Should this guy have served time?

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?

The guy was found guilty.The only person questioning whether it should be legal is you.

That was the judges decision. I haven't seen the evidence presented at the trial. I have no basis for determining what should be the proper sentence in this case. I haven't seen any sqirming.I see some people, mostly scientists, who find that there is no evidence on which to base a conclusion.I find one person, randman, jumping to conclusions based only on hearsay and innuendo.

See Message 2 and Message 33.I will thank you to stop trying to smear people, merely because they refuse to jump to conclusions without evidence.

I answered, randman. See Message 2 and Message 33.We ask judges and juries to make these decisions, based on evidence.Maybe you would prefer a police state, with sentences handed out by computers. I prefer to stay with our present form of government.

The appropriate sentence will depend on circumstances. You can't make rigid rules. That's why courts have discretion in setting sentences.

The court usually has enough to make a judgement. In these kinds of cases, a lot of evidence is witheld from the public. There is no such thing as "in general".In the particular case, the guy lost his job, is on probation, is on a list of sexual predators. Whether that is enough, I cannot tell, due to lack of evidence. I don't know the circumstances there, either. I have answered and given my views. Unlike you, I don't jump to conclusions without evidence.