3 ms·

In mitigation such things are pretty normal - particularly coming from the prosecution under direct questioning, which this was. You don't mince words when aske

In mitigation such things are pretty normal - particularly coming from the prosecution under direct questioning, which this was. You don't mince words when asked for a direct opinion by a judge. Of course the press pieces don't address the context, as the context was and is a state secret. Bob is a Rabbi, a youth worker, a kite festival organiser, and a stand-up bloke and father of three very well adjusted adults I've known since I became a conscious entity.

icebraining 10y ago
Fair enough, but in any case, the argument wasn't on whether what he said was fair or correct, or whether the reaction was appropriate, but whether the (over)reaction was because of some unrelated case. I mean, it's not exactly uncommon for anything involving pedophilia, often even when there's no actual evidence of such, to explode in Think Of The Children hysteria, and a man in an official position calling a 13-year-old a "predator" sounds exactly the kind of thing that can trigger it. So the question is: are barristers often referring to 13-year-old as predators, and the media just specifically picked up on this case?
- madaxe_again 10y ago
  The answer to that query is a pretty sound yes - mitigation looks at the precise circumstances and behaviours of surrounding that which is being sentenced over, and this is the sort of thing that is raised.
  - foldr 10y ago
    I think what people find difficult to understand is how this could be construed as mitigating. No-one can seriously think that a 13 year old girl is in a position of powerto "predate" on an adult man. What the defence really seems to be doing is trying to blame the victim by saying it was her fault for being horny rather than the perpetrator's fault for failing to exercise any self restraint.
    - madaxe_again 10y ago
      Bob was the prosecution, responding to a query on a defence mitigation statement by the judge - honestly, if you read the transcript, the context is clear.
      - foldr 10y ago
        Surely the fact that the prosecution said it makes it worse.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]

icebraining 10y ago

Fair enough, but in any case, the argument wasn't on whether what he said was fair or correct, or whether the reaction was appropriate, but whether the (over)reaction was because of some unrelated case. I mean, it's not exactly uncommon for anything involving pedophilia, often even when there's no actual evidence of such, to explode in Think Of The Children hysteria, and a man in an official position calling a 13-year-old a "predator" sounds exactly the kind of thing that can trigger it. So the question is: are barristers often referring to 13-year-old as predators, and the media just specifically picked up on this case?

madaxe_again 10y ago
The answer to that query is a pretty sound yes - mitigation looks at the precise circumstances and behaviours of surrounding that which is being sentenced over, and this is the sort of thing that is raised.
- foldr 10y ago
  I think what people find difficult to understand is how this could be construed as mitigating. No-one can seriously think that a 13 year old girl is in a position of powerto "predate" on an adult man. What the defence really seems to be doing is trying to blame the victim by saying it was her fault for being horny rather than the perpetrator's fault for failing to exercise any self restraint.
  - madaxe_again 10y ago
    Bob was the prosecution, responding to a query on a defence mitigation statement by the judge - honestly, if you read the transcript, the context is clear.
    - foldr 10y ago
      Surely the fact that the prosecution said it makes it worse.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]