Connect with us

U.S.

NJ Judge Says Teen Accused of Rape Deserves Leniency Because He Comes From a “Good Family”

Published

4 years ago

on

  • Prosecutors filed a waiver for a 16-year-old to be tried as an adult after he sexually assaulted a girl, filmed it, and sent it to his friends. 
  • A judge denied the waiver because he says the teen came from a “good family” and did well on college tests. 
  • An appellate court overturned the ruling, but many were upset with remarks the judge made.
  • Many were particularly upset with the judge questioning whether or not the victim was really unaware of what was going on, and saying that she should take into account how this case would impact the boy’s life.

16-Year-Old Accused of Sexual Assault

Court documents show that a New Jersey family court judge brought up a 16-year-old boy’s “good family” and high test scores in a case accusing the teen of sexual assault. 

Judge James Troiano denied a waiver in 2018 that would allow the teen, who court documents refer to as “G.M.C.” to be tried as an adult. His decision was overturned by an appellate court, whose ruling was made public in June. 

According to court documents, in 2017, G.M.C. attended a party along with close to 30 others. Areas of the basement where the party was held were blocked off, and G.M.C. took a 16-year-old girl referred to as Mary to one of those sections. The documents said that the two had been drinking, and Mary was visibly drunk, slurring her words, and stumbling. 

“A group of boys sprayed Febreze on Mary’s bottom and slapped it with such force that the following day she had hand marks on her buttocks,” the court document said. 

“Mary and G.M.C. had intercourse in the darkened room,” the document continued. “G.M.C. filmed himself penetrating Mary from behind on his cell phone, displaying her bare torso, and her head hanging down. He forwarded the clip to several friends.”

G.M.C. also sent a text to his friends that read, “[w]hen your first time having sex was rape.”

After the incident, Mary was on the floor vomiting, and G.M.C.’s friends told Mary’s friends that she was ill and should be checked on. The next morning, Mary noticed the markings on her body and that her clothes had been torn. She told her mother she was afraid something had happened to her. 

Over the next couple of months, she learned that G.M.C. had recorded the incident and tried to communicate with him so she could put the situation in her past. However, G.M.C. denied that such a video existed. 

Mary’s mother contacted authorities and investigators told G.M.C. and his friends to delete the video, which they did. Mary and her family then pursued charges.

A prosecutor said there was probable cause to charge G.M.C. with aggravated sexual assault, invasion of privacy and endangering the welfare of a child. They also sought to elevate the charges to adult criminal court. 

“[G.M.C.’s] conduct as it relates to the charged offenses was both sophisticated and predatory,” the prosecutor wrote in a waiver. “Filming a cell phone video while committing the assault was a deliberate act of debasement. And, in the months that followed, he lied to [Mary] while simultaneously disseminating the video and unabashedly sharing the nature of his conduct therein. This was neither a childish misinterpretation of the situation, nor was it a misunderstanding.[G.M.C.’s] behavior was calculated and cruel.”

Judge Troiano’s Statements

Judge Troiano issued a denying waiver. He said he did not think this was a “traditional case of rape.” When describing a traditional case he gave the example of “two or more generally males involved, either at gunpoint or weapon, clearly manhandling a person.”

Judge Troiano also said he found it unclear if Mary was really so drunk that she was unaware of what was going on. He later described the text message G.M.C sent as “just a 16-year-old kid saying stupid crap to his friends.”

“[T]his young man comes from a good family who put him into an excellent school where he was doing extremely well,” he later said, before citing that G.M.C. was also involved with Eagle Scouts. “He is clearly a candidate for not just college but probably for a good college. His scores for college entry were very high.”

Judge Troiano later added that Mary and her family need to consider what effects this would have on G.M.C.’s life. 

The June appeal that overturned his decision allows for G.M.C. to be tried as an adult and moves the case out of family court. The appeal criticized the way Judge Troiano assessed the case saying it “sounded as if he had conducted a bench trial on the charges rather than neutrally reviewed the State’s application.”

“That the juvenile came from a good family and had good test scores we assume would not condemn the juveniles who do not come from good families and do not have good test scores from withstanding waiver applications,” the appeal added.

Reactions to Case

Once major outlets like the New York Times picked the story up, many were upset with the comments Judge Troiano had made regarding the case. Many criticized him for favoring a young man for the privilege he came from.

Others pointed out that Judge Troiano has been retired for several years, and according to the Times, is 70 years old. While in retirement, he has been asked to fill vacancies.

He is also not the only judge in New Jersey family courts that has been criticized for the way they handled sexual assault cases. In a very similar case, Judge Marcia Silva denied charging a 16-year-old boy accused of assaulting a 12-year-old girl as an adult.

She said that the “offense is not an especially heinous or cruel offense.”

“Beyond losing her virginity, the State did not claim that the victim suffered any further injuries, either physical, mental or emotional,” Judge Silva wrote. 

In this case, as well, the appellate court was able to overturn her decision. Many expressed frustrations with her actions. 

See what others are saying (New York Times) (The Hill) (NJ.com)

Related Topics:

U.S.

Disney Renders DeSantis-Appointed Oversight Board Powerless

Published

11 hours ago

on

March 30, 2023

By

The board is looking into avenues for potential legal retaliation, but Disney maintains its actions were “appropriate and were discussed and approved in open, noticed public forums.”

The Fight For Disney’s Special District 

Disney has stripped powers from the board Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) installed to oversee its theme parks, board members claimed. 

According to the Orlando Sentinel, board member Brian Aungst Jr. said Disney’s action “completely circumvents the authority of this board to govern.”

DeSantis has been waging a war against the House of Mouse ever since the company condemned his controversial “Don’t Say Gay” law, which heavily restricts the discussion of sexuality in classrooms. To retaliate against the company, he took control of Disney’s special status that allowed it to operate as a self-governing district with autonomy over the land encompassing and surrounding Walt Disney World. 

Disney operated under that special status for decades under the Reedy Creek Improvement District, but after DeSantis took over, it was changed to the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. DeSantis appointed all members of the board, prompting concerns that it could be used to silence and sway Disney on social and cultural issues, including its content. 

The oversight board gets control over infrastructure, property taxes, issue bonds, road and fire services, and other regulations. When DeSantis seized it, it was considered a big loss for the entertainment giant, but now, board members say the company may have lost little to no power at all. 

As first reported by the Sentinel, Disney and the previous board signed an agreement allowing Disney to retain control over much of its land on Feb. 8, the day before Florida’s House signed the bill that gave DeSantis power to stack the board. Disney now holds veto powers over changes to the park, and any changes must be subject to the company’s “prior review and comment” to ensure thematic consistency. 

The agreement also bars the board from using Disney’s name or trademarked characters like Mickey Mouse.

The Board’s Plan to Fight Back

Board members reportedly did not become aware of this until recently and discussed the issue at a Wednesday meeting. 

“This essentially makes Disney the government,” board member Ron Peri said, via Click Orlando. “This board loses, for practical purposes, the majority of its ability to do anything beyond maintain the roads and maintain basic infrastructure.”

The subject of the agreement that has perhaps caught the most public attention is its staying power. The declaration says it will remain “in effect until 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration.” That means that so long as direct members of the royal family are alive, so is this deal. 

According to BBC News, this is known as a “royal lives” clause and its use dates back to the 17th century, though it is rarely used in the U.S.

The board, however, already has plans to push back against Disney and has voted to hire outside legal counsel to evaluate their options.

“We’re going to have to deal with it and correct it,” Aungst said. “It’s a subversion of the will of the voters and the Legislature and the governor. It completely circumvents the authority of this board to govern.”

A spokesperson for DeSantis released a statement claiming that “these agreements may have significant legal infirmities that would render the contracts void as a matter of law.”

Disney maintains everything was above board. 

“All agreements signed between Disney and the district were appropriate and were discussed and approved in open, noticed public forums in compliance with Florida’s Government in the Sunshine law,” the company said. 

See what others are saying: (Orlando Sentinel) (Click Orlando) (The Washington Post)

Continue Reading

U.S.

White Supremacist Propaganda Reached Record High in 2022, ADL Finds

Published

3 weeks ago

on

March 9, 2023

By

 “We cannot sit idly by as these extremists pollute our communities with their hateful trash,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said.

White supremacist propaganda in the U.S. reached record levels in 2022, according to a report published Wednesday by the Anti-Defamation League’s Center of Extremism.

The ADL found over 6,700 cases of white supremacist propaganda in 2022, which marks a 38% jump from the nearly 4,900 cases the group found in 2021. It also represents the highest number of incidents ever recorded by the ADL. 

The propaganda tallied by the anti-hate organization includes the distribution of racist, antisemitic, and homophobic flyers, banners, graffiti, and more. This propaganda has spread substantially since 2018, when the ADL found just over 1,200 incidents. 

“There’s no question that white supremacists and antisemites are trying to terrorize and harass Americans with their propaganda,” ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “We cannot sit idly by as these extremists pollute our communities with their hateful trash.” 

The report found that there were at least 50 white supremacist groups behind the spread of propaganda in 2022, but 93% of it came from just three groups. One of those groups was also responsible for 43% of the white supremacist events that took place last year. 

White supremacist events saw a startling uptick of their own, with the ADL documenting at least 167, a 55% jump from 2021. 

Propaganda was found in every U.S. state except for Hawaii, and events were documented in 33 states, most heavily in Massachusetts, California, Ohio, and Florida.

“The sheer volume of white supremacist propaganda distributions we are documenting around the country is alarming and dangerous,” Oren Segal, Vice President of the ADL’s Center on Extremism said in a statement. “Hardly a day goes by without communities being targeted by these coordinated, hateful actions, which are designed to sow anxiety and create fear.”

“We need a whole-of-society approach to combat this activity, including elected officials, community leaders, and people of good faith coming together and condemning this activity forcefully,” Segal continued. 

See what others are saying: (Axios) (The Hill) (The New York Times)

Continue Reading

Business

Adidas Financial Woes Continue, Company on Track for First Annual Loss in Decades

Published

3 weeks ago

on

March 8, 2023

By

Adidas has labeled 2023 a “transition year” for the company. 

Yeezy Surplus 

Adidas’ split with musician Kanye West has left the company with financial problems due to surplus Yeezy products, putting the sportswear giant in the position to potentially suffer its first annual loss in over 30 years. 

Adidas dropped West last year after he made a series of antisemitic remarks on social media and other broadcasts. His Yeezy line was a staple for Adidas, and the surplus product is due, in part, to the brand’s own decision to continue production during the split.

According to CEO Bjorn Gulden, Adidas continued production of only the items already in the pipeline to prevent thousands of people from losing their jobs. However, that has led to the unfortunate overabundance of Yeezy sneakers and clothes. 

On Wednesday, Gulden said that selling the shoes and donating the proceeds makes more sense than giving them away due to the Yeezy resale market — which has reportedly shot up 30% since October.

“If we sell it, I promise that the people who have been hurt by this will also get something good out of this,” Gulden said in a statement to the press. 

However, Gulden also said that West is entitled to a portion of the proceeds of the sale of Yeezys per his royalty agreement.

The Numbers 

Adidas announced in February that, following its divergence from West, it is facing potential sales losses totaling around $1.2 billion and profit losses of around $500 million. 

If it decides to not sell any more Yeezy products, Adidas is facing a projected annual loss of over $700 million.

Outside of West, Adidas has taken several heavy profit blows recently. Its operating profit reportedly fell by 66% last year, a total of more than $700 million. It also pulled out of Russia after the country’s invasion of Ukraine last year, which cost Adidas nearly $60 million dollars. Additionally, China’s “Zero Covid” lockdowns last year caused in part a 36% drop in revenue for Adidas compared to years prior.

As a step towards a solution, Gulden announced that the company is slashing its dividends from 3.30 euros to 0.70 euro cents per share pending shareholder approval. 

Adidas has labeled 2023 a “transition year” for the company. 

“Adidas has all the ingredients to be successful. But we need to put our focus back on our core: product, consumers, retail partners, and athletes,” Gulden said. “I am convinced that over time we will make Adidas shine again. But we need some time.”

See what others are saying: (The Washington Post) (The New York Times) (CNN)

Continue Reading