Is Texas a lenient state? I just don’t get this, along with some other cases like the “affluenza” case.
Texas is not a “lenient” venue for a trial, but it may very well be a sexist / misogynist venue.
In Texas, the juries can set sentences, and in this case the jury recommended probation- so a lot comes down the particular jury and the particular case.
That may have more to do with the quality of lawyering than the actual facts of the case – obviously the defense was successful in winning the jury’s sympathy. We don’t know what evidence there was, but for purposes of sentencing the jury could consider factors that are beyond guilt/innocence (such as character evidence).
Maybe the prosecutor downplayed the severity of the crime & the need for incarceration ?
(I am appalled that this rapist didn’t get a prison sentence.)
It was a vile act and he should be under the jail because he has a duty to protect patients and it’s worse because she wasn’t his patient.
It boggles the mind, but I would venture to guess that the lawyer persuaded the jury that he had been punished already by losing his medical license.
The fact that he did this to her repeatedly and insisted this was consensual should absolutely have resulted in jail time imo, as it shows he takes no responsibility at all for his behavior. Despicable.
She’ll get even with the civil settlement.
What a horrible story. It seems obvious to me that it couldn’t be consensual. He should have gotten jail time!
I wondered if part of it was race. From HuffPost:
"Sheikh admitted to sex with Laura, but he said that it was consensual. In court, defense attorney Lisa Andrews characterized Sheikh as being overwhelmed with desire for Laura in a bizarrely racist comment.
“Here we have this Latina woman with her fake boobs that came onto that little nerdy middle-aged guy, and he lost his mind,” she said in her closing argument."
ugh
From ABC 13 Houston: The victim’s civil lawsuit against Baylor College of Medicine and Ben Taub Hospital was dismissed by a judge, but is waiting to be heard by the state’s Supreme Court.
How horrifying that “he lost his mind [with lust]” is considered a “defense.” I’m aghast.
Ick! Scary, truly! Who thinks being hospitalized is a good time to be a rape victim! Wow—consensual because the person is so heavily sedated they can’t fight back?
The worst part of the horrible story is that he was probably a serial rapist. If you look at that MO, it looks practiced.
This whole thing is is one big WTH??? The sentence, the crime, etc. However, I wonder how this affected the outcome (from https://www.chron.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Ex-Baylor-doctor-found-guilty-of-raping-patient-13162171.php ):
I’m not sure how they know the timing involved unless she admitted it in court.
Anyway, it would be interesting to hear the thoughts of the jury.
How could they determine with such certainty that her encounter with her husband was during her first night at the hospital and not the night before?!
Maybe through some sort of deterioration of the material? Doesn’t it have a 48-72 hour lifespan? Of course, that doesn’t necessarily prove that she wasn’t incapacitated at the time (ick!). The defense also brought up phone records showing texts and long voice calls.
I’m just grasping at straws to understand why a jury would be so lenient. There has to be something more than, “think of his wife and kids”, blah, blah, blah.
There. Are. No. Words.
Is it possible that the jury was not in agreement regarding the verdict, and that this was their “compromise” in convicting him but not recommending a prison sentence? Without more to the story, it really is difficult to comprehend the probation-only recommendation.
If you weren’t on jury and didn’t get to interview jurors after verdict, you would never know how or why decisions were reached. It’s a very upsetting case and result.
“Here we have this Latina woman with her fake boobs…”
What a disgusting comment by the defense attorney, objectifying the victim.
Unbelievable.