« Notable new initiative, Safe Streets & Second Chances, taking "evidence-driven approach to the chronic issues of recidivism" | Main | Encouraging new report on prospects for prison reform legislation emerging from Congress »

January 24, 2018

Highlighting comments, commentary and consequences from state sentencing of mass molester Larry Nassar

The nature of Larry Nassar's crimes and of his victims contributed to his state sentencing earlier today (basics here) garnering lots and lots of attention.  I suspect in days to come we may see continuing commentary about Nassar's crimes and their enduring consequences, and tonight I thought to highlight a few particulars already garnering attention.

First, certain comments made by the state judge at sentencing have prompted an array of reactions, and so I thought it useful to link here to a full transcript of the judge's full comments at sentencing.  I think it is fair to call everything about the Nassar case remarkable, and the judge's sentencing statement also merits that adjective.

Second, and speaking of the judge and her sentencing comments, over at Slate Mark Joseph Stern already has this notable commentary headlined "Larry Nassar’s Victims Deserved a Judge Like Rosemarie Aquilina."  The piece closes with these lines: "The result was impassioned and imperfect.  It was also what Larry Nassar deserved."

And third, this local article reports on a noteworthy consequence of Nassar's crimes: "Michigan State President Lou Anna Simon resigns hours after Nassar sentencing."  I hesitate calling the MSU Prez another victim of Nassar, but I do not hesitate predicting that Nassar's crimes will reverberate in many ways and in many areas for quite some time to come.

Prior related posts:

January 24, 2018 at 11:15 PM | Permalink


Lesbian failed to protect young girls, had to resign in disgrace. See the story on Lou Ann Simon, President of Michigan State. This is a horrible story, and this lesbian must be held accountable, fully. It went on for decades, with multiple complaints. She did nothing to protect heterosexual girls.

Posted by: David Behar | Jan 25, 2018 1:05:19 AM

He will get a new sentencing hearing if he appeals. The judge's comments were over the line. She showed not just empathy and sympathy for the victims ( as she should and is completely proper), but to say she will have a victim with her if she speaks to the media and speculation about other crimes and a few other comments, will cast sufficient doubt on her impartiality that he would likely get a new sentencing.

Posted by: defendergirl | Jan 25, 2018 9:06:05 AM

Professor, this is why you should conclude that Mr. Behar has abused the privilege.

Posted by: Publius | Jan 25, 2018 11:45:55 AM

Publius. What is the religion of Dr. Larry Nassar? That may explain the forbearance of his misconduct for decades by lawyer traitor scum, like you.

Posted by: David Behar | Jan 25, 2018 12:16:05 PM

Publius: I long ago concluded that David Behar rather enjoys abusing his commenting privileges. But because I am such a strong believer in free speech, I remain disinclined to ban him. Nearly every day he tests my patience, and I am always saddened that he fails to realize how much he undermines his goals and message with his poor rhetorical choices and excessive repetition of ad hominens.

Posted by: Doug B. | Jan 25, 2018 12:49:56 PM

Prof. Berman. You are not at risk for this. I am interested in Facebook/Twitter/Google.

Look at the deed to your home. If you own a house, you may exclude people from it. However, your property line extends to the sidewalk or even to the middle of the street in front of it. So, you are liable for injuries on the sidewalk. You can be fined for not removing the snow on your sidewalk. It is your property, but is open to the public. You may exclude people from your living room. You may not exclude people from your sidewalk. It is open to the public. In the proper time and manner, I may have a loud protest on your sidewalk.

When I am banned from Facebook, I am being excluded from the biggest sidewalk in the world, where 2 billion people have been invited. I am not being excluded from their living room.

No one has spotted this problem, but it is self evident.

Posted by: David Behar | Jan 25, 2018 1:00:12 PM

Publius. I am the ambassador from earth to the lawyer profession. Prof. Berman may enjoy getting news from earth once in a while. The stuff I say is what everyone else thinks. As a member of a criminal cult enterprise, you are isolated from outside facts and current thinking.

It is ironic. I am accused of using ad hominems. However, the lawyers here have only attacked me personally, and very rarely tried to rebut the points I make. These are self evident to everyone, down to Life Skills students, learning to eat food with a spoon.

Posted by: David Behar | Jan 25, 2018 1:03:48 PM

Mr. Behar, I'm really quite confident that virtually no one else is thinking the "stuff" you write. The reason few seek to rebut the assertions you make is that the vast majority of them are incoherent such that rebuttal is either impossible or unnecessary. And I've not attacked you in any ad hominem way. I've criticized your statements, not you personally. You, on the other hand, take every opportunity to label people and professions and to deride kids with special needs with your insipid references to "Life Skills students."

Professor Berman, I share your strong commitment to free speech. But this is your blog and not the town square, and you are a private actor and not the government. It is of course and in all events your choice, but it seems a shame to have the usually hearty dialogue here polluted by nasty, often incohent and sadly repetitious comments (surely even Mr. Behar could come up with something more clever than the "Italian death penalty," "lawyer traitor scum" and "Life Skills students"). If I invited friends over to sit around, have a glass of wine and talk, and one of them began ranting offensively, I'd probably ask him to go home.

Posted by: Publius | Jan 25, 2018 2:25:38 PM

The Slate article notes:

"Yet even that was largely a theoretical issue. Nassar was convicted on federal child pornography charges in December; a judge sentenced him to 60 years in prison, which he will serve before doing time in Michigan. Thus, even if Aquilina had given Nassar a lighter penalty—he agreed to a sentence floor of 25 to 40 years in his plea deal—he still would have died in prison."

What will a new sentencing hearing get him?

Posted by: Joe | Jan 25, 2018 8:23:00 PM

Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB