In no way to I want to denigrate these victims or excuse Nassar's horrific crimes. But one wonders, why the emotionally wrought testimony here, when the same people have problems with "mass incarceration" of street criminals. Is there perhaps some riding a political wave here?
An important distinction here is that these are victim impact statements. They are a common part of many sentencing proceedings. Nassar has already plead guilty, he is not on trial. Sitting there and have to listen to his victims talk all week will hopefully be the second-closest thing to Hell that Nassar experiences.
Why are we hearing about these victim impact statements? Many reasons.
1 - the sensational nature of the crimes. A sex predator with at least 140 known victims is a pretty sensationalistic case.
2 - the profile of the victims. Olympic champions like Simone Biles, Aly Raisman, and McKayla Maroney are among Nassers' victims. These girls were on cereal boxes and magazine covers and TV commercials all over America.
3 - the role of the USA Gymnastics association in feeding Nassar a steady diet of victims. They employed this monster for many years. When McKayla Maroney sued USA Gymnastics for their role in her torment, the settlement included a clause that if she spoke about it she ever mentioned it publicly she would have to pay them $100,000. Swimsuit model Crissy Tiegen offered to pay the fine on Maroney's behalf, which brought extra attention to USA Gymnastics for putting this shameful clause in the settlement. After Tiegen's gesture today became a major news item, USA Gymnastics released a statement this evening insisting that they have no intention of claiming that money from Maroney, and that they hope that she and any other victim feel "empowered" to speak out against abusers, and that the safety and well-being of their athletes is their highest priority. That's a load of
****. Clearly the existence of a $100,000 fine in their settlement agreement for speaking up indicates that their highest priority is protecting their reputation rather than protecting their athletes.
I would think that everybody, regardless of where they exist on the political spectrum, agree that Nassar belongs in prison for the rest of his life. (capital punishment supporters will no doubt hope that the rest of his life is a very short time, of course, but that's a minor detail.) I don't think anybody anywhere is going to say that they're being too harsh on Nassar or that he's being treated unfairly.
But one wonders, why the emotionally wrought testimony here, when the same people have problems with "mass incarceration" of street criminals. Is there perhaps some riding a political wave here?
I don't get it. Are you suggesting that maybe "#MeToo" is the reason that Nassar is going to receive such a harsh sentence? I don't think so. Severe punishment for
**** has been popular. If this is a "political wave", it's a wave that has been rolling for many many years.
As for why "the libruls" oppose "mass incarceration" but still want to see Nassar rot in jail for an eternity, I think the answer is that everybody agrees that Nassar belongs in prison for the rest of his life, but many people question the value of incarceration for minor crimes, especially non-violent crimes. Sending someone to prison for having a joint in their pocket seems of little value. And people question whether incarceration is applied equitably. For example, steal $100 from a cash register and you'll be in prison. Steal $100 million from a pension plan, and you'll probably get a fine and a promotion.
-k