Remember the infamous Brock Turner case, where Judge Aaron Persky sentenced Turner to just probation, despite being convicted of rape? At the time, Persky had said that Turner's life would be ruined by prison, and had felt that Turner could better rehabilitate and live a normal life without spending time in prison. The flaw in that thinking, of course, is that the effect of prison on the convicted sexual predator shouldn't be a concern. Once you've committed a serious crime, any negative effect on your life is your own fault. (It would be much different, of course, if Turner had only been convicted of something like petty theft, and the judge went easy on him.)
Persky was eventually recalled.
At the time, there was a lot of screaming about "white privilege" and "male privilege", especially by feminists. They were correct to be angry about the inappropriate sentence, but they blamed it on the wrong factor.
Persky was a lifelong Democrat. His decision about Turner wasn't informed by whiteness, but rather a general bleeding heart leniency toward convicted violent criminals. It also had to do with Perky's young life trajectory being similar to that of Turner -- both being frat boy college athletes -- and he saw his young self in Turner (minus the rape). However, it was the general thought process about crime-and-punishment which needed the focus. Persky saw the penal system as strictly rehabilitative, not punitive. Thus, from that view, his only concern was for Turner to reform and live a normal life, rather than to give him the appropraite punishment for rapiing. That view of the penal system is one strictly informed by left-wing politics, thus it was no surprise to learn that Persky was a Democrat.
Now we have a very similar case.
Chirstopher Belter, who is presently 20 years old, was convicted of raping four teenage girls. These occurred in 2017-18, and he was 16-17 at the time. There's no statutory rape or abuse of a minor element here, since he was a minor himself, and was the same age as the victims. However, he committed forcible rape against four different girls he knew, and that obviously justifies substantial prison time, even given the age he was when he committed the crimes.
Belter was convicted. Unfortunately, judge Matthew Murphy, who is almost 70 and about to be force-retired anyway, gave him probation. Murphy said to Belter, "I agonized. I'm not ashamed that to say that I actually prayed over what is the appropriate sentence in this case because there was great pain. There was great harm. There were multiple crimes committed in the case. It seems to me that a sentence that involves incarceration or partial incarceration isn't appropriate, so I am going to sentence you to probation."
Murphy, like Persky, is another lifelong Democrat. Again, he took a bleeding heart concern for the criminal's welfare, and decided it "wasn't appropriate" to put this man in prison for what he did. Like the Turner case, this was again a miscarriage of justice, and feminists have the right to be pissed.
Right now we are seeing a conflation between the Rittenhouse and Belter cases, as "evidence" that young, white males get all kinds of privilege in criminal court, which is not afforded to young black or Hispanic males.
Not only are these two cases completely different from one another, but "white privilege" has nothing to do with either. The Rittenhouse case was simply a bad criminal prosecution, where there was clearly reasonable doubt about whether he committed a crime by shooting those three men, all of whom were attacking him. This Belter case involved someone who was clearly guilty, convicted, and then given a nonsensical probationary sentence by a bleeding heart judge.
If you want to make a feminist's head explode, ask them what type of sentence they think is appropraite for a rapist. Usually they will tell you they want a harsh sentence of some sort. Then ask them, "And which political party tends to support long sentences for all violent criminals and sexual predators, and which one tends to push for more leniency in sentencing?" When you point out that Republicans overwhelmingly support tougher criminal sentencing, then you can ask them why they don't vote Republican, if they want to see this changed. They never have a good answer for this.
It's not white privilege. It's criminal privilege, which has been something long granted by the Democrats -- from lawmakers to judges. Notice that looting and rioting tends to almost exclusively take place in Democrat-run cities. Why do you think that is?
