Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 purplefood wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 purplefood wrote:
It's also easy to hate rapists...
You know because they're rapists...

Yep. It's also easy to be annoyed when people shout at me like I'm defending rapists when I'm questioning the quality of a report exploiting peoples mindless and childlike hatred of rapists to get free hits on their website.

Well i don't think anyone seriously think you're defending the rapists...
That would be stupid...
The article isn't a great one but it's not exactly uncommon for a story to be written before more facts present themselves...

The facts have been available for some time. This all happened 2 years ago.

Well then i need to read more carefully after a few drinks and i agree with you concerning the article...

 Mannahnin wrote:

The girl is eleven years old. I don't care if she was walking around naked wearing a sandwich board with "me service you cheap, only five dolla" on, anyone who touches her is a rapist, because she is incapable of giving informed consent.

No one disagrees with this.

 Yodhrin wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Hrrrrm, yeah, just like all them kids who's relatives abuse them over a period of years and years. and they don't tell anyone about it; surely that MUST mean that they were asking for it. It couldn't be because they're terrified of reprisals, or because they don't feel they have anyone to turn to, no, it obviously just means they're a slut and it's their own fault :

EDIT: And yes, I am judging them, all of them; the rapists and the moronic townspeople who support them, because this isn't some wishy-washy "won't somebody PLEASE think of the children?!" story, an eleven year old girl was raped, repeatedly, by multiple people. There is no ethical context in which that is ok.

There is such a concept as innocent until proven guilty, and the article seems incomplete, leaving several important questions unanswered. Such as, how on Earth did this happen several times over a span of months? The townspeople may all be horrible monsters, or possibly they may have some reason (good or bad) to be suspicious of the process and the authorities there. It's very easy to freak out and condemn them all, but there does remain a small chance that there's more to the story.

There are a number of things that come to my mind how this could have happened, the most promonent thought is that the girl was being threatened by her assailants. In these kind of circumstances, the attackers can have an all powerful aspect to the victem, who is convinced that no one can help them. I've had the chance to meet several parents whose children were being abused by relatives or family friends over lengthy periods of time before discovery. These kind of people are good at controling the victim and covering their tracks to the point that the abuse can go on for years and even extend to siblings of the victim.
Perhaps the girl was convinced by her attackers that what was happening wasn't wrong and was even a good thing, but it had to be kept a secret. When this happens, she feels like she's part of something that makes her important and she doesn't want to lose it.
There are really quite a number of ways something like this can be kept from parents. The big misconception of pedophiles is that they are mostly guys in overcoats lurking around parks and schools. The exact opposite is true. They usually turn out to be trusted friends or relatives of the family or the victim who are suprisingly good at using the victim's help in keeping things secret.

Relapse wrote:
@Dogma, I think I catch your meaning if you're saying that parents expect that their children would have been world beaters, but being raped took that from them. Feel free to correct me on that if I'm wrong.

Not world beaters, just a different kid; the kid they wanted. One of the things I have most frequently encountered with rape victims (male or female) is that their parents could not cope with the rape in the manner that they did. Lots of "You're gay now." and "You're not my daughter."

Relapse wrote:

One of the best things, in most cases that I've seen or heard of is for the parents to seek counciling for themselves as well as their child and to talk with others who have gone through similar circumstances.

This is one of those the "More important for the parents than the kid." circumstances I think, and have experienced. I recall a friend telling me that her mom's first response was "Its alright baby, we're Catholic." Fill in the blanks*.

*Didn't know the rape involved a choir boy...or maybe did; it was an old family.

 dogma wrote:

Relapse wrote:
@Dogma, I think I catch your meaning if you're saying that parents expect that their children would have been world beaters, but being raped took that from them. Feel free to correct me on that if I'm wrong.

Not world beaters, just a different kid; the kid they wanted. One of the things I have most frequently encountered with rape victims (male or female) is that their parents could not cope with the rape in the manner that they did. Lots of "You're gay now." and "You're not my daughter."

Relapse wrote:

One of the best things, in most cases that I've seen or heard of is for the parents to seek counciling for themselves as well as their child and to talk with others who have gone through similar circumstances.

This is one of those the "More important for the parents than the kid." circumstances I think, and have experienced. I recall a friend telling me that her mom's first response was "Its alright baby, we're Catholic." Fill in the blanks*.

*Didn't know the rape involved a choir boy...or maybe did; it was an old family.

There is definitely a wide spectrum of emotion to deal with for all concernned in a situation like this. The girl's father I talked with wanted to turn his back on the whole affair. I told him if he did, he could very well be setting the stage for someone else to be attacked because this guy would possibly be let off by the judge. When I first heard about my daughter's attack, it seemed like all the emotion left me, which was just as well, because it allowed me to make decisions and put things in motion that led to this guy being taken away.
My wife did tell me later it was like I was someone else, although to me, I felt the same.

I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

Monster Rain wrote:I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

Well, you see, if she gets pregnant as a result, then it obviously wasn't rape.

/vitriolic sarcasm; I feel gross even making that joke

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Sorry but I can't think of any possible excuses to validate it......

Can tell us?

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Sorry but I can't think of any possible excuses to validate it......

Can tell us?

What is it with you people and the basic inability to tell the difference between a defense of rape and a criticism of yellow journalism? It's as if there has to be exactly two sides, no more no less, to everything or else it doesn't count. If there's anything that time and time again pushes me away from this community it's the total lack of maturity or capacity to handle even simple nuances like "Well that story leaves out a lot of important facts". How does requesting more information about a story have anything to do with defending rape? Hell, the story wasn't even about the rape it was about the missing original suspect and how the reporter wonders whether the towns racial divide is harming the investigation.

But that flew right over your head.

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Sorry but I can't think of any possible excuses to validate it......

Can tell us?

What is it with you people and the basic inability to tell the difference between a defense of rape and a criticism of yellow journalism? It's as if there has to be exactly two sides, no more no less, to everything or else it doesn't count.

Is business good for trawling out two year old rape stories so that bored wargamers can get their heckles by proving whose angrier about something they didn't even know existed until now? It must be, because the people in this thread play like a puppet.

Well shuma, incase you can't tell from my post? Im admitting im unable to tell.
Hence I asked if you are willing to tell us what can the other side actually bring to light that can change the situation.

Im not here to judge him, or the validity of MSNBC, Im just curious in what you can come up with.

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Sorry but I can't think of any possible excuses to validate it......

Can tell us?

What is it with you people and the basic inability to tell the difference between a defense of rape and a criticism of yellow journalism? It's as if there has to be exactly two sides, no more no less, to everything or else it doesn't count.

Is business good for trawling out two year old rape stories so that bored wargamers can get their heckles by proving whose angrier about something they didn't even know existed until now? It must be, because the people in this thread play like a puppet.

Well shuma, incase you can't tell from my post? Im admitting im unable to tell.
Hence I asked if you are willing to tell us what can the other side actually bring to light that can change the situation.

Im not here to judge him, or the validity of MSNBC, Im just curious in what you can come up with.

I don't think that's true. I have very clearly stated that I think the report was a cash grab at an easy headline topic, and that the case itself is irrelevant to the story as presented. If they wanted to be informative and give a helpful perspective they wouldn't have given such blatantly clear bias and insinuated that half of a city is sheltering a child rapist. What it seems you, purple food, and monsters rain want are cheap shots to feel strong.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

It happened two years ago, the case is ongoing, the report presents a clear bias and insinuates that large portions of a city are hiding a repeated child rapist for racial reasons and it does it without presenting any meaningful information that would serve to give the reader a perspective beyond "black dudes raped a girl, ya'll should be ashamed". It's a gakky article with a clear bias and a very clear intent. There's no rationalizing here, the article exists so that armchair judges can hoot and hollar about something that's over.

It was probably a slow news week.

 ShumaGorath wrote:
I don't think that's true. I have very clearly stated that I think the report was a cash grab at an easy headline topic, and that the case itself is irrelevant to the story as presented. If they wanted to be informative and give a helpful perspective they wouldn't have given such blatantly clear bias and insinuated that half of a city is sheltering a child rapist. What it seems you, purple food, and monsters rain want are cheap shots to feel strong.

I assure you shuma, I have no interest in cheap shotting anything to feel strong about anything.
I dont know the victim, I dont know the accused, I dont know MSNBC, and I don't know you.

Im merely curious on what possibility is there to change the situation, to make the other side more innocent. Because you sound like you can provide some ideas, so I asked.

You might be looking too much into this. I follow a very basic logic shuma.

Wow how in the world does this have a town or community divided? On its face it is just wrong, and immoral in nearly every culture.

Now about this innocent until proven guilty thing, that only applies in a court of law. There is no application of this in the court of public opinion which is what we have here.

Make all the judgements you like, but there is nothing good coming to the people that perpitrate these kinds of acts.

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
I don't think that's true. I have very clearly stated that I think the report was a cash grab at an easy headline topic, and that the case itself is irrelevant to the story as presented. If they wanted to be informative and give a helpful perspective they wouldn't have given such blatantly clear bias and insinuated that half of a city is sheltering a child rapist. What it seems you, purple food, and monsters rain want are cheap shots to feel strong.

