Morning Poll: Did Rachel Brock Get Off Easy?

rachelbrocknewmug.jpg
Rachel Brock could serve no jail time for sexually abusing a then-13-year-old boy.
Rachel Brock, the 22-year-old daughter of Maricopa County Supervisor Fulton Brock, pleaded guilty yesterday to charges that she sexually abused the same teenage boy her mother also pleaded guilty to molesting.

The charges to which Brock pleaded guilty -- two counts of child abuse with sexual motivation -- are much less severe than those with which she was initially charged.

Brock originally was charged with seven counts of sexual conduct with a minor and one count of furnishing obscene materials to a minor. Had she been convicted of those charges, she could be facing decades in prison.

However, because of the plea deal, when she's sentenced in August, Brock faces no more than a year in county jail, and 10 years probation -- and she won't have to register as a sex offender.

Her mother, Susan Brock, was sentenced to 13 years in prison, lifetime probation, and must register as a sex offender for similar crimes.

Rachel was 18 when she began abusing the boy, while Susan was in her 40s -- but the abuse was roughly the same. The sentences: not so much.

We want to know what you think: did Rachel Brock get off easy (no pun intended).

Cast your vote below.





My Voice Nation Help
32 comments
fbruce
fbruce

I Say Arizona,pass out guns & ammo to all the sex offenders and all persons without crime for 5 years  meet up in tombstone for the quick n the Dead tournament with the politicians & Law enforcement that aught to narrow things down   Bet the only ones runnin' are the politicians!

fbruce
fbruce

ere are two groups that scapegoat sex offenders: politicians without platforms and lazy journalists with sheeple to listen to them and spread false fears

fbruce
fbruce

I don't get it. All these special laws just cost us money and don't really accomplish anything. They don't make anyone safer, that's for sure. 

Sex offender registry, ballistic fingerprinting, micro-stamping, special DWI laws, cell phone/driving laws...etc. They really don't protect anyone but they do cost tax payers a fortune and generate a lot of involuntary tax revenue and fines. I just find these laws a pathetic way for lawmakers and law enforcement to justify their huge numbers and reason to be employed.

fbruce
fbruce

The Only way an offender is offensive is if he she they seem offensive that could mean they smell of rum like most politicians Not that I find Rum offensive ,,,;The Politicians however? Hmmmm!Offensive is a matter of perspective Luv!Never let yer self b'come confused by an unclear understandin''o' wot ye be mixed up 'bout! Savy!

fbruce
fbruce

OUR POLITICIANS ARRRRRRRR! just more subtle@ IT, pretty soon there will be no reason to breathe the EPA will say "You THE PEOPLE"are adding too much CO2 to the Environment, your law makers need"You THE PEOPLE" to cut back on the hot air during election season! lol, so they will tell the People "to make sure for Your children's safety we propose a bill to suffocate your kids for only a 30 second intervals for 3 x a day for a month so the law makers can have enough hot air to Blow up some more BS to get paid for what they are not doing & if they are it isn't working either way!!!!!!!!! lol, ROTFLMAO Seriously People

Rurubean
Rurubean

I think we should organize a march , everyone who has been affected by the outragious sex offender laws, or those who are just outraged that the powerful and privilaged dont have to obey the same laws we do. I say we organize in front of Mr Fulton Brocks home. I want to know if he is just as pissed as we are that his whore of a daughter wont be on the registry? She wont have to register for life? Neighbors will never be notified if she moves in the area?? Will she actually be allowed to be around friends/family who are under 18????? Thats not fair ! And I promise you had it been you or I in this position we would have suffer a much worse fate!!!!! DO SOMETHING! DONT JUST TAKE IT!!!!

fbruce
fbruce

  There is no evidence that  registries prevent sex crimes.  But it is clear beyond any doubt that thousands of people have been harmed and many lives ruined through the sex offender registries and scarlet letter laws that brand many people that have not committed any crimes against children as “violent, sexual predators” whocannot go near a school, public library or other facility where children may be present.

