Poll: Student jailed for 9 months for "prank"

Was the sentence:

  • too harsh

    Votes: 178 36.1%

  • spot on

    Votes: 244 49.5%

  • not harsh enough

    Votes: 71 14.4%
  • Total voters
    493
mcast said:
Destroying his life over a stupid prank is too much, hefty fine paid to the victim and a sincerely apology would have been enough.
Click to expand...

It's interesting that you and others keep calling it merely a prank rather than what it is: sexual assault. At what point does the prank not become a prank? If he raped her? What about if he just put his penis in her mouth? Where do you draw the line?
 
Yes, stupid thing to do.

Prison sentence is a over-reaction, hefty fine and some community service would have done the trick. If this is in a magistrates court then as usual pathetic. If he mentioned he had a drug/alchol problem he would have been let off.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's interesting that you and others keep calling it merely a prank rather than what it is: sexual assault. At what point does the prank not become a prank? If he raped her? What about if he just put his penis in her mouth? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

He didn't really sexually assault her though, sometimes a comedy moment is a comedy moment. He didn't touch her privates with melicious intent. I know technically it's probably in that class but it's not what I'd consider assault. #
 
ChroniC said:
He didn't really sexually assault her though, sometimes a comedy moment is a comedy moment. He didn't touch her privates with melicious intent. I know technically it's probably in that class but it's not what I'd consider assault.
Click to expand...

You should reconsider then.
 
Burnsy2023 said:
It's interesting that you and others keep calling it merely a prank rather than what it is: sexual assault. At what point does the prank not become a prank? If he raped her? What about if he just put his penis in her mouth? Where do you draw the line?
Click to expand...

Why can't it be a prank and sexual assault? The two aren't mutually exclusive.

Personally I would say the motivation here was the entertainment value rather than sexual gratification. That is not to defend or belittle the act but context is important.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
Why can't it be a prank and sexual assault? The two aren't mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

Well, sexual assault is a crime, so it's useful to differentiate that from non-criminal tomfoolery. Where does the "it was just a prank" excuse end?
 
I'd also add context is important to determine potential future risk, what kind of sentence is required for rehabilitation or as a deterrent for future crimes. I'm not in favour of punishing just for the sake of punishing.

But this applies to all crimes, not just this one (in my view).
 
elmarko said:
I'd also add context is important to determine potential future risk
Click to expand...

Context is also important in relation to the effect this has on the victim. For all we know this girl could be very traumatised by this and the suffering she has and associated psychological effects could far outlast (and most likely will) the term this chap has to serve. Being drunk and just a prank and "not violent" is just a poor excuse tbh. How would you like it if I walked upto you and hit you in the face for a "prank" - it was only one punch no malice intended just a laugh - I am not sure you'd see it that way.
 
Xordium said:
Context is also important in relation to the effect this has on the victim. For all we know this girl could be very traumatised by this and the suffering she has and associated psychological effects could far outlast (and most likely will) the term this chap has to serve. Being drunk and just a prank and "not violent" is just a poor excuse tbh. How would you like it if I walked upto you and hit you in the face for a "prank" - it was only one punch no malice intended just a laugh - I am not sure you'd see it that way.
Click to expand...
Who said anything about it being an excuse? - why do people assume that by not wishing the harshest punishments available to the law you are excusing?. I'm stating that for determining future risk, requirement for rehabilitation or a deterrent almost a year in prison seems excessive given the context.

From what I recall there has been other cases where the charges have been dropped to common assault (which prevents the person going on the sex offenders register, which in my view - should be reserved for those who pose a threat to society - something I'm not so certain of in this case).

I agree the victims can't be ignored, but the person has already lost a career & education (which will also have a life-time impact) - going on the sex offenders register & a prison sentence effectively destroying much of his future employment prospects full stop (not just his chosen career) - is a little too far in my view.

This is obviously based on the limited information we have, but there may be other factors not shown which account for the judgement in that case it may be appropriate.
 
Last edited:
thedoc46 said:
Did the girl who was most probably a friend? want to see her friend receive such a harsh sentence?
Click to expand...

Victims of crime can make a victim impact statement (VPS [how the crime affected them and their families, et cetera]). These are taken into account by the court / judge when deciding on sentencing. So depending on what she wrote in the VPS (if she wrote one), this could either be the most lenient sentence the judge could give, or it's the most severe he could give when taking everything into account.
 
elmarko said:
Who said anything about it being an excuse?
Click to expand...

Err you actually insinuated that aspect - this part of your first post seems to downgrade it because it it not so "extreme". Other people have also raised it.

elmarko said:
on the other sexual assault (which includes other more extreme forms of abuse, such as groping women in public) seems excessive in this case.
Click to expand...

Now I think: grabbing someone's **** is not as extreme as getting your penis and sticking it on someone face but you seem to think it's the other way around.
 
If he does the full time, it'll be about the same as Pistorious will for killing someone.

Perspective.

My personal opinion is the lad is a clown for doing it, but actual jail time for that? Feels ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom