Stubenville rape case comes to an end

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.

**LordofHats**

Kilkrazy wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

Good point

but I guess that'll depend on how one gauges effect. Is false accusation only damaging if it leads to a prosecution? Just because a cop says "there's nothing to investigate here" doesn't mean that anyone will believe them. And given the seriousness of rape allegations I doubt a cop would just wave it off without some kind of investigation at which point everyone you may know has seen cops walking around asking if you're a rapist. Even if it is later found to be false, you're stuck with everyone you know remember that cops were walking around asking if you're a rapist.

**Howard A Treesong**

I don't believe that people get so drunk they can't tell the difference between right and wrong. It might have taken away some inhibitions, but the issue is that some of these 'sport stars' appear to enjoy a very privileged position where they feel entitled to have certain things and get what they want. The reaction of some seems to suggest for example that the loss of their sporting careers deserves more mention than the victim. I've met people like these men, not rapists, but nasty in other ways because of the enormous entitlement they have because they are constantly told how wonderful they are, they think their have a right to have what they want.

They didn't rape her because they were drunk, they did it because they are part of a culture where they are told they are better than everyone else and get what they want. She was just an object to be used by them and mocked afterwards.

**LordofHats**

And these two guys definitely weren't that drunk. Given the witness testimony they seemed pretty damned conscious of what was going on.

**Kilkrazy**

LordofHats wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

Good point but I guess that'll depend on how one gauges effect. Is false accusation only damaging if it leads to a prosecution? Just because a cop says "there's nothing to investigate here" doesn't mean that anyone will believe them. And given the seriousness of rape allegations I doubt a cop would just wave it off without some kind of investigation at which point everyone you may know has seen cops walking around asking if you're a rapist. Even if it is later found to be false, you're stuck with everyone you know remember that cops were walking around asking if you're a rapist.

Since there isn't any evidence for that being a problem I think we shall have to leave it in the realm of things that can safely be ignored.

**MeanGreenStompa**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:

I'll just leave this here

CNN bleating about the 'wasted lives' of the 'poor boys' filled me with a near incandescent rage.

And then FOX did this (and apparently MSNBC) and I went out and chopped wood for two hours, for the urge to rend and break was upon me.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/18/1736351/fox-news-steubenville/?mobile=nc

In an act of serious journalistic negligence, Fox News this morning ran tape of the Steubenville rape trial in which one of the rapists named the victim.
Typically in sexual assault cases, the major news media’s policy is not to name a victim. This is doubly true in the Steubenville case, where the victim is also a minor. But Fox News, in what seems to be an editing mistake, ran a clip from the court room where Mays said the victim’s name:
I would truly like to apologize to [redacted], her family, my family and the community. No picture should have been sent around, let alone even taken.
Out of respect for the victim, ThinkProgress will not publish the name, or the video.
In an earlier piece on Fox’s news website, the organization did manage to censor out the names of the two rapists, Trent Mays and Ma’lik Richmond. Their names, however, have been published by news outlets because the boys’ lawyers have openly identified them in court. The victim’s has not, until this point.
Media have clearly struggled with how to represent the case, and earlier coverage from Fox actually bucked a trend of victim-blaming that was prevalent in other news outlets. Still, the negligence in failing to redact the girl’s name is a serious journalistic failure.
Fox News did not immediately return a request for comment.

**LordofHats**

And then FOX did this (and apparently MSNBC) and I went out and chopped wood for two hours, for the urge to rend and break was upon me.
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2013/03/18/1736351/fox-news-steubenville/?mobile=nc

Damn.

Although am I the only one who finds this:

I would truly like to apologize to [redacted], her family, my family and the community. No picture should have been sent around, let alone even taken.

Questionable? I certainly hope he apologized for certain other acts that may have been committed. Perhaps of a grossly detestable nature. The crime for which the case was named, perhaps?

**Crablezworth**

Al jazeera has a clip of the CNN insanity. Just because you can't publish the victim's name, doesn't mean you should try and change public perception of who the victim or victims are. I'm a pragmatic guy, I'm pretty liberal when it comes to crime and punishment and I certainly don’t think these kids should receive life imprisonment or a death sentence but god damn at least discuss the victim's future and ability to move on and thrive before you start talking about the criminals that victimized her as if they’re victims of anything other than their own actions.

http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201303182147-0022619

Reminds me of the onion:

College Basketball Star Heroically Overcomes Tragic Rape He Committed
http://www.theonion.com/video/college-basketball-star-heroically-overcomes-tragi,19097/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=SocialMarketing&utm_campaign=standard-post:headline:default

**MrDwhitey**

Well, if only I didn't expect this:

Spoiler:

**Cheesecat**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
How can anyone feel sorrry for these guys. They are 16-17. By that age you should bloody know whether or not it is rape. Thy chose to take advantage of a young girl and post on it. They deserve atleast 5 years in state prison.
Heck for extra, send them the Cali for punishment.

Why 5 years instead of 1? What do you think the extra 4 years will do to improve the situation?

**hotsauceman1**

Because, It is longer and they need to learn their lesson. It will also serve as a major deterant to others thinking rape is a good idea.

