Sex assault victim groped by off-duty cop wants apology from Arizona judge

Sex assault victim groped by off-duty cop wants apology from Arizona judge

A sexual assault victim who was groped by an off-duty police officer is demanding an apology from an Arizona judge who during a sentencing hearing for the defendant told her: "If you wouldn’t have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you.”

Hatch, a Republican appointed by Gov. Jan Brewer in June 2010, did not return a telephone call from NBC News seeking comment. The woman's name was withheld because she is a victim of a sexual crime.

Here we go again, another Republican gone off the reservation when it comes to women. Please someone explain how on earth anyone can condone this in the slightest. For a group so afraid of an outbreak of Sharia Law they sure are doing a bang up job to take us there. So now women aren't supposed to go out for a night of fun with their friends? And if they do they should expect to be molested by men because it is their fault for going to a bar?

reply to post by KeliOnyx
Hmmm - no.

Do I consider drunken groping justified? No.

But, do I consider shoehorning or selective presentation of facts to suit an agenda justified? Also, no.

Yes, she was groped, but the judge wasn't just saying "Too bad, so sad" - the perp lost his job and got two years' probation, although he *could* have faced a sterner sentence.

What exactly is your point with this thread? The judge spoke quite honestly, even if it's an unfair fact - there are drunken idiots at bars. She didn't justify the offense or let the guy off with no punishment.

Sometimes it's drunk chicks going too far. So...???

According to the Arizona Daily Sun, a jury convicted 43-year-old Robb Gary Evans of a felony charge of sexual abuse on July 2. Prosecutors said Evans walked up behind the victim in a Flagstaff bar, put his hand up her skirt and groped her last summer.

The cop should be fired, he is a danger to all women and probably a rapist. Being drunk doesn't make you finger rape women.

"If you wouldn't have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you," Hatch said.

The judge should be fired as she clearly isn't very intelligent. No one has the right to sexually assault people. If it could happen at a bar, it could happen walking down the street. She's a misogynist. It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is a republican.

reply to post by RealSpoke

Guess thats like telling the victims of the Colorado theater shooting that if they hadn't been there,none of it would have happened to them.


Seriously do these idiots expect people to just hide in they're homes and never go out just in case something bad will happen? You can't live your life like that.People have EVERY right to go out and go places and expect NOT to get hurt by someone else!

It is solely on the heads of those who can't obey laws or have any morals when they do something wrong.

reply to post by RealSpoke
RealSpoke, I generally like your posts, but other than in your mind and the realm of possibility, there is no solid indication of what you refer to. The grabbing of buttocks is just as likely, and women have done as bad or worse on a fairly regular basis. And, just to make sure you're aware - HE WAS FIRED.

Also, since when is it a firing offense for a judge to make a truthful statement? How is she not intelligent, or a misogynist, exactly? There are drunk people at bars, and drunk people do stupid things - including women since I apparently have to drive that point home. The judge didn't let this guy off the hook, and she clarified her decision.

You are letting your emotional responses cloud your rational judgement, and your partisanship is showing as a result. Come on, now.

reply to post by Praetorius


The cop ran his hands through her cooch, not a butt grab. She wasn't making out with this guy or anything the least bit inviting, he attacked her unknowingly from behind.

Prosecutors contended that he drank eight beers and then drove himself to the Green Room, where he flashed his badge in an attempt to get into a concert for free. While inside, he walked up behind the victim, who was a friend of a friend, put his hand up her skirt and then ran his fingers across her genitals.

When bouncers threw him out, Evans told them he was a cop and they would be arrested.

You are letting your emotional responses cloud your rational judgement, and your partisanship is showing as a result. Come on, now.

At a certain point, it becomes true. Republicans regularly say things like "honest rape", "legitimate rape", and "forceful rape".

There are drunk people at bars, and drunk people do stupid things - including women since I apparently have to drive that point home

There are rapists/molesters every where you go. She could have just as easily gotten molested anywhere. Or should women just learn to stay in the kitchen and never leave the house? What the judge said was just straight up stupid. It's like blaming a girl for being date raped because "she shouldn't have been at a party". It's a regressive mindset.

One more Judge that thinks their the God almighty with their words of stupidity.

We really should not be required to rise in their honor as well for I surely don`t honor a judge.

reply to post by RealSpoke

At a certain point, it becomes true. Republicans regularly say things like "honest rape", "legitimate rape", and "forceful rape".

Hey, I'll call (and DO fairly regularly, actually) republicans idiots as necessary, and do not substantiate any of this lunacy you mention.

And fair enough - it he went further than I originally supposed, it doesn't change much if anything of what I pointed out earlier. He was still fired, and what the judge said was still true - he wasn't justified in, nor pardoned for, his actions.

There are rapists/molesters every where you go. She could have just as easily gotten molested anywhere.

Just as could a man, since this doesn't only happen in "man on woman" situations.

Or should women just learn to stay in the kitchen and never leave the house?

I wouldn't say that, but if you go where drunks are likely to be, then fair or no, you might be subject to what drunks are sometimes inclined to do. That doesn't make it right, but it also doesn't make it any less real.

What the judge said was just straight up stupid. It's like blaming a girl for being date raped because "she shouldn't have been at a party". It's a regressive mindset.

I still don't know if I'll be able to agree. Should people be able to go out without things like this happening? Sure - people shouldn't be stupid. But will people - of every sex, race, and creed continue to be stupid? Of course they will. Just because the judge said something honest - even if it was an unfair truth - doesn't mean she should be fired as you said, and I still don't feel an apology is necessary because sometimes truth simply sucks. She wasn't BLAMING the victim, she was just admitting an unpleasant truth, and the perp still payed for it.

Take care.

flagstaff is NOTORIOUS for sexual harassment/stalking cases...and always men being charged. The police dept there is well-known by locals for being extreme in this regard.
are people noticing the judge is a WOMAN? That gives her the right to chide the 'gropee' plus she knows moe facts about this case than either party involved or you or me.

there is no way to defend against a woman's accusations in Flagstaff- trust me, I know. 'stalker' and 'rapist' are women's (in Flag) buzzwords like 'molester' or 'pervert' are children's in many places.

She was blaming the victim you tool. What exactly do you think it means when someone tells you "well if you didn't go there it wouldn't have happened" means? We are not talking about things you should expect when you are in a bar like:
Drinks spilled on you.
Someone bumping into you.
Someone accidentally burning you with a cigarette.
Someone "accidentally" brushing their hand across your backside, frontside or topside.
All of these things are to be expected when you get a bunch of drunk people together in the same room.

A woman should not be expecting to get violated because she chose to go out to hear some music and have a few drinks. What do you think you are? a Bonobo Chimp and its okay to just randomly walk up to people and grope their genitals? This Judge said the equivalent of telling a rape victim "Well if you weren't dressed like that it wouldn't have happened". Which she probably believes to be true as well. With an attitude like yours you better invest in some burkas for your daughters.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
She was blaming the victim you tool. What exactly do you think it means when someone tells you "well if you didn't go there it wouldn't have happened" means? We are not talking about things you should expect when you are in a bar like:
Drinks spilled on you.
Someone bumping into you.
Someone accidentally burning you with a cigarette.
Someone "accidentally" brushing their hand across your backside, frontside or topside.
All of these things are to be expected when you get a bunch of drunk people together in the same room.

A woman should not be expecting to get violated because she chose to go out to hear some music and have a few drinks. What do you think you are? a Bonobo Chimp and its okay to just randomly walk up to people and grope their genitals? This Judge said the equivalent of telling a rape victim "Well if you weren't dressed like that it wouldn't have happened". Which she probably believes to be true as well. With an attitude like yours you better invest in some burkas for your daughters.

Gee, I'm glad you've got such a good grasp on things here. Let's run a quick poll: How many here have been touched/groped in molestational fashion by their boy's choir leaders at the age of 8?

*raises hand*

Should I have had anywhere near the expectation this lady did? Did I get anywhere near the justice she did?

No. The choir leader went on about his life as I was too young and immature to do anything proper to address it.

The offender in this case lost his job, is likely branded for life, and has to go through 2 years' various handling as result.

To the victim, the judge admitted she was not to blame, no one would be happy with the judgement but that she was responsible for finding an appropriate punishment, and that women must be vigilant against becoming victims - more so, I would say - than 8 year old boys should be.

So yes, you might disagree with what the judge said. You might find it offensive. But you CAN NOT find it untrue, let alone as offensive as what happened to me or the lack of justice I got as compared to what this woman did.

So stuff it and realize we all have to protect ourselves, and that no dishonor was shown to this woman aside from a truthful statement you dislike, and no pardon given to the offender.

And your reference to a burqa on the head of my children is no less ludicrous than your other posts elsewhere.

reply to post by Praetorius


What part of perfectly clear spoken English do you not understand?

"If you wouldn't have been there that night, none of this would have happened to you,"

Translation: You should not go to bars if you had stayed home it wouldn't have happened so it must be your fault.

Hatch said that the victim was not to blame in the case, but that all women must be vigilant against becoming victims.

