Convicted Child Rapist's Participation in Olympics

[Something Funny]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13739075/amp/Olympic-child-rapist-Steven-van-velde-interview.html

I was wondering what you guys think about this case.

The crime happened 10 years ago, when he was 19. He is 30 now and seems to have his life together.

Do you think people like that should be allowed to turn their lives around like that and to be forgiven?

Or should we just shame and shun them forever, as a society?

It might sound controversial, but I think that it's a good thing that he was allowed to rebuild his life. It's better for the society and is in line with being compassionate and forgiving.

On the other hand, seeing him get away so easily (he only served 1 year in prison) might send a wrong message to other potential rapists and pedophiles.

Idk...

I guess this also ties in with whether you think that people can genuinely change or not.

[Leo Gura]

That should be on the judicial system. Why did they let him out so early?

But if he served his time then he should get a second chance. It does no good to kick a man after he served his time.

Edited August 14 by Leo Gura

[Something Funny]

8 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

That's should be on the judicial system. Why did they let him out so early?

Yeah, I agree. I don't know why but it's hard to judge their decision without full information.

9 minutes ago, Leo Gura said:

But if he served his time then he should get a second chance. It does no good to kick a man after he served his time.

I was mostly asking for opinions on this. That's what I've been thinking as well.

[Buck Edwards]

He deserves a chance. 

[Scholar]

It very much depends on what kind of rape it was. I'm assuming it wasn't a violent rape but more so statutory rape, with maybe coercive elements.

 

Either way, we, largely, live in a societies that put consenting adults in prison for being in sexual relationships under the pretense of eugenics, so it is not very surprising that people would go bonkers in clear abuse cases such as this.

Edited August 14 by Scholar

[Yali]

The victim felt guilty after he was convicted that she went on to self harm. This tells you that there was some level of consent even though she was underaged.

the UK government defines any sexual act with someone underaged as rape. So by their definition, he’s a rapist. But I’m not sure I would agree with that.

Edited August 15 by Yali

[Consept]

16 hours ago, Something Funny said:

Yeah, I agree. I don't know why but it's hard to judge their decision without full information

It sounds like he only did a year because he was extradited to the Netherlands where the laws are slightly different. In the UK whatever you're sentenced to you do half usually, so if he got 4 years he would've only done 2 anyway. 

But the story of him being 19 and her 12 is pretty bad on his part. It probably was consensual but 12 is so young. The girl didn't even report him it just got alerted because he told her to get the morning after pill. 

I can see an argument for 'he's done his time let him live' but the issue is that you're competing in a public sport and its not going to sit well with people. So in theory he can do it but he should definitely be aware of the potential for backlash  

[vibv]

The rhetoric around pedophiles resembles a witch-hunt.