While horrific crimes involving abuse of children do occur, these are rare and comprise a tiny percentage of those convicted with sex offenses.  However, the sex offender registries paint all offenders with the same brush whether it is teenagers having sex, a person urinating by the side of the road or someone who brutalizes a child.   Most sex offenses (more than 80%) are committed by family members or other people well-known to the victim.  Repeat offenses by sex offenders are rare with recidivism in most jurisdictions less than 5%.   Existing sex offender laws and the elaborate and costly apparatus to enforce these laws have little effect on preventing sex offenses.  These laws have sprung up around particularly horrible crimes and are often named after the victims.

Evidence-based approaches to preventing child abuse exist but too often are not applied and too often such programs remain underfunded while large funds are consumed by highly visible approaches that provide political benefits to people seeking to get elected on tough on crime platforms.   We propose that all funding for sex offender registries be redirected to fund programs that reduce child abuse.  This starts with training children to recognize abuse and abusers and to say no to the abuser and to report abuse to their parents or guardian or other person with responsibility.  Abusers whose actions are caught early can behelped to understand their actions and to prevent this behavior in the future.  For the sex offender with a deeper problemmore intensive therapy would be warranted.

fbruce
fbruce

Germany, May 15, 1871 - First Version of Paragraph 175 - Unnatural fornication, whether between persons of the male sex or of humans with beasts, is to be punished by imprisonment; a sentence of loss of civil rights may also be passed."What was the outcome of this law that was passed so long ago? When Hitler came to power he "broadened the law so that the courts could pursue any "lewd act" whatsoever, even one involving no physical contact... leading to the possibility of punishment for acts as mild as kissing.... Convictions multiplied by a factor of ten to about 8,000 per year.... Furthermore, the Gestapo could transport suspected offenders to concentration camps without any legal justification at all (even if they had been acquitted or already served their sentence in jail)....Thus, between 5,000 and 15,000 sex offenders were forced into concentration camps, where they were identified by the pink triangle. The majority of them died there. In contradistinction to normal police, the Gestapo were authorized to take sex offenders into preventive detention."

Today in the U.S. we face similar circumstances. True, some refuse to see the similarities between the modern U.S. and Nazi Germany, nonetheless they are HERE

Rurubean
Rurubean

I am absolutely floored by this! I wish we didnt have to accept this "one rule for king, another for country" bullshit!!! MR BROCK, BE A MAN AND SEE TO IT THAT EVERY OTHER PERSON SITTING IN PRISON SERVING DECADES FOR CRIMES IDENTICAL TO WHAT YOUR DAUGHTER DID IS SET FREE !!! Do you think its fair Mr Brock that because a person is not morman or doesnt have the money you have should recieve a heavier sentence then what your pervert daughter got???

Azspeedie
Azspeedie

This is total bullshit. So will she be kicked out of BYU? Or will the Mormon chuch hide this one as well like they do everything else!

ShelomithStow
ShelomithStow

I know nothing about this case that is not in this article, so first of all, how old was the teenage boy when the encounters with Rachel began? Am I the only one who thinks the term "abuse" is being used a bit fast and loose here?  Since age-of-consent statutes were broken, I get it that some terminology indicating illegal activity must be used, but in my opinion, the old "statutory rape" or "statutory misconduct" was a better designator.  At least with that, everyone understood exactly what happened.  With the term "child abuse with sexual motivation," one pictures her tying down an eight-year-old and fondling him with him begging and crying for her to stop.And no; she didn't get off light.  I know that many will not agree with me, but I believe that statuary offenses involving willing teenagers--and she was a teenager when it began--should be handled in a much different way than true sexual molestation of a true child.

Jason
Jason

Rachel got off light because of dear old dad Fulton's position as a member of the MCBOS.

I suspect that now that Fulton's marriage is ruined, his family is ruined, and basically his career is ruined, he will hang his head in shame and go play pocket pool with his hero, the MCSO shurf.  

anon
anon

All I know is, please get that mug shot out of the rotation on the front page!!!!

Arizona Woman
Arizona Woman

This is a very serious case of sexual abuse going on for years, not a single isolated incident or two.  

