How unsurprising

A judge decided to release convicted child rapist Debra Lafave from probation. Coincidentally, the early release violates the plea agreement Lafave signed:

Five weeks after giving birth to premature twin boys she cares for “24/7,” Debra Lafave on Thursday won early release from the probation she got for having sex in 2005 with a 14-year-old boy.

Now 31, the former teacher won sympathy from Circuit Judge Wayne Timmerman, who told her he himself is a father of three. He joked that twin boys might be more curse than blessing later on and congratulated her for completing community control that is so rigorous most fail.

—-

In a tense exchange with the judge, Assistant State Attorney Michael Sinacore said Timmerman had broken the negotiated plea Lafave agreed to six years ago to avoid a potential 30-year prison term. In the agreement she signed, she promised to fully complete probation.

Sinacore said the victim’s family had agreed to a lenient sentence only to spare the boy from a sensationalized trial.

This ruling is not surprising. Lafave got a slap on the wrist from the start, and the judge allowed Lafave to have unsupervised contact with children under 18 after finishing sex offender treatment.

Of course:

Lafave will remain a registered sex offender for the rest of her life. That means she will have to notify a sheriff’s office any time she changes her address. She’ll also have to identify herself as a sex offender when she renews her driver’s license.

The judge noted that Lafave can never teach school again in Florida.

She will not have to worry about finding new victims at a school. She just gave birth to twin boys. She has all the unsupervised time in the world to groom and abuse them.

Honestly, as much as I want to be fair, this is a woman who got away with her crime without really taking responsibility for it. At the very least she should have finished the remaining months for her probation. And as much as this pains me, I agree with Nancy Grace.  Timmerman swallowed this deal like it was chocolate pudding.

19 thoughts on “How unsurprising

  1. The comments.

    My god, the comments in support of this woman!

    There…there are no words to describe it.

  2. And the people calling this 14 year old “Lucky”, criticising his need for therapy.

    Sickening.

  3. Eagle, none of that is surprising either. When this cases first made news, plenty of people — including some reporters — sided with Lafave and called the boy “lucky”.

  4. What disgusts me is that people will let stuff like this fly but will then turn around say its in the “best interests of the children” for a willing dad to get forced out of his child’s life over false abuse allegations. WTF?

  5. Did you notice how she used a pregnancy to avoid completing her sentence?
    It seems to happen a lot. Women suddenly ‘fall’ pregnant after being charged with a crime, but before sentencing, or in this case during probation. It is too frequent and convenient to be accidental.

  6. “Groom and abuse them”?
    She may have had sex with a 14 year old boy and for that I think she should have served some jail time.
    But there’s no indication she’s in to either incest OR prepubescent sex and I fail to see your comments as anything but sensationalistic and very prejudicial.

  7. gwallan:

    In my state of Maryland it would be legal for me to have consensual PIV sex with a 16 year old young woman. I’m 40, as of this year.
    One state over, in any direction, it would be statuatory rape.
    I’d end up on a sex offenders registry in those places and people would mix me in with those who offered 6 year olds a lollipop and then gave them… something else.

    In any case it would never happen , but assuming it did and me and some 16 year old gal had a mutually satisfying sexual encounter.
    Does this mean, in your opinion, I should be barred from a playground, presumably on the very very small chance that I not only like developed mid and older teens sexually but also children who have no sexual characteristics at all?

  8. She may have had sex with a 14 year old boy and for that I think she should have served some jail time. But there’s no indication she’s in to either incest OR prepubescent sex and I fail to see your comments as anything but sensationalistic and very prejudicial.

    Of course my comments are prejudicial. This is a woman who tried to blame her sexual abuse of a 14-year-old on being bipolar and when she faced prison time claimed via her attorney that she was too pretty to go to jail. This is not a person who seems to value rules or boundaries. I never said anything about her being interested in prepubescent sex. I said that she has plenty of time to groom her sons and later abuse them. Most sex offenders, whether molesters or pedophiles, groom the potential victims. It is possible that she would not do that to her own children, but I fail to see the logic in assuming that when the state so fears her that required her to register as a sex offender for life. That implies that the state believes that if given the chance she will abuse again. Well, now she has two boys to potentially do that to.

  9. Clarence: “But there’s no indication she’s in to either incest OR prepubescent sex and I fail to see your comments as anything but sensationalistic and very prejudicial.”

    No offense, Clarence, but I find this a bit hypocritical of you since you supported the state’s enforcement of child support on this 14 year old victim due to the best interest of the child.

  10. Wait… the article says the “judge noted she would be no longer able to teach ‘in Florida'”

    …Does that mean she can teach somewhere else?

  11. @Clarence…

    The age of consent where you live has no bearing on Debra Lafave’s liking for young boys. She prefers them quite a bit younger than sixteen.

  12. Wait… the article says the “judge noted she would be no longer able to teach ‘in Florida’”

    …Does that mean she can teach somewhere else?

    I do not think so. She lost her teaching license, and I think the license works the same as law licenses. With her lifetime sex offender status she would (presumably) never to be able to get another license in a different state.

  13. Eagle 33:
    You totally got me mixed up with someone else. I’ve been posting on Feminist Critics for years, I don’t support assigning arrears to statutory victims.

  14. Toysoldiers:

    So at least you know something about the case I didn’t know and are not just assuming based on what she was convicted of?
    Heck, I’m inclined to agree she would not be a very good mother, but I still think it highly improbable she would abuse them as prepubescents OR groom them as adolescents Most pedophiles don’t seem to target their own children, for whatever reason, I suspect the incest taboo, and maybe the bonding from knowing them as infants and as people.

    I might be more inclined to trust what the state “believes” when it puts someone on these registries if they didn’t have so many people on them who don’t belong there. In affect since these registries are being required for so many minor offenses and no distinction is made except MAYBE in SOME states as to whether you can get your name removed, all offenders are treated the same.

    I agree she’ll probably be a crappy mother and whilst I don’t think she should have spent her life in jail or something, jail time would have been appropriate. If the victims family wins their appeal and she goes back on probation, I’ll be happy about that. That being said, I do not see her as any danger to her children, unless they pick up her bad habit of trying to avoid responsibility or her alleged bipolar is real and causes her to physically abuse them.

  15. Clarence, it is possible that she will not abuse her own children. However, it is also possible that she will, particularly given the way she excused her behavior from the outset. Granted, I agree that the state often puts people on sex offender registries for no valid reason. Yet, this is a woman who was a first-time offender who raped a 14-year-old boy. It is rare for someone like that to end up with a life requirement. So something prompted it, possibly a desire to make an example out of Lafave or because the state felt she was that dangerous.

    Either way, I do not think that children, particularly male children, should be left with someone the state considers such a risk.

  16. Clarence: “Eagle 33:
    You totally got me mixed up with someone else. I’ve been posting on Feminist Critics for years, I don’t support assigning arrears to statutory victims.”

    Thanks for claryfing, Clarence. Sorry about that.

    I know there was someone who justified the child support decision and I do know her name starts with a “C”. Just can’t put my mind on it at the moment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s