*Content is triggering*
This story speaks for itself. From the free Sara Kruzan action page at change.org:
"Life without parole means absolutely no opportunity for release," said Senator Yee. (of California) "It also means minors are often left without access to programs and rehabilitative services while in prison. This sentence was created for the worst of criminals that have no possibility of reform and it is not a humane way to handle children. While the crimes they committed caused undeniable suffering, these youth offenders are not the worst of the worst.""As a society we've learned a lot since the time we started using life without parole for children," said Elizabeth Calvin, a children's rights advocate with Human Rights Watch. "We now know that this sentence provides no deterrent effect. While children who commit serious crimes should be held accountable, public safety can be protected without subjecting youth to the harshest prison sentence possible."
Watch. Listen. Weep. Take Action.
Also, read our previous coverage on prisons.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Sara Kruzan: Life Without Parole for Killing her Pimp.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.feministing.com/cgi-bin/movabletype/mt-tb.fcgi/16752
This breaks my heart.
The judge clearly didn't care that she came from a broken home and had no one to protect her (and I'm not saying that women need to be protected, but children do). Besides, how can you honestly fault someone for killing their pimp, who committed at least statutory rape with her. I say "statutory" because she didn't say whether she consented or not, though it doesn't much matter since she was 13. If this had been swapped, and a pimp had killed one of his prostitutes, I wonder what the judge would have done?
When I looked at this headline and saw "killing her pimp" all I could think was "good for her." Immoral? Maybe. Wrong in the overall scheme of things? Nope. He would have done the same thing to other girls.
Just to clarify, I'm not saying that she should be exempt from her crime. The judicial system should be respected. But if I was the judge I would have looked at the 25-life sentencing and given her 25. Rehabilitation is, in my personal opinion, the answer when it comes to people so young.
It makes me sick that women like her are stuck in prison and Polanski is throwing parties in his villa.
The judicial system should be respected? How about the lives of some of the least valued people in society--young, low income, black and brown girls--should be respected and more valued. Society failed her. We failed to ensure that she was taken care of as a child and adolescent and did not have to live a life of abuse. And then we lock her up for killing a man who abused her for 3 years? Unfortunately, Sara's story is not that uncommon. There are plenty of young girls--typically black and brown girls (often queer) from lower income neighborhoods who experience physical, sexual, and emotional abuse at home and/or in the foster care system, run away, get turned out into prostitution, and end up arrested and locked up in juvenile detention centers for selling sex. See the problem here?
Sara, and the many others like her should not have gone to jail. Sara should have never had to experience all of that abuse. She should have never been pimped out. And killing her pimp should not have been the only way out. Our judicial system and society owes Sara and the many others like her not only a huge apology but a promise to value their lives and commit our resources to their safety and success.
I encourage everyone to watch the documentary Very Young Girls to get more of an idea about incidences like this and the structures that allow this kind of abuse to exist and continue. It was made by an organization in NYC called GEMS. You can check them out here: http://www.gems-girls.org/
Last comment:
I met and interviewed Sara this summer for my job. She is an absolutely amazing woman. She's strong, intelligent, and incredibly inspirational. She's super nice and gives hugs when she first meets you. I wish her all the best and pray, pray, pray to any gods/goddesses that may exist that she gets some justice and peace in this world.
I think she is 32 now. Seems like the petition might be a little old.
She killed someone. She broke the law.
Noone is above the law. Deplorable that her circumstances were she is not exempt from the consequences of her actions.
So she--as a child--has to be accountable when NO ONE ELSE WAS? Where was everyone when she was being raped on a regular basis by various people for at least 3 years? She killed her abuser--her rapist. We don't know what the circumstances are, but even if he didn't die in the midst of attacking her, he brutally abused her over an extended period of time. People who have been in these situations before often attest that they are repeatedly threatened with death if they try to leave. It is a very twisted situation and self defense needs to have a broader interpretation than death that occurs as a "heat of the moment" response to an attack. I honestly think she has taken on far too much accountability for something that can not just be written off as "deplorable circumstances" but rather everyone else around her failing to ensure her safety and escape from a horrifying life situation.
Society failed her. That doesn't exempt her from her actions.
She still took a person's right to life. The action was taken with malice aforethought.
Her actions where unlawful and she must answer for that.
Hi, Alice, when do individuals become responsible for their own decisions? Do all kids who face these types of tough circumstances deserve to go free? The piece seems to be using Kruzan to make the argument that no juvenile should be sentenced to LIP. You *seem* to be reinforcing that, or at least in the case of hard luck kids.
I agree that she should be punished for her crime like anyone else. And anyone else would have gotten a much shorter sentence for killing their abuser of years as the only means of escape and as a child. She has more than paid her dept. Why is it that children are tried as adults arbitrarily and more often when they are minorities?
I don't think any juvenile should get life in prison. That's the whole point of the "juvenile" legal designation--they're young. They don't have the best judgement, so they're not held as legally responsible as adults are for their actions. Can you imagine going to prison for your entire life for something you did when you were a teenager? Yes, I agree that some people do horrible things as teenagers. But that doesn't mean they should never get a chance to do anything else.
So she--as a child--has to be accountable when NO ONE ELSE WAS? Where was everyone when she was being raped on a regular basis by various people for at least 3 years? She killed her abuser--her rapist. We don't know what the circumstances are, but even if he didn't die in the midst of attacking her, he brutally abused her over an extended period of time. People who have been in these situations before often attest that they are repeatedly threatened with death if they try to leave. It is a very twisted situation and self defense needs to have a broader interpretation than death that occurs as a "heat of the moment" response to an attack. I honestly think she has taken on far too much accountability for something that can not just be written off as "deplorable circumstances" but rather everyone else around her failing to ensure her safety and escape from a horrifying life situation.
What we're talking about here is the value that is placed on certain people's lives, but not others. For example, a man in Halifax killed a prostitute and was sentenced to four years in prison (he only served two because in Canada, any time you spend in jail before you are sentenced counts as double time). Meanwhile, this woman killed her pimp at 16 and was sentenced to life without parole. Why is one person's life more valuable than another, and why is it than in some circumstances, murder is more excusable than others?
I wouldn't know, the events are not easily comparable and are in different jurisdictions and have different laws.
I'm unfamiliar with your anecdote but the taking of a life is wrong no matter whom its taken from. As far as I've gathered from this case, they proved malice aforethought (or malice prepense)and that was the reason why.
Maybe the law needs to be changed but until that happens she is still held accountable for what she did.
"Maybe the law needs to be changed but until that happens she is still held accountable for what she did."
I just think this is really the wrong way to go about making change. Simply because something is THE LAW doesn't mean it is right, or that we should abide by it, or that we should be punished for breaking it. Laws are created by people, and they often are set up in a way that hurts other people - in our criminal justice system, those people are most often people of color and LGBT people. Laws are not some magic, neutral body.
I think a lot of people agree on the point that some laws are unjust, but sometimes the argument is then made that, when breaking the unjust law, those people should be prepared to accept its consequences. Why should this be the case? I think we can all cite examples from the civil rights movement, ie should Rosa Parks have ended up in jail for sitting at the front of the bus? That's the classic example, but there are millions more. We do not wait for unjust laws to be change, and accept their consequences in the meantime.
Who said the law was unjust. That murder was premeditated and unlawful.
Law and order is a basic fundamental of our society and while I agree that some laws can be unjust and must be fought.
This was murder. This heinous act transcendence beyond matters of jurisprudence.
You comparison is bad. Fighting for your civil liberties and the murder of another being are not comparable.
Murder is not justifiable nor should it be given a waiver.
But the part that you're consistently disregarding throughout your argument is that she is a child. She wasn't just someone who killed her abuser, she was a CHILD who killed an abuser that she clung to because he was a father figure and she had no where to go.
She was a CHILD who was repeatedly raped and used at his hands.
She was a CHILD whose mindset was so damaged and warped by the abuse he inflicted on her that she, at 16 years old, innocence and hope long since spoiled, killed him. Likely in a final act to attempt to free herself from him.
She is not exempt from the law, as you have frequently pointed out. Nor is she exempt from punishment. She should be punished, but life without Parole? You can't seriously support her never having a chance to actually have a life? After what she endured at the hands of that man, you can't possibly sit on your high pedestal of judgment and say that she's reaped what she sowed? When she was only an abused girl searching for someone who would love her, and he viciously took advantage of her and finally it was too much for her? You can't be serious.
Just because it is "the law" doesn't make it right.
The 2 years separating her from 18 is all the difference?
This was not a justifiable homicide. This was premeditated murder. She didn't just snap and let the bastard have it.
She plotted his death. That is what makes it different from other homicides.
That is why she got that sentence.
A heinous act.
(I'm sorry but taking a life is wrong,I guess we just disagree on this.)
yes, two years separating her from eighteen make ALL the difference.
have you seen typical teenagers recently? 16-year-olds act much differently than 18-year-olds, and have a much less developed sense of good judgment, and that's in good circumstances.
in this society, we've decided that 18 is the age of majority. to punish children according to the standards set forth for adults is wrong, in my opinion.
Not for murder in the first degree.
You can't expect to be taken seriously with this stuff.
Do you understand that the "State" decides who to charge and who not to charge?
You wouldn't be feigning this ignorance to avoid admitting you support the decision to charge her with 1st degree, now would you?
I just don't like how some people here are glossing over that she did something deplorable in my opinion and which is wrong in any context.
Murder is worse than rape.
Yet people in this thread seem to think this pimp deserved it. No one deserves to be raped and no one deserves to be murdered.
Now if you wanted the punishment to be 25 to life with parole I don't have a problem with that.
It just frightens me that some people here think she should get a free pass for what she did.
You're the biggest glosser in the room!
Yet people in this thread seem to think this pimp deserved it.
We have said it was justified.
It just frightens me that some people here think she should get a free pass for what she did.
No one thinks she should get a "free pass". We think a discounted pass is certainly in order. You are the only one who thinks understanding and mercy = free pass.
What is the difference between a free pass and a pass that you paid for, or a pass that you earned? What's the price that should be required to get a pass?
So far the things which you say should not ever count towards a "pass" or cause a court to show mercy:
repeated rape as a minor
excessive violence used to control
threats of violence
conditioned responses (meeting violence with violence) taught since early childhood.
and let's not forget: repeated theft of earnings
All that is a bunch of bullshit that shouldn't be considered, says you, And yet you are here complaining about how people are "glossing" over the importance of your personal opinion, and how people asking for mercy frightens you.
Oh my "opinion" that murder is a horrible crime. How insensitive of me.
Nothing justifies one individual taking the life of another individual.
One can feel sympathy but what is paramount is to be judged based on your actions, not on your life story. She planned out the death of a human being and followed through. Those mitigating circumstances don't balance out the aggravating circumstances.
She exhibited a specific intent to kill and premeditation and deliberation. She exhibited "malice aforethought".
She must pay for that.
Leaving aside the particular case in question - your claim that "Nothing justifies one individual taking the life of another individual" is not a position supported by any legal code that I am aware of in the entire course of human history. There are always exceptions made for a variety of reasons. Those change from jurisdiction to jurisdiction and from time to time, but there are always legal exceptions to that position. So the 'dangerous' argument being made by some folks here is simply that this might be one of those exceptions. You clearly disagree but let's not pretend that civilization and the rule of law are coming apart at the seams because a group of people is arguing for this exception or that one.
Maybe I should of clarified:
"Nothing justifies one individual taking the life of another individual in that manner"
I realize their are exceptions sometimes people act irrationally in the heat of the moment but I personally can't see justification of a deliberate and methodical murder.
Its not that I think the world will come at its seams, but it weakness society response of abhorrence to such an act if we let some people receive lesser punishment and others do not.
They should all receive harsh and equal punishment for such a crime.
Had Elizabeth Smart killed her abuser do you feel like she would deserve life in prison?
If she killed him in a planned premeditated way instead of finding any other option. Yes.
If he was threatening her and about to rape and there was a clear present danger at that very moment. No.
This is one of the differences between different levels of homicide.
I agree with you that a 16-year-old isn't exactly a child in the typical sense; but she wasn't an adult either. She was a teenager, and maturity levels of teenagers vary so widely it's difficult, sometimes, to classify them as one or the other.
However, I take serious issue with this:
"This was not a justifiable homicide. This was premeditated murder. She didn't just snap and let the bastard have it. She plotted his death. That is what makes it different from other homicides...A heinous act."
I don't quite understand why premeditated murder is always perceived as a cut above crimes of passion on the evilness scale. I understand in theory; but it doesn't always pan out that way and it's high time judges and lawyers realized that.
If you ask me, a person who committed a crime of passion is far more dangerous than a youth who plotted to kill her abusive pimp. A person who commits a crime of passion is impulsive and has a serious anger issue that flirts the line with criminally insane--again, not always, but technically in theory. This, to me, is more dangerous than a teenager who sees murder as her only escape route from an abusive authority figure; and yes, that is what he was to her.
One must look at circumstance and motive here. OK, killing a person is wrong. We know that. She knows that.
But I'm going to take your position--that taking a person's life is wrong--and point out that is exactly what her pimp did to her. He took her life, her youth, from her. Put yourself in her shoes; what options did she have that she was aware of? She could go on being abused and forced into prositution by a trusted authority figure, or she could ensure he was out of her life permanently, or she could try and run away (and worry that if he found her, he would kill her). She couldn't go to the police, for fear that they would charge her with prostitution. She might not have known about other options, such as youth shelters, or if she did, she probably worried he would find her there. Until the justice system recognizes that youth prostitutes are victims and not criminals, it's really hard to consider her crime "heinous." It was her way out, and quite frankly, it sounds to me like justice was served.
Should she have been convicted of murder? Maybe--one would have to look at the details of the murder, and the details of their relationship, more closely, which I'm sure the lawyers and judge did--but never should she have received life without parole.
Thank you, you worded much better than me the point I was trying to make.
People should be punished when they commit a crime, but her punishment is, IMHO, disproportionate to her crime. The extenuating circumstances should have been considered.
"Maybe the law needs to be changed but until that happens she is still held accountable for what she did."
No, it's not maybe. The law needs to be changed. We've decided that the law needs to be changed. You are welcome to disagree, but that means you are opposed to our agenda. Changing the laws that affect women unjustly is pretty much the entire agenda at this website. If you disagree with the agenda - or if you have not yet made up your mind if you agree with the agenda, then you shouldn't be here. If you expect to debate us into silence, or confuse us with question-begging, be advised that it won't work.
"Who said the law was unjust. That murder was premeditated and unlawful."
We said the law is unjust. We said it, say it, will continue to say it. Perhaps you thought we should have waited until we were asked what we felt, but we decided not to. We think it's unjust. We say it's unjust. We give money and time and our voices in efforts to get these laws changed. We say it's unjust. Have I repeated it enough? We say it's unjust.
The question is, Do you say the law is NOT unjust?
We've stated our agenda. State yours.
The law isn't unjust.
Its application is.
Anyone who commits a premeditated murder should get life. Not just girls who happened to have been prostitutes.
Just because some people are getting away with it doesn't excuse what she did.
Why do I feel like there are a bunch of murder-apologists here.
i knew it....now we're "murder-apologists". that didn't take too long.
NO ONE is saying that what she did was right, or that she doesn't deserve punishment. she deserves punishment under the juvenile system, because she was a juvenile when she committed her crime. she needs to be incarcerated as long as it takes to do everything possible to ensure that, if released, she won't get involved in this sort of situation or murder again. if that's 25 years, or 10 years, or 50 years, that's what it should be. the same thing held true for her pimp; he didn't deserve to die, but to go to prison. that's hardly apologia.
IN ADDITION, our society should be taking further steps to prevent the sort of physical and sexual abuse that underscores this case from happening IN THE FIRST PLACE.
children are not held to the same legal standard of responsibility as adults in any other scenario, because there is the recognition that, due to a combination of brain development and socialization, their brains don't work the same way. they have not developed and tested the good judgment and rational thinking that keeps people out of bad situations and allows them to accurately assess risk.
Her mind was completely traumatized during the developmental years from what this man had did to her. Do you really think she was in an emotional state warrants life?
Had Elizabeth Smart killed her abuser do you think she would have deserved life in prison?
I agree completely.
I agree with the idea that the prostitute was punished far more harshly than the pimp and that this is profoundly unjust. This case is even worse - it's a child, for crying out loud!!!
Undoubtedly the pimp was Polanski-level scum but wow, talk about victim blaming. I can't believe someone actually wrote, "he was asking for it." I've never seen anyone literally write that here. We wouldn't write that about rape & we shouldn't write that about murder.
Sure life may have been hell, but she should have just left him. For all we know she killed him because she simply got mad at him, or because he was giving another girl too much attention, or any number of things. I sympathize with anyone who's been preyed on since they were 11, but when 11 yo boys kill people, I expect them to serve time like adults do.
No where in my post did I write he was asking for it.
Juli--I didn't say you wrote that. Someone else wrote that. Sorry, should have been more clear.
Sure life may have been hell, but she should have just left him.
Bet that never occurred to her.
What a sad story. She definitely should not have gotten life without parole for killing a worthless piece of scum like him. He was a pimp who took advantage of her and abusing her since she was 11 years old. As far as I'm concerned it was self defense and she shouldn't be in jail at all because he deserved to die.
-Nikki-
what facts suggest he should have been killed, or that she was in imminent danger. self defense requires an imminent threat on one's life, and nothing in the video showed that.
the mindset that says a pimp deserves death, doesnt differ much from one that would send a youngster to prison for life
Her case seems to be one of the ones where she might just need to be rehabilitated, such as her going to a half-way home.
What bothers me is, the ones who likely tout that "Children are innocent and need to be protected!" are likely the ones who support this insane punishment on children who are convicted of crimes.
This is disgusting, especially given the fact that the average sentence for rape in this country is about 11 years. That poor girl. Just another example of the grossly misguided assumption that things like sex trafficking don't happen here.
Of course pimps are people too. Maybe there are quality pimps out there who fight to make sure that their women are properly taken care of, since they can't go to the law for protection. Of course in this case that's seriously in doubt given that he was some creepy 11 year old molesting kind of guy.
I feel like I've been given a skewed view of this case. Were there no circumstances involved in this murder that got her such a heavy sentence? Is she likely to kill again?
If it's as cut and dry as it's presented I don't understand this whole "25 years would be sufficient" attitude. C'mon, if you abuse children or other people you have a power advantage over, you're running the risk of being stabbed, shot, poisoned, or otherwise killed. He chose to take those risks. Maybe I'll get in trouble for victim blaming, but it sounds like he just might have been asking for it. I don't see that she should be punished more so than a slap on the wrist. That is if the case is so cut and dry.
"Maybe there are quality pimps out there who fight to make sure that their women are properly taken care of, since they can't go to the law for protection. Of course in this case that's seriously in doubt given that he was some creepy 11 year old molesting kind of guy."
I feel like we can take a stronger stance than this. We don't need to equivocate around whether an adult male, who groomed an 11-yr-old child for prostitution then raped her at the age of 13 to start her career, might not be a nice guy. It may seem like I'm being picky, but I actually think its important. Its important that we can stand up and say: there is nothing okay with what he did to her, and we do not need to try to humanize him.
Incarcerating people that break the law to save their own skin does NOT solve the underlying problem. We can put people in jail for stealing, but if when they get out they still can't afford to buy basic essentials, they'll do it again. We can put people who murder their abusers in jail, but at the end of the day, the only person they would ever kill would be the person abusing them, and don't have a "lesson to learn." Jail is about teaching people that they are to not do that again, or to keep them away from society because they are a potential threat.
Obviously people need to be punished for breaking the law, but we can't continue to act like prison time is the only thing that can fix crime-doers and stop crime.
Was practically half the evidence withheld from the jury as prejudicial, or were there extenuating circumstances? I mean how were the lawyers unable to get at the very least a temporary insanity plea? Anyone have a link for these things?
Comments people are making are VERY scary. It seems that people think the sentencing for a murder should be based off of how perceivedly good or bad the victim was.
Justice is justice. I don't think anyone would say that the pimp––and other pimps engaged in similar illegal (and, as generally accepted, immoral) activities––should have been brought to justice through the justice system, and that in fact killing him means that he CAN'T be put to justice through the system.
And I certainly don't think anyone would say that the woman didn't go through a terrible, terrible situation, even going as far as saying "society failed her."
But a lack of justice should not precipitate another lack of justice. It may be idealistic, but I've always said that the best remedy for injustice is JUSTICE itself. (I apologize for using that world entirely too much.)
A murder is a murder, and just because we sympathize with the murderer and vilify the victim doesn't mean it's not that, a cold-blooded crime that deserves strict punishment.
But what about the fact that she was a KID?? She was probably so messed up by what this guy did to her that she couldn't take it anymore - she was 16 and had been a prostitute for 3 years and repeatedly raped - it's not like anyone off the street choosing to murder a pimp, it's someone who has been so mentally battered beyond recognition - as a CHILD!
Kids are old enough to know murder is wrong. Even 11 year olds know that. She was 16. As to why she killed him, its sheer conjecture. She might have killed him for any number of reasons.
Maybe I'm just a victim of Chicago's South Side but I've seen too many child murderers to feel terribly sorry even for the one's with really tough childhoods.
Robert Sandifer had at least as bad--if not worse--a childhood as Kruzan. Every time I start to think about taking it easy on child offenders, I remember him. And the lives he took.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Sandifer
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,981460,00.html
You really can't compare those crimes and you know it.
