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Troiano is not the only judge whose outdated opinions about sexual assault have created controversy.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.

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

payment methods

WHO DOESN’T LOVE A POSITIVE STORY—OR TWO?

“Great journalism really does make a difference in this world: it can even save kids.”

That’s what a civil rights lawyer wrote to Julia Lurie, the day after her major investigation into a psychiatric hospital chain that uses foster children as “cash cows” published, letting her know he was using her findings that same day in a hearing to keep a child out of one of the facilities we investigated.

That’s awesome. As is the fact that Julia, who spent a full year reporting this challenging story, promptly heard from a Senate committee that will use her work in their own investigation of Universal Health Services. There’s no doubt her revelations will continue to have a big impact in the months and years to come.

Like another story about Mother Jones’ real-world impact.

This one, a multiyear investigation, published in 2021, exposed conditions in sugar work camps in the Dominican Republic owned by Central Romana—the conglomerate behind brands like C&H and Domino, whose product ends up in our Hershey bars and other sweets. A year ago, the Biden administration banned sugar imports from Central Romana. And just recently, we learned of a previously undisclosed investigation from the Department of Homeland Security, looking into working conditions at Central Romana. How big of a deal is this?

“This could be the first time a corporation would be held criminally liable for forced labor in their own supply chains,” according to a retired special agent we talked to.

Wow.

And it is only because Mother Jones is funded primarily by donations from readers that we can mount ambitious, yearlong—or more—investigations like these two stories that are making waves.

About that: It’s unfathomably hard in the news business right now, and we came up about $28,000 short during our recent fall fundraising campaign. We simply have to make that up soon to avoid falling further behind than can be made up for, or needing to somehow trim $1 million from our budget, like happened last year.

If you can, please support the reporting you get from Mother Jones—that exists to make a difference, not a profit—with a donation of any amount today. We need more donations than normal to come in from this specific blurb to help close our funding gap before it gets any bigger.

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