Girl faces jail for giving out names of juveniles who raped her

[chanel]

I started a thread on this yesterday. Apparently the boys have not been officially sentenced yet. The gag order was only put in place until "disposition".

I doubt if she will be held in contempt. But I still think the gag order was wrong.

If she has to live with that humiliation the rest of her life, so should they.

 

[manifold]

Nothing wrong with that.

But they still aren't rapists.

Why not?

Because that's not what they were convicted of mainly.
Sexual assault and rape are not synonymous

In the context of this story, is that really a hair worth splitting?

 

[chanel]

In the United States, the definition of sexual assault varies widely between the individual states. The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network defines sexual assault as "unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling."[4]

The National Center for Victims of Crime states:[5]
“ Sexual assault takes many forms including attacks such as rape or attempted rape, as well as any unwanted sexual contact or threats. Usually a sexual assault occurs when someone touches any part of another person's body in a sexual way, even through clothes, without that person's consent.

Sexual assault - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It really doesn't matter what type of RAPE it was, does it?

 

[Artevelde]

Okay, I am seeing this differently.

At 17, she shouldn't have been drinking in the first place. I thought the legal age for drinking was 21? She was four years under that.

Second, she was 'very' drunk. How does she know she was attacked AFTER she passed out? How does she know she didn't actually consent? Lots of people get drunk and have sex with random strangers, she cannot say with certainty that she didn't consent.

Since these boys were convicted, I think we deserve to know who they are. It is rather unfair that the name of the victim is released but not the names of the attackers.

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

 

[Artevelde]

Why not?

Because that's not what they were convicted of mainly.
Sexual assault and rape are not synonymous

In the context of this story, is that really a hair worth splitting?

No, but hysteical ravings and accusations are pretty unhelpful too.

 

[Artevelde]

In the United States, the definition of sexual assault varies widely between the individual states. The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network defines sexual assault as "unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling."[4]

The National Center for Victims of Crime states:[5]
“ Sexual assault takes many forms including attacks such as rape or attempted rape, as well as any unwanted sexual contact or threats. Usually a sexual assault occurs when someone touches any part of another person's body in a sexual way, even through clothes, without that person's consent.

Sexual assault - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

It really doesn't matter what type of RAPE it was, does it?

I think it makes a great deal of difference to the sentencing.

You feel that it doesn't matter if somebody is convicted of first degree murder or manslaughter or wrongful death?

 

[WillowTree]

She needs to call the factor.

 

[GuyPinestra]

Okay, I am seeing this differently.

At 17, she shouldn't have been drinking in the first place. I thought the legal age for drinking was 21? She was four years under that.

Second, she was 'very' drunk. How does she know she was attacked AFTER she passed out? How does she know she didn't actually consent? Lots of people get drunk and have sex with random strangers, she cannot say with certainty that she didn't consent.

Since these boys were convicted, I think we deserve to know who they are. It is rather unfair that the name of the victim is released but not the names of the attackers.

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Obviously you have no fucking clue of what a 'plea bargain' is...

plea bargain n. in criminal procedure, a negotiation between the defendant and his attorney on one side and the prosecutor on the other, in which the defendant agrees to plead "guilty" or "no contest" to some crimes, in return for reduction of the severity of the charges, dismissal of some of the charges, the prosecutor's willingness to recommend a particular sentence, or some other benefit to the defendant. Sometimes one element of the bargain is that the defendant reveal information such as location of stolen goods, names of others participating in the crime, or admission of other crimes (such as a string of burglaries). The judge must agree to the result of the plea bargain before accepting the sentence. If he does not, then the bargain is cancelled. Reasons for the bargaining include a desire to cut down on the number of trials, danger to the defendant of a long term in prison if convicted after trial, and the ability to get information on criminal activity from the defendant. There are three dangers: a) an innocent defendant may be pressured into a confession and plea out of fear of a severe penalty if convicted; b) particularly vicious criminals will get lenient treatment and be back "on the street" in a short time; c) results in unequal treatment. Public antipathy to plea bargaining has led to some state statutes prohibiting the practice, but informal discussions can get around the ban. (See: plea, cop a plea)

 

[Artevelde]

They didn't get the punishment she expected. I actually hope the girl was punished herself for drinking so heavily.

I got that much, but what did she want?

And I sincerely hope she learned about the evils of drinking.

what did she want?

to get drunk....

that doesn't entitle anyone to put a hand on her.

and i don't care if she's naked and spread out on the ground.

True, although I'd be inclined to question the assertions of rape of any girl who spreads herself naked on the ground, but that was not the case her. The fact that she was stupid and irresponsible and committed a crime does not in any way excuse others committing a crime by assaulting her in any way.

A fine for drunk and disorderly conduct would suffice for her.

 

[manifold]

Because that's not what they were convicted of mainly.
Sexual assault and rape are not synonymous

In the context of this story, is that really a hair worth splitting?

No, but hysteical ravings and accusations are pretty unhelpful too.

Is that how you characterize what this girl did?

