Let us recap -
as a 14-yr old kid, this lady was raped by a 30-yr monster.
Judge has acknowledged there was no s__ual gratification.
There are 2 victims here - the mother and daughter.
For those who say a man would have got more jail term, it is also well established that when men do such things to their kids, they do it for s__ual gratification.
This woman was not a predator. She is disturbed. As always, lots of jumping on the bandwagon going on here.
Let us recap -
as a 14-yr old kid, this lady was raped by a 30-yr monster.
Judge has acknowledged there was no s__ual gratification.
There are 2 victims here - the mother and daughter.
For those who say a man would have got more jail term, it is also well established that when men do such things to their kids, they do it for s__ual gratification.
This woman was not a predator. She is disturbed. As always, lots of jumping on the bandwagon going on here.
I agree about the s-xual gratification part...
but I still humbly disagree :@: that just because she was raped when she was 14yrs old she should make her daughter go through something like this...the mother did not get abused by her parents, she got abused by another man..she should as a mother who has been through such a terrible experience be more protective about her daughter...not the other way around.
I have ppl in my family who have been abused, and I know that they are VERY protective of their children, than being abusive towards them. (which is how it should be).
^ but I still humbly disagree that just because she was raped when she was 14yrs old she should make her daughter go through something like this *** I am not saying she should make her daughter go through this*. ...the mother did not get abused by her parents, she got abused by another man..she should as a mother who has been through such a terrible experience be more protective about her daughter...not the other way around. ***True - that would be the logical thing to do. We do not know what this experience did to her psyche - maybe in her mind, by "teaching" the daughter what happens, she thiught she was protecting her.*
I have ppl in my family who have been abused, and I know that they are VERY protective of their children, than being abusive towards them. (which is how it should be).
Sorry abt the folks in your family - and am glad they handled it well. In this woman's mind, she was not abusing the daughter - and that appears to be the point that is being missed.Ideally she would not have done this. But if while doing what she did, she in her mind was being prtective and not abusive, that needs t o be considered. So final judgment - counseling :)
On one hand you state it makes sense to get the woman psychological help. And on the other hand you state 4 years is not enough because "she ruined her kids life and took her child's innocence away".
I am neither a lawyer not a judge. But I believe in order to determine if a crime is committed, intent plays a big role. If there was no intent to commint a crime - in other words if the mother did not know she was doing anything illegal, then she should not have to spend any time in jail.
The criterion, in my opinion, should not be the outcome of her conduct- that she ruined her child's life, but her intent - whether she intended to do so. That is all.
Showing mercy is a good thing, taking into account extenuating (is that the correct word?) circumstances is a good thing. Granted, the path of least resistance is to throw the book at her. But that would just be pack mentality.
Where does it say that the mother was raped at 14? It was her own will to have a relationship with the 30 yr old man. That doesnt explain why she raped her own child.
Chandni, I am sorry you do not consider sex with a minor equivalent to rape. At least in the West where you live, it is called statutory (spelling?) rape I believe.