Mom Gets 30 Years For Throwing Sex Parties
I’ll preface this piece by saying that I don’t condone what Silvia Johnson did. Giving drugs and alcohol to minors - bad.
But…30 years? Are you shitting me? That’s a 2nd Degree Murder sentence! ! We’ve seen so many stories of parents getting a slap on the wrist for beating and torturing kids, and the judge in this case wants Johnson locked up for three decades for what is essentially a victimless crime? (Yeah, I said it. She gave these kids drugs and alcohol. Which is bad. But there’s a great deal of difference between handing a teenager a joint and a Miller and, say, shooting someone.) Normally, the less I know about the specifics of the crime the better, but in this case I’m dying to hear the details. And I’m very curious about the judge - something tells me he goes to sleep with a gun in one hand and a Bible in the other.
One more thing. I can understand a teenager wanting to sleep with that LeTourneau chick. But Miss Johnson looks an awful lot like the mom on That 70’s Show. Call me shallow, but that’s wrong on so many levels.
Tags: arvada, badly+Colorado, behaving, Colorado, cool-parents, drugs+alcohol+parents, sex-partiesRelated Stories
POSTED IN: Uncategorized
7 opinions for Mom Gets 30 Years For Throwing Sex Parties
Candace J
Nov 15, 2005 at 12:20 pm
Is this the same woman I did a post on in September?
…after checking…
It is! Wow, 30 years. That does seem a bit harsh. Though, I suppose she got some of those years for statutory rape. She had been accused of sleeping with some of the teen boys she hosted the parties for.
Jeff Suchy
Nov 15, 2005 at 12:54 pm
Where was this judge a few posts back (Parents get three years for starving child?) Seems like a bit (25 yearsish) too much.
Malik
Nov 15, 2005 at 5:42 pm
Victimless crime?! She repeatedly raped five minors over the course of a year. If it was a man, and he sexually abused five girls for more than a year, (or five boys for that matter), you’d be all for it.
That Girl
Nov 16, 2005 at 3:46 am
If she was a man and it was teenage girls she probably would’ve gotten off easier. Im sure the harsh sentence had more to do with the fact that the judge saw her as a slut rather than an abuser.
thordora
Nov 17, 2005 at 5:24 am
While this might sound weird, I think we’re forgetting that male adolescents have a slightly different view on this type of thing….she didn’t hold the boys down and rape them did she? Did they continue to return to the “cool mom’s house?” I am not condoning, nor do I think what she did is right, but there is a world of difference between men and women with this type of thing. And before anyone uses the word coercion, that doesn’t fly in cases where it’s a man and a girl, so why would it for a woman and some boys?
30 years for this is asinine. Some guy in my area, who had child porn of over 119 kids on his pc, got a whopping year. And this doesn’t even touch on the many cases of horrific child abuse detailed on this site, or rape cases where the offenders get less than 5 years, and people are almost dead, or dead.
That Girl was right-being a Slut still costs you.
Jas...
Nov 17, 2005 at 2:35 pm
I wondered what the boys were thinking when she offered to have sex with them! I mean, I know what horny is, but I was never THAT horny! I’m glad I wasn’t the only one to think it!
Doug
Nov 23, 2005 at 8:45 pm
Just another example of americans putting sex, and drugs as more dangerous than violence and murder. Wasn’t suprised to see the post that decided that a man was more likely to get a lesser scentence come from someone with a tag “that girl”. The judge was a women!!! Why would she be more likely to send a women to jail for longer than a man??? Its more likely the case that this judge is a judicing (i made up a word, so what?) maniac, not a slut hater. Wow i could rant for a while on gender equality (which i’m all for. Sex with young boys, or young girls, same sex or different sex, is all statutory rape.