Maybe as someone living in Brooklyn near BedStuy, New York, I've also had my fair share of child crime. Arguably more, seeing as a lot of it has been personal experiences, once watching two people get shot right in front of my eyes. I STILL think that refusing to acknowledge a child's upbringing WHILE THEY'RE STILL IN THE MIDDLE OF IT is flat out WRONG. Note that I heavily distinguish "while they are still children".
A lack of sympathy isn't adequate reason for completely disregarding that maybe some serious shakiness of the mind contributed to her actions, and that anyone (ANYONE) who was raised in the exact same situation would have reacted similarly. You can say you wouldn't, but how would you know? This girl was mentally battered beyond belief and still developing.
It's bullshit to claim that 16 is anywhere near being a full human being with full judgment capacity, especially, ESPECIALLY for someone who went through what she did.
All of this iron-clad "the law is the law and she committed murder" bullshit flat out doesn't fly, because we're looking at things from the perspective of a bunch of sane fully developed adults. I see absolutely NO evidence that she had developed any judgment by this point in her life - how the HELL can society condemn her for life when she was still such a child.
Does she deserve to be punished? Without question! Does she deserve to never have a life? NO. She deserves to have a chance at SOMETHING in life other than the black hole of pain and suffering she has endured since birth. She deserves to do time (and a LONG time)
But the purpose of jail is supposed to serve both as a place of justice but also as a place where criminals will no longer be criminals. If you can't fix them, lock them away for life.
This girl can be fixed because she was put away for life much too early.
Sorry for the use of the word "fix" but I feel like it's the only way to get the point across. Especially at 1:39am...
word to this.
before they turn 18, in this society, children are CHILDREN. they do not have the responsibilities nor the rights of adulthood, nor should they have they same punishments, because their judgment is not yet formed and tested.
and let's stop pretending that everyone who is arguing that this GIRL shouldn't be in prison for the rest of her LIFE is somehow a moral relativist who doesn't have standards for behavior. christ.
I am not saying that she shouldn't be punished. But mitigating circumstances do come into play. Killing someone who is abusing you is even taken into play when there are adults involved. A life sentence is completely ridiculous.
There is NO WAY he would have been brought to justice. Had he been caught it would have been more likely that she would have been the one to be brought to jail. It is extremely difficult for pedophiles and rapists to be sent to jail. If the victim is a poor, black, prostitute it is pretty much impossible.
I believe this young girl was in a situation where her life was in danger almost every day and in her mind the only way for her to survive was to kill this man a human life was lost but it was not murder
it was self defense.
As much as I hate to see juveniles sentenced to LIP, I'm also tired of seeing juveniles killing people and then hiding behind the fact that they're a minor. Minors don't know killing is wrong? Minors can't run away from their pimps?
In the last 3 weeks, we've had juveniles kill @ least 3 people in Chicago, and a group of juveniles in FL SET A KID ON FIRE!!! So spare me the 'kids can be saved' routine. Prison is about rehabilitation 2nd. Its about punishment 1st.
Not having seen the prosecutor's case, its hard to really know, but she does present a sympathetic case.
Killing your pimp in self defense, setting someone on fire, SAME DIFF.!
Minors can't run away from their pimps?
Why no, in fact. Neither can most adult prostituted women. Do you think street prostitution is a job that someone can just resign from by giving her two weeks notice? Please, go educate yourself on the nature of pimps and prostitution.
Oh, Frumious, I know the streets, I'm not stupid. I also know people who walk away from those lifestyles. Literally. So lets be serious. She could leave the neighborhood, leave the town, leave the state if she had to. She could join the military. I know people who've done all of the above to escape bad situations...Looking at it from that perspective anyone who's ever been forced into a gang, or is in a crappy situation, gets a free Get Out of Jail free card.
Huh. It's so interesting how you make it sound so easy, I mean especially considering that she had been practically raised into this lifestyle when she was 13 and saw her pimp as a father figure who gave her the only "love" in her life she had at that point, and that she had a mom who obviously didn't give a shit about her. Yes, move to a different town! Where will you live? Ask family! Oh wait, you have no family elsewhere that cares about you? Live with a friend! Oh wait...... You don't have any friends outside this "business" because you probably left school after being called a slut and being shamed by your peers? Well I don't know, you're 16 and you have no legal rights and are still technically owned by your mom who won't leave the town because she's too high to do anything and could care less about you and if you get caught by the police doing anything they'll just take you home. Back to the town where the man who you thought really cared about you can pick you up and abuse you and use you for more, and will likely punish you for leaving. He will probably threaten to kill your mom if you leave again. Or anyone who is close to you. Or he might rape you so violently that you become so terrified that you can't leave for fear of what he'll do to you.
Because of course, 16 year olds are capable of thinking of EVERY WAY to get out of a situation, and after all their complete lack of rights in their lives doesn't make it damn near impossible to do anything without their parents. Oh, and if your mom doesn't care about you? Then you're just a low-income bitch who deserves it.
...It makes me so indescribably angry that people are incapable of grasping that she was trapped. Of course: who the hell has empathy for a prostitute?
It is much more than her being "just a minor". This was an abused her and the man she killed was her abuser. This is taken into consideration even for adults.
Kruzan did what the police in her area could not or would not do. As far as I'm concerned she should have been awarded some sort of medal or honorary police badge.
The child argument holds no water in my opinion. There were *children* who gang raped an immigrant mother for HOURS beat her and made her suck her son's penis and brutally beat him too and left them both for dead. CHILDREN AS IN UNDER THE AGE OF 18!!!!!! They should get at LEAST 30 years a pop but because they are *children* you better believe they will get out and be free to do demonic thingto other women and their children. That's just one example where murder wasn't even involved by sheer good luck.
I think circumstances suc as her being abused should have played a major role. There's a man who killed a Catholic priest who raped him as a boy who didn't get life without parole! This man spent DECADES of his life away from the priest, came back, killed him and was given a very light sentence. This isn't about save all the murderous children, because I resent anyone putting her in the same categor as children who senselessly kill, torture, rape, abuse ad assault other people for no reason. SHE KILLED HER ABUSER!!! Why is that not the top notch reason she SHOULDN'T be sentenced to life without parole? In most cases those who kill an abuser, even premeditated, tend to get leniency at sentencing. But being a prostitute is probably why she wasn't granted any.
"In most cases those who kill an abuser, even premeditated, tend to get leniency at sentencing. But being a prostitute is probably why she wasn't granted any."
Key.
Personally I think nobody should spend more than 20-25 years in jail unless they are a "dangerous offender" who is likely to murder again. Does any other country make 16 or even 20-year old murderers die in jail?
Let's say a 16 year odl got bored and decided to rape, torture and then murder every child under the age of 5. He gets caught a year later after doing this to about 10-12 children (male and female). Would you advocate this hard for him too? Would you tell the parents of his victims that the *boy* who raped, tortured and murdered their BABIES, INFANTS and TODDLERS was just a child and deserves a chance at life? THat he should have hope? THat he could change and should be trusted in society again not to hurt anybody else?
I think grouping people who are col blooded relentless sociopathic murderer/torturers/rapist in with children who kill the people who abuse them is utter bullshit. Circumsances matter in every homicide/murder. Why throw it all to hell just because little Satan isn't 18 yet? FOR THE RECORD I think Susan was a child who killed her abuser and not some evil human-monster who gets off on causing physical suffering and death of others.
I'm stunned at this. It's so sad that any of it happened at all.
I do think she deserves punishment. But more than that, I think she deserves rehabilitation. And in my opinion, she deserves another chance. Murder is wrong, no two ways about it, but circumstances matter. There is just no way that her sentencing fits the crime.
Even though there is nothing good about this occurrence at all, maybe some good can come of it. Maybe Sara's case will prompt discussion and study of pimps and the sex industry, and maybe other people can learn from her experience and become better informed about the reality of the sex trade.
Well, one thing I think this case - in comparison with the sentences given to male offenders in similar scenarios and so on - does say is that we as women are not felt to have the same right to defend ourselves, especially physically.
Absolutely horrible. How many times do you hear parents say that they would kill someone who would rape their children? How often do you hear women say that they would kill someone who raped them? People are rarely, if ever, chastised for saying such things.
This girl did just that and has now been given a life sentence. This is ludicrous and an affront to humanity. This man was her rapist. Am I saying that she shouldn't have some sort of punishment? Yes, but there are certainly mitigation circumstances in the case (such as rape, previous abuse and neglect, and the fact she was a child). I think her sentencing goes back to the myth that black women (in this case a black child) can not be raped. It also goes to the myth that prostitutes can not be raped. It is difficult and horrific enough for a middle class, white female to get justice for a rape. Imagine how difficult it would be more a marginalized, minority child.
Everyone please read "Celia: A Slave" by Melton A. McLaurin and watch the documentary "Very Young Girls" to see how black female children are exploited, and then exploited again by the state. You can see that not much has changed in a 200 years time.
There is no justice in an unjust society.
Regardless of whether her punishment matches her crime, or her act was heinous or premeditated.
Let's talk about young women not believing in themselves and how this it took this woman 20+ years to "believe in herself". Let's talk about how some(privileged) women come to believe in themselves and figure out "who they are" and find self-confidence and assertion, meanwhile ending up in college and on trajectories to "succeed" and others(poor, typically non-white) end up exploited into prostitution. And then, let's talk about how "learning to believe in yourself" is a non-issue for boys.
Let's talk about educating young women and how young women are raised by communities (peers, family, media) to self-judge, seek men's approval/affection, judge and compete with eachother.......
Agreed, agreed, agreed.
It bothers me that the fact that she was a 'child' is used as many people's primary argument for why she should not be sentences to life without parole.
Her status as a 'child' at that age is debatable at best, and beside the point. I feel that it is unjust to sentence any woman, regardless of her age, to life without parole for killing her pimp and abuser.
BINGO!!!!!
shorter every jerk in this thread:
"I'd find her much more appealing if she was still bloody and bruised and swollen."
You can't tell me that there was nowhere that she could go to get away from her life.
Victim blaming (same thing people said, and sometimes still say about domestic violence survivors).
And such an easy assumption for people who have supportive family contacts, have not been abused, have not had their minds manipulated, and have not been turned away from or poorly treated and judged by social services by virtue of having sold sex (or merely the suspicion/automatic assumption, which often has a lot to do with their race). Yes, there are prostituted people who are actually held captive and surveilled while they sell sex. Yes, there are people who are told that if they move they will be found, raped, and/or killed, and there is plenty of violence to back that up but sometimes the threat alone and knowing that it happened to someone else, or just thinking that your pimp is capable of finding you if you run, killing you, or bringing you back into "the life" is all that it takes. Yes, there are people engaged in the sex trade who very bravely attempt to report assault or rape to the police and then get locked up for prostitution. It's seen as a confession! It happens all the goddamn time. Please tell me why people who can't even legally consent to sex are being arrested and locked up on prostitution charges instead of being recognized as sexual assault survivors and youth who need support? (I'm not talking about Sara per se in this example b/c I don't know if she'd ever had contact with police or the penal system before the murder, but plenty of other girls have and don't get sent to safe houses or home--they get sent to jail).
I am not saying that pimps deserve to die. I am saying that as a society we should take a stand against the abuse and violence against girls and sex workers and create support systems that meet these population's needs and allow them to live healthy, self determined lives. Everyone deserves that. No one deserves to be raped, beaten, threatened, kept as a sex slave, or sent in and out of jail (b/c lets be real, it's a revolving door) for any of those things. No one should have to kill out of desperation arising from these things. And all of that abuse, as well as her status as a minor should definitely be considered a seriously mitigating circumstance.
Maybe she did. But she was a child, raped since the age of 13, and she was groomed since she was 11. She was also most likely drugged. She was traumatized beyond the point of what most of us could possibly imagine. Because of this, she could not possibly see her options, and indeed they were very few. She was simply incapable of being able to think through any options like an adult woman would. It is difficult for adults to get out of these situations.
Had she gone to the police they would have at best laughed her off and at worse arrested her. She also had no parents. Please tell me exactly what she should have did?
Had Elizabeth Smart or Jaycee Dugard killed their abuser would you feel that they would deserve life in prison? They were two girls who were raped and exploited at about the same age Sara Kruzan.
So does this mean we're going to start giving wives who kill their abusive husbands life without parole? 'Cause I'm pretty sure we don't. They get jail time, sure, they did kill someone. But they are considered justified, most people understand domestic abuse to some degree to know that. At least I can't remember a headline where a wife who killed her abusive husband was given life without parole. How could a jury be so callous to this? Just because she was a prostitute does not make it in any way her fault, but I feel that that is how people see it. It doesn't matter that she was 13, that she was raped, probably drugged, none of that matters because when people think of prostitutes they automatically think of immoral women who are asking for it. Drives me fucking crazy. More people should do some research or watch documentaries like Very Young Girls. I watched that documentary and my heart just broke. This story makes my heart break. It is ridiculous.
She killed her abuser. She was a child. Yes, she should be punished, even she knows that, but no one who kills someone in self defense (justified self-defense) deserves life without parole. Especially not children.