By Scott St. Clair | The Save Jersey Blog
In the Sayreville sexual assault case, it was only a matter of time before the apologists and excusers chimed in, this time in Julie O’Conner’s Star-Ledger Q-and-A column on why the accused football players are children in need of a kind word and forgiving attitude. Bunk!
O’Conner can’t even bring herself to correctly describe what it is they’re alleged to have done. Instead of rape, unlawful restraint and assault – all serious crimes – she reduces it to “sexual hazing.” What’s alleged to have happened rates several steps above locker room wedgies and snapping towels.
She ignores two key parties to the case: the victims, against whom gross and reprehensible criminal violations of their dignity and bodies have been committed, and the public, who deserve to be protected against those who commit such crimes by having them removed from society and locked away for a long time, perhaps forever.
The criminal law must secure justice for victims and protect the public against offenders, not pat rapists on the head saying it’s not their fault because they’re kids. In fact, little Johnny did mean it.
O’Conner’s academic studies and intellectual parsing rationalize mollycoddling. No wonder these punks thought they could get away with it.
Sexual hazing, is there such a charge? You can’t go making up charges after a crime has been committed. Don’t like that these guys are going to be charged with rape or sexual assault then get the legislature to pass a law that creates a “sexual hazing” charge for situations such as this. In the mean time we have to go with what we’ve got on the books.