In Arizona, "touching" over clothing is = to 17 years per "touch" and we aren't even talking about intercourse, oral copulation, etc. This was a "child", with an ongoing relationship that lasted years, not a single of incident. Not that 10 years probation is a day at the beach in a system that's designed to fail.Where are designations? "dangerous crimes against children" that is used for all others in sex crimes with children category?  Where's the sex offender registry, which is lifetime for everyone else?  Unless the legislators begin to correct broad brushing language in their statutes, Ms. Brock, needs to be treated as harshly as everyone else, many who have been falsely accused sitting in prison -- first offense, non-violent, non-sexual "touching" for DECADES. Research how the women have been treated in the past -- one standard for the officials' families and another for the ordinary people whose lives were shredded in a culture of hypocrites exspousing family values.

Jim Davolt
Jim Davolt

This is so bullsh! Why should she be treated any different. No registration is simply ridiculous. Its true its not what you have done but who you know. I think everyone should be contacting the courts and protesting this, maybe if enough people complain about it, they would change it. Wait a minute, who am I kidding this is Arizona..home of the politically embarrassing and unjust court system.

Mistalee
Mistalee

" and she won't have to register as a sex offender. "

Meanwhile, some drunk fool who is seen whipping it out to piss against a wall will be tried as a sex offender, be registered as a sex offender and have to live with the stigma for the rest of his life when he was just passing beer through his kidneys and there was nothing sexual about it.

Mistalee
Mistalee

Apparently, she got off easy and often. 

Cuminurmouth
Cuminurmouth

Ask her daddy Fulton if she "gets off easy?"  

shadeaux14
shadeaux14

If this was a male, pleading guilty to the same offense, he would most assuredly go to prison. Gender, and in Az., political connections do make a difference. So much for "Equal treatment under the law."

Brucegreywolf
Brucegreywolf

I like Yer muster mate I'm wonderin' ifin ye have restrictions @ present, I used to; so just askin' wanna join up with a real Crew I'm recrutin' Savvy! We have other means that will help with out a said march will you talk to me?

ShelomithStow
ShelomithStow

But Rubean, isn't the real point, not that she should be on a public registry that lumps school-boy pranks with violent rapes and that research shows is a total failure at preventing sexual abuse, but that no one should be on it.  A  better way of separating offenses by actual risk of threat to the community and then managing only those that are indeed threats must be found.

fbruce
fbruce

I would hazzard an educated guess there would be violence threatened ...I'm Game, Fer a fair Donnybrook!, let's roll!

FormerRepublican
FormerRepublican

Those who sit in powerful positions passing judgment on others and abusing their power in a systemic culture of cruelty and inhumanity, will one day pay a huge price. People need help NOT incarceration, but Arizona's lawmakers "tough on crime" has created laws that put ALL at risk including themselves, only they should also receive the same draconian punishment they want for others, until they wake up, get some common sense and "reform" (improve) poorly written laws that broad-brush everyone into one box which should be reserved only for the truly sick and depraved violent offenders. These are serious life destroying charges that should not be handed out lightly, as has been done for years in Arizona. 

fbruce
fbruce

REALLY! Even if I liked the physical abuse, as a kid that face would scare the hell out of me it would have to be a double bagger in case hers fell off! & Hell no I wouldn't tell I would be too embarrassed! ROTFLMAO!!!!! I usually try not to Character assassinate but lol....WOOF! But Hey My mug shot aint great either! lol No One's ever is the cops like you to look scuzzy so every one that sees you sees you as a dirty ugly mean nasty person,;that way if you wind up wanted....people are more likly to turn you in! law enforcement tactic

Anon
Anon

Mistalee, You brought up a keep point. Sex offender registry is a lifetime sentence where the taxpayers pay to follow an individual for their entire lives. This group has been singled out. Ms. Brock is very much an example of a person with disturbing sexual conduct with a mother who set the example -- and fits the profile of who should be on a registry. It's time to review the sex offender registry if she is let off the hook and do the same for all others who are in the child sex crime category.

Arizona Woman
Arizona Woman

Most other women have been treated very harshly in Arizona with more women being incarcerated in Arizona than men. The incarcerated women are treated the same as "men" since prisons were designed for men NOT women.  The sheriff will tell the world everyone is treated equally (that is except him and his sidekicks).

Anon
Anon

Brock is a "side-kick" who fostered the sheriff's cruel and unusual punishment culture. When some of these officials are stung in the butt with their poorly written laws, then maybe that when common sense reform will take place.

Now Trending

Phoenix Concert Tickets

From the Vault

 

Loading...