Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,819 Year: 3,076/9,624 Month: 921/1,588 Week: 104/223 Day: 2/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Should this guy have served time?
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 1 of 112 (280064)
01-19-2006 5:20 PM


Pathiakis, who quit his job after school officials questioned his extracurricular contact with students, was arrested in January 2004 after a 15-year-old boy told authorities the Middleboro High School teacher raped him Dec. 23, 2003.
Massacusetts Superior Court Chief Justice Suzanne Delvecchio
Prosecutors asked Brockton Superior Court Judge Suzanne V. Delvecchio to give Pathiakis four to eight years in state prison, followed by five years probation. But she issued a suspended, 2 1/2-year jail term, followed by five years probation.
Delvecchio, the first woman to be appointed chief justice of the Massachusetts Superior Court, was honored in 2000 as the keynote speaker at the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Bar Association's annual dinner.
Page not found - WND
Note: the sex was consensual, but the boy was 15. Some questions:
1. Is there a double-standard as some female teachers have been more severely prosecuted for sex with their teen students?
2. Is the judge, being gay, not being objective, and should she have recused herself considering her pro-homosexual activities, even if just for appearance's sake?
3. Does this type of thing deserve prison or jail-time?
4. Is lighter sentencing in this area a move towards accepting homosexual sex between teens and adults? Historically, in some areas of the world, such as with the pashas in Afghanistan, homosexual sex between teens and adults has been somewhat socially accepted and at times widespread. Is it a fantasy for conservative outlets like WND to decry this as a general move, or an accurate reflection of where society is heading in normalizing homosexuality.
This message has been edited by randman, 01-19-2006 05:21 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by nwr, posted 01-19-2006 5:33 PM randman has replied
 Message 3 by DrJones*, posted 01-19-2006 8:12 PM randman has replied
 Message 8 by berberry, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM randman has replied
 Message 14 by Phat, posted 01-19-2006 10:48 PM randman has replied

  
nwr
Member
Posts: 6408
From: Geneva, Illinois
Joined: 08-08-2005
Member Rating: 5.1


Message 2 of 112 (280067)
01-19-2006 5:33 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
01-19-2006 5:20 PM


So what are you expecting? That we will jump to conclusions based on a brief news report, without being privy to all of the evidence considered by the judge?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 5:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 11:56 PM nwr has replied

  
DrJones*
Member
Posts: 2284
From: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
Joined: 08-19-2004
Member Rating: 6.8


Message 3 of 112 (280092)
01-19-2006 8:12 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
01-19-2006 5:20 PM


2. Is the judge, being gay, not being objective, and should she have recused herself considering her pro-homosexual activities, even if just for appearance's sake?
Do you have any evidence that the judge is:
a) Homosexual
b) Engaged in pro-homosexual activities?
Yes she was the keynote speaker at the Massachusetts Gay and Lesbian Bar Association's annual dinner in 2000, but that doens't mean she's gay. My father was the keynote speaker at a recent Holocaust memorial, and he's neither Jewish nor a Holocaust survivor. The article you supplied does not provide any support to your claim that she is a Homosexual.

If "elitist" just means "not the dumbest motherfucker in the room", I'll be an elitist!
*not an actual doctor

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 5:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 4 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 9:56 PM DrJones* has not replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 4 of 112 (280111)
01-19-2006 9:56 PM
Reply to: Message 3 by DrJones*
01-19-2006 8:12 PM


she is pro-gay
But you are right that she may not be homosexual. That's a mistake on my part. I don't think it really matters in context here. Her stance towards "gay rights" in advocating gay marriage, etc,...is pretty clear. So the question remains if openly advocating for gay rights could be perceived as prejudicial. I am not saying she is or not, but just raising an interesting issue since this is so politicized and she is not the first judge to recently hand down probation for gay sex with teens.
This message has been edited by randman, 01-19-2006 10:00 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 3 by DrJones*, posted 01-19-2006 8:12 PM DrJones* has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:06 PM randman has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 5 of 112 (280112)
01-19-2006 10:06 PM
Reply to: Message 4 by randman
01-19-2006 9:56 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
I don't think it really matters in context here. Her stance towards "human rights" in advocating gay marriage, etc,...is pretty clear. So the question remains if openly advocating for human rights could be perceived as prejudicial.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 9:56 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:14 PM jar has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 6 of 112 (280115)
01-19-2006 10:14 PM
Reply to: Message 5 by jar
01-19-2006 10:06 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
The Chief Justice of the Superior Court, Suzanne DelVecchio, has championed homosexual marriage for years. The Superior Court is the state's trial court, where the "Goodridge" case began and ended.
Justice DelVecchio appeared at the Lesbian & Gay Bar Association the year after Marshall did, on May 5, 2000. This was just after Vermont approved civil unions.
"They're all shepherds up there," she told the audience of several hundred lawyers and judges. "They quarry some granite. A stone is what they export. Their product is ice cream and stone. And Vermont recognizes same-sex couples. And here we are in Massachusetts. Would you please? It's embarrassing. Could we get with the program a little bit? The only way gays and lesbians in this state are going to achieve what has been achieved in Vermont is to stay who you are [i.e. be proud of your homosexuality], apply for the [important] jobs and demand to be seated at the table." Noting that it would be an uphill struggle, DelVecchio said: "Nothing is easy. Do you think getting my hair this color is easy?"
Attorney Mary Bonauto was also at that dinner listening to Judge DelVecchio speak. Bonauto was applauded for her work in Vermont and she presented an award to the two Vermont lawyers who had helped win civil unions in that state earlier in the year. Bonauto would file her gay marriage case in DelVecchio's Superior Court a year later.
Page not found - Mass News
It looks too cozy to me. She is tight with the crowd that files a case in her court, and does not recuse herself even though she also openly advocates that the law be changed to reflect a definition of marriage between individuals and not a man and a woman. She and the legal team bringing the suit to change the law are all essentially in the same group. One wonders if they planned their legal strategy.
Is that how judges are suppossed to behave?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:06 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM randman has replied
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM randman has replied

