When I typically write about cases of sex offenders walking out of court with no jail time, the offender is female. She usually gets a pass for some asinine reason related to her sex, looks, social status, parental status, mental state, childhood, or general health. This time it is the offender is a man, although the reason for his release is just as ridiculous:
The 23-year-old man, who cannot be named to protect the victim, pleaded guilty on Wednesday in Brisbane District Court to three counts of rape, five counts of indecent treatment of a child and two counts of failure to comply with court-ordered reporting requirements.
Judge Terry Martin sentenced the man to 12 months jail suspended for 18 months for the rapes and an 18-month probation order for the remaining sex offences and a fine of $150 for the compliance breaches.
He will serve 50 hours community service.
The unemployed man was 15 or 16 when he abused the victim in 2008 or 2009.
The victim was four to five years old at the time of the offences.
In short, this was a first-time offense for something the man did as a minor. That would explain the 12-month jail sentence, yet it does not why the man was allowed to walk. It is particularly bizarre considering why this case even reached the court:
The victim’s parents and the rapist’s family did not know the abuse happened until the boy told his father in 2014 after the father saw a newspaper report about the abuser’s attacks on two other boys.
So the victim in this case may have been the first victim, but was not the last. The man was charged with indecent treatment of the two other boys. However, he also received a two-year suspended sentence for an unspecified crime. Incidentally, he failed to comply with the conditions of the suspended sentence.
Even if the judge wanted to take the man’s admission to and cooperation with police into account, the man already demonstrated that he will not comply with court orders. Is this not the point where the court should lock him up? Why give him a second chance to fail to comply? It is not as if he received a long sentence. He got one year in jail, which he would not have complete in full, followed by 18 months of probation. He would be out before the end of the year.
Why not place him in jail to ensure he complies with the order and receives the treatment?
I understand giving a person a second chance, however, this person has already abused two other boys and ignored court orders. He had his chance. Now he needs to understand the consequences of his actions. He should not get a pass because he plead out early in the investigation. He molested three children. It seems more than fair to lock up him.