ModernChivalry.org
Main => The Round Table => Topic started by: Sir Brian on 2012-07-26, 11:27:12
-
With such a preponderance of evidence assuring those scumbag’s guilt – hence the plea agreement, I would rather see them castrate the vermin. Oh to have more draconian punishments to suit the crimes! >:(
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/savannah-dietrich-twitter-sexual-assault-louisville-174732753.html (http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/savannah-dietrich-twitter-sexual-assault-louisville-174732753.html)
-
Yeah, i really hope they let her go, as a freedom of speech issue. It's just stupid that the law would treat the victim more harshly.
-
The link you posted went to a blank page for me, so I had to google. I found a story with slightly different details. (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/24/tagblogsfindlawcom2012-blotter-idUS72090766820120724 (http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/07/24/tagblogsfindlawcom2012-blotter-idUS72090766820120724)). I didn't see anything about what the ruling was, only that it was private since they are juveniles tried as juveniles. I'm assuming not enough, based on her outrage.
I'm a little torn on this one. I'm vehemently opposed to the rape and photographing it too, obviously. At the same time, the victim was 17 and passed out drunk at a party? That's well under age from the legal limit of 21 years old, and it's a *really* tough life lesson to learn that you shouldn't pass out drunk among sleazy people of ill repute - and that goes for any age and situation. That also presents the question of, the boys were 17, were they drunk too? Probably can thank Snooki and general Hollywood image of "OMG I'm drunk and horny, I won't remember anything, that's so hot, PARTY WOOO!!!" for the ridiculous mentality that seems a large part of today's idiot-idol-worshippers generation.
If that's the case, I can't help but place some of the blame her way. It's like coming to an intersection in the road, one path is brightly lit, freshly painted and a sign that says 'Welcome to Happy Street' .. and the other way is dimly lit, the buildings are crumbling, and there's a sign that says 'Trespassers will be shot. Repeatedly.', yet choosing to walk down the dimly lit path. It's a great way to find yourself in a bad situation quickly due to the environment and bad choices. I'm not sure if I'm wording things well - people have the right to pass out drunk and expect to not be raped - but at the same time, should understand when doing so, other people don't always respect that right. Especially hormone fueled, potentially drunken teenagers.
A teenage female passed out drunk amongst intoxicated teenage males is slightly less risky than throwing a bear, a lion, a turkey, a shark, a wolf and a velociraptor in a cage and telling them to play nice.
Now, the original article posted didn't mention her drinking/drunk, just passed out. I haven't (and don't want to) seen pictures. Did she pass out on a couch in 'public'? Did she pass out in a bedroom in 'private'? Did she do anything to encourage or entice or approve sexual activity before losing consciousness? Did she have any previous sexual encounters with the boy(s)? Or maybe it was a late night and she fell asleep at 5am sitting on the couch, completely sober. If that's the case, everything I said above in regards to her sharing the blame, is completely invalid, and hellfire to the perpetrators at full force.
It's extremely hard to make a proper judgement on anything from the media because the details between sources are often blurry, unspoken, or contradictory. It's like the college student in MD who killed a robber with a sword - some stories say the intruder was killed in the garage, others say he chased the man across the yard and killed him while he was running away. The underage drinking and unknown previous interaction(s), if any, with the perpetrators, is a wildcard for me on her complete innocence, or contributing in an unknown quantity to the end result. A lot of circumstantial info is missing.
If she tweeted their names and other information publicly that she is legally required to withhold, she is in the wrong (legally), rape victim or not. She may not agree with the law, but if the courts don't and can't release names or details of juvenile cases for legal reasons, the victim has no right to do so (legally) either.
The article I linked to said the charges against her were dropped, and her twitter account was closed. At least *one* step in the rusty 'wheel of justice' is working. Maybe the others will be fixed in the future.
That said ... I'd be truly overjoyed to find out that the perpetrators have been not only castrated, but also sentenced a few hundred hours of community service work at a rape victims counseling / shelter. And have some long term garnishments from their eventual paychecks (one can hope) that go towards funding the same victim support services. I'd probably make them paint signs that say 'We raped an unconscious girl and posted photos online. Honk if you hate us.' ... and I'd make them go stand in the median of a busy highway, all day, for a week or two. Maybe that will change their mentality, and maybe that will affect their circle of (likely similar) friends.
