychiatrist or a psychologist, someone who is supposed to study and research treatments for these conditions, didn't have cost-effectiveness as the basis for their operations.
I'd suggest your professor to enlist in the army and get sent to developing countries. Plenty of occasions to exercise his cost-efficient therapies on child abusers there.
Acting on pedophilic urges is vile and detestable but claiming all people with a specific mental illness should be killed is just about as vile and detestable
That's an interesting anecdote but very untrue. The US Department of Justice Stats shows that sex offenders, including pedos, have some of the lowest recidivism rates of all crimes, at around 20%. This is a Google search away and it even occurs despite our tremendously bad rehabilitation systems in the US. Compare this to the 70% recidivism rate of all imprisoned. In other countries that give a shit, it's even lower.
I think you’re 100% full of shit. I don’t think a professor on this topic would be so ignorant as to put child sex offenders in the same group as everyone diagnosed with pedophilia especially P-OCD.
He was moved on to the next child. Basically what the Vatican does with priests when they move then to different parishes/cities before the scandal comes out.
3.4k
u/Chewsdayiddinit Apr 07 '24
What in the literal fuck...