Same crime, same county: Guess which sexual predator-teacher got the tougher sentence.
Florida Circuit Judge Chet Tharpe sentenced former Hillsborough County teacher Ethel Anderson to a stunning 38 years in prison this week for performing oral sex and other sex acts on a 12-year-old boy she tutored on weekends. “There are those that believe that nothing’s wrong if the defendant is a woman and the victim is a male,” Tharpe said as he sent the sexual predator to prison. “This court does not recognize gender. If it’s proven, as an adult, that you had sex with a child, you can expect to go to prison.”
This was an ringing and much needed message to send to a county, indeed to a country, that have often seemed confused about how to handle women who rape their underage students using the authority and trust they have as teachers. Especially in Hillsborough County, though, for it was here that ex-teacher Debra Lafave pleaded guilty in 2005 to having sex with a 14-year-old boy,and was merely sentenced to house arrest by Judge Thorpe’s colleague Judge Wayne Timmerman. Why? Interesting question. LaFave’s lawyer famously argued that his movie star gorgeous client was too attractive to go to jail (recall the recent post here about defense attorneys appealing to bias), and it worked.
Looking at LaFave and Anderson side by side—LaFave blonde, slim and sexy; Anderson short, dark and overweight—and it’s easy to see how Tharpe’s sentencing can be, and probably will be, attacked as racially biased. Both LaFave and Anderson are female, teachers, sexual predators and statutory rapists, yet Anderson will be in prison well past the date when she can collect Social Security, and LaFave only had to wear a leg bracelet for a few years. Nonetheless, the fact that LaFave’s beauty unjustly saved her is no argument for being excessively lenient to Anderson as well. All such teacher-rapists should face long sentences and hard time, and Judge Tharpe deserves great credit for having the courage to reject Judge Timmerman’s warped and sexist standards. A male teacher who raped a 12-year old girl would face twenty years to life in every state. A female rapist should be viewed no differently.
_______________________________
Pointer: Instapundit
Facts: Tampa Bay Times
Ethics Alarms 
“This was an ringing and much needed message to send to a county, indeed to a county…”
Umm, you may want to correct that typographical error. I think you meant “country” for one of them.
And I thought I had checked that. Thanks. I’m clearly going blind…
Ahem, you still haven’t fixed it. 🙂
I DID! I SWEAR! Ugh. I’m using italics now.
He just wanted to REALLY emphasize that the message was sent to the county 😀
Those two women are true nithings.
How is Tharpe a Hero? He applied a proportionate and fair sentence. If anything, Tharpe is normal, and Timmerman is a Dunce.
It’s by far the heaviest sentence ever handed out in this kind of a case. The first high profile offender, Mary Beth Letourneau, who also raped a 12-year old, got just six months in the county jail and three years of sex offender treatment. That set precedent, at least culturally. This shatters it.
Yeah I didn’t look up all the other cases. Valid point.
Good for Tharpe. Would’ve been better if Timmerman had been the one.
Ah, but that would have looked like racial bias even to me.
Count on it: More comparisons of Anderson’s and Lafave’s sentences are inevitable, and will stoke the passions of race-hustlers. I expect someone who didn’t like that cartoon in the University of Alabama newsletter to pounce on the Hillsborough County cases real soon – anonymously but all-powerfully, of course.
My gut is that it is less race and more looks. The argument would likely go “well of course Anderson committed rape, who would want to sleep with that willingly, but Lefave, hubba hubba” or some other meaningless nonsense like that.
I agree, Dan, but of course race and looks/attractiveness are impossible to separate completely. And your hypothetical quote, in various forms, is everywhere, and was when LaFave was on trial. “Summer of 42” stuff: who wouldn’t want to be seduced by her?
Well, if someone looks less like Beyonce and more like “Precious” then race goes out the window and it is all about looks.
And you and I both know that wanting is irrelevant in these cases where age of consent laws are violated.
Huh? Timmerman is white. How would he have been racist had he given an actually fair sentence to Lafave?
I think the original thing was that it would have looked good if Timmerman had realized the error of his earlier ways and sentenced Anderson harshly, and the counterargument was that if he’d done that (even if it was because he’d changed his mind about the whole subject) it would look like he was sentencing based on race.
I meant that it would have been better if Timmerman had sentenced Lafave appropriately the first time, so that the message is sent that looks don’t alleviate sentence.
