Two recent cases seem to underline gender double standard in New Mexico's criminal sentencing.
In the first case, Brenda Ray, a 40-year-old high school teacher in Albuquerque, New Mexico began a sexual relationship with one of her male students, who was then only 16 years old. According to police, Mrs Ray had sex with the teenager on multiple occasions over several years and gave him alcohol, marijuana and cocaine. Despite this, the prosecution in the case agreed to drop all charges related to supplying alcohol and drugs. Although the prosecution never determined whether she supplied the teen cocaine as a minor or an adult - in either case its still a crime. Once the unlawful substance charges were dropped, the backstabbing wife then pleaded guilty to having sex with a minor.
During sentencing, Judge George Eichwald decided to give Brenda Ray a pass. She will not serve any jail time nor register as a sex offender. Instead, she was only assigned three years of probation. No explanation was given. Additionally, she lost her teaching job and it also appears she lost her husband.
Contrast this outcome with what happened in the second case. According to police, Edward Christy 58, had a sexual relationship with a 16 year old girl he met online. Once the internet relationship was established, the girl (who lived in California) threatened to kill herself if she could not be with him. Christy then drove to California and took her back to his New Mexico house. Her parents reported her as missing. Over the next few weeks Christy and the girl had consensual sex - some of it involving her fantasies about bondage - until police discovered the missing girls whereabouts.
Edward Christy was sentenced to nine years in prison on charges of coercion and enticement of a minor to engage in sexual activity and possession of child pornography. The pornography charge appears related to some videos of underage teenagers found on his computer.
The only real differences in these cases are: supplying a minor with alcohol and drugs transporting a minor across state lines, videos of girls under 18 years old AND THE DEFENDANT'S GENDER.
Its hard to believe driving a minor across state lines and downloading videos of underage girls is significantly more harmful than supplying a minor with illegal substances on multiple occasions. Therefore, gender accounts for the HUGE discrepancy in punishment.
Also, several New Mexico towns recently conducted undercover sex sting operations specifically targeting men looking for girls under the age of 18.Authorities are angered about adult males looking for girls younger than 18 yet have no problem with a 16 year old boy and an adult woman.
This bring up the question of lawsuits. Can Christy sue for sex discrimination AND would it not be better for government agencies to avoid the possibility of these lawsuits by SIMPLY HOLDING GROWN WOMEN ACCOUNTABLE FOR THEIR ACTIONS.
2 comments:
Rob,
Yes a total hypocracy.
I also noticed a fair while ago, whenever I read about these teacher / student liaisons, that if the teacher is a man: he's usually referred to as a 'predator', or a 'paedophile' and that he raped or sexually assaulted the 'child' (even if the 'child' happens to be 17 yrs old).
Conversely, a woman teacher with an underage boy in her care: the media report as 'had an affair with', 'became emotionally
involved with' or at worst: 'she took advantage of' or 'breached her position of trust'.
NEVER: 'Raped the child' or 'sexually assaulted the boy' and most certainly, I've never seen such a female perpetrator referred to as a 'pervert', 'paedophile' or 'predator' (even though she is no less any of those than her male equivalent). At least according to the current LAW.
Note that in all of these 'offences' against 'children' involving 'child victims' they are always consensual. It is only the
totally ridiculous feminist influenced law that deems or DEFINES a teacher's 'child' lover as a 'child' and as a 'victim'.
(How many other laws can you think of that require a victim to be TOLD they are a victim, because the 'victim' doesn't consider
him/herself as a 'victim')?
Because in all of these cases the 'children' ARE consenting partners (although the nonsensical feminist law states they are too
young, too immature, or naive to GIVE their consent, which is NONSENSE) and NO RAPE occured, (only nonsense 'statutory rape') whether it is male teacher or female teacher, it is really a non-event. The law thinks otherwise...
Often these cases are only 'cases', because somehow the state became aware of the relationships. Nobody actually complained or made a fuss and if anyone did it was usually the 'childs' parents or some
jealous co-worker, or even a sticky-beak neighbour...
However, since the state often throw men into prison for many DECADES to be sodomized and beaten daily as despised 'paedophiles',
the SAME judgement must surely apply to BOTH GENDERS of teachers, when it comes to assessing the seriousness thus the penalty for this (imagined and farcical) 'crime'...
Also: a lot of people (usually men) who comment on this rather hot topic, often say that no crime ever occurred when discussing a
BOY being 'seduced' by a 'hot' female teacher, insisting how he was so 'lucky' and how they envy the lucky 15 year old boy...
What they don't seem to understand is that in all these (nonsense) cases, GIRLS with male teachers are no less 'lucky' than the boys
who 'score' with a 'hot' lady teacher...
Men making such comments all seem to have been indoctrinated (fooled) by this BS 'victimology' about women and girls, which of
course, is one of the core elements of feminist ideology.
They still see the <18 yr/o girls as 'victims' of 'child abuse' when clearly they were FULLY consenting partners, NOT victims at all, but think <18 yr/o bos as 'lucky' little heros.
In reality, they're no more 'lucky' than their girl counterparts.
Girls / women actually enjoy sex more than men and place more importance too on love / romance and are more inclined to become dependant on an older lover than boys or men.
At the end of the day there are really no 'victims' in these so-called 'crimes'. Even young people are capable of choosing, thus should have the right to choose their friends or indeed lovers, without the 'approval' or disapproval of the tyrannical FEMINIST ruled state!
Men are said to be predators while women are said to have affairs - so true!
Post a Comment