Susan Duursma Sentenced to Sixty Days in Jail for Sex Crime with Teen

[Psephos]

http://www.kxnet.com/story/26441803/susan-duursma-sentenced-to-sixty-days-in-jail-for-sex-crime-with-teen

<snip>
A former Bismarck middle school teacher is sentenced for having sexual relations with a 15-year-old student in 2013.

Susan Duursma was sentenced to six years with all but 60 days suspended. That means she'll spend sixty days in jail. In May, the former Wachter Middle School teacher pleaded guilty to one count of child abuse-- a class B felony.

She will not have to register as a sex offender.

<snip>


60 days in jail for a teacher seducing a 15 y/o. And no registration as a sex offender.

It speaks for itself.

[Liberal_in_LA]

1. I agree that a man would get a longer sentence...most likely

[NYC_SKP]

2. WTF? no registration?

Why is this?

[Nuclear Unicorn]

3. To answer your question --

[Psephos]

4. even South Park wouldn't try that with the sexes reversed

which tells you everything

[Jenoch]

5. If a 33 year old male middle school teacher

sexually assaulted a 15 year old female student, I am quite certain the punishment would be more severe than in this case.

[politicat]

11. Depends on state. In Montana, her sentence is 2x what a male teacher got, and no slut-shaming.

Remember the judge who gave the teacher 30 days for raping a 14 year old student, and slut-shamed the victim?

http://www.thewire.com/politics/2014/06/the-montana-judge-who-blamed-a-14-year-old-for-her-own-rape-will-be-censured/372185/

[Jenoch]

42. I remember that case.

The judge should have been removed from the bench. That girl killed herself.

[politicat]

47. Judge was censured.

Not enough. But I can hope the wheel will reincarnate him into a young female who needs protection and Justice. Because I think he needs the lesson of empathy for the powerless.

These cases... There is no good, only lesser and greater degrees of worse.

[Gman]

6. To call it rape when it involves a 15, 16 or 17 YO

boy is ludicrous. It's bad policy and screws up the lives of good women. I don't know this woman or anything about her but her life is messed up forever. She is likely a great teacher. In higher education, a relationship between a teacher and a student is forbidden by rules and ethics. A college prof, make or female, would be fired for fraternization to this degree. And so should the woman in this case at a secondary school level. Enforcing ethics and rules are good for this type thing by protecting the integrity of the system. But tagging someone like her as a sex offender for life and a convicted felon is ridiculous. She'll never be a productive member of society again. Some say the boy didn't understand. Would a teenage boy's answer of. "Yes" be any different at 16 than it would be at 40?

Now if it's a male adult teacher and a female high school student, nail the SOB to the jail wall. Some things are not equal and this is a great example.

[sub.theory]

7. Poe?

Seriously can't tell if you're joking. Poe?

Anyone sexually exploiting children should be locked up forever. Full stop. Damn right her life should be over!

[Veilex]

30. Indeed!

[alp227]

37. YUCK. That post was kept 2-5.

What is going on with all the rape apologist posts being KEPT by JURIES?

[Turborama]

41. More of their rape/child abuse apologia that was left by a jury (poster's account is under review)

Just as in the opinion of those who think
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5490076

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Sigh. More apologetics for statutory rape from this user. It's annoying, over-the-top, and despicable, because the user is defending a teacher convicted of raping a student, based on the fact that "oh 12-year-old girls could get married in the past." Yuck. Before you consider this post just another opinion, do realize that a user has been banned for making similar remarks: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=115240&sub=trans

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Fri Sep 5, 2014, 09:57 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: I saw it as apologetics for child abuse, as well. I've always thought this one's a wrong'un.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: from QuayBlue: advocation of child rape? I think you're trolling, either way it's not funny. Hide this bullsh*t
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: the person has not used offensive language and was just stating his/her opinion.

Interestingly, their account under review even though the transparency page isn't visible: http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=profile&uid=103453

[alp227]

43. I think getting two hides within 12-24 hours = flag for review. nt

[sub.theory]

45. Still shocked he was serious

He's literally saying it's totally cool for female teachers to rape their male students. I'm still trying to process the madness in that.

Even more blown away that jurors here think it's cool too. WTF?!

[Taitertots]

8. She raped him, why should we call it anything different?

Why is it any different from a male teacher raping his female students?

If a girl can't consent at 15 than neither can a boy. The only thing "not equal" is your opinion about how the laws should be applied to people of different genders.

[Taitertots]

17. Correct me off I'm wrong but you seem to be saying

It isn't rape for no reason other than your arbitrary determination that it is different. Despite the fact that it meets any reasonable definition of "rape".

[Gman]

19. Just as in the opinion of those who think

All these cases are equal regardless of gender.

Until not too many years ago a girl in Texas could get married at age 12. IIRC minimum age fur a male was 16. While I do think that was entirely too young regardless of the period, those in power thought it was appropriate at the time.

The point is it's all arbitrary and subject to the latest whims.

[Veilex]

31. There is absolutely nothing arbitrary about child abuse. Full stop.

I don't care if you'd call it rape or not. The FACT is this is child abuse... and her professional life with children should absolutely be over... anything else is letting her off light...which is sexism.

[Taitertots]

39. The "they used to do it in Texas" line isn't very convincing

[AngryAmish]

9. So when I was buggered at about this age, should I have been grateful?

My asshole certainly wasn't. It hurt like hell.

[AngryAmish]

15. I don't know how to respond to this.

So the gender of one's rapist changes how one should feel about it?

[Logical]

18. LOL, so how young is too young with your disgusting protocol? 14? 13? 12? 11? 10? Sick! nt

[AngryAmish]

22. Honestly, you are sick.

Go away.

[mythology]

35. I have no idea what to say to the person you're responding to

I lack the words to express my utter contempt.

[Inkfreak]

29. Jury results for your post.

I voted to leave.

On Thu Sep 4, 2014, 06:35 PM an alert was sent on the following post:

So when I was buggered at about this age, should I have been grateful?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5489851

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

WTF? This can't be a serious post!

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Thu Sep 4, 2014, 06:52 PM, and the Jury voted 1-6 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: you might want to ask the poster if it's serious or not
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No, alerter. You can't be serious. That poster is responding to an outrageous post. And if AA was raped who the fuck are you to question his experience. Fuck that. Leave.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: I think it is a serious post. While, perhaps, more graphic than necessary, he effectively made his point,

[AngryAmish]

36. Can I ask who alerted on this?

Who is enough of a grown up?

[alp227]

44. most likely whichever poster was spamming statutory rape apologetics here. nt

[Inkfreak]

10. Ridiculous post. (nt)

[Logical]

13. Wow, disgusting post. nt

[lumberjack_jeff]

20. Statutory rape is sometimes okay, and by 5:2 the jury agrees.

To call it rape when it involves a 15, 16 or 17 YO
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=5489702

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Sep 4, 2014, 03:50 PM, and voted 2-5 to LEAVE IT ALONE.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Disgusting.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Alerter, you appear to disagree with his opinion. That's OK, so do I, but that is NOT a reason to hide something. Or alert on it for that matter.
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is simply someone's opinion. Discussion/debate would be more appropriate than alerting and hiding.
Juror #7 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Victim blaming..................

[lumberjack_jeff]

24. Rape apologia is generally hidden. And I tend to agree with the reasons why. n/t

[AngryAmish]

25. can we save this thread?

[alp227]

40. Two other posts were kept. I tried to alert on that post linked here.

Seriously? Many real DUers are willing to allow anything to be said "because it's an OPINION" while sacrificing any semblance of standards? And while Gman got 3 hides here (and is flagged for review), two of the hides were mere **4-3**. Scary.

[lumberjack_jeff]

23. Gman, can you elaborate on why it's okay for female teachers to have sex with their students...

but not male teachers?

What is it that is different between male and female teachers and male and female students?

Reading between the lines implies that you consider a 15 year old (male) student with a female teacher a peer or near-peer relationship and therefore not exploitative.

I would ask the jury the same question if I could.

[Skittles]

32. sorry Gman, you are wrong

that is a hideous double standard -adults should not be having sex with kids - that is extremely bad judgement

[msanthrope]

34. You are exactly the juror I would look for if I were this woman's defense attorney. That is not a

compliment.

[Heidi]

48. Seriously? I checked with my husband (who's 48) and he assured me

that he said "Yes" to many, many things at 16 that he would greet with an emphatic, "No way!," today.

Rape apologia may be okay with DU jurors, but it's not okay with me.

[NYC Liberal]

26. 60 days for rape. Unbelievable.

[historylovr]

27. See post 11 up thread.

Unfortunately criminally light sentences for rape are not unheard of.

[NYC Liberal]

28. Yep. And it's disgusting.

[historylovr]

33. Amen to that.

[Nye Bevan]

38. WTF? 60 days? Not just rape, but rape by a person in a position of power.

And what's with delicately referring to this rape as a "sex crime"?

[KitSileya]

46. This is par for the course, unfortunately.

It is routine for rapists to get very light sentences - see the teacher who got 30 days, and told by the judge that the victim, a 14-year old, was the seducer.

As for the word choice in the media, that is a continuing issue addressed by feminists, also here on DU. The media avoids using the word rape as if it were the plague - headlines such as "Man had sex with 8-year old" is very common, and very damaging. It is also incredibly common in cases of campus rape, that the crime is hardly ever referred to as a rape by campus authorities.

And as an addendum, people should note that we do indeed have rape apologists here on DU. This thread alone is proof, but there have been others. The moment the victim is a boy and the rapist a woman, there's always some male posters who'd rather go the 'nudge, nudge, wink, wink, all boys care about is sex, so it isn't rape' route.