[murdoog]

It seems there is a middle ground between speaking up for him at his sentencing and boycotting his book, especially if it's as good as the article suggests.

I myself am a pointy headed professor, and my biggest problem with using a book by someone like this guy (who, let me make clear, I think is a monster and probably got too light a sentence), would be that he would make money from it. It would have been good if, as part of the sentence, profits from sales of his textbook went to his victims.

[murdoog]

who, let me make clear, I think is a monster and probably got too light a sentence

To be clearer still, strike the word "probably"

[T'wit]

> It seems there is a middle ground between speaking up for him at his sentencing and boycotting his book

An interesting point. The book, of course, is blameless, and evidently useful. Nor has it any connection with the crimes. I don't see any legal basis for taking away the professor's royalties. The only "option" left -- and let's be clear that I am joking <g> -- is to snub his copyright and flood the market with zillions of cheap pirated copies.

[Draco]

. . . if profits form the sales [of the rapist Professor's geology book] when to the victim.

Agreed, Murdoog, but this was a criminal trial and the merits of your argument/wish must await a civil trial, which I hope the boy's parents undertake. The rationalization of the professors makes the words "ivory tower" seem insufficient.