Ah! Crystal clear now. Carry on Sir.
I misunderstood your post. I thought you were wishing that Timmerman had the chance to rectify his earlier mistake with the Hitchcock blonde by throwing the book at a frumpy black woman,
Oh no! My mistake. Quick wording left out pertinent clarifying details.
Meh, maybe we could dig this ditch deeper and double down on different standards based on racial characteristics. Maybe even bring back phrenology.
I might be incorrect, but I Know that here in Illinois, sex crimes involving victims under the age of 13 are treated more harshly. That might be the cause for the discrepancy to some degree…
I was wondering about that as well- still, while remaining far too lazy to investigate relative sentencing guidelines, it looks pretty dang obvious that the earlier sentence was incredibly lenient. It may be a bit less harsh with an older teen, but not THAT easy.
I’ve heard a little more about the case from a local shock jock in Tampa. It has not been reported that the defendant had been grooming the victim since age 6. This testimony was given by both the defense and prosecution. I think that weighed heavily into the sentencing. The other factor is it went to trial for Ethel Anderson (when she was offered a plea) and Debra Lafave took a plea deal.
Typically I agree with you on many of your articles/opinions, but not this time.
Upon reading more into these two cases, I found that in the case of Debra Lafave, the victims family offered her a plea bargain (that specifically offered no jail time) in order to protect their son from the high profile case where Lafave was facing a 30 year sentence. So yes, while the defence did argue that she was too beautiful for jail, that was not the reason she got off so lightly. I’m surprised you didn’t mention this.
The judge didn’t have to accept the plea bargain, and should not have.
And what is it you disagree with?
I’m inclined to agree that the judge was probably biased, it’s just that you have only outlined what may or may not have been factors in the judges decision (being entirely conjecture on your part (unless there was some interview with him or something)) while neglecting to mention the plea bargain. It creates an incomplete picture which invites readers to agree with you without having the full story.
People appear to think that prosecutors can decide sentences. They can’t. Whether a sentence comes out of a plea bargain or the position of either lawyer, the judge signs the order, and the judge is responsible. If a judge thinks a plea bargain is too lenient, then its the judge’s job to reject the plea. This is what happened to Roman Polanski. I can’t include a tutorial on how sentencing works with every post about it. Well, I could, but I’m not going to.
Sexual crimes against children… and who were in their care and under their authority. They ALL got off far too lightly.
I’m not asking for a tutorial on sentencing. I’m asking why you didn’t mention the plea bargain. That seems like important information to me.
Because it’s irrelevant to the post. There is a rebuttable presumption that LaFave;’s appearance generated undue sympathy and leniency from the judge AND the prosecution. The plea bargain may have reflected the prosecution’s belief that no jury would find being molested by La Fave a crime worthy of punishment… and may well have been correct.
I disagree with you completely Phillip. The judge could have done several things to protect the child from the high profile case as you stated. Also, it is not the parents decision as to the trial, this crime wasn’t just against the child but SOCIETY. Your mixing civil with judicial, the parents technically have no say if the accused goes to trial. True the judge/prosecutor can take their requests into consideration but the fact is the Prosecutor and Judge is to protect ALL of society, and LaFave broke SOCIETIES law and should have been fully accountable.
I never said the judge was limited to what was offered in the plea bargain. I merely pointed out that a plea bargain was offered and that Jack didn’t mention it. I think it is important information to consider, especially when the accused got such a light sentence (as was offered in the plea).
There are many times that a jury & judge should never be allowed to see the accused or victim. Justice is suppose to be blind so lets make certain that the JUDGEMENT is based upon facts and not lust, as I and every other male knows to be the case with Timmerman. This article is too kind to Timmerman, I consider him being a worse criminal than LaFave with his decision, mocking the very meaning of justice. Shame on the agencies who failed to disbar this creep. Its not over, some day this “judge’ will stand before THE Judge and THE Judge won’t care what he looks like but how he mocked everything holy and the trust of citizens he took an oath to protect. The victim was not only raped by LaFave but also by Timmerman’s form of justice.
“Never be allowed to see” the accused? Yikes. Why stop there? Why not prevent them from knowing anything about him or her at all? Physical appearance isn’t the only factor that creates bias. Of course, that might make judging difficult…