• gonzo-rand19@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 days ago

    In his summing up the judge said “It has been proven that sexual intercourse took place at a time that she was in a state that meant that she couldn’t possibly consent to it. The offence is serious and unacceptable.”

    Wow, we can both read! That’s awesome. Now one of us just has to work on their comprehension and maybe even finish the article next time…

    • Knock_Knock_Lemmy_In@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      You asked why wait. The point of jail and fines is to avoid reoffending. The judge thinks he won’t, and will be more valuable to society as a doctor than an inmate. Also If he does this again then he will get hit twice as hard.

      • gonzo-rand19@moist.catsweat.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        Something tells me that they are not publishing his name because they’re betting that his future patients would feel differently. I would not want to see Dr. Rapist for any reason, even if he’s the best physician in the city.

        • milicent_bystandr@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          But Dr Shacked Up With A Woman Once When They Were Both Drunk And She Was Too Drunk And He Should Have Known Better might be a bit more acceptable to some.