And yet another sex-assault verdict that spawns public ire

Public indignation regarding perceived laxity in criminal sentencing outcomes for sexual-assault defendants is hardly a geographically confined concern.

Indeed, it’s coast to coast.

Many readers of our sexual victims’ advocacy blog at the long-tenured Los Angeles personal injury law firm of Taylor & Ring will readily note that after considering today’s post in conjunction with the news reported in our immediately preceding blog entry. Our August 31 post presented material information regarding the public outcry over the recent criminal sentencing in a California case involving a university sexual assault. The perceived laxity of the judge in that case has resulted in his removal from the criminal bench and a recall petition demanding his ouster that has been signed by a reported 1.3 million California residents.

And now there’s this news from Massachusetts: Widespread criticism is resulting in the wake of a recent sentencing outcome of a teen defendant convicted of sexually assaulting two classmates at a house party.

The district attorney’s office wanted a behind-bars outcome for the defendant’s action. Instead, the judge doled out two years of probation.

Moreover, the sentence enables the defendant to skirt designation as a sex offender. Additionally, his criminal record slate will be wiped clean if he simply complies with probationary dictates.

That outcome has engendered widespread public criticism, with some commentators charging that it clearly values the suspect’s life and future more than it does the victims’ rights.

In a manner many people might have understandably regarded as unfeeling and even cavalier, the defendant’s attorney deemed it relevant to note that his client was a “three-sport athlete” who, following the lenient outcome, would be able to embrace the “college experience.”

One notable point to make about unsatisfactory outcomes in criminal cases involving sexual crimes is that wrongdoers can often still be held accountable in civil actions brought by a victim and not by state authorities.

Meaningful money recoveries obtained by knowledgeable and aggressive attorneys in such cases can materially help victims, promote justice and send a clear message of deterrence in sexual assault matters.