  
jar
Member (Idle past 394 days)
Posts: 34026
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004


Message 7 of 112 (280116)
01-19-2006 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by randman
01-19-2006 10:14 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
It looks too cozy to me.
Yup, we know that. But when has a concern for human rights and against oppression been wrong?
In addition to being a issue totally unrelated to the case in question, her support of human rights as opposed to oppression is something that ALL Christians should applaud. We need more folk on the bench supporting human rights.

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:14 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:42 PM jar has replied
 Message 13 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:45 PM jar has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 8 of 112 (280117)
01-19-2006 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
01-19-2006 5:20 PM


What if the judge was pro-heterosexual...
and the young boy had been a girl. All other facts being the same, should the judge have recused herself? After all, you don't have to go all the way to Afghanistan to find acceptance of heterosexuality between adults and children. You have only to go so far as New Mexico and Colorado.
So what about it, randman? Should pro-heterosexual judges recuse themselves in cases where a heterosexual man rapes a little girl?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 5:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:44 PM berberry has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 9 of 112 (280118)
01-19-2006 10:22 PM
Reply to: Message 6 by randman
01-19-2006 10:14 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
She is tight with the crowd that files a case in her court, and does not recuse herself even though she also openly advocates that the law be changed to reflect a definition of marriage between individuals and not a man and a woman.
I don't see the conflict of interest. It wasn't a case about gay marriage; it was a case about statutory rape. But the "victim" was very nearly the age of consent, and there may have been other mitigating factors as well.
You're looking at a relatively light sentence for sex that was rape only in the stautory sense, and trying to grasp at a straw to "prove" the judge had a conflict of interest, but the homosexual advocacy is a stretch, at the very least.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 6 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:14 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:41 PM crashfrog has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 10 of 112 (280122)
01-19-2006 10:41 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by crashfrog
01-19-2006 10:22 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
I don't see the conflict of interest. It wasn't a case about gay marriage
I probably did not elaborate. She and another judge sat on cases about gay marriage with one of their friends that was at the same political rally.
On this case, I think it's legitimate considering the political activities of this judge to consider if biasness or the appearance of biasness is not a real concern.
But on a different note, it appears many here think that it really is no big deal for adult homosexuals to have sex with teens.
Is that the case?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2006 9:58 AM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 11 of 112 (280123)
01-19-2006 10:42 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
01-19-2006 10:22 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
It is a human right for adult men to be able to freely have sex with willing male teens?
Serious question, and one I think that is at the heart of the light sentence here.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM jar has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 16 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:53 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 12 of 112 (280125)
01-19-2006 10:44 PM
Reply to: Message 8 by berberry
01-19-2006 10:22 PM


Re: What if the judge was pro-heterosexual...
apples and oranges
Let me ask you something? Is it right and should it be legal for adult men to have sex with teen males if they are willing?
serious question
I think there is a sense among many that this is acceptable, and is one reason for some recent light sentencing in that regard, often lighter than what females have gotten for having sex with male teens.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by berberry, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM berberry has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by berberry, posted 01-19-2006 10:50 PM randman has replied
 Message 24 by nwr, posted 01-19-2006 11:17 PM randman has replied

  
randman 
Suspended Member (Idle past 4899 days)
Posts: 6367
Joined: 05-26-2005


Message 13 of 112 (280126)
01-19-2006 10:45 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by jar
01-19-2006 10:22 PM


Re: she is pro-gay
Btw, you have strange concept of oppression.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by jar, posted 01-19-2006 10:22 PM jar has not replied

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 18262
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.1


Message 14 of 112 (280128)
01-19-2006 10:48 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by randman
01-19-2006 5:20 PM


Wait a few years, teach!
These types of situations all need to be dealt with the same way.
Any kid, be they a boy or a girl, do not have the maturity to deal with a sexual relationship with an adult that is at least five years older than them. All incidents should be treated seriously. IMHO, anyway.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 5:20 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 27 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 11:22 PM Phat has not replied

  
berberry
Inactive Member


Message 15 of 112 (280130)
01-19-2006 10:50 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by randman
01-19-2006 10:44 PM


Re: What if the judge was pro-heterosexual...
randman writes me:
quote:
apples and oranges
Hell no it isn't! If the two situations are so entirely different, you should be able to explain how they are different. So cut the crap and explain.
quote:
Is it right and should it be legal for adult men to have sex with teen males if they are willing?
Is it right and should it be legal for adult men to have sex with teen females if they are willing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:44 PM randman has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by randman, posted 01-19-2006 10:57 PM berberry has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024