**Kovnik Obama**

Kilkrazy wrote:
False accusations of rape are extremely rare. There was a report last week.

http://metro.co.uk/2013/03/13/false-rape-and-domestic-violence-allegations-extremely-rare-3539568/

That is UK, obviously, the situation in the USA may be different.

I don't find 3/months to be that low, to be honest, even at a national level. On top of things, these are only the ones where there was enough proof of wrongdoing to enable a suit against the accusator. For those three, there might be dozens that are simply dropped.

I personnally know one girl who prefered to let accusations of incestuous rape hang over her dad's head then reveal she was having an affair with her PE teacher.

**Fifty**

Kilkrazy wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

Speaking as a teacher, I can tell you that for teachers, there is no false accusation that has no effect. That probably extends to many walks of life.

I've never been accused of behaving in appropriately towards a pupil, but several of my colleagues have been accused of hitting and/or shoving pupils. Once, I was there when it "happened" and it was nonsense, and on others there have been several witnesses and each time it went nowhere. On each of those occasions, a kid has basically accused the teacher of something to get themself out of trouble. For each of those teachers, it was pretty harrowing. Sadly, it is a fairly effective tactic for kids to use to get themselves out of trouble, and in one of the cases, the family were still trying to use "teacher violence" as an excuse in every meeting we had about their git of a son months after the so-called event. I can only imagine how much worse a rape accusation would be. I know that I would find it awful if it ever happened to me, and I know I would never ever do such a thing.

**Hlaine Larkin mk2**

MrDwhitey wrote:
Well, if only I didn't expect this:

Spoiler:

That makes me sick to my stomach, how you can defend rapists by saying she wanted it or saying it was what most guys would do shows a complete lack of understanding what happened

**Kovnik Obama**

Kilkrazy wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
Kilkrazy wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
That study only covers prosecutions. I would suspect a great many false accusations of just about any crime can be found to be false rather quickly and never proceed to court. Even the majority of actual cases of rape and domestic violence never proceed to court. Actually figuring out how common(or uncommon) false accusations are has been a huge cluster feth for everyone.

Should people care about a false accusation that is so weak it has no effect?

Good point but I guess that'll depend on how one gauges effect. Is false accusation only damaging if it leads to a prosecution? Just because a cop says "there's nothing to investigate here" doesn't mean that anyone will believe them. And given the seriousness of rape allegations I doubt a cop would just wave it off without some kind of investigation at which point everyone you may know has seen cops walking around asking if you're a rapist. Even if it is later found to be false, you're stuck with everyone you know remember that cops were walking around asking if you're a rapist.

Since there isn't any evidence for that being a problem I think we shall have to leave it in the realm of things that can safely be ignored.

I don't know how it is in the States of in the UK, but usually here, the decision to prosecute is taken in common by the chief of police and the crown attorney, based on the possibility of obtaining a condemnation. By then, the damage of a false accusation to a person's reputation can already be done.

**Cheesecat**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
Because, It is longer and they need to learn their lesson. It will also serve as a major deterant to others thinking rape is a good idea.

1 year in the cell is a really long time that seems like a fine determent and also people learn at different paces and the time spent needs to be adjusted according to that, if you start getting excessive with the punishment you can run the risk of making the prisoner feel bitterness and

hopeless when he/she goes back into society which is not a helpful mentality to have and could increase the likelihood of reoccurring criminal behaviour, plus having 5 years removed from society during your teens could damage important developmental stages into adulthood.

**hotsauceman1**

These kids lost their teen years the second they took advantage of that girl.

**Cheesecat**

hotsauceman1 wrote:
These kids lost their teen years the second they took advantage of that girl.

Not true, they're aged 16-17 and they're punished for 1 year so that means they still have 2-1 years as teenagers left when they're free.

**LordofHats**

Assuming they get out in 1 year. It says a 1 year minimum and no one has said if they're likely to be out that soon. Unless I missed it.

**Cheesecat**

LordofHats wrote:
Assuming they get out in 1 year. It says a 1 year minimum and no one has said if they're likely to be out that soon. Unless I missed it.

That's a good point, as some people need more time than others to be reeducated.

**KalashnikovMarine**

Another link to the entire CNN bit: http://www.upworthy.com/cnn-pays-touching-tribute-to-the-rapists-who-attacked-a-16-year-old-girl

Absolutely disgusting.

**WarOne**

The whole situation is sickening and not only shame on the boys, but society for all the STUPIDITY generated by the observers of this case from social media commentators to major news organizations.

Truly...

**Relapse**

Howard A Treesong wrote:
I don't believe that people get so drunk they can't tell the difference between right and wrong. It might have taken away some inhibitions, but the issue is that some of these 'sport stars' appear to enjoy a very privileged position where they feel entitled to have certain things and get what they want. The reaction of some seems to suggest for example that the loss of their sporting careers deserves more mention than the victim. I've met people like these men, not rapists, but nasty in other ways because of the enormous entitlement they have because they are constantly told how wonderful they are, they think their have a right to have what they want.

They didn't rape her because they were drunk, they did it because they are part of a culture where they are told they are better than everyone else and get what they want. She was just an object to be used by them and mocked afterwards.

