This Judge Said Coming from a “Good Family” Means a 16-Year-Old Couldn’t Be a Rapist

Another example of why rape victims have a hard time getting justice.

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

When a 16-year-old boy appeared in a New Jersey court, the question was whether he would be tried as an adult for having allegedly raped a 16-year-old girl. A New Jersey judge denied the waiver, but his rationale has launched an outpouring of online outrage.

The boy, who was drunk, filmed himself penetrating an intoxicated girl at a party, the New York Times reported Tuesday. He then sent the video to his friends with the caption, “When your first time having sex was rape.”

Judge James Troiano, however, said that the boy’s actions did not constitute a “traditional case of rape,” according to a document from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. Troiano explained that in the typical case of rape in which children were tried as adults, “There were generally two or more generally males involved, either at gunpoint or weapon, clearly manhandling a person…and just simply taking advantage of the person as well as beating the person, threatening the person.”

But what was most appalling was how Troiano explicitly connected the boy’s good social standing to his decision not to try him in adult court. “This young man comes from a good family who put him into an excellent school where he was doing extremely well,” he said. “He is clearly a candidate for not just college but probably for a good college. His scores for college entry were very high.”

Troiano is not the only judge whose outdated opinions about sexual assault have created controversy. In 2016, Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky issued a six-month jail sentence to Brock Turner, a Stanford University student accused of sexual assault. Persky eventually lost his job as a result.

Some people have noted that the 16-year-old defendant is not legally an adult and should not be charged as such, but the general focus was the judge’s egregious remarks as justification for this decision, especially given the clear evidence of the boy’s actions.

Politicians also weighed in. 

An appeals court rebuked the judge and cleared the way for the boy to appear before a grand jury, which will treat him as an adult and decide whether to indict him for sexual assault, the New York Times reported.

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

WE CAME UP SHORT.

We just wrapped up a shorter-than-normal, urgent-as-ever fundraising drive and we came up about $45,000 short of our $300,000 goal.

That means we're going to have upwards of $350,000, maybe more, to raise in online donations between now and June 30, when our fiscal year ends and we have to get to break-even. And even though there's zero cushion to miss the mark, we won't be all that in your face about our fundraising again until June.

So we urgently need this specific ask, what you're reading right now, to start bringing in more donations than it ever has. The reality, for these next few months and next few years, is that we have to start finding ways to grow our online supporter base in a big way—and we're optimistic we can keep making real headway by being real with you about this.

Because the bottom line: Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism Mother Jones exists to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we hope you might consider pitching in before moving on to whatever it is you're about to do next. We really need to see if we'll be able to raise more with this real estate on a daily basis than we have been, so we're hoping to see a promising start.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate