Blake Invitational 1 Kamiak nb aff

14 Walton JA Aff

https://hsld.debatecoaches.org/Walton/Alayof+Aff

Theory Disclosure

Interp - Must disclose all unbroken positions on the wiki

Aff Plan Sexual Offenses

I affirm.

Framework

Ethics is divided between ideal and non-ideal theory. Ideal theory ask what is demanded in a perfect world while non-ideal theory ask what is demanded in a world that is already unjust. Prefer non-ideal theory as a meta-ethical starting point:

Social Reality- ideal theory ignores social realities, which in turn contradicts ideals. Normative ideals aren't created separately from the social norms that govern us because those influence what we can count as an ideal in the first place.

Standpoint Epistemology: Ideal theory strips away questions of particularities and isolates a universal feature of agents. This normalizes a single experience and epistemically skews ethical theorizing.

Thus, the standard is minimizing structural violence. Non-ideal theory necessitates structural violence since instead of following rules that assume an already equal playing field, we take steps to correct the material injustice.

Prefer additionally-

Debate that does not attempt to find practical solutions ignores everyday violence-only a standard that creates spaces for finding solutions and looks at the specific, empirical analysis is productive and ethical.

Smith 13 Elijah. "A Conversation in Ruins: Race and Black Participation in Lincoln Douglas Debate" 2013 IB

At every tournament you attend this year look around the cafeteria and take note of which students are not sitting amongst you and your peers. Despite being some of the best and the brightest in the nation, many students are alienated from and choose to not participate in an activity I like to think of as homeplace. In addition to the heavy financial burden associated with national competition, the exclusionary atmosphere of a debate tournament discourages black students from participating. Widespread awareness of the same lack of participation in policy debate has led to a growing movement towards alternative styles and methods of engaging the gatekeepers of the policy community, (Reid-Brinkley 08) while little work has been done to address or even acknowledge the same concern in Lincoln Douglas debate. Unfortunately students of color are not only forced to cope with a reality of structural violence outside of debate, but within an activity they may have joined to escape it in the first place. We are facing more than a simple trend towards marginalization occurring in Lincoln Douglas, but a culture of exclusion that locks minority participants out of the ranks of competition. It will be uncomfortable, it will be hard, and it will require continued effort but the necessary step in fixing this problem, like all problems, is the community as a whole admitting that such a problem with many "socially acceptable" choices exists in the first place. Like all systems of social control, the reality of racism in debate is constituted by the singular choices that institutions, coaches, and students make on a weekly basis. I have watched countless rounds where competitors attempt to win by rushing to abstractions to distance the conversation from the material reality that black debaters are forced to deal with every day. One of the students I coached, who has since graduated after leaving debate, had an adult judge write out a ballot that concluded by "hypothetically" defending my student being lynched at the tournament. Another debate concluded with a young man defending that we can kill animals humanely, "just like we did that guy Troy Davis". Community norms would have competitors do intellectual gymnastics or make up rules to accuse black debaters of breaking to escape hard conversations but as someone who understands that experience, the only constructive strategy is to acknowledge the reality of the oppressed, engage the discussion from the perspective of authors who are black and brown, and then find strategies to deal with the issues at hand. It hurts to see competitive seasons come and go and have high school students and judges spew the same hateful things you expect to hear at a Klan rally. A student should not, when presenting an advocacy that aligns them with the oppressed, have to justify why oppression is bad. Debate is not just a game, but a learning environment with liberatory potential. Even if the form debate gives to a conversation is not the same you would use to discuss race in general conversation with Bayard Rustin or Fannie Lou Hamer, that is not a reason we have to strip that conversation of its connection to a reality that black students cannot escape. Current coaches and competitors alike dismiss concerns of racism and exclusion, won't teach other students anything about identity in debate other than how to shut down competitors who engage in alternative styles and discourses, and refuse to engage in those discussions even outside of a tournament setting. A conversation on privilege and identity was held at a debate institute I worked at this summer and just as any theorist of privilege would predict it was the heterosexual, white, male staff members that either failed to make an appearance or stay for the entire discussion. No matter how talented they are, we have to remember that the students we work with are still just high school aged children. If those who are responsible for participants and the creation of accessible norms won't risk a better future for our community, it becomes harder to explain to students who look up to them why risking such an endeavor is necessary. As a student provided with the opportunity and privilege of participation by the Jersey Urban Debate League, I can remember plenty of tournaments in high school where the only black students at the tournament were individuals from my high school. It was a world shattering experience; no one spoke to us first and those we did approach didn't have to acknowledge the fact that, every weekend, our failures and successes made us the representatives of black America in the minds of students and judges that never had to freely associate with black people. The irony of participation for black students is that to understand your existence in an academic, usually white, space throws that very space into question. They are both told that joining debate will make you smarter, more personable, and better able to communicate; however those who are already there don't speak to them, they don't vote for them, and they don't associate with them. The unanswered question, then, is "For which bodies does LD exist?" Continuing to parade LD under the guise of neutrality will reproduce the problem at hand. Hiring practices, Judge Preferences /Strike Sheets, invitations to Round Robins, and who coaches don't require their students to associate with all contribute to the problem at hand because they "accidentally" forget to include people of color. When only two major debate workshops bothered to hire anyone black to work with their students this summer it spoke to the reality of which bodies are seen as being competent enough to teach. Their skills as pedagogues weren't dismissed because they aren't qualified, but because they are black. If we are to confront structural discrimination against the black community, we can't retreat to a defense of neutrality but have to take strides in addressing and ending the cycle of exclusion. If black students do not feel comfortable participating in LD they will lose out on the ability to judge, coach, or to force debate to deal with the truth of their perspectives.

Structural violence is the most educational and fair. In the real world this is what policy makers take into account and think about, they also have the most empirical and direct effects, which is makes it the most educational. And, provides the fairest weighing mechanism. Under phil you can just exclude all my impacts and under util you can say some vague extinction outweighs.

Plan

Resolved: the United States Federal Government should abolish plea bargaining in court cases involving sexual offenses.

Abolishing plea bargaining boost the legal system's credibility, which increases deterrence that can be used to disincentivize future sexual assaults.

Fine 87 (Ralph Adam Fine, American judge, author, and television personality who served on the Wisconsin Court of Appeals from 1988-2014, "Plea Bargaining: An Unnecessary Evil", Marquette Law Review, Volume 70, Issue 4, Summer 1987) JS

The very essence of deterrence is credibility. As I point out in Escape of the Guilty, we keep our hands out of a flame because it hurt the very first time (not the second, fifth, or tenth time) we touched fire. If deterrence is to work, we must, in the words of noted Norwegian law professor and criminologist, Johannes Andenaes, make "the risk of discovery and punishment" outweigh "the temptation to commit crime." 10 Yet, plea bargaining destroys this needed credibility. A good example is what happened in two states with strict gun laws. Massachusetts and Michigan have both tried to control the unlawful use of guns. Starting in April of 1975, someone carrying a handgun without a license in Massachusetts faced a mandatory one year in jail. Michigan's anti-gun law went into effect in 1977 and required that an additional two years be tacked on to any felony sentence if the defendant was carrying a gun at the time of the crime. Prosecutors and judges in Massachusetts took the law seriously and it worked. However, the Michigan story, as Harvard Professor James Q. Wil- son relates, was different: Many judges would reduce the sentence given for the original felony (say, assault or robbery) in order to compensate for the add-on. In other cases, the judge would dismiss the gun count. Given this evasion, it is not surprising that the law had little effect in the rate at which gun-related crimes were committed." As a 1973 report of the U.S. National Advisory Commission on Criminal Justice Standards and Goals concluded: Since the prosecutor must give up something in return for the defendant's agreement to plead guilty, the frequent result of plea bargaining is that defendants are not dealt with as severely as might otherwise be the case. Thus plea bargaining results in leniency that reduces the deterrent impact of the law.12 Deterrence is, of course, further weakened as the criminal brags about his deal and spreads word throughout the com- munity that the law has no teeth. Dean Roscoe Pound of the Harvard Law School, who studied plea bargaining in the 1920's, called it a "license to violate the law"'13 and, over a hundred years ago, the Wisconsin Supreme Court derisively condemned it as "a direct sale of justice."14

Plea bargains let offenders get off with minimal punishment, which increases the likelihood that they'll become repeat offenders.

Martin 12 Kyle Martin, Staff Writer, 2-11-2012, "Many break law again after first offender sex crime plea," Augusta Chronicle, http://chronicle.augusta.com/news-metro-crime-courts/2012-02-11/many-break-law-again-after-first-offender-sex-crime-plea JS

Of the 84 people given first offender status for sex crimes in the past 11 years in Richmond County, one-third committed new crimes before their probation expired, an Augusta Chronicle database shows. Some of those new offenses were sex crimes: rape, public indecency and child molestation. Georgia law doesn't allow first offender status for some sex crimes, including sodomy, incest and child molestation, but records show defendants are allowed to plead to lesser offenses that do qualify for it, such as misdemeanor sexual battery. First offender status allows a person to walk away without the stain of a felony conviction if he or she completes probation or a prison sentence without any violations. District Attorney Ashley Wright said that generally plea bargains are allowed for lesser sex crimes when the evidence isn't strong or the witnesses are small children who prosecutors are reluctant to place on the witness stand. Louis Hameed, for instance, was charged with aggravated child molestation because a 13-year-old girl gave him oral sex when he was 17. Because they were close in age, Hameed was allowed to plead to a lesser charge. He successfully completed probation and is not a registered sex offender. In another case, William Mark Richardson was charged with aggravated sexual battery but pleaded guilty to misdemeanor false imprisonment. He was one of four defendants accused of inserting a toilet plunger handle into the rectum of a fellow inmate at Augusta's Youth Detention Center. The victim later gave conflicting statements as to whether penetration occurred, so the prosecutor settled on an agreement with the defense. "They exercised good judgment, and I'm OK with it," Wright said of her staff. However, some cases come back to haunt prosecutors and open questions about why they were granted first offender status. Gerald Wayne Smith was arrested in 2003 on charges of assaulting three women. An indictment accused him of choking a woman and ordering her to take her clothes off; forcing another woman to give him oral sex; and abducting a third woman who was threatened with murder and forced to perform oral sex. Smith pleaded guilty midway through his trial to two lesser offenses of false imprisonment. He had a prior arrest as a peeping Tom, but that charge was dropped, so he qualified for first offender status. He was given 10 years of probation. Five years later, in 2008, Smith and Tommy Middleton were accused of raping a woman. Smith pleaded guilty to rape and received a six-year sentence, with four years of probation. Middleton received one year in prison and seven years of probation for his Alford plea, which acknowledges a guilty verdict is likely and is treated as a guilty plea by the courts. Forty-five percent of the 84 first offenders listed in the Chronicle database received more than one probation revocation during their sentence. This could be the result of committing a new crime, not complying with court-ordered counseling, not notifying a probation officer of a new address or not paying fines. The rest succesfully completed probation, and most are not on the sex offender registry. One such case is that of Eldrige Bronson, who was indicted on a statutory rape charge at age 18 in 2004 for having sex with a female younger than 16. A year later, he pleaded guilty and received 10 years of probation as a first offender. That probation was terminated early in 2007, and he is not on the registry.

Advantage 1 is Rapists

Plea bargains allow for rapists to be convicted of a less serious offense, which adds insult to injury for victims.

Williams 10 Rachel Williams, freelance writer, 3-20-2010, "Fewer rape convictions because plea bargains prevail, report suggests," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/mar/20/rape-convictions-lady-stern-cps JS

Hundreds of convictions gained in rape cases are actually for lesser offences, official figures reveal. In her landmark review into the handling of rape cases, Lady Stern suggested this week that there should be greater focus on the fact that of rape cases that got to court, 58 ended in conviction for rape or a related offence. But Ministry of Justice records show that in 2008 only 38 of rape cases won a conviction for rape itself. Alternative convictions were generally for offences such as sexual assault or sexual activity with a child under 16 - a much easier charge to prove because consent is not an issue. But they could also include non-sexual crimes such as a violent attack that was part of the incident, although the Crown Prosecution Service said this was highly unlikely to occur. Alternative convictions could come about because of a plea bargain, where a rape or - more likely - attempted rape charge is dropped after a defendant offers to plead guilty to a lesser sexual offence, or because the jury is given two alternative charges and convicts on the lesser one, acquitting the defendant of rape. Campaigners said reducing rape to a less serious offence was a "kick in the teeth" for victims. "The sentence will be lower, the man will be out sooner, and the victim may also get less or even no compensation," said Ruth Hall, of Women Against Rape. "The rapist will be confirmed in his view that he can get away with rape and is more likely to do it again." When a charge of sex with a minor is used instead of rape it can be particularly harrowing for the victim, because it suggests she consented to the activity. The mother of an underage teenage girl who complained she had been raped by a teenage boy but saw him charged with sexual activity with a child said: "She still is judged by others as a result of this charge and the subsequent pathetic sentence."

The impact is injustice for victims - plea bargains enable the defendant to avoid punishment for rape and they send a message that rape isn't a serious offense.

Martin 14 Tim Martin, columnist for the Times Standard, 8-2-2014, "No more plea deals for sex offenders," Times Standard, http://www.times-standard.com/article/ZZ/20140802/NEWS/140808593 JS

A typical plea deal requires that the defendant plead guilty to a lesser charge in exchange for the prosecutor's agreement to not charge the defendant with a greater crime, dismiss other charges, or recommend a reduced sentence. How does the court system determine that sex offender probation for a crime of violence is more effective than, say, placement on the Megan's Law sex offender registry? The usual excuse is that "half a loaf is better than none." They insist that when evidence is weak it's best to give a rapist a lighter sentence than risk an acquittal. Evidently, job performance and job security outweighs justice in our courts. Studies show that convicted rapists often spend an extremely short amount of time behind bars. A 45-year-old California soccer coach was sentenced to one year in prison after pleading no contest to raping one of his players while she was drunk and unconscious; A Washington attorney got four defendants off with zero jail time after they raped a 15-year-old-girl; A Montana District Judge sentenced a former high school teacher to 30 days in lockup for raping a 14-year-old student, who later killed herself. The judge stated that the victim was "older than her chronological age" and "as much in control of the situation" as the teacher. An Alabama man was convicted of raping his neighbor when she was 14 and had his 40-year prison sentence suspended in full. The light sentences were all a result of plea deals. Why do judges and DAs cook up an alternative universe in which rape is used as a bargaining chip? Do they misunderstand the seriousness of the crime? Are they busy with "more important" cases? Traditionally a rape victim has no voice in the plea bargain and no right to pursue her assaulters as she deems fit. In the most basic terms, plea deals are between the prosecutor and defense that the judge must agree to accept for it to go forward. What justice is there for a rape survivor when the offender gets off easy and never has to acknowledge his crime? Is it fair that a victim must live with issues about intimacy and trust for the remainder of her life? Using rape as a negotiating tool sends a dangerous message to sex criminals and child predators, too. It tells them that the sexual abuse of a female by a male is not actually a serious crime. But according to the FBI, rape is the nation's second most violent crime, trailing only murder. After the occurrence of rape, a victim can experience a multitude of emotional and mental effects that make the reporting process difficult, from shock and anxiety to denial and fear. Sexually assaulting a person is about as close as you can come to killing them.

Even a "win" for the prosecutor via a plea deal is insufficient for the victim, which answers Neg turns.

Center for Research on Violence Against Women 11 "What percentage of rape cases gets prosecuted? What are the rates of conviction?" UK Center for Research on Violence Against Women, December 2011 JS

Participation in prosecution, plea negotiations, and testifying in sentencing phases are difficult and controversial victims' rights issues across many crimes, but are particularly complicated in sexual assault cases . Researchers examining the difficulties of rape survivors throughout the criminal justice process emphasize that a "win" for a prosecutor (e.g., a guilty plea to any charge) may not be the justice sought by a survivor who needs, for example, the truth of her experiences to be publicly acknowledged, or wants to prevent the offender from sexually assaulting others (5, 14, 29). A plea deal to a lesser charge or a conviction on a non-sexual crime may not feel like justice since the offender is never required to actually admit or acknowledge that he raped the survivor.

Independently, plea deals allow offenders to get reduced sentences that enable them to commit future crimes and even engourouges them to commit more rape

Williams 10 Rachel Williams, freelance writer, 3-20-2010, "Fewer rape convictions because plea bargains prevail, report suggests," Guardian, https://www.theguardian.com/society/2010/mar/20/rape-convictions-lady-stern-cps JS

Hundreds of convictions gained in rape cases are actually for lesser offences, official figures reveal. In her landmark review into the handling of rape cases, Lady Stern suggested this week that there should be greater focus on the fact that of rape cases that got to court, 58 ended in conviction for rape or a related offence. But Ministry of Justice records show that in 2008 only 38 of rape cases won a conviction for rape itself. Alternative convictions were generally for offences such as sexual assault or sexual activity with a child under 16 - a much easier charge to prove because consent is not an issue. But they could also include non-sexual crimes such as a violent attack that was part of the incident, although the Crown Prosecution Service said this was highly unlikely to occur. Alternative convictions could come about because of a plea bargain, where a rape or - more likely - attempted rape charge is dropped after a defendant offers to plead guilty to a lesser sexual offence, or because the jury is given two alternative charges and convicts on the lesser one, acquitting the defendant of rape. Campaigners said reducing rape to a less serious offence was a "kick in the teeth" for victims. "The sentence will be lower, the man will be out sooner, and the victim may also get less or even no compensation," said Ruth Hall, of Women Against Rape. "The rapist will be confirmed in his view that he can get away with rape and is more likely to do it again." When a charge of sex with a minor is used instead of rape it can be particularly harrowing for the victim, because it suggests she consented to the activity. The mother of an underage teenage girl who complained she had been raped by a teenage boy but saw him charged with sexual activity with a child said: "She still is judged by others as a result of this charge and the subsequent pathetic sentence."

Advantage 2 is Autism

False sexual offense cases against defendants with autism are inherently unfair - they result in naïve plea deals that have severely damaging consequences.

Kelmar 16 Brian Kelmar, father of a 24 year old son with autism and auditory and sensory processing disabilities, 4-6-2016, "Mislabeled a Sex Offender: The Kelmar Family's Fight for Justice," Arc Blog, https://blog.thearc.org/2016/04/06/mislabeled-sex-offender-kelmar-familys-fight-justice-2/ JS

My name is Brian Kelmar, and I am the father of a 24 year old son who has autism and auditory and sensory processing disabilities. Our nightmare began almost six years ago, right after my son graduated high school. It's a case of the "perfect storm" that resulted in my son being punished and treated as an outcast in our community and in society. Do words like "trusting, bullied, eager to please, and not understanding social situations" sound familiar? These words describe my son and how he interacts and/or experiences the world around him. Like others with autism, he had few friends growing up, let alone a girlfriend. That core need for friendship hasn't changed. He continues to long to fit in and feel included, and have friends in his life that he can talk to. So, when a female friend of my younger son started texting my son, he was so happy that he found someone nice to talk to. The girl's texts started innocently enough with just small talk. The communication began when he was away at a college summer orientation where he was learning about the autism program he was to begin in the fall. The texting from her soon became very sexually aggressive, and he did not understand what the texts were about. He answered her questions with short words or answers, such as "like", "what", "ok", and "huh"? She pointed out to him, "you really don't understand what I am talking about" in regards to her sexual statements like "friends with benefits" and "hooking up," along with more graphic content which he did not understand. When reading the back and forth texting, it's clear to anyone reading these messages that they were going right over my son's head. After he returned from orientation, she repeatedly began asking him to meet with her. He had no idea of how to handle her sexually aggressive messages, and he certainly didn't foresee what would happen next. When he met her in person, she became very sexually aggressive. Like other people with autism and sensory issues, he can easily become overwhelmed and shut down, similar to a computer that has too many programs open at the same time. This is exactly what happened during her sexual advances. When his mind "rebooted" and his thought process reengaged, he told her to stop. She did and he took her home. That same evening the police came to our house in the middle of the night. Since the front door is closest to my son's room, he answered it. Not understanding the situation and thinking the girl was in trouble because she was the aggressive one, he answered their questions before I got to the door. The police took him to jail for two days until I could get him released on $100,000 bail. In an instant, my son's life was changed forever. My son and our family entered a criminal justice system that we had no idea how to maneuver, and a system that had no idea about autism. Our lawyer had no experience with autism or working with people with disabilities. We were told by the attorney that the only option was to plea bargain. Later I discovered that is how most cases are resolved, through plea bargaining (experts estimate that 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state cases are resolved through plea bargaining). During the sentencing phase, the judge heard testimony from the court appointed forensic psychologist with comments like: "It was the alleged victim that was grooming him for a sexual encounter" "He did not understand the situation" "She was the aggressor" These statements were all true based on the evidence of the text messages. The judge understood the situation, and gave my son a ten year suspended sentence. We never had any written plea bargain agreement. Then he was sentenced to 10 years probation. What we did not find out until after the sentencing was that due to the way the law was written, he would not only be on the sex offender registry, but he would be put on the violent sexual predator list for life. This was absolutely devastating and the consequences last a lifetime. This punishment will limit his ability to be employed, where he or our family can live, where he can travel to visit family members or even his future family (if they are under 18). He can't even travel to see his own grandmothers now because of the laws affecting travel between states. This whole experience has been like a slow, agonizing psychological death sentence for him, and for our entire family.

This is not an isolated incident - The CJS is set up to doom these people.

Hill 17 Roberta Ruth Hill; writer, poet, and researcher who has written various research books and a biography about what it was like to raise her son with autism as a single parent; 1-27-2017, "False Confessions of People with Autism," Autism Parenting Magazine, https://www.autismparentingmagazine.com/autism-false-crime-confessions/ JS

According to the paper, people with autism can give misleading indications of guilt because of a sophisticated form of echolalia, trickery and deceit, and believing that the police officers are authority figures. This creates a justice system where all autistic individuals are at a disadvantage due to the special techniques that police officers and other law enforcement personnel apply in questioning them. Furthermore, we were told by my son's lawyer at the time that he would not bring up autism during his trial because autism can't be used as a defense, nor could his family testify on his behalf. His lawyer would not use it to explain his false confession either. The justice system does not allow an individual with autism to use a diagnosis as a defense, which also means that autism is not a viable reason for a false confession. It's a catch-22 situation! The judicial system seems to be set up in such a way that people with autism are overlooked by a blind spot that erodes their ability to receive the same justice that people without disabilities receive. How can the justice system still continue to ignore the plights of people with autism within the current legal system? Is it justice for all or justice for some?

The impact of this is devastating, it addition to the false conviction at hand it ruins their future chance of life.

Kelmar 16 Brian Kelmar, father of a 24 year old son with autism and auditory and sensory processing disabilities, 4-6-2016, "Mislabeled a Sex Offender: The Kelmar Family's Fight for Justice," Arc Blog, https://blog.thearc.org/2016/04/06/mislabeled-sex-offender-kelmar-familys-fight-justice-2/ JS

My name is Brian Kelmar, and I am the father of a 24 year old son who has autism and auditory and sensory processing disabilities. Our nightmare began almost six years ago, right after my son graduated high school. It's a case of the "perfect storm" that resulted in my son being punished and treated as an outcast in our community and in society. Do words like "trusting, bullied, eager to please, and not understanding social situations" sound familiar? These words describe my son and how he interacts and/or experiences the world around him. Like others with autism, he had few friends growing up, let alone a girlfriend. That core need for friendship hasn't changed. He continues to long to fit in and feel included, and have friends in his life that he can talk to. So, when a female friend of my younger son started texting my son, he was so happy that he found someone nice to talk to. The girl's texts started innocently enough with just small talk. The communication began when he was away at a college summer orientation where he was learning about the autism program he was to begin in the fall. The texting from her soon became very sexually aggressive, and he did not understand what the texts were about. He answered her questions with short words or answers, such as "like", "what", "ok", and "huh"? She pointed out to him, "you really don't understand what I am talking about" in regards to her sexual statements like "friends with benefits" and "hooking up," along with more graphic content which he did not understand. When reading the back and forth texting, it's clear to anyone reading these messages that they were going right over my son's head. After he returned from orientation, she repeatedly began asking him to meet with her. He had no idea of how to handle her sexually aggressive messages, and he certainly didn't foresee what would happen next. When he met her in person, she became very sexually aggressive. Like other people with autism and sensory issues, he can easily become overwhelmed and shut down, similar to a computer that has too many programs open at the same time. This is exactly what happened during her sexual advances. When his mind "rebooted" and his thought process reengaged, he told her to stop. She did and he took her home. That same evening the police came to our house in the middle of the night. Since the front door is closest to my son's room, he answered it. Not understanding the situation and thinking the girl was in trouble because she was the aggressive one, he answered their questions before I got to the door. The police took him to jail for two days until I could get him released on $100,000 bail. In an instant, my son's life was changed forever. My son and our family entered a criminal justice system that we had no idea how to maneuver, and a system that had no idea about autism. Our lawyer had no experience with autism or working with people with disabilities. We were told by the attorney that the only option was to plea bargain. Later I discovered that is how most cases are resolved, through plea bargaining (experts estimate that 90 to 95 percent of both federal and state cases are resolved through plea bargaining). During the sentencing phase, the judge heard testimony from the court appointed forensic psychologist with comments like: "It was the alleged victim that was grooming him for a sexual encounter" "He did not understand the situation" "She was the aggressor" These statements were all true based on the evidence of the text messages. The judge understood the situation, and gave my son a ten year suspended sentence. We never had any written plea bargain agreement. Then he was sentenced to 10 years probation. What we did not find out until after the sentencing was that due to the way the law was written, he would not only be on the sex offender registry, but he would be put on the violent sexual predator list for life. This was absolutely devastating and the consequences last a lifetime. This punishment will limit his ability to be employed, where he or our family can live, where he can travel to visit family members or even his future family (if they are under 18). He can't even travel to see his own grandmothers now because of the laws affecting travel between states. This whole experience has been like a slow, agonizing psychological death sentence for him, and for our entire family.