20-30 years seems excessive here, and he should contest it as an 8th amendment cruel and unusual punishment challenge. By saying this in in no way condoning this behavior. A lot of instances where a younger teen or even child that is acting like they are interested in sex with adults are acting out past sexual abuse.

This is also a great reason why you NEVER talk to the police! He must certainly had he not talked to the police gotten a better sentence than 20-30 years.

I agree it is an over the top sentence!

There is a teacher here in Utah that had the same sentence as well and it was a female also

With stiffer and stiffer penalties being handed out my prayers are that men and women both "get the picture".

I have to disagree with the opinions here that he should have received a lighter sentence. He was a teacher. He was in a position of authority for goodness sakes! He knew what he did was wrong and he knew better but he continued on after any whatever supposed "advances", and didn't even think to approach anyone about what was happening.

He messed up big time.

Listen, I get it that if he was having problems initially, most people think who do you go to? His options were guaranteed far better had he nipped it in the bud than thinking he could get away with something.

But you cannot go to anyone to the police yourself if you abuse ANY minor.

I would disagree steps. People get less time in prison for 2nd degree murder, negligent homicide, DUII deaths etc. His abhorrent behavior cannot be tolerated as a society, but 30 years? Remember he can't ever work as a teacher again, which is what he went to college for. He will forever be on the registry which as we know is a difficult punishment, and he will be on parole. I don't think probation was the right sentence for him vut certainly 30 years is too much.

The real question is more of a sociological/criminological one. Is there proof that harder sentences has a deterrent effect on behavior of the general population? You said you hopes more people would get the picture and that is why you justified 30 years. It is a really interesting question to look into:

http://www.sentencingproject.org/doc/Deterrence%20Briefing%20.pdf

"Research to date generally indicates that increases in the certainty of punishment, as opposed to the severity of punishment, are more likely to produce deterrent benefits"

I think even conservative criminologists have a tough time proving specific incapacitation for longer sentences increases public safety on a macro level. I mean think about it, we still have an epidemic of children being abused and the laws have increasingly gotten tougher the past 15 years. However, we aren't seeing a drop in
abuse.

To add to what Independent said - we cannot say that people should get longer or lesser sentences because of the position they held - the crime is the same crime - on a personal level I have never believed in the whole "higher standard" thing - humans are human no matter what position they may occupy.

I wonder if he got a longer sentence than he might otherwise have received because he admitted sending the girl lewd texts.

I agree with Independent

I agree Independent

I am not saying it's wrong to punish this guy, I of course think he needs to be punished. I am simply asking what is the justification for 30 years which is much higher than the crimes I previously mentioned. I think congress can implement any policy they see fit, but a best practice would be to rely on research as to what would be the best way to accomplish a goal. In this case the goal they are trying to accomplish is less child abuse. Research does not bear out the efficacy of their policies they are implementing.

Politicians are reacting to the public's fear, and the public is scared to death by the media. It is a vicious cycle that we cannot get away from.

Here is an example of a good question we need ask before we start drastically increasing the penalties: What if increasing the penalty for sexual abuse to 30 years (or much higher than it currently is) made it less likely people would report sex abuse?

We don't even know the answer to this question yet the demand for blood from the public makes the politicians want to increase the penalties without even consulting anyone in the academic community for what the research is actually saying.

Twenty to thirty years in prison for the crime of consensual sex with a teen is much too harsh. One of the major problems with the criminal justice system is the inordinately long prison sentences we dole out, which benefits neither the offender, the victim, nor society. This is particularly true regarding non-violent crimes, including simple possession of CP or these internet solicitation cases.

A very long prison system for a non-violent, consensual crime does nothing but basically ruin a man's life, choke our prison system by contributing to prison overcrowding, and costs the taxpayers money which could be better used elsewhere.

This is not the type or nature of criminal act that should be a "life ender" for this young man. While he will be able to go on with his life, his quality of life will most likely be much worse than it needs to be. He needs punishment for sure, but not a punishment so harsh that it might ruin his life.

As I read the article, I noticed that the judge referred to this as a "sexual assault." While it was illegal, I don't think the word "assault" is an appropriate description. Assault, in my mind, refers to a violent act, which this was not.

People reading the article will see the word "assault" and think he forced himself on her, which he did not. Yes, I realize that she was underage and I would never disparage the victim of a crime----which she was----but she was a willing participant.

We need to call a spade a spade here and stop using terminology for the sake of inflaming passions.

The prosecution will say that she was underage and not responsible, nor did she have the maturity level to deal with this. I agree, BUT I can damn well guarantee you that if she, the 14 year old, had committed a major crime, the same DA would have attempted to try her as an adult. Then, all of a sudden, this "child" would have somehow undergone some miraculous transformation and changed into an adult. The hypocrisy astounds me at times.

The girl, while underage, was 14 years old. She certainly was not a child. While she was truly a victim and this young man needed some punishment for taking advantage of a 14 year old, he did not need 20 to 30 years' worth. We have an unfortunate tendency in this country to hand out sentences that are disproportionate to the crime.

Ten years would have been a more fair and reasonable sentence.

rewdiazepam

I agree his sentence is rather long, but I don't think he should be able to work as a teacher ever again. That's fair.

DealRMe,

I agree with you in that he should never be entrusted to teach again. And yes, that is fair.

In all the states I am aware, a felony conviction is assurance that the teaching licence will be revoked, so he will never teach again, I am sure.

rewdiazepam

I agree with others here that this is much too harsh. Two recent cases here in ct show how disproportionate senses are. One case a woman was texting and killed someone, she got five years and will most likely be out in three. The other case is a woman stabbed her boyfriend killing him, she got twenty and could be out much sooner. And this guy gets 20-30??!!

If this country and the DAs, judges, and legislators ever decide to take the politics out of our criminal justice system, all this nonsense with the disparity in sentences will stop.

I doubt that will ever happen as all three of the aforementioned groups of people are politicans and rely on a "tough on crime" stance to win votes and continue to ge re-elected.

But I can hope.

rewdiazepam