Judges draw criticism over rape cases

Two New Jersey judges have come under fire for their handling of rape cases, one for asking whether a 16-year-old Eagle Scout “from a good family” should face serious consequences over a video-recorded assault on an intoxicated teenager.

Another judge asked whether a 12-year-old girl’s loss of virginity constituted serious harm.

The comments, which follow other cases of perceived leniency toward sex offenders from privileged backgrounds, led victim advocates to question whether judges are qualified and trained to handle sex assault cases in the #MeToo era.

“Survivors’ worst fears are coming to life. They’re fearful of victim blaming or having the crimes committed against them be minimized,” said Patricia Teffenhart, executive director of the New Jersey Coalition Against Sexual Assault.

Monmouth County Judge James Troiano said in his opinion that the Eagle Scout charged with assaulting a 16-year-old girl at a pajama party had good test scores and was on track to attend a top college.

According to an appeals court decision in June, the teenager sent friends a video of him having sexual intercourse with the girl, along with a text, saying: “(w)hen your first time having sex was rape.”

Troiano called the encounter different from “the traditional case of rape,” where “two or more males” attack someone at gunpoint. And he attributed the text to “a 16-year-old kid saying stupid crap to his friends.”

The judge wrote that the “young man comes from a good family who put him into an excellent school where he was doing extremely well. … He is clearly a candidate for not just college but probably for a good college. His scores for college entry were very high.”

Lawyer Debra Katz said Troiano was redefining the legal standard for rape and should be removed from the bench.

Troiano, a retired judge who serves part time, did not return calls seeking comment.