>Over 800 serial rapists, criminals who have struck 10-15 times without being stopped, were identified. 127 convictions have been made this far.
The definition of serial rapist is 10+ victims. That's a lot of them in one county. o_O
The definition of serial rapist is 10+ victims. That's a lot of them in one county. o_O
>One of the most astounding findings here is that you've identified 817 serial rapists. That's 817 people who attacked more than one person
>A rapist rapes on average seven to 11 times before they're caught. ... Of our set of 817 ... over 50 of them have 10 to 15 hits apiece.
Still horrifying.
The numbers here don't tell us how many kits are taken annually, what percentage of women report and get a kit done at the hospital, or how many years' worth of kits this was.
Well, the discussions when they came home were "fun". One of those discussion was about a young man who raped a young girl. The judge said something like "it's the first time i felt guilt and compassion from a rapist". It was disturbing, so i asked her to tell me a little more than this, and she told me that at most, rapists regrets being caught, regret "not being able to control themselves" but she can never feel sentiment over the victim except jealousy. The prison counselor and my mother agreed, and my mother even said that the boy might be either a really good faker, either an extreme case. Later i learned that the boy had a schizophrenic episode and was send to a mental hospital rather than prison (as he should).
I have nothing to conclude this, but i do think personnally than most rapist should be on watch after a prosecution, and should be really costly. I don't think they can reform, and the only way second crime to be safe from them is to take them out of the society (aka long prison time).
Source: I used to work for the sex crimes unit of the public defender.
Not even close. At its peak, in 1950, it had 1.6M to New York's 7.8M. BTW Wikipedia has various "Demographic history of" pages to satisfy your curiosity.
Perhaps you could use Wikipedia to satisfy your curiosity
a) Wrong on the population in the year given
b) Choose the incorrect decade for peak population with respect to the size of other cities in the US.
c) Gave a snide remark to the user to use Wikipedia while unable to do so themselves...
[Edit rate limited reply] Well I guess you learn something new everyday, but the parent insinuated the poster did not know this to be the case with the BTW, so you can read it however you'd like
I understood your underlying point, but I don't think the correction is attempting to nitpick you, just striving for accuracy.
I believe it also held claim to the largest city by land area. (Not counting metro area — just city limits.)