Female teacher gets a 10-year sentence for rape

Is it just my imagination or are the charges made and the sentencing imposed in these cases influenced by the looks of the offender. It seems more than a coincidence that the “Barbie Dolls” are apt to get leniency whereas the rough looking bimbos are charged with graver crimes and receive stiffer sentencing.

In contemporary times, Western society generally values looks over substance. If you don’t believe this, than ask yourself if someone in a wheelchair (a Franklin D. Roosevelt for example) has a snow-ball’s chance in hell of ever getting elected as the U.S. president?

In this day and age, looks count; in fact, it is ok if you do nothing, so long as you look good not doing it!

Here's another article on the same crime/sentence. An excerpt:

The victim's uncle, who spoke on behalf of the family, asked for the maximum sentence, saying Holt had tarnished the reputation of teachers and violated his nephew's trust.

"He had his innocence taken away through betrayal," he said, adding that Holt should be treated the same as if she were a male teacher who took advantage of a female student. "Rape is rape," he said.

While prosecutors did not get the sentence they were seeking, Kriner noted that 10 years is "a long time." He said he hopes Holt uses her experience as a teacher to help other inmates while she's incarcerated.

What surprises me is that they dared to print that comment about "rape is rape" in the article I linked. Sure, it's common sense, and blindingly obvious to anyone with the slightest sense of reality, but it's still verboten to print such things, as MSNBC's usual misandric censorship of the same statement demonstrates.

Good for them (the KansasCityChannel.com folks) for reporting and printing it, and good for the prosecutors for seeking the max, even if they didn't get it. The fact that our blatantly sexist legal systems have been letting teachers get away with rape with nothing more than a slap on their pretty little wrists is no excuse - these rapists deserve to do the same time for the same crime.

Notice also that when the rapist has a vagina, it's an "affair". When the rapist has a penis, it's a "string of sex crimes". Women are just as capable as men of being evil monsters - stop excusing their crimes already.

What intrigues me the most about this case is how the prosecution came up with 28 counts of rape?

According to the article, the predator had sex with the boy 28 times over the course of a week: 28 divided by 7 days = 4 times a day.

But when two people are humping like rabbits, how do you define the beginning/end of a "rape" episode?

Does it involve a sexual climax? Insertion? Withdrawal? Engulfment?

Were they watching DVD's in between copulating?

Did she get up for a beer? Order a pizza?

I just can't figure out the legal math....

Finally, a just (sort of) sentence for a female child rapist.

However, if the rape victim had impregnated his rapist he could have been held liable for 18 years of child support for the resulting bastard. That misandric reality still bites!

Let's have the girls do the same time for the same crime.
Equal work for equal pay, and all of that good stuff.

oregon dad