Agree with the bit in bold. There's always that sense of confusion and anger when you hear or read about some **** who's raped a woman or abused a child but only got a handful of years in prison as punishment. Do the judges/law makers not understand that the victims have to live with it for the rest of their lives?
To sum up, he's a total ****. He got a total ****'s sentence. As I said earlier, it will probably be reduced on appeal anyway. They'll love his attitude in jail!!....
6 years for what Johnson did, within the scheme of sentences handed down for far worse crimes, is excessive. Unless there is some aggravating factor that hasn't been reported, that sentence is likely to be substantially reduced (as I said above). Perhaps it is the case that all the killers, robbers, rapists, child molesters, burglars, thieves and thugs who got less (or no worse) than Johnson ought to have received heavier sentences, but it is not for the judge in Johnson's case to use him as an example to the rest of the judiciary as to how they ought to be sentencing, by handing down a rogue sentence. I am no fan of scumbags like Johnson. However, what I am a fan of is saving the public purse the expense of having to pay Johnson's legal costs on the inevitable appeal that will now follow, and an appeal that is likely to be successful.
I just want to throw in that I really don't care what sentence he got BUT if everyone here is naive enough to think that this girl was some innocent sweet little flower who had absolutely no idea what she was doing, well.. whatever.
You would also be right in assuming if this had been a 28 year old woman with a 15 year old boy 90% of people would be saying "yea, go on you dirty little bastard, get in there!" Fact is, at 15, girls are pretty much physically developed and many of them can easily pass for an 18/19 year old. Personally I wouldn't touch a young girl (16-19), just because aside from everything else they may be physically developed but they sure as **** are mentally messed up around that age so no thanks.
I think you've just answered your own poiint there. The law is there to protect a mentally messed up 15 year old from herself. He was 28 and should have known better. She isn't the one on trial or in anyway responsible for precisely that reason.
Firstly, I think your quotes contradict each other tbh...she may not have been some innocent little flower but she was a child and as you said "would be "mentally messed up around that age" then surely she was an innocent victim as he groomed her. Secondly, there was no evidence that she had in anyway led him on or initiated anything or encouraged it etc...so I have no idea why you would doubt that she was an innocent sweet child who was manipulated by an adult with no sense of decency. I ain't digging at you btw...I think that the evidence presented, his lies, his eventual guilty plea and bollocks spoken by his supporters all suggest he targeted her cos she was easy for him to manipulate. one of the worse things I read from his defence was when a psychologist said he did what he did cos he was struggling with becoming a father.
I would like to think that if this had been my daughter this would not have happened. I feel sure that I would have noticed changes in her demeanour and attitude and would have been able to talk to her about what was happening. Teachers as well should notice peculiar behaviour. None the above excuses Johnson for his despicable actions and he deserves to go to jail, although the term of imprisonment highlights serious inconsistencies amongst judges.
You're obviously a decent chap,i am usually but now and again i'd be happy with a rougher type of justice... sorry.
