It's just comparing two cases that reached a verdict in the same day, sure the cases are different, but the results are very telling. It is a worse offense to access a website without the owners permission than it is to rape someone if you're under 18.
In this case, I think the "if you're under 18" thing is something of a red herring. I agree that they should have been tried as adults, but I don't know how much that would actually have changed the outcome. The minimum sentences set by the judge are, sad to say, actually comparable to what many adults convicted of rape eventually serve.
Comments
It's just comparing two cases that reached a verdict in the same day, sure the cases are different, but the results are very telling. It is a worse offense to access a website without the owners permission than it is to rape someone if you're under 18.
In this case, I think the "if you're under 18" thing is something of a red herring. I agree that they should have been tried as adults, but I don't know how much that would actually have changed the outcome. The minimum sentences set by the judge are, sad to say, actually comparable to what many adults convicted of rape eventually serve.