Some women think that Jodie Tucker’s sexual assault is defensible, but it’s sheer hypocrisy.
A drunk man who molested an innocent young woman on a train should be hanged, have his testicles chopped off or be imprisoned for life, my loyal readers would say.
A drunk woman who molested an innocent young woman on a train ‘made a mistake’, according to numerous females who have criticised my coverage of the court case.
Tucker, a 26-year-old HR professional from Swindon, attacked a university student who selflessly took on the responsibility of getting her home safely.
A complete stranger, the woman was left traumatised by the events that followed. The victim revealed how she’s suffering from hair loss and horrific nightmares – forcing her to repeatedly relive it.
Tucker placed her hand on the Good Samaritan’s knee, before moving up her thigh and touching her crotch – over the victim’s clothing – before being told to stop.
Ignoring her plea to stop the unwanted sexual behaviour, she once again placed her hand in the victim’s lap and touched her inner thighs.
Yes, she was, according to her solicitor, “very, very, very drunk”. But is that a defence? No, in law it’s actually an aggravating factor – meaning her offence was more serious, not less serious.
The Sentencing Council states: “The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending.”
I think we can all agree that Tucker’s crime was awful, but some people – mainly women – continue to defend her actions by suggesting it was simply a ‘mistake’.
Why when a man commits a similar crime we want him condemned to prison or even death? Is Tucker’s pretty smile enough to sway us from wanting her to pay for her abuse?
One of the angry women in my inbox earlier today told me that “it wouldn’t bother me” if a drunk man carried out the same attack on her whilst travelling on a train. Somehow, I doubt it.
In the interests of complete transparency, the women asked me if I skipped jail time for a criminal offence I committed nearly ten years ago – implying that my crime was as serious and yet I avoided a stint behind bars.
Personally though, I don’t think the theft of a few mobile phones from a £200 million company compares to sexually assaulting someone, causing them severe emotional distress and ongoing mental health issues.
I’ve never sought to defend my crime. I did it, I admitted it, I served my sentence and I’ve lived a squeaky clean life since. I also accepted the press coverage and abuse that came with it – including having my face plastered across the front page of two local newspapers.
Tucker’s solicitor managed to convince the judge to reduce her sentence from a 12-month community order, which was recommended by probation, to an 11-month one. But why’s this significant?
It’s significant because when you’re handed a community order of more than one year, you must register as a sex offender for five years. Tucker won’t have to, despite being a sex offender.
When scientist Dr Prabhat Sakya touched two women on the train during one journey, he was sentenced to 52 weeks’ imprisonment suspended for 24 months. He also had to register as a sex offender for ten years.
Tucker sexually assaulted one less woman, but it was still a serious offence – one that should have been met with the register and a suspended sentence at the very least.
The amount of compensation awarded to her victim won’t even cover eight counselling sessions. What comfort is that when you’re scarred for life?
Join the conversation about this on Facebook >