I assure you shuma, I have no interest in cheap shotting anything to feel strong about anything.
I dont know the victim, I dont know the accused, I dont know MSNBC, and I don't know you.

Im merely curious on what possibility is there to change the situation, to make the other side more innocent. Because you sound like you can provide some ideas, so I asked.

You might be looking too much into this. I follow a very basic logic shuma.

Nothing I have said in my posts indicates that I think a side is more or less innocent. The article wasn't even about the innocence or guilt of the suspects. The article is about the towns separation and racial anxiety that is possibly exacerbating the circumstances of trying the case.

You are all the ones that decided to turn it into a contest to scream "I don't approve of rape" the loudest. Not me. Not the article.

 ShumaGorath wrote:


You are all the ones that decided to turn it into a contest to scream "I don't approve of rape" the loudest. Not me. Not the article.

Really? I wasn't aware I was like that.... oh well.

i just hope that what happens to pedophiles at the prison near my house (folsom state prison) happens elsewhere, pedo what admitted a while back, a week later the news reports said fellow inmates effectively drawed and quartered the man, even California's worst criminals dont approve of that....

Innocent until proven guilty?

Well the guy who went on the run was proven guilty, two of the adults and all of the juveniles pleaded guilty and could probably be convinced to testify against those who didn't.

I don't see many of them avoiding jail time.

Indeed. There was a confession, video evidence, and eye witness testimony. I find it hard to be convinced that all of this was falsified.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
Nothing I have said in my posts indicates that I think a side is more or less innocent.

So, in other words, you're just trying to make yoruself feel better than everyone else around you. Gotcha.

I, and several other people, have responded to the article's being about the tensions in the town itself. Namely, I find it illogical given the evidence presented in court. While I hate to stereotype, but part of me just wants to say "Gee, trailer park residents being illogical. How bizarre and unheard of is this."

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

We don't have any info on WHY the townspeople are so divided, and some of them distrustful of the authorities. I'm all for condemning rapists. I don't have enough data to join in the chorus saying the non-rapists in the town should be killed and the earth of their homes salted.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LunaHound wrote:

 ShumaGorath wrote:
It happened several times over the span of months. Did her parents do nothing? Was she being payed? That article leaves an awful lot out.

Sorry but I can't think of any possible excuses to validate it......

Nothing can validate the rapes, and no one here is claiming it can. What is being questioned is whether there are any factors or missing information which can explain WHY the other townspeople are reacting this way. And no, "trailer park people are illogical", is not a reason.

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

We don't have any info on WHY the townspeople are so divided, and some of them distrustful of the authorities. I'm all for condemning rapists. I don't have enough data to join in the chorus saying the non-rapists in the town should be killed and the earth of their homes salted.

Aside from documented victim blaming, you mean?

"Them boys didn't rape her," Angie Woods told the Houston Chronicle in April. "She wanted this to happen."

 Monster Rain wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

We don't have any info on WHY the townspeople are so divided, and some of them distrustful of the authorities. I'm all for condemning rapists. I don't have enough data to join in the chorus saying the non-rapists in the town should be killed and the earth of their homes salted.

Aside from documented victim blaming, you mean?

"Them boys didn't rape her," Angie Woods told the Houston Chronicle in April. "She wanted this to happen."

Looks like the Sisters have a job to do.

Seems some of the residents think that because it wasn't what one might think of when one hears "rape", i.e. kicking and screaming, overt assault, then it's not really rape.

In a community where all there is to do is drink and feth and fight, sexuality happens at a young age, particularly for girls.

Similar stories have likely played out time and again in that community, it likely seems normal for many residents, and that is why "half the town" isn't out howling for the offender's blood.

Doesn't make it right, just likely what is happening in this case.

feeder wrote:
Seems some of the residents think that because it wasn't what one might think of when one hears "rape", i.e. kicking and screaming, overt assault, then it's not really rape.

In a community where all there is to do is drink and feth and fight, sexuality happens at a young age, particularly for girls.

She was 11, and assaulted by 20 guys.
I think your interpretation of the events is a bit off.

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
11, and assaulted by 20 guys.
I think your interpretation of the events is a bit off.

You think that if this was a case of violent gangbang then the town would be divided? Some people would be claiming she wanted it?

No, I think what we have here is statutory rape, a little girl grown up too fast, and racism.

Doesn't make it right, just what likely happened here.

feeder wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
11, and assaulted by 20 guys.
I think your interpretation of the events is a bit off.

You think that if this was a case of violent gangbang then the town would be divided? Some people would be claiming she wanted it?

