0
   

Judge Spares Prison for 'Entitled' Rapist Who Admitted Attack on 'F*cking B*tch' Who Rejected Him

 
 
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2016 05:32 am

Judge Spares Prison for 'Entitled' Rapist Who Admitted Attack on 'F*cking B*tch' Who Rejected Him

This is the second prominent case this year where a rapist got a slap on the wrist.
By Travis Gettys / Raw Story
August 11, 2016

http://www.alternet.org/files/styles/story_image/public/story_images/20160811_081639_wilkerson.jpg

Photo Credit: Austin James Wilkerson (Boulder County Sheriff's Office), via Daily Camera

A former University of Colorado student avoided prison despite admitting he sexually assaulted a drunken woman after pretending to care for her.

Austin James Wilkerson was convicted in May of sexually assaulting a helpless victim and unlawful sexual contact, which carried a possible 12-year prison term, reported the Daily Camera.

Boulder District Judge Patrick Butler sentenced the 22-year-old Wilkerson to 20 years to life on probation and two years in the Boulder County Jail on a program that will permit him to leave during the day to work or attend classes, and then return to jail at night.


The judge said he spared Wilkerson from prison, which prosecutors had sought, because Colorado law would have kept him there under the sex assault conviction until he was deemed fit.

“I’ve struggled, to be quite frank, with the idea of, ‘Do I put him in prison?’” Butler said. “I don’t know that there is any great result for anybody. Mr. Wilkerson deserves to be punished, but I think we all need to find out whether he truly can or cannot be rehabilitated.”

Wilkerson apologized to the victim, who asked the court to show him as much mercy as he’d shown her, but the woman had already left by the time her assailant spoke or was sentenced to probation.

“I’m sorry I have perpetrated the cycle of sexual assault on college campus,” Wilkerson said. “My actions can never be undone.”

Prosecutors said Wilkerson sexually assaulted the first-year student, who is now 21, on March 15, 2014, after telling the intoxicated woman’s friends he would care for her.

“He made certain his roommate saw him checking her pulse and temperature, and giving her water,” prosecutors said. “(After the assault) he sent a message to the victim’s friend who then thanked him for caring for the victim.”

Wilkerson initially denied what he’d done but later admitted to friends that he “let his hands wander” and had “fingered a girl while passed out,” reported The Guardian.

He later told a university investigator that he had repeatedly made sexual advances toward the victim, but she had rejected him.

Prosecutors said the rejections “pissed off” Wilkerson—who called her a “f*cking b*tch.”

Wilkerson later testified during his trial that the woman was not intoxicated and had “passionately” engaged in sexual activity with him, prosecutors said.

Deputy District Attorney Caryn Datz said she disagreed with the probation department, which found Wilkerson remorseful, saying the former college student had lied on the witness stand.

“It was a five-day display of arrogance, entitlement, privilege and blatant disregard for the role of law,” Datz said of his trial. “This defendant on the witness stand admitted he is willing to lie to gain an advantage to himself.”

The judge agreed that Wilkerson appeared to feel “entitled” and “tried to play the system,” but still kept him out of prison.

The victim said she suffered from panic attacks and nightmares after the sexual assault, and the woman said even her own mother partially blamed her for the attack.

“Worst of all is the victim blaming,” she told the court. “‘If I hadn’t been drunk, this wouldn’t have happened. If I hadn’t gotten separated, this wouldn’t have happened.’ Yet it was excusable for him to rape me because he was drunk?”

The case bears strong similarities to the Brock Turner case at Stanford University.

The 21-year-old Turner, a former star swimmer, was convicted of multiple felonies after sexually assaulting an unconscious woman outside a fraternity party, but continues to argue the sexual activity was consensual.

Judge Aaron Persky sentenced Turner, who blames alcohol for his actions, to just six months in a county jail for the attack, and is now facing a recall campaign related to the lenient sentence.



Travis Gettys is an editor for Raw Story.
 
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2016 06:07 am
@bobsal u1553115,
That is an interesting example of a Tough on Crime bill with unintended consequences.

I don't know what else the judge could have done. It sounds like they should rethink the law.

bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2016 06:44 am
@maxdancona,
He should have sent him to jail. 10 yrs hard time, no parole sounds right.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2016 07:05 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Apparently, according to the article, the judge agrees with you. He didn't have that option.

Did you read the article?
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Aug, 2016 07:07 am
@maxdancona,
In both of the articles you posted recently, there are competing legal issues. There are valid arguments to be made on both side.

I think you are posting them as things to get outraged about. But there are actual interesting issues here that aren't at all black and white.

