Ohio rape case...a slippery slope?

[Agit8r]

You keep clinging to that.

You know that there was direct testimony from other witnesses that stated she was unconscience. The state proved she was, with testimony, pictures, Facebook and twitter posts. In fact, one boy testified they tried to get her to give them a blow job but couldn't manage to position her head comfortably so they just masturbated over her body after they stripped her.

Well, by right-wing logic, that is just her body "shutting that whole thing down" so even by their own logic it must be "legitimate"

 

[Contumacious]

Do you advocate violating a person in such an inebriated state?

And of course, I know that her condition is not what bothers you.

What upsets you is the fact that even when you were 16 none of the football players wanted to look at, let alone bang , you.

Come on , 'fess up and the truth shall set you free.

Consequently , you are now 50 and still have an intact hymen.

.

.

You don't know anything about me.

I wouldn't want to be raped and I wouldn't rape anyone, period.

Are you frigid? Muff-diver?

Level with me - consider me your psychotherapist.

.

 

[Michelle420]

And of course, I know that her condition is not what bothers you.

What upsets you is the fact that even when you were 16 none of the football players wanted to look at, let alone bang , you.

Come on , 'fess up and the truth shall set you free.

Consequently , you are now 50 and still have an intact hymen.

.

.

You don't know anything about me.

I wouldn't want to be raped and I wouldn't rape anyone, period.

Are you frigid? Muff-diver?

Level with me - consider me your psychotherapist.

.

Stick to the topic.

Do you advocate violating a persons rights when they are so inebriated they go unconscious?

 

[Contumacious]

This case is really about sadism and what constitutes sadistic pleasure. r.

Yes, I concur.

Guys that have been banging that girl for years now needed a notary public present and working to confirm her consent.

.

You know this how? Link?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MXyD7SaQOHs"]Text: I know you didn't rape me.[/ame]

.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Yes, I concur.

Guys that have been banging that girl for years now needed a notary public present and working to confirm her consent..

They need her consent each and every time.

HUH?Is a representative of the National Organization of Women squeezing your nuts as we speak or , are you, nutless?.

Go speak to your comrade, Andrew Vachs, for some advice.

You can't have sex legitimately without consent, your prick. It's called rape if you don't.

 

[Seawytch]

I see a lot of douchebags that need to do a turn on the rape crisis hotline.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I doubt it would make any impression on ContyDoosh.

 

[thereisnospoon]

You've probably all heard about the Ohio juveniles convicted of raping a young woman too intoxicated to give consent. If not, the story is here:

Two teens found guilty in Steubenville rape case - CNN.com

While I think it was MONUMENTALLY stupid of those boys to take pictures of the drunk girl and post them on the internet, I must admit, at the risk of sounding cold, I'm not sure I support the rape conviction.

I don't want to "blame" the victim but on the other hand, nobody forced her to drink herself into oblivion. That was her choice, one that any one knows can lead to unintended and negative consequences. But that's not really my point.

My point is that while these boys, who were also drunk, messed with this girl (no penile penetration), I'm not sure I'd call it rape. While the girl never "consented" to relations, nor did she protest or ever utter a "no" or "stop".

My concern is about the NEXT time two drunks kids have at it. Have we come to a point where the girl can now claim rape because she never gave explicit consent? That's going to result in a lot of innocent boys branded for life as a pervert and that's wrong.

I say if you get so drunk you are unable to voice opposition to another horny teenager fingering your girly parts, you should probably focus on drinking less and not the actions of the drunk boy, all of whom deal with raging testosterone. Of course it's rape if the girl says 'no' but now it's rape if the girl doesn't say 'yes'? What next, signed consent before any sexual relations?!

I don't know, if it was my boy that did that, I'd punish him for sure, but I don't see imposing what is effectively a lifetime sentence of 'sex offender' that will ensure he never gets a good job or any opportunity for advancement. It just doesn't seem right to me. If it was my daughter, I wouldn't allow her to blame the boys. I'd reprimand her for being so damn irresponsible in the first place.

What say you? Am I off base here? I admit to not have a well formed opinion on this one. It just doesn't feel right to me.

Here's a piece of advice. Don't walk behind a nervous horse.

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
These boys are NOT victims.
The victim is a girl who was also a juvenile. Did she drink until incoherent? Looks that way. Did that give those boys the right to violate her? Absolutely not.
The evidence showed the boys knew exactly what they were doing. They committed a heinous violent act against this girl. And THAT is rape. Rapists go to prison. These two boys are lucky Ohio law recognizes them as juveniles. In other states, they may have been tried as adults. Or at least sentenced as juveniles until aged 21 then sent to adult prison.

In any event, the punishment fits the crime. The boys will be released from custody in one and two years respectively. What they did will be with them for life. Tough shit. They knew what they did was wrong.
The girl is the victim here. Just because she was incapcitated as result of her own actions does not mean she was any less of a victim of RAPE.
Ph, in some states penile penetration is not a requirement for a violation of the body to be deemed rape. This is to protect victims from for example penetration with objects such as broom handles or other things. This applies to men as well in anal penetration. Example suppose these two boys decided to pick on a weaker boy in the locker room and they anally assaulted him with a mop handle. In some states that is considered RAPE..
Nice hypothetical, but your argument goes nowhere.
BTW, the adults involved, homeowners, who purchased the alcohol are now under the gun of prosecutors and there will no doubt be civil litigation levied against them as well.
Good....Hang 'em all.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

This is not meant to disagree with you but there is a bit of inconsistency in the law in that a woman in certain circumstances can be considered raped when she has sex while drunk because she's considered not responsible for her actions,

but nowhere else in the law that I can think of does intoxication serve to remove one's responsibility for one's actions. Drunk driving for example.

The theory behind this law is that the man is supposed to realize she is too drunk to give legal consent and walk away. The problem with that theory is that it doesn't take into account that a man might be too drunk to consent also, and shifts the burden of proof to the defendant.

That said, you are ignoring the bigger problem in rape laws, the fact that a woman can consent to sex, change her mind in the middle, and the law will be able to charge a man with rape if the man does not immediately stop.

I'm not sure what planet you're from, but my experience has been, if a man is "too drunk to consent" to sex, he is also usually quite incapable of an erection. That, of course, might explain why these charmers fingered her, instead.

It might.

 

[Intense]

Let's try to keep this Thread out of the Taunting Area.

 

[Contumacious]

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
.

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

 

[Michelle420]

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
.

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Why does it upset you so much that the boys who admitted to penetrating her, urinating on her and posting nude pictures of her while she was passed out unconscious were convicted of rape?

What is it that you think is ok about what they did?

 

[Contumacious]

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
.

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Why does it upset you so much that the boys who admitted to penetrating her, urinating on her and posting nude pictures of her while she was passed out unconscious were convicted of rape?

What is it that you think is ok about what they did?

Something called "DUE PROCESS OF LAW", NOW

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

 

[Michelle420]

did you watch the video of them laughing about pissing on her and joking about rape?

[ame=http://youtu.be/W1oahqCzwcY]Leaked Steubenville Big Red Rape Video - YouTube[/ame]

 

[hoosier88]

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
.

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

(My bold)

1. There were all the photos, Tweets, e-mails, v-mails, video footage, etc., witness' statements, the perps' own statements, plus whatever forensic evidence from the assaulted young woman & her clothes, bedding, etc. I don't know if a rape kit was administered - surely it was entered into evidence, if one was done.

2. Are OH juvenile offenders offered the choice of a jury by their peers? & their peers would be - what? A panel of teenagers? That won't fly - how do you swear in - empanel - a jury that is too young to vote, to sign a contract, that barely might be of age to contract marriage? Juvenile courts are set up precisely to avoid these issues, & the issues of popular sentiment.

So either the judge decides the legal issues, or you empanel adults from the normal jury system. But again, the juvenile courts don't usually run to juries, TMK. Which means if you really want a jury, you have to opt to be charged as an adult. I'm not sure that the accused had that right - as I say, I think they're v. lucky NOT to have been charged as adults & waived to the regular court system.

3. Would their peers have convicted them? Unknowable, & irrelevant @ this point. You can't subject the perps to double jeopardy for the sake of an experiment. & the courts of law are not a popularity contest.

Rape is a defined crime. Penetration is a defined act. Child pornography is a defined crime. The moment they touched this young woman without her consent, it was assault. The moment they undressed her, fondled her, simulated or actually performed whatever vile acts, each separate action was probably a felony. Plus each photo, Tweet, video could be charged as a separate count, especially the photos/videos - & each message/pix/video/Tweet could be tracked back to show who it came from, who it went to, timehack, date; you could even determine location by doing forensics on the signal spread - if that were necessary. If the young men had been of age & charged as adults, they would likely be put away for a long time.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Why does it upset you so much that the boys who admitted to penetrating her, urinating on her and posting nude pictures of her while she was passed out unconscious were convicted of rape?

What is it that you think is ok about what they did?

Something called "DUE PROCESS OF LAW", NOW

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Given that they actually face the possibility of potential incarceration as adults if they violate their probation, they actually had to waive a right to a jury trial in Ohio. In other words, they were not denied anything.

 

[Contumacious]

Now, here's the problem with your premise. Nothing was done TO these boys. They committed a CRIME. They were tried and convicted in a court of law by a juvenile court judge in accordance with Ohio law.
.

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

(My bold)

1. There were all the photos, Tweets, e-mails, v-mails, video footage, etc., witness' statements, the perps' own statements, plus whatever forensic evidence from the assaulted young woman & her clothes, bedding, etc. I don't know if a rape kit was administered - surely it was entered into evidence, if one was done.

2.e.

Bullshit.

The stupid Judge was supposed to provide Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law.

He just declared them delinquent and refused to provided the aforementioned documentation.

Without that information those two kids were subjected to a Kangaroo Court designed to appease the Femi-nazis, the Ohio Talibaners and the NY Times.

.

.

 

[Contumacious]

Why does it upset you so much that the boys who admitted to penetrating her, urinating on her and posting nude pictures of her while she was passed out unconscious were convicted of rape?

What is it that you think is ok about what they did?

Something called "DUE PROCESS OF LAW", NOW

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Given that they actually face the possibility of potential incarceration as adults if they violate their probation, they actually had to waive a right to a jury trial in Ohio. In other words, they were not denied anything.

Bullshit.

All they needed was ONE JUROR -ONE- to declare them not delinquent - one.

.

 

[Michelle420]

Something called "DUE PROCESS OF LAW", NOW

Show me how it was proven BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT that they were guilty of a crime

Show me the reason they were deprived of their right to a jury trial.

There is NO FUCKING WAY THAT A JURY OF THEIR PEERS WAS GOING TO CONVICT ---- NO FUCKING WAY.

.

Given that they actually face the possibility of potential incarceration as adults if they violate their probation, they actually had to waive a right to a jury trial in Ohio. In other words, they were not denied anything.

Bullshit.

All they needed was ONE JUROR -ONE- to declare them not delinquent - one.

.

They were guilty.

 

[varelse]

Wow, the misogynists and rapists really came out of the woodwork in this thread...