Then I'd turn my attention to parents - of the victim, of the perpetrators, and of the homeowners (if it wasn't the victims/perpetrators), and we'd have a discussion or two.
I *highly* doubt that's the ruling, and I suspect my thoughts on differences of 'Justice vs Law' and appropriate penalties are the #1 reason I'd never make it as a judge or politician....
-
The link you posted went to a blank page for me, so I had to google.
Do you have NoScript running on firefox? It looks like it's one of those annoying pages that uses javascript to load the actual content.
-
It is quite simple for me, really. Unless this girl gave approval for any sort of sexual congress, those boys had no right to lay a hand on her, drunk and passed out or not. That she was underage, they were underage, it was a party, there was alcohol present, everyone was doing it - all of that is irrelevant.
I also would not call the parents to task too much- I'm inclined to believe that they would not have been aware that their sons would do such a thing; a spur of the moment action that was totally repugnant, not to mention stupid on their part, but I don't see this as something to blame on the parents. 17 year old boys rarely call their parents up before they do something stupid, especially when they know they shouldn't be doing it- but that is hardly the fault of the parent; at 17 I was fully cognizant of my actions, all of them, and the consequences that would ensue should I continue doing stupid things. That they were drunk too does not exonerate them.
As a father of two young women, this is something that strikes home; as far as I'm concerned, that those two aren't hanging by their ankles being bludgeoned with various blunt-force items is disappointing to me, to say the least. I know its wrong to go after them, especially after the court has ruled in their favor for the most part, but I am a father, and it is my duty to protect my family. I find the court's decision to be woefully inadequate.
-
The link you posted went to a blank page for me, so I had to google.
Do you have NoScript running on firefox? It looks like it's one of those annoying pages that uses javascript to load the actual content.
The URL tag was mismatched / broken and showed the URL wrong so it just went to a blank page. When I copy/pasted it worked, but looks like it's fixed now.
Am I missing what the court's ruling was? I didn't see that anywhere, only about her tweeting about it.
That she was underage, they were underage, it was a party, there was alcohol present, everyone was doing it - all of that is irrelevant.
I also would not call the parents to task too much
In this case, it would be questions to the parents of were they home at the time, did they know what activities were going on / sanction it, or were they oblivious / not home. I agree 100% that the teens involved almost certainly didn't call their parents and say "we're about to do this, sound like a good idea?".
Side story - A long time ago, at 17, the same day I got my driver's license, I departed on a unannounced cross country road trip from VA to CA to meet a girl I was talking to online and had never met - later to have a chance encounter at the Ohio turnpike with an 18 wheeler, a concrete jersey wall, a steering wheel, a concussion, a dashboard, a stretcher, stitches, and a friendly hospital staff that let me watch the accident cleanup on the news from my hospital bed ... I'm completely familiar with the "wow, that was an *amazingly* poor choice!" of teenage boy mindset. So familiar, that I literally made the local morning news because of it. :)
I know in some states, parents who allow under age drinking can be charged with 'contributing to the delinquency of a minor', and I vaguely recall some case where the homeowners had some underage kids over, who left drunk, and killed someone/multiple people in a fatal car wreck. The homeowners were charged as accessories to murder, or something similar, even though they never left their house. As juveniles in this case, their parents could have some potential legal responsibility in it, if the state law is such.
Unless this girl gave approval for any sort of sexual congress, those boys had no right to lay a hand on her, drunk and passed out or not.
That's exactly what I'd like to know, and why the circumstances are important. If she gave consent, while drunk, and doesn't remember saying it, what does that mean to her case/claim? What if she let it happen, and only started the rape claim when the pictures went online, knowing she would be in trouble for it? What if one or both of the perps are exes of hers that she pissed off and/or dumped, then they retaliated by posting the pictures of them ''roleplaying" as such (when they were on good terms), and she retaliated by filing the rape claim?
Side Story - There was a story floating around of a guy who found out he got his girlfriend pregnant, and also found out she had been cheating on him. When he threatened to break up with her, she said she would call the police and say she was raped by him (since she's pregnant w/his kid). He managed to videotape themselves, without her knowledge, as she made the same threats again, while gloating about owning him. (Then did some sexual stuff - which makes the following even more embarassing). True to his word, he broke up with her - and she filed the false police report. When he and his parents went to the police station, and the girl and her parents were there, he presented the tape as evidence while she sat at the police station crying wolf ... needless to say what the outcome of the police report was after viewing the tape. To boot, she had to live with her parents knowing she not only lied about being raped to them *and* the police, but she had made her own underage sex tape, too.
I guess it's that the pictures are a snapshot in time, and given that the participants are of similar age and (as far as I know) able to engage in such activities legally and willingly, it's not a question of did it happen, it's a question of : was it consensual at the time and she's filing as revenge, or is it a valid claim for something she never agreed to and is truly a victim of? With the scarcity of info I've seen, I can't decide either way.
As somebody who knows women who have been raped, it's a short fuse for me. But as somebody who also knows women who have woke up naked in bed with somebody they can't remember going to bed with (after a night out drinking heavily), it's a grey area, too.
-
You make an excellent point, one that I did not bother to give thought to- whether or not she's crying wolf. I'd love to believe that she is not, but of course, I'm biased with that sort of thing. Which is a shame, as I pride myself on being clear- and relatively cool-headed...and yet I was still more than willing to believe the worst of those boys, without given them any real consideration with regard to being innocent of the charge. Given that they're basically getting away with it, my thinking is that the evidence must be ambiguous at best, otherwise the charges would be harsher.
I used to know women like the one you described, Sir James, willing to give false testimony to achieve her own self-serving ends. Thank you for the lesson, Sir James, I shall not forget it.
-
At least the contempt of court charge was lifted.
-
As somebody who knows women who have been raped, it's a short fuse for me. But as somebody who also knows women who have woke up naked in bed with somebody they can't remember going to bed with (after a night out drinking heavily), it's a grey area, too.
Re-reading, I feel I should clarify this and say that the person(s) those women woke up with drunk and/or naked the next morning with, was not me and did not involve me in any way.
I used to know women like the one you described, Sir James, willing to give false testimony to achieve her own self-serving ends. Thank you for the lesson, Sir James, I shall not forget it.
My pleasure. We're all human, male and female, both capable of indiscretions, both capable of the same sins. I can easily say "based on the evidence given, I feel X", though I try to think of the "devil's advocate" scenario. It didn't happen much before I kept seeing Maeryk's posts on ArmourArchive - which, I'm sure you're familiar with. Changed my perspective a bit, and sometimes, I wanted to choke him, too. :)
-
Seems simple enough to me. Use the apparently very vivid visual evidence so kindly provided to weigh each parties stories. Apparently the boys actually plead guilty, and made a plea bargain. Simple, clean-cut case.
From my (admittedly, quite limited) experience, it seems to me that this girl was out looking for vengeance (rather understandable if her claims are true) and not justice, and was shocked to learn that she wasn't going to do a big dramatic trial hearing where the boys would receive a heavy sentence from a shocked and appalled jury, and probably become a media sensation or something.
she is in the wrong. Being a victim doesn't entitle you to break the law. If she did indeed post those things and violate the law in doing so, punish her for it. Punish the boys for the rape and sexual assault they are pleading guilty to. Simple enough.
-
Seems simple enough to me. Use the apparently very vivid visual evidence so kindly provided to weigh each parties stories. Apparently the boys actually plead guilty, and made a plea bargain. Simple, clean-cut case.
From my (admittedly, quite limited) experience, it seems to me that this girl was out looking for vengeance (rather understandable if her claims are true) and not justice, and was shocked to learn that she wasn't going to do a big dramatic trial hearing where the boys would receive a heavy sentence from a shocked and appalled jury, and probably become a media sensation or something.
she is in the wrong. Being a victim doesn't entitle you to break the law. If she did indeed post those things and violate the law in doing so, punish her for it. Punish the boys for the rape and sexual assault they are pleading guilty to. Simple enough.
Very little is often simple when distinguishing between 'justice' & 'vengeance'. Motives are often the key factors in determining between the two. Granted, I speak from someone that does this as a profession but I have been a victim's advocate as well as investigator of such crimes. Older days would have made justice as easy as an "eye for an eye" but modern society dictates morality & civility in how we approach judgement. The law is not made simple and may not even deliver justice in a form satisfying to crime victims and their loved ones. But the system must also protect those accused falsely and have reprocussions for allegations that have serious consequences.