No, I think what we have here is statutory rape, a little girl grown up too fast, and racism.

Doesn't make it right, just what likely happened here.

Video evidence, confessions and the testimony of the girl in question be damned?

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

feeder wrote:

 CthuluIsSpy wrote:
11, and assaulted by 20 guys.
I think your interpretation of the events is a bit off.

You think that if this was a case of violent gangbang then the town would be divided? Some people would be claiming she wanted it?

No, I think what we have here is statutory rape, a little girl grown up too fast, and racism.

Doesn't make it right, just what likely happened here.

Video evidence, confessions and the testimony of the girl in question be damned?

I don't know, where can one read the testimony and confessions?

 dogma wrote:

 Gen. Lee Losing wrote:

Nice.
Thread about the destruction of a child's life... bring in politics. Good work.

Her life hasn't been destroyed as she isn't dead. She has been prevented from living a life in which she wasn't statutorily raped, but her life hasn't been destroyed*.

That being said, it is relevant that certain members of certain parts of the political spectrum seem to distinguish between "legitimate rape" and "illegitimate rape". Saying "ZOMG tragedy, we can't talk about politics!" is basically a failure to appreciate how political and social (because I hate the word "sociopolitical") circumstances affect the manner in which the relevant town has split.

I wasn't aiming for some GOP bashing, the 'legitimate rapes' comment while coming from a single politician reflects the though processes quite a few people have concerning rape. My comment is more following on from those I made in another thread recently about there being a culture surrounding rape which is coming through from multiple stories on the topic. There are people and certain groups of people, who do not appreciate it for what it is. They are dismissive or apologists for it, it amounts to victim blaming and slut shaming, rather than real condemnation of the crime.

 Mannahnin wrote:
There is such a concept as innocent until proven guilty, and the article seems incomplete, leaving several important questions unanswered. Such as, how on Earth did this happen several times over a span of months? The townspeople may all be horrible monsters, or possibly they may have some reason (good or bad) to be suspicious of the process and the authorities there. It's very easy to freak out and condemn them all, but there does remain a small chance that there's more to the story.

Maybe there are other reasons for the community to be sceptical. I could understand this better if the comments from the townsfolk were just of horror and disbelief, but those reported are more along the lines of an apologist attempting to excuse or explain it away; 'she didn't look 11', 'she wore makeup' or 'doesn't sound like she put up much of a fight'. It doesn't seem like some townsfolk actually deny outright that a child was raped, so much as question the validity of labelling a group of people having sex with an 11 year old as rapists in the first place.

People making these sorts of comments will probably claim any guilty verdict is an injustice and continue to claim blame the victim for 'luring' the offenders into having sex with them. I've seen and heard it before, the rapist will still somehow be see as a victim by some.

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
People making these sorts of comments will probably claim any guilty verdict is an injustice and continue to claim blame the victim for 'luring' the offenders into having sex with them. I've seen and heard it before, the rapist will still somehow be see as a victim by some.

That's along the lines of what I am getting at. This sort of passive attack is likely common in the community, and there is a mentality of "don't run with dogs if you don't want to get fleas."

Doesn't make it right, etc.

feeder wrote:

 Howard A Treesong wrote:
People making these sorts of comments will probably claim any guilty verdict is an injustice and continue to claim blame the victim for 'luring' the offenders into having sex with them. I've seen and heard it before, the rapist will still somehow be see as a victim by some.

That's along the lines of what I am getting at. This sort of passive attack is likely common in the community, and there is a mentality of "don't run with dogs if you don't want to get fleas."

Doesn't make it right, etc.

I can see why a black community would be skeptical of rape charges given the long history of false rape charges used against black males. Though the fact that there is actual evidence should make them realize that this isn't a case of racially motivated false accusations

 Jihadin wrote:
Think they're down on the same level as pedaphiles in prison.

Well raping an 11 year old counts as both rape and paedophilia, the accused had better have a cell to himself.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Monster Rain wrote:

 Mannahnin wrote:

 Monster Rain wrote:
I'd like to hear more rationalization of how a news story is reporting adults having sex with an 11 year old out of context.

We don't have any info on WHY the townspeople are so divided, and some of them distrustful of the authorities. I'm all for condemning rapists. I don't have enough data to join in the chorus saying the non-rapists in the town should be killed and the earth of their homes salted.

Aside from documented victim blaming, you mean?

"Them boys didn't rape her," Angie Woods told the Houston Chronicle in April. "She wanted this to happen."

Hold on, if she is 11 she can't legally consent to sex with an adult.

no, in the us, most states have a age of consent of 18, the only one i know of that isnt that is Washington, which is 16.