Did you ladies see this article on the AP wire about the sex attacker who received an early release for a crime committed decades ago?
Apparently this fellow was going through the AA 12-step program and got to step 9, wherein he was required to apologize to those whom he'd wronged (unless the apology would cause further harm). He took the time to contact his victim from his college days back in the '80s and apologized, admitting that he'd raped her.
You'd think justice would then be served, wouldn't you? There's no statute of limitations on felonies in Virginia, where the crime was committed, and the victim took the proof to the authorities, whom she felt had originally disregarded her situation years back. The man even pled guilty to lesser charges and proceeded to sentencing.
You'd think justice would be served, wouldn't you?
I'm not positive I feel that way, folks. The judge ordered a 10 year sentence, but then suspended all but 18 months of the time to be served. Then the rapist became eligible for early release - and got out after six months time.
His lawyer says he's done his time. His victim says the shortened sentence makes her feel justice is incomplete.
What do you think? Was an apology and a shortened sentence (and a plea bargain) enough? Should the victim move on, thankful this much justice has arrived? Or should the perpetrator be handed more? Has he received his judgement and paid his dues? I'm of two minds here. What about you?
Side note here: the victim, Liz Seccuro, has gone public with her name and story, in an effort to assist other women who are victims of sexual assault. She has also founded STARS (Sisters Together Assisting Rape Survivors) as a resource for rape victims and their families.
Comment Preview