Justice is something I wish for all crimes against the person specifically those such as murder and sexual assault. Rape cases brings a specific rage out of me because I have seen first-hand the aftermath in many different scenarios that last a lifetime. Supporting those affected becomes a lifelong process towards recovery (that may never arise). Any comfort (even empathy) one can give to those affected, matters much towards healing .....
-
Oh, I understand. My first reaction it to make those men play leapfrog with unicorns!
But the law goes easier on those who won't "Fight to the bitter end" and make a big hearing and case out of it. I think she was shocked by this, and vented her anger (and in the process violated the law) on twitter.
All rape victims deserve empathy, caring, whatever it is that they need to gain whatever recovery they can. But it's not a "Get out of jail free" card as far as violating the law.
-
Oh, I understand. My first reaction it to make those men play leapfrog with unicorns!
But the law goes easier on those who won't "Fight to the bitter end" and make a big hearing and case out of it. I think she was shocked by this, and vented her anger (and in the process violated the law) on twitter.
All rape victims deserve empathy, caring, whatever it is that they need to gain whatever recovery they can. But it's not a "Get out of jail free" card as far as violating the law.
There is no comparison of her infraction of the ‘law’ to those A-holes’ infractions of the law. They all violated the law but the girl’s infraction is a misdemeanor where as the pond-scum committed felonies.
The insult added to injury perpetrated upon this girl by our court system was the fact that the system placed a higher value upon the future prospects of those underage criminals whose records will be sealed and be clear of any further public scrutiny when they turn 18, yet she has to endure the burden of those scars for the rest of her life!
Oh and what is all this happy horse-sh** with hypothesizing or second guessing the girl’s motives or intentions when there isn’t a shred of evidence proving or disproving it? – Which ironically enough proves the very stigma this girl has suffered this past year, yet those scumbags are ‘protected’ from that because they are ‘minors’? Instead of speculating that she was some woman scorned which regrettably does happen however with those rapists taking a plea bargain, it expounds upon the surety of their guilt and supports the validity of her accusations. She should be commended for her courage to stand and demand justice and not allow her honor to be further violated for the court’s expediency or society’s misplaced empathy for underage rapists.
-
Oh and what is all this happy horse-sh** with hypothesizing or second guessing the girl’s motives or intentions when there isn’t a shred of evidence proving or disproving it? – Which ironically enough proves the very stigma this girl has suffered this past year, yet those scumbags are ‘protected’ from that because they are ‘minors’? Instead of speculating that she was some woman scorned which regrettably does happen however with those rapists taking a plea bargain, it expounds upon the surety of their guilt and supports the validity of her accusations. She should be commended for her courage to stand and demand justice and not allow her honor to be further violated for the court’s expediency or society’s misplaced empathy for underage rapists.
I take it you have never been on the receiving end of such outrage, Sir Brian, otherwise you might not be so blind to the possibility. That is not to say that I am against your view- I share it, but Sir James reminded me, especially in this day and age, that not all people are as noble or honorable as we would like to believe them to be.
I should like to be able to take anyone at their word, if only because I am of that mind- but I would be naive to believe that it is so. I am also of the mind that teenaged boys are quite aware of their actions and should be punished for it- without sealing their records so they can go on with their lives...they should have to live under the stigma of 'ex-con' just like any other foolish enough to commit a crime and get caught.
-
I take it you have never been on the receiving end of such outrage, Sir Brian, otherwise you might not be so blind to the possibility. That is not to say that I am against your view- I share it, but Sir James reminded me, especially in this day and age, that not all people are as noble or honorable as we would like to believe them to be.
I should like to be able to take anyone at their word, if only because I am of that mind- but I would be naive to believe that it is so. I am also of the mind that teenaged boys are quite aware of their actions and should be punished for it- without sealing their records so they can go on with their lives...they should have to live under the stigma of 'ex-con' just like any other foolish enough to commit a crime and get caught.