Translation: Oh it isn't your fault that this Chimp walked up and grabbed your genitals. But to keep it from happening again stay locked in your house. Because obviously the victim was wrong for thinking public spaces should be a fondled by complete strangers free zone.

So tell me just exactly what you think the woman could possibly have done to keep this pervert from grabbing her inappropriately?

"When you blame others, you give up your power to change,"

WTF who the hell else is there to blame? It isn't like the cop in question got charged because she groped herself. Oh that is right we have to go back to the first quote where she tells the woman that she should not be going to bars. Because when you go to bars it is perfectly ok for someone to walk up reach under your skirt and get a good feel.

She didn't only tell her it was her fault once she did it twice and then sandwiched in there to cover her ass, told her it wasn't her fault. The cop got the slap on the wrist he did because she never thought it was his fault he couldn't keep his hand out from under her skirt. It was obviously her fault for thinking she was allowed to go out in public with the expectation that no one would molest her. She is blaming the victim and it is more than abundantly clear you are still blaming yourself for your own abuse.

Take a deep breath, read and understand: it is not your fault for going to choir. The fact he didn't get punished for it doesn't make it your fault or right either.

reply to post by KeliOnyx
You're angry. I get it. But the perp lost his job and got his sentence as determined appropriate by the court. But what exactly are you looking for here? The judge expressed her opinion - however unpopular or distasteful it might be, it's also TRUE.

So what exactly are you carrying on about? That's life's unfair?

Trust me - I already know that's true from personal experience. Replace her with a judge that won't speak so openly in the future, and I promise you'll change exactly *nothing*.

If you want to deal with injustice, I suggest you look elsewhere since all you're fussing about here is personal commentary.

reply to post by Praetorius


Personal commentary from an extreme right Judge that has no credibility. Your entire defense of what she said is based entirely on the premise that it is true. Yeah it is true in the same sense that if you don't want to be burglarized you shouldn't own a house or buy nice stuff. Or how about if you don't want to have your car stolen don't buy a car. This is a person that is sitting in judgement of other people, the job requires more reasoning than if you don't want to be victimized find yourself a cardboard box and stay away from society altogether. This woman is not fit to be a Judge.

I really haven't said much about the sentence because she is right in the regard no one would be happy with it. The cop thinks it's ok to just walk behind women and stick his hands up their skirt. And nothing short of cutting his hand off would probably have satisfied the victim and neither of those solutions would be acceptable. Personally if he were just some ordinary citizen the punishment that was given would be appropriate. But with him being a cop I personally feel he should have gotten the max. Because it was his duty to protect citizens from creepy perverts not become one. The level of responsibility of his chosen vocation demands a higher level of consequence.

Originally posted by Praetorius
reply to post by RealSpoke

 

RealSpoke, I generally like your posts, but other than in your mind and the realm of possibility, there is no solid indication of what you refer to. The grabbing of buttocks is just as likely, and women have done as bad or worse on a fairly regular basis. And, just to make sure you're aware - HE WAS FIRED.

Also, since when is it a firing offense for a judge to make a truthful statement? How is she not intelligent, or a misogynist, exactly? There are drunk people at bars, and drunk people do stupid things - including women since I apparently have to drive that point home. The judge didn't let this guy off the hook, and she clarified her decision.

You are letting your emotional responses cloud your rational judgement, and your partisanship is showing as a result. Come on, now.

edit on 9/7/2012 by Praetorius because: (no reason given)

It's more that RealSpoke just posts anti-Republican pro-Democrat garbage in every thread. Cop should have been fired, he was. Judge is right although the phrasing was terrible. No one deserves to be raped, or assaulted regardless of circumstances, but putting yourself in bad situations tends to lead to bad outcomes. I don't go the bars because of the atmosphere, this very thing. Judge did not use this to justify the cops behavior, which is the implication here. I wouldn't walk down the streets of a bad neighborhood at night even though I should be able to.

Originally posted by KeliOnyx
reply to post by Praetorius

 

Personal commentary from an extreme right Judge that has no credibility. Your entire defense of what she said is based entirely on the premise that it is true. Yeah it is true in the same sense that if you don't want to be burglarized you shouldn't own a house or buy nice stuff. Or how about if you don't want to have your car stolen don't buy a car. This is a person that is sitting in judgement of other people, the job requires more reasoning than if you don't want to be victimized find yourself a cardboard box and stay away from society altogether. This woman is not fit to be a Judge.

