re: Deputies arrest 4 in LSU student Madison Brooks case

quote:

---

Doesn’t seem like near enough prison time when you take into account what they did to her, and those actions caused her death.

---

Agreed

quote:

---

Doesn’t seem like near enough prison time when you take into account what they did to her, and those actions caused her death.

---

I would be shocked if they dont get at least 20 years.

quote:

---

Especially Washington, with his other legal troubles

---

Seems bad to ever let this guy see the outside of a prison (if accusations are true).

quote:

---

You’re much more optimistic than me

---

Where is your pessimism coming from?

quote:

---

Where is your pessimism coming from?

---

There's probably still a bit of a fear that this will be turned into a racial issue at some point, and then all bets are off.

quote:

---

DNA and BAC alone will get them at least 10. Admitting knowing she was drunk. They are fricked.

---

Just for my own sake, I think it is important to divide guilt and sentencing.

The jury will decide guilt. The judge will decide sentencing.

I would be EXTREMELY surprised if a judge did not give Washington a very long sentence if convicted. Carter is likely to get a fairly long sentence, but perhaps not quite as long.

The other two may not be convicted, and, because they are charged as principals only, will likely get lighter sentences if they do.

That's my take.

I did a quick look, and it appears that the recent convictions for third degree rape have pulled hefty sentences.

Also, for those of you arguing about intoxicated consent, here is some actual law on the subject:

quote:

---

The element of a stupor or abnormal condition of the mind produced by an intoxicating agent, such as alcohol, does not require an unaware victim with no capacity to resist, but rather an agent-influenced incapacity to effectively resist the advances of the perpetrator. See State v. Porter, 93-1106 (La. 07/05/94), 639 So.2d 1137, 1143. The degree of alcohol **10 influence is for the jury to decide. Id. The provisions of La. R.S. 14:43 criminalize behavior which “takes advantage of a person who has had too much to drink and participates in an act to which he or she would not otherwise have consented.” State v. Clark, 04-901 (La. App. 3d Cir. 12/08/04), 889 So.2d 471, 475.

With regard to the “unsoundness of mind” element of La. R.S. 14:43, courts have held that competency to testify is not the same as the capacity to understand the nature of the sexual act. State v. Peters, 441 So.2d 403 (La. App. 4th Cir. 1983), writ denied, 530 So.2d 560 (La. 1988); State v. Ward, 04–1295 (La. App. 5th Cir. 04/26/05), 903 So.2d 480, writ denied, 05-1718 (La. 03/17/06), 925 So.2d 533. There is a vast difference between understanding the distinction between the truth and a lie and understanding the nature and consequences of a sexual assault. State v. Peters, supra. In State v. McDowell, 427 So.2d 1346, 1350 (La. App. 2d Cir. 1983), this Court explained that the relevant inquiry regarding the victim's ability to consent in rape cases is whether the victim “understands and appreciates the nature of the act of sexual intercourse, its character and the probable and natural consequences which may attend it.”

State v. Kelly, 51,701 (La.App. 2 Cir. 5/23/18, 9–10); 244 So.3d 1251, 1257, writ denied, 2018-0988 (La. 1/8/19); 259 So.3d 1023

---

quote:

---

Now that the minor is charged, he might be the one to flip. His consent case is much stronger than Washington’s. That’s all I got.

---

I’m been following and listening, and appreciate your seemingly objective unemotional opinions. Honesty I don’t care about Madison OR the potential defendants. I don’t know them and never will.

IMO Most aren’t understanding that a very good argument could be made that the 2 males (one of which was effectively a child himself) - much like Madison - ALSO lacked the ability to consent to consensual sex.

We ALL agree that if someone says “no” that it’s rape…That’s easy.. But this one is a bit more tricky and gray when the “victim” verbally consented to, and even arguably initiated, the sex.

The victim dying in a separate, yet legally-unrelated incident at least from a criminal standpoint, is emotionally clouding many peoples judgment of criminality IMO.

I believe -on the very limited information that I have - that if Madison had made it her bed, no one would be discussing this because no charges would have ever been reported/filed/asserted.

(At this point I’m well aware I’m in the minority/unpopular opinion, I just strongly believe in innocent until proven guilty and hate the mob mentality)

They didn’t rob a bank. The argument that “drunk doesn’t absolve you” is irrelevant in this context/situation.

They apparently had consensual sex with someone while they were all drunk, someone died, and now we’re all looking for someone to blame.

We’ve all had drunken consensual sex, are we all rapists?

You make a great point! I’m serious and I don’t know!

Do you know beyond a reasonable doubt that it wasn’t consensual?