The whole case makes me sick or anytime someone gets treated the way that girl did. The crowning item to this whole deal is the fact that everyone at the party who knew about it was laughing up a storm. Worthless feths, the lot.

**KalashnikovMarine**

On a lighter note, you know you're the absolute scum of humanity when even dakka can't blame the victim.

**LordofHats**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
On a lighter note, you know you're the absolute scum of humanity when even dakka can't blame the victim.

Page 1 unfortunately.

**KalashnikovMarine**

LordofHats wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
On a lighter note, you know you're the absolute scum of humanity when even dakka can't blame the victim.

Page 1 unfortunately.

But Chaos retracted his opinion immediately on actually reading about the case.

**LordofHats**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
On a lighter note, you know you're the absolute scum of humanity when even dakka can't blame the victim.

Page 1 unfortunately.

But Chaos retracted his opinion immediately on actually reading about the case.

Then I missed that part then XD

**KalashnikovMarine**

Yep all Dakka is united on these guys being scum, or if any one backs them they're smart enough to keep their traps shut about it.

Edit: Well all OT any way

**Kovnik Obama**

KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Another link to the entire CNN bit: http://www.upworthy.com/cnn-pays-touching-tribute-to-the-rapists-who-attacked-a-16-year-old-girl

Absolutely disgusting.

Hot blonde reporter : "It was an incredibly emotional, incredibly tragic moment, as these two young men learned that their lives were over, in part as a result of the crimes they committed, but mostly due to my employer's decision to spam their names all over the media. Really, these kids had such a bright future, but now that they have rightfully been convicted, and that we've burned their names into your memory forever, they will never be able to live a normal life. ''

Me : ಠ_ಠ

**Crimson Devil**

LordofHats wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
LordofHats wrote:
KalashnikovMarine wrote:
On a lighter note, you know you're the absolute scum of humanity when even dakka can't blame the victim.

Page 1 unfortunately.

But Chaos retracted his opinion immediately on actually reading about the case.

Then I missed that part then XD

Everyone that put him on their ignore list wouldn't know that.

**Sir Pseudonymous**

Hlaine Larkin mk2 wrote:
MrDwhitey wrote:
Well, if only I didn't expect this:

Spoiler:

That makes me sick to my stomach, how you can defend rapists by saying she wanted it or saying it was what most guys would do shows a complete lack of understanding what happened

Not to single you out, as this is addressed to everyone across the board who responds like this to outrageous babblings on twitter or wherever: how do people in this day and age not understand what trolls are? When someone makes such egregious statements as we see in this image, they're either children who don't know any better or raving lunatics, and in neither case should be acknowledged, or else they're just being outrageous because they think it's funny, and so shouldn't be engaged. The gibberings of trolls aren't indicative of society, nor any widespread problem therein, just fringe outliers and people being facetious.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Fifty wrote:
1) What these guys did was reprehensible, no matter what.
2) If they had woken up sober the next day full of shame for their actions and tried to make amends, they'd need a punishment, and support to try and put their own lives back together.
3) If they had woken up sober and panicked and tried to hide what they did, they'd need punishment, education to make them realise the full enormity of their crime, and support to try and put their own lives back together.
4) As they actually woke up and bragged about it, what they need is punishment as a deterrent to others. Their own morals are clearly too loose to be able to refrain from such behaviour from the goodness of their own hearts in future, so what they need is such a serious punishment that they'll be afraid to ever do it again, and that will act as a deterrent to other similarly minded young men.

...

There are two sides to the coin. Women do seduce men, then make false accusations. Sometimes the women were drunk at the time. Being drunk is no excuse for raping, but it is also no excuse for giving consent. Now, a sober, decent man will know that the woman would regret it, and not sleep with her, but a drunk, desperate or unpleasant man might take the opportunity. If a woman is drunk and says "no" or is drunk and incapable of giving an answer, or incapable or even knowing what is happening, it is rape. But if a woman gets a bit tipsy and seduces someone she wouldn't normally, it is no more rape than if a guy gets drunk and shags the fat ugly girl. It is a mistake, but it is her mistake, not the guy's.

Basically, this is an emotive issue which stirs up strong feelings on both sides of the argument. Each case is different. Getting drunk does not mean you have given up your right to safety and decent treatment from others. Drinking does excuse doing something stupid, embarrassing or silly, such as sleeping with someone you wouldn't normally, but it does not excuse doing something vile, depraved or sadistic, such as forcing yourself on someone or accusing someone else of doing that later. Sadly, there are arseholes in the world who will do bad stuff, sober or drunk. There is no excuse.

Exalted.

While in general accusations of "rape," especially when alcohol is involved, need to be taken with a grain of salt, and when the events are murky and evidence lacking doubt and caution should rule over emotional impulses, but when the degenerate animals film themselves raping an unconscious girl, and proceed to go on to brag and laugh about it, then they should be put down like the rabid animals they are. Giving them a trivial prison sentence and permanently ruining their lives with the conviction and the media storm does nothing but produce a wretched, marginalized animal that's no less defective and dangerous than it was to begin with.