Truly Sir William you have vastly presumed wrong. In fact I most certainly have firsthand experience in the recent past and still ongoing, of being wrongfully condemned and disgraced by disreputable and nefarious individuals so I am keenly aware of the ‘possibility’ of the false and wicked accusations of ignoble malcontents.
I also have no delusions as to the true state of humanity Sir William which as a whole is utterly corrupt and morally deficient. I live daily with the expectation that I will see the absolute worst from any new person I happen to meet and ultimately hope I end up seeing them at their very best; however until such a time I am forever vigilant of their words and actions to warrant or moderate my suspicions.
-
Oh and what is all this happy horse-sh** with hypothesizing or second guessing the girl’s motives or intentions when there isn’t a shred of evidence proving or disproving it? – Which ironically enough proves the very stigma this girl has suffered this past year, yet those scumbags are ‘protected’ from that because they are ‘minors’? Instead of speculating that she was some woman scorned which regrettably does happen however with those rapists taking a plea bargain, it expounds upon the surety of their guilt and supports the validity of her accusations. She should be commended for her courage to stand and demand justice and not allow her honor to be further violated for the court’s expediency or society’s misplaced empathy for underage rapists.
I take it you have never been on the receiving end of such outrage, Sir Brian, otherwise you might not be so blind to the possibility. That is not to say that I am against your view- I share it, but Sir James reminded me, especially in this day and age, that not all people are as noble or honorable as we would like to believe them to be.
I should like to be able to take anyone at their word, if only because I am of that mind- but I would be naive to believe that it is so. I am also of the mind that teenaged boys are quite aware of their actions and should be punished for it- without sealing their records so they can go on with their lives...they should have to live under the stigma of 'ex-con' just like any other foolish enough to commit a crime and get caught.
Minors or not, they have to contest with the future of a sex offender registry if the rape charges stick but it depends on the state laws that are applicable. The stigma alone WILL ruin their future lives so to carry some weight into how they act even if it doesn't seem like justice ....
-
Sir Brian, you must understand I wish not to trivialize such a heinous act such as rape. As I said, a more fitting punishment is to play leapfrog with unicorns. It would be a true injustice if both parties received anywhere near similar punishments.
A plea bargain for rape is nothing to be taken lightly. The law would much prefer a confession and 100% certainty that they have them and can punish them than risk a trial, where anything can happen. In a trial, even if the boys plead guilty, a jury could still find them innocent. Think of it less as a lighter punishment, and more as assurance on the law's part.
Lord Dane makes a good point, that future on the Sex Offender registry is nothing to be trivialized either. With their records sealed, it's probably worse, since they have nothing to disprove everyone's initial thoughts of "Child Molester!"
-
Sir Brian, you must understand I wish not to trivialize such a heinous act such as rape. As I said, a more fitting punishment is to play leapfrog with unicorns. It would be a true injustice if both parties received anywhere near similar punishments.
A plea bargain for rape is nothing to be taken lightly. The law would much prefer a confession and 100% certainty that they have them and can punish them than risk a trial, where anything can happen. In a trial, even if the boys plead guilty, a jury could still find them innocent. Think of it less as a lighter punishment, and more as assurance on the law's part.
Lord Dane makes a good point, that future on the Sex Offender registry is nothing to be trivialized either. With their records sealed, it's probably worse, since they have nothing to disprove everyone's initial thoughts of "Child Molester!"
I sympathize with Sir Brian...but have faith in one thing.....where justice doesn't present itself in a courtroom, if tends to find itself in other forms & other places....
Keep to your moral code & hold onto your faith. Because we are approaching a turning point for our civilization & it will be needed for the survival of mankind. Good men are measured by their faith, decency, and knowing when action is justified. Always protect yourself, your brethren, & the innocent. More importantly, teach these skills onto those you cherish so they know.
-
Keep to your moral code & hold onto your faith. Because we are approaching a turning point for our civilization & it will be needed for the survival of mankind. Good men are measured by their faith, decency, and knowing when action is justified. Always protect yourself, your brethern, & the innocent. More importantly, teach these skills onto those you cherish so they know.
Truly words of wisdom Lord_Dane and I agree with wholeheartedly.
I also would like to offer my apologies to everyone if I seemed to come off a bit heavy on this subject matter, as I related a bit in my earlier response I retain some very vivid experiences of having my reputation ‘dragged through the mud’ and it remains a poignant focal point on some of my perspectives. :-[
-
I also would like to offer my apologies to everyone if I seemed to come off a bit heavy on this subject matter, as I related a bit in my earlier response I retain some very vivid experiences of having my reputation ‘dragged through the mud’ and it remains a poignant focal point on some of my perspectives. :-[
I'd like to also offer an apology for going way out with the theories and thoughts. I got on here to PM you, and saw the thread reply. Myself, knowing someone falsely accused of improper sexual conduct, including a police report, and this being a similar situation (party with lots of drinking - blacked out - but no pictures) ... I felt torn on what to believe in this case, especially with such an immense lack of relevant information given to us.
With only the plea bargain so far, and no sentence actually given, the judge still has the right to accept, modify or outright deny the plea bargain. In essence, she flew off the handle in court and on twitter based on what *might* be the sentence, without it even happening. We'll likely never know what they actually get, because of their ages. If she tweets it, I wouldn't fault her one bit.
A few new-ish interesting developments on both sides:
A District Court judge has scheduled a Friday hearing on a motion to remove the Jefferson County attorney's office from the case of two teens who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting 17-year-old Savannah Dietrich.
http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20120730/NEWS01/307300035/Judge-sets-date-motion-removing-county-attorney-from-Savannah-Dietrich-case (http://www.courier-journal.com/article/20120730/NEWS01/307300035/Judge-sets-date-motion-removing-county-attorney-from-Savannah-Dietrich-case)
Mejia was obviously angry with Dietrich’s actions, saying his client’s “privacy has been trampled. He’s accused of things he didn’t do. Anybody who looks at (the postings online) believes things about this kid that are false, but there is nothing I can do about that.”
Mejia said he could not talk about the facts of the case, as he is bound by juvenile confidentiality.
http://gawnews.com/?p=3487 (http://gawnews.com/?p=3487)
-
And forgive me if my words seemed to trivialize the matter at hand, or make the actions taken by both parties in any way appear comparable.
These are sad times, when it must be considered that a woman would falsely accuse a man of such a heinous act, and sadder still that such fiends, rapists, and the like still walk the streets, or are protected by society.
-
I take it you have never been on the receiving end of such outrage, Sir Brian, otherwise you might not be so blind to the possibility. That is not to say that I am against your view- I share it, but Sir James reminded me, especially in this day and age, that not all people are as noble or honorable as we would like to believe them to be.
I should like to be able to take anyone at their word, if only because I am of that mind- but I would be naive to believe that it is so. I am also of the mind that teenaged boys are quite aware of their actions and should be punished for it- without sealing their records so they can go on with their lives...they should have to live under the stigma of 'ex-con' just like any other foolish enough to commit a crime and get caught.
Truly Sir William you have vastly presumed wrong. In fact I most certainly have firsthand experience in the recent past and still ongoing, of being wrongfully condemned and disgraced by disreputable and nefarious individuals so I am keenly aware of the ‘possibility’ of the false and wicked accusations of ignoble malcontents.
I also have no delusions as to the true state of humanity Sir William which as a whole is utterly corrupt and morally deficient. I live daily with the expectation that I will see the absolute worst from any new person I happen to meet and ultimately hope I end up seeing them at their very best; however until such a time I am forever vigilant of their words and actions to warrant or moderate my suspicions.
Then I am not sure what it was I said wrong, Sir Brian. You have been the victim of a wrongful accusation, that much is clear- my POV is only that it not occur in this case as well. If they did it, burn them for it...but if they did not- then burn HER for the falsehood. This little blurb caught my eye in particular, from the gawnews.com site:
"In the end, we hope that the Judge decides to open of the proceedings so that all the facts can be known. We hope the judge rejects the pleas and conducts a trial. We do not understand how someone who cried at night for months because she was worried about who saw her victimization, now wants to go, apparently, on Television to discuss it. That is a mystery to us. Most media outlets, respectful of victims do not publish the names of sex crime victims because it is widely seen as shameful. Maybe that is wrong. Maybe Ms. Dietrich evolved and has become a stronger person. Maybe she likes attention. We do not know. A public trial or hearing could answer some of these questions."