We'll have to agree to disagree, Keli. I guess my main sticking point is that I can interject myself into the situation - and readily see giving what the judge said here as up-front advice to my own daughters someday, by way of warning: "Be careful if you go to places like this, because you're putting yourself in an environment where something like this might happen. It won't necessarily be your fault if it does, but you'll want to be vigilant and take steps to ensure that you don't become a victim," etc.

If my daughters then asked me to apologize for implying that they would someday be responsible for this happening to them in the future, I'd ask them to go to their rooms and think about not saying silly things in the face of truth, however unpleasant that truth may be.

I really haven't said much about the sentence because she is right in the regard no one would be happy with it. The cop thinks it's ok to just walk behind women and stick his hands up their skirt. And nothing short of cutting his hand off would probably have satisfied the victim and neither of those solutions would be acceptable. Personally if he were just some ordinary citizen the punishment that was given would be appropriate. But with him being a cop I personally feel he should have gotten the max. Because it was his duty to protect citizens from creepy perverts not become one. The level of responsibility of his chosen vocation demands a higher level of consequence.

You might possibly be right there - I haven't done an in-depth review, but I would at least *like* to assume the judge did in light of his tenure and service record. I know all too often the shield protects police from appropriate punishment, so hopefully that didn't occur here and it was just a one-off case of exceeding bad judgement on his part - and that any repeat performances bring down the full weight of his probation violation.

I'm by no means trying to excuse the action of the cop, or blame the victim - I just honestly can't fault the judge for her words in the matter, and I think the plaintiff is pretty much just looking for a spotlight and 15 minutes of fame by seeking an apology for it.

reply to post by Praetorius


Don't misunderstand me I am getting your point on this. But this is entirely a different situation than say if she had said this to a woman that refused a legitimate offer for someone to walk her to her car. Or was walking down a dark street without a phone, pepper spray or a gun. There are places and situations this type of advice would be appropriate this is not one of them. There is no advice you can give that would have prevented this man from thinking it was perfectly acceptable to do this.

But you have still failed to provide a reasonable amount of vigilance to have protected herself from a random guy walking up behind her and inserting his hand in her crotch. This is where I feel you and this Judge are wrong, this isn't good advice it isn't a warning on vigilance it is blaming the victim for going out to a bar. Because in this situation short of wearing a chastity belt or growing eyes in the back of her head that was the only thing she could have done to prevent it from happening. She did what she was legally right to do, she was violated and the bouncers threw him out and he was charged because what he did is a crime.

This isn't some over dramatization of some guy "accidentally" running his hands across her rear or brushing up against her chest. When you go out to a bar those things are to be expected. And the judge would have been right to give this advice if it were the case This guy walked up behind her and instead of a handshake greeted her with a hand in her crotch.

It would be like you crossing an intersection the way you are legally supposed to (looking both ways, waiting for the light and all that) getting hit by a car and the Judge telling you well if you had stayed home it wouldn't have happened. Completely ignoring the fact you had done everything you were already expected or required to do and were not the one that harmed yourself.

reply to post by RealSpoke


I see you are over here throwing that word misogyny around.

By the way, the definition is not "apathy" as you so deftly suggested before. You should read up on misogyny before throwing the term around in any old way. The Democrats are throwing this stuff around in an attempt to make Republicans appear to hate women and have a war on women.
The communist revoluton found a way to increase the war between the sexes and now the Democrats are using it in their war against Republicans.

Here is an except from "Men Who Hate Women and The Women Who Love Them" by Dr. Susan Forward

Does the man you love assume the right to control how you live and behave?

Have you given up important activities or people to keep him happy?
• Is he extremely jealous and possessive?
• Does he switch from charm to anger without warning?
• Does he belittle your opinions, your feelings, or your accomplishments?
• Does he withdraw love, money, approval, or sex to punish you?
• Does he blame you for everything that goes wrong in the relationship?
• Do you find yourself “walking on eggs” and apologizing all the time?

Sensational stories in the media blown up with an agenda have nothing to do with true misogyny. Do I think it's ok for a guy to walk around bars groping women? No I do not. Are some of these people misogynistic? Maybe. But the whole Repubican Party is not misogynistic just because some leftist radical named Sandra steps on to the platform and makes demands to have others pay for her stuff.

She's a misogynist. It doesn't surprise me one bit that she is a republican.

Being a Republican does not make her misogynist. See this is where you just put nutty stuff out here. What about Anthony Wiener and his internet antics? He was clearly cheating on his wife. There are plenty of activist judges who are Democrat. You just never hear about them because the liberal media doesn't want you to hear about them.

By the way, Young Turks is clearly a Progressive media site.

edit on 9-9-2012 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)