 

[Artevelde]

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Obviously you have no fucking clue of what a 'plea bargain' is...

plea bargain n. in criminal procedure, a negotiation between the defendant and his attorney on one side and the prosecutor on the other, in which the defendant agrees to plead "guilty" or "no contest" to some crimes, in return for reduction of the severity of the charges, dismissal of some of the charges, the prosecutor's willingness to recommend a particular sentence, or some other benefit to the defendant. Sometimes one element of the bargain is that the defendant reveal information such as location of stolen goods, names of others participating in the crime, or admission of other crimes (such as a string of burglaries). The judge must agree to the result of the plea bargain before accepting the sentence. If he does not, then the bargain is cancelled. Reasons for the bargaining include a desire to cut down on the number of trials, danger to the defendant of a long term in prison if convicted after trial, and the ability to get information on criminal activity from the defendant. There are three dangers: a) an innocent defendant may be pressured into a confession and plea out of fear of a severe penalty if convicted; b) particularly vicious criminals will get lenient treatment and be back "on the street" in a short time; c) results in unequal treatment. Public antipathy to plea bargaining has led to some state statutes prohibiting the practice, but informal discussions can get around the ban. (See: plea, cop a plea)

Obviously you have no clue about the justice system. Nobody is guilty of anything they haven't been convicted of. To claim that they are guilty of rape when a court hasn't found them guilty of that is simply lying or stupidity or both.

 

[Artevelde]

In the context of this story, is that really a hair worth splitting?

No, but hysteical ravings and accusations are pretty unhelpful too.

Is that how you characterize what this girl did?

No that is what GuyPinestra did and does.

 

[WillowTree]

Okay, I am seeing this differently.

At 17, she shouldn't have been drinking in the first place. I thought the legal age for drinking was 21? She was four years under that.

Second, she was 'very' drunk. How does she know she was attacked AFTER she passed out? How does she know she didn't actually consent? Lots of people get drunk and have sex with random strangers, she cannot say with certainty that she didn't consent.

Since these boys were convicted, I think we deserve to know who they are. It is rather unfair that the name of the victim is released but not the names of the attackers.

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Yeah, and OJ didn't slaughter Nicole either. So now we know who the idiot is.

 

[manifold]

No, but hysteical ravings and accusations are pretty unhelpful too.

Is that how you characterize what this girl did?

No that is what GuyPinestra did and does.

This may come as a surprise to you but GuyPinestra's ranting editorial on the subject has no bearing on what this girl did and whether she deserves some punishment for disobeying the judge's gag order. I'm merely asking you if your opinion about that really hinges on the outcome of a plea bargain? Because if so, that's pretty dim witted, no offense.

 

[Artevelde]

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Yeah, and OJ didn't slaughter Nicole either. So now we know who the idiot is.

I guess you have a problem with the idea of Courts deciding about guilt or innocence rather than the mob.

 

[Full-Auto]

You obviously were too stupid to read the OP.

They took pictures while assaulting her and showed them to others.

And they DID rape her, they got that charge reduced to sexual assault in the plea bargain.

Fucking idiot!

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Yeah, and OJ didn't slaughter Nicole either. So now we know who the idiot is.

I hope those perps have to register as sex offenders for the rest of their lives...Because they are exactly that. Sexual offenders.

 

[WillowTree]

The idiot here is you. They were NOT convicted of rape, hence they did not rape her. Unless you feel that everybody is per defenition guilty of what they were first charged with and the Court's ruling is totally irrelevant.

Yeah, and OJ didn't slaughter Nicole either. So now we know who the idiot is.

I guess you have a problem with the idea of Courts deciding about guilt or innocence rather than the mob.

Yeah, and Caycee ANthony didn't kill Kaylee either..

 

[Artevelde]

Is that how you characterize what this girl did?

No that is what GuyPinestra did and does.

This may come as a surprise to you but GuyPinestra's ranting editorial on the subject has no bearing on what this girl did and whether she deserves some punishment for disobeying the judge's gag order. I'm merely asking you if your opinion about that really hinges on the outcome of a plea bargain? Because if so, that's pretty dim witted, no offense.

Maybe you should simply calmly read what I wrote and assume that the words mean what they are supposed to mean. In a state where the rule of law prevails, one is guilty of that for which one is properly convicted by a court of law, nothing else.

 

[manifold]

No that is what GuyPinestra did and does.

This may come as a surprise to you but GuyPinestra's ranting editorial on the subject has no bearing on what this girl did and whether she deserves some punishment for disobeying the judge's gag order. I'm merely asking you if your opinion about that really hinges on the outcome of a plea bargain? Because if so, that's pretty dim witted, no offense.

Maybe you should simply calmly read what I wrote and assume that the words mean what they are supposed to mean. In a state where the rule of law prevails, one is guilty of that for which one is properly convicted by a court of law, nothing else.

I guess I missed the part where you offered an opinion about what the victim did.

Do you think she should be punished with a fine and/or jail time?

 

[Artevelde]

Yeah, and OJ didn't slaughter Nicole either. So now we know who the idiot is.

I guess you have a problem with the idea of Courts deciding about guilt or innocence rather than the mob.

Yeah, and Caycee ANthony didn't kill Kaylee either..

How helpful that you feel you can single-handedly replace the whole court system. Tremendous savings. Guess we can abolish the courts and the constitution and leave everything up to you.