His child rapist pronouns
We saw the other day that the LA news media reported a sexual assault on a girl of 10 as the crime of a woman when in fact of course the perp was a man who claimed to be a woman. I posted about it here and here.
Now we learn that the LA district attorney suspended a prosecutor for refusing to call the perp a woman. It’s only the right-wing media that are reporting on this.
Los Angeles district attorney George Gascon has suspended a prosecutor for allegedly referring to a convicted child molester and suspected murderer by his birth name and the pronouns that correspond to his sex, rather than the name and pronouns he adopted after coming out as transgender.
That is, after claiming to be transgender after molesting a child.
Assistant district attorney Shea Sanna served as the lead prosecutor on part of the Hannah Tubbs case, according to a Fox News report citing law enforcement sources. Sanna has argued in the past that jailhouse phone calls show Tubbs was attempting to use gender identity to game the justice system — an argument that sources say made others in Gascon’s office uncomfortable.
So take an aspirin! Who cares if it made them uncomfortable; what if it’s true? And how likely is it that it’s not true?
The child molestation case dates back to 2014, when Tubbs attacked a ten-year-old girl in a women’s bathroom. At the time, Tubbs was two weeks shy of 18 and and identified as a male named James. Eight years passed before police arrested Tubbs in connection with the attack. DNA evidence allowed police to make the link in the cold case.
After pleading guilty, Tubbs, now 26 and going by the name “Hannah,” received a sentence of two years at a juvenile facility because Gascon’s office declined to transfer the case to adult court. Gascon thus adhered to one of his day-one directives barring “children” from being tried as adults.
A boy two weeks short of 18 who sexually assaults a girl of 10 isn’t a “child.” An adolescent, yes, but a child, no.
Following the sentencing last year, jailhouse recordings of Tubbs were released in which the convict boasted about the light sentence he would receive after pleading guilty. Tubbs also made explicit remarks about the victim.
Let me guess – tight pussy type of thing?
Gascon pretended to care.
“After her sentencing in our case, I became aware of extremely troubling statements she made about her case, the resolution of it and the young girl that she harmed,” explained Gascon. “If we knew about her disregard for the harm she caused we would have handled this case differently.”
…
In an interview with the New York Post last year, Sanna disputed the idea that Gascon only found out about the tapes after the sentencing.
“George Gascon was in possession of all evidence and knew or should have known of every statement made by Tubbs when he said he still believes Tubbs should be tried as a juvenile,” said Sanna. “Gascon knew about all 250 plus jailhouse tapes and removed me from the case the night before the hearing where I was going to play the tapes.”
It’s disgusting.
It’s despicable behaviour. That is a man. Everyone knows it, especially those trying to stop anyone from pointing it out. The emperor is having the small boy arrested for hate crime as we speak.
If it is OK for a man who claims to be a woman to enter women-only facilities, then it will only be a short time before this sort of thing becomes routine. This sort of predatory behaviour under camouflage is well-known in Nature. Result: the girl of 10 will be most likely scarred for life, with God knows what longer term consequences. The bastard should be locked up in a mens’ prison and counselled to ponder his situation.
I agree Omar, but the trouble is that sex offenders are segregated further in most male prisons because they are subject to attacks by other prisoners. So this guy wants the additional protection of a women’s facility because he knows that he’ll be safer there, along with the potential of other female victims. This guy is also accused of beating a homeless man to death with a rock. I don’t know what counts as appropriate justice for this animal, but what’s currently available in the ‘justice system’ is woefully lacking. But hey, let’s protect pronouns, we don’t want to hurt the poor bastard’s feelings.
Perhaps someone ought to invite Nicola ‘That’s not a man or a woman, that’s a rapist’ Sturgeon to the court.
twilighter @#3:
Them’s the breaks when they choose voluntarily, without coercion and of their own free will to become sex offenders. They maybe shoulld have thought of that before choosing that career path.
But hey, better late than never. Or as the US President Harry S Truman was fond of saying: “If you can’t stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.” Or, as I conclude after a long and very active and always mutually-consenting (hetero) sex life: that which swings cheerfully from my pelvic girdle has got me into most of the trouble I have ever been in, and only that which lies between my ears has got me out of it.
NB: NEVER the other way round.
No. Abuse of prisoners, and turning a blind eye to assaults and violence in prison, are not OK.
In Alabama we are dealing with a number of scandals related to extremely poor treatment of prisoners, and some people are saying that the prisoners deserved the abuse because they’re criminals. No. That’s not part of the sentence, it’s cruel, it should not happen.
Ugh, Omar, for heaven’s sake. NO it’s not ok for prisons to promote or allow or fail to stop violence among the prisoners. Don’t say shit like that here.
OB:
But the only way they can guarantee that is by putting sex offenders into solitary confinement, which on my information is impossible due to lack of facilities. Everywhere probably, except Russia and maybe China and some other countries, where they also have large lists of capital offences, and execution is often straight after the guilty verdict is issued, with no right of appeal.
Ever since ancient times, prisons have had a dual function of 1. punishment/deterrence of crime and 2. protection of the rest of the (law abiding) population. #2 is the most popular. Politicians all know that. ‘Loranorder’ is a well-trod platform.
I am appalled she re et prison time. Given it is California, and George “Set Them Free” Gascon, I am surprised he didn’t push for “reparative justice”. Perhaps one on one discussion between the rapist and her victim so they could come to an understanding!/sarc sarc sarc
Heck, the relatives of a woman drug to death by a professional theft gang actually suggested they shouldn’t be punished. In my dotage I find it harder and harder to identify with the modern left.
Omar, I know that, but stating the facts about prisons and resources is one thing and gloating is another. Don’t gloat.
I plead not guilty, Your Honour. Please cite one instance where I did.
I’m sure the solution isn’t obvious, but given the crime(s), society at large needs (in fact demands) to be protected from this sociopath and others like him. Incarceration is what we have. In order to do that, I think the additional considerations of protecting other prisoners from him would take precedence over protecting him from other prisoners, but in theory both could be achieved. The prison system isn’t perfect, but it seems to me that putting a male prisoner in a female prison is an unnecessary and reckless risk. I mean unless he’s in complete isolation, and then we are looking at imposing an excessively cruel sentence. Excessive cruelty isn’t something non-criminals should be tasked with (despite understandable feelings of outrage and vengeance).
I agree that he should have been tried as an adult in the first place, then if convicted he would not have had the same opportunity to commit other crimes or game the system, but as it sits he should at least be prevented from being housed in any female facility. I guess we’ll see if the justice system can avoid further failures.
There must be more than one sex-offender in any one prison at one time. Could they not be kept together, separately from other prisoners?
Tim Harris: Look for the George Carlin video on “Solving the Budget Deficit”. while George is crude as heck and says many questionable things, HE does offer one possible solution to the question.
(Note…I am not serious…and neither was he. It’s a comedy skit)
Re that comment of mine @#8 to which OB objected, and which reads
Maybe I could alter that to read:
And as well, we open here that old philosophical can of worms, free will vs determinism, besides being up to our necks in counterfactuals. Though it is a totally unresolvable conundrum, I have faith that we’ll somehow find a way through. Reason will prevail.
(Aside: Hope I didn’t put my foot in it. Some might disagree on that point, I know.)
Or you could just say sorry, point taken. Or you could just say ok. Or you could say nothing. But no, you have to insist you were right to tell us you approve of cruel and unusual punishment.
OB: Would you agree with what I said way back at #2:
??? I speak as a member of a family which was massively impacted by just this sort of thing. And no, I don’t believe in cruel and unusual punishments. Nor do I assume that my own reality is anyone else’s reality.
Omar, I think you are missing the point of the objections. What rapists and molesters deserve for their choice of being criminals is their sentences, their imprisonment. Nothing more. We are not arguing about choice and free will and any of that, but rather about the idea that prisoners of any kind somehow deserve being subjected to violence and rape, or threats of the same.
Omar – saying “Them’s the breaks” in reference to attacks by other prisoners IS approval of cruel and unusual punishment. If that’s not what you meant you could always say “Sorry, that’s not what I meant, it came out wrong”. I wouldn’t press the point but you’ve done this before, more than once – said something over the top and then endlessly explained why it wasn’t over the top when I said it was and please don’t do it again. It’s tiresome and frankly kind of narcissistic.
At the risk of being “tiresome and frankly kind of narcissistic:” Some years back now, I read a report in the popular press (Readers’ Digest?) about an unusual approach taken in the US somewhere by some court or other to a bunch of boys judged to be at risk of starting on lives of crime. They had committed entry-level offences like shoplifting, but when interviewed by police and counsellors after court appearances showed an arrogant and unrepentant attitude, leading to the conclusion on the part of the authorities that they were at the start of a downhill slope that would likely land them eventually in jail (‘gaol’ for British and Australian readers.) That would in turn have a likely amplifying effect, as the recidivism rates were pretty high.
For their education on the topic of jail, it was arranged that they visit one. What was novel in this was that a bunch of prisoners was briefed about them and asked to cooperate, which they did.
On their way to the jail in a bus, the boys were all pretty cheerful and cocky. But once inside, they were treated like genuine new arrival crims. In front of the rest, one convict approached one of them and said something like: “Hey dude. I like the look of you. I want you for my cellmate; I mean my bedmate. I could really have some fun with you in my bed these cold nights…” Etc. Etc.
The report said that on the way back from the jail, the mood in the bus was very sombre and subdued. Reality had bitten. They had been exposed to the consequences, that certain decisions they might make could lead them to.
One of my grandsons has recently been caught shoplifting. It so happened that shortly afterwards, I had the opportunity to take him to view from outside the Supermax Security Prison at Goulburn NSW, which is about 3 hours drive south of Botany Bay, where Australia began as a convict settlement. To Botany Bay were sent in chains the best and the worst of His Britannic Majesty’s subjects, from Irish rebels, to the hardest cases from the hulks on the Thames.
The whole Goulburn Supermax is built like a fortress, and is also surrounded by bare ground, all in turn inside a high-security outer perimeter fence, apparently heavily barbed and razor-wired. From their towers the guards have excellent surveillance over the whole area inside the entire perimeter, and no doubt state-of-the-art communications. I explained to my grandson that those guards will be under orders to shoot anyone who is in that perimeter area, since such people cannot be anything other than escapees. I explained to him that as a junior shoplifter, he was at the start of a slippery slope that could lead to him being eventually banged up in something like Goulburn Supermax, and that once inside he would find that it was definitely no holiday. The guards in the towers are probably trained marksmen, and with excellent shooting gear. They would not be the slightest bit interested in his personal issues and problems that had landed him ‘inside’ as they took aim and fired. That’s the reality, and them’s the breaks. The game of life has never been played on a level field.
As someone once said: “Here I stand. “
Here I also stand, as a common or garden commenter at this BandW blog, previously proclaiming a mission of discussion, and for its own sake, if my memory serves me well.
Tim @14 Most men’s prisons here in the US do keep sex offenders separate from the general population in varying degrees. I don’t know about elsewhere.