Ideology wants a simple answer that fits a singular narrative. However, such simple answers don't often match the complexities of the real world. It pays to try to see both sides of an issue.
0 Replies
 
bobsal u1553115
 
  2  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2016 07:19 am
@maxdancona,
Bullshit. His question was if he should put the little scamp in prison. And the answer to that is: resoundingly, yes; by all means, absolutely.
maxdancona
 
  0  
Reply Sun 14 Aug, 2016 07:26 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Is this a reading comprehensive problem? If you haven't read the article closely enough to intelligently discuss the issue, then we can't really have an interesting conversation, can we?

From the article; what was the reason that the judge gave for not putting this "little scamp" into prison?

Can you at least indicate that you understand the issue (from the judge's perspective)?
bobsal u1553115
 
  3  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2016 09:34 am
@maxdancona,
"
The judge said he spared Wilkerson from prison, which prosecutors had sought, because Colorado law would have kept him there under the sex assault conviction until he was deemed fit.

“I’ve struggled, to be quite frank, with the idea of, ‘Do I put him in prison?’” Butler said. “I don’t know that there is any great result for anybody. Mr. Wilkerson deserves to be punished, but I think we all need to find out whether he truly can or cannot be rehabilitated.”"
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Mon 15 Aug, 2016 10:53 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
The judge said he spared Wilkerson from prison, which prosecutors had sought, because Colorado law would have kept him there under the sex assault conviction until he was deemed fit.

“I’ve struggled, to be quite frank, with the idea of, ‘Do I put him in prison?’” Butler said. “I don’t know that there is any great result for anybody. Mr. Wilkerson deserves to be punished, but I think we all need to find out whether he truly can or cannot be rehabilitated.”


The judge thought that putting him into jail was the equivalent if a life sentence, something that he thought was excessive.

The problem with an ideological narrative is that you cherry pick any thing that supports your bias and ignore everything else. In this case it is causing you to completely ignore the real story.

I am not saying that I agree with the judge here. I am saying that because of your ideological bias, you have yet to show any understanding of the issue behind this decision.

bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 07:05 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
because Colorado law would have kept him there under the sex assault conviction until he was deemed fit.


Which is done to all criminals and should be done to this rapist.

Why do you like rapists so much?????????
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 07:24 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Quote:
Why do you like rapists so much?????????


The same reason that you like terrorists so much.

I haven't given an opinion on this decision. I am merely pointing out that the actual issue is far more complicated than you are making it out to be.

You are trying to establish an unquestionable ideological narrative. You want a black and white, simple world view. Sorry, I am going to question it anyway.


bobsal u1553115
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 07:28 am
@maxdancona,
So your Libertarian streak stops short of "terrorists".

Curiously, what terrorists do I support? Rapists seem to be the terrorists you can support quite comfortably.
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 07:37 am
@bobsal u1553115,
That is a cheap personal attack designed to prevent anyone from questioning your ideological narrative.

Show me where, here or anywhere else, I have supported a rapist.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 07:56 am
@bobsal u1553115,
Let's recap what happened here

1) You post an article (actually couple of articles) that you felt outraged about.

2) I read the article to see what really happened.

3) I responded based on what the article said pointing out that there was a slightly more complicated issue at play.

4) I attempted to bring up the issue the judge was faced with for an intelligent discussion. I didn't express any opinion on the issue... I merely offered a discussion.

5) You rejected any intelligent discussion, instead deciding to make a personal attack.

I still wouldn't mind an intelligent discussion. You can be outraged... but you should at least be able to intelligently the real reason why the judge made the decision he did.

Being outraged without being informed is not helpful. Using personal attacks to shut down discussion is worse.
0 Replies
 
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 08:25 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
Wilkerson initially denied what he’d done but later admitted to friends that he “let his hands wander” and had “fingered a girl while passed out,”

What does this mean to you?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 09:05 am
@Glennn,
That he admitted to committing sexual assault. I don't think we disagree on this point.
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 09:09 am
@maxdancona,
Why are you leaving out the part about him initially lying about the fact that he committed sexual assault?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 09:12 am
@Glennn,
I didn't leave that out. He committed sexual assault. He lied about it. He was convicted of sexual assault. He finally admitted to sexual assault.

We agree on all that.
Glennn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 09:16 am
@maxdancona,
Quote:
I didn't leave that out.

Yes you did. Take another look at your post to me.

Anyway, what is your opinion of the character of this guy after hearing of what he did?
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Tue 16 Aug, 2016 09:20 am
@Glennn,
Same as yours probably. He committed sexual assault, lied about it and was then convicted of it in court.
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » Judge Spares Prison for 'Entitled' Rapist Who Admitted Attack on 'F*cking B*tch' Who Rejected Him
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 12/08/2021 at 12:44:09