Judge Gives White Student No Prison Time For Raping 2-Year-Old Girl And Livestreaming It Online

He streamed the assault online when he was just 16 years old.
In another scary moment in which white privilege trumps the safety of potential victims, a white male was recently given a very lenient sentence for a very serious crime.
Kraigen Grooms, now 19 years old, plead guilty to second degree sexual assault in April 2013 when he was just 16 years old because he had raped a 2-year-old girl and streamed the whole thing online, with at least one other person watching. Prosecutors determined that the act was premeditated and claimed that before he was caught for this disgusting crime, he was planning a similar assault on a 3-year-old boy.
When Grooms was initially convicted, he faced a 25-year prison sentence, but in July of this year he plead guilty to “a lesser charge of engaging in a lascivious act with a child.” Because of this reduced offense, a judge sentenced him to five years of supervised release and a potential 10-year suspended sentence if he breaks parole.
While County Attorney Gary Oldenburger said that he was likely coerced by people online to commit the sexual acts, forensic analysis of computers used in the transfer of video recordings revealed that Grooms found the incident “so hot” and was plotting a second attack. Photos of an unidentified male child around 3 years old were discovered with arrangements for online streaming and recording the assault.
The family of the 2-year-old victim had said that they didn’t wish for Grooms to be sentenced to significant prison time and Oldenburger said that this was the main motivation for giving him a light sentence with no prison time. However, an argument can be made that the safety of potential, future victims needs to be considered before simply letting Grooms out on probation.
He has undergone several mental health evaluations since he was first arrested, but if treatment doesn’t work, it’s likely that another toddler, or even several, could become victims of his horrible sexual plots. If he was convinced once to molest a toddler, perhaps he could be coerced again or even act on his own.

This light sentence in favor of a white defendant is only one in a long line of recent light sentences. Infamous Brock Turner was recently released from jail after serving only three months for digitally penetrating an unconscious woman near a dumpster. Last month, Austin Wilkerson was sentenced to only probation and a 2-year jail sentence after he sexually assaulted a drunk female victim that was in his care. Despite the victim asking the judge to “have as much mercy for the rapist as he did for me that night,” he gave Wilkerson no prison time. By comparison, black assailants are consistently sentence to 5-15 years in prison.
The judge, Randy Degeest from Iowa, is facing online criticism and online petitions have even been circulated to have him fired.

What are your thoughts on Grooms’ release? Please share, like, and comment on this article!


Declassified FBI Docs Confirm: Americans — NOT Foreigners — Orchestrated Terrorism Post 9/11

In a not-so-shocking revelation, largely unreported by the mainstream media, newly declassified Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) documents have confirmed that “a broadening U.S. military presence overseas and outreach by Islamist ideologues” was behind an 11% increase in plotted terror attacks against the United States since 2006 — and those terror attacks were orchestrated by Americans, not foreign nationals.
According to an Intelligence Assessment of 57 terrorist plots against the United States and U.S. interests between 2001 and 2010 — carried out in 2011 by the Los Angeles Division of the FBI and the Joint Regional Intelligence Center (JRIC) — “foreign nationals led anti-US targeting prior to 2006 plotting 52% of all terror attacks,” but sociologically- and religiously-diverse American nationals [read homegrown terrorists with no identifiable religious affiliation] plotted 70% of the terror attacks on their own land, beginning 2007.
The report states:
“The FBI and the JRIC assess with high confidence, based on available and reliable open source reporting, that the upward trend in participation by the U.S. persons named in the dataset was due to self-selection, sometimes passively influenced by Internet provocateurs, but was not due to a formal, face-to-face recruitment plan by foreign violent extremists. The FBI and the JRIC do not rule out that a larger recruitment strategy to radicalize US citizens exists; however, based on the current dataset, it was not a factor in the overall rise in targeting by US persons against the United States and U.S. interests.”

U.S. Foreign Policy Instigates Terrorism…

As The Free Thought Project points out, the notorious war on terror, excessively aggressive foreign policy, as well as the invasive surveillance state sparked enough resentment post 9/11 to radicalize American nationals and breed homegrown terrorists. The FBI report substantiates:
“Two central themes galvanized actors: anti-U.S. sentiment based on a perception that the United States was at war with Islam, and the belief that violent jihad was the righteous, and in fact, requisite response. 32% percent of those who provided a justification for their actions described it as their religious duty to “defend Islam” against perceived threats. This motivation was expressed consistently, whether the extremist was a U.S. person or foreign national. Regardless of the consistent motivation, U.S. persons drove the post-2006 increase in anti-US activity.
“U.S. military action in Afghanistan and Iraq factored into the decision-making process of action-oriented extremists in approximately 25% of cases between 2001 and 2010. Beyond Afghanistan and Iraq, action-oriented extremists named a variety of alleged provocations, including the 2006 clash between Hizballah and the Israelis, and the publication of cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed by a Danish newspaper. Two subjects, Ronald Allen Grecula (U.S. person) and Michael Curtis Reynolds (U.S. Person), both indicted in 2006, agreed to work with Islamist extremists due to personal issues, not religious or political conviction.”
This is not the first time America’s foreign policy and its overseas military actions have been identified as stirring global and domestic terrorism.
A 2004 Federal Advisory Committee report admitted that:
“American direct intervention in the Muslim World has paradoxically elevated the stature of and support for radical Islamists… When American public diplomacy talks about bringing democracy to Islamic societies, this is seen as no more than self-serving hypocrisy. In the eyes of Muslims, American occupation of Afghanistan and Iraq has not led to democracy there, but only more chaos and suffering.
“U.S. actions appear in contrast to be motivated by ulterior motives, and deliberately controlled in order to best serve American national interests at the expense of truly Muslim self-determination. Therefore, the dramatic narrative since 9/11 has essentially borne out the entire radical Islamist bill of particulars.”
In 2006, the first formal assessment of global terrorism by United States’ intelligence agencies (since the Iraq war began) found that the American invasion and occupation of Iraq helped spawn a new generation of Islamic radicalism and that the Iraq war had made the overall terrorism problem worse.

…But, Does Anyone Care?

The FBI disclosure runs against the entire premise of Barack Obama administration’s Countering Violent Extremism (CVE) programs aimed at reducing the threat of terrorism in the United States. The very fact that the FBI/JRIC report was published five years ago yet the U.S. government did nothing to: end its nefarious war of terror, reset its foreign policy, or amend its domestic spying program, is a proof that the United States is deliberately ignoring its own responsibility in promoting terrorism worldwide. As The Free Thought Project notes:
“Considering U.S. foreign policy generally protects corporate and imperial interests in natural resources such as oil and, notoriously, opium poppies, among many others, the profit lies in obfuscating that fact while promoting a false need to continue unending war.”