Skip to comments.'She didn't affirmatively say no': Silence means consent according to defense...(Steubenville rape)
Posted on 03/12/2013 8:26:48 PM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: 'She didn't affirmatively say no': Silence means consent according to defense in Ohio high school rape trial where passed out, drunken teenage girl was 'sexually assaulted' by multiple football players
Defense lawyers in the coming trial of two high school football players charged with raping a nearly passed-out-drunk 16-year-old girl are expected to argue on the issue of consent.
In the case that has shocked the nation, prosecutors state that the inebriated girl was taken to a number of parties by a group of drunk teenagers, supporting her to walk when she wasn't physically capable.
The prosecution claims that the group later sexually assaulted the girl while she lay unconscious.
But attorney Walter Madison, who represents one of the accused boys, argues she was drinking voluntarily and left willingly with the group of boys.
As reported by the Cleveland Trader Madison said: 'There's an abundance of evidence here that she was making decisions, cognitive choices.' 'She didn't affirmatively say no,' he stated.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
She's no more a "victim" than a drunk driver that wraps their car around a tree: except you can't prosecute a tree to mitigate your lack of judgement.
How close are we to crossing that line where the victim just needs ‘four witnesses against her to accuse her of lewdness’.
This is reprehensible, but I don’t see what your point in posting it is. Is it not the duty of defense council to make the best case it can for the defendents? As far as I can tell, they are the only ones blaming the victim.
Load of crap. The rapists used free will to attack her. They aren’t trees who she happened to run into.
Sure she was drunk, but that does not make her any less a victim.
You are a disgusting pig.
This is a little off topic, but from an article posted a couple of items below this one;
“The faces of U.S. soldiers in combat are beginning to change, but women arent just newly permitted on the front lines of the battlefield. “
Why if women are being raped, need special protection, as in the violence against women act, and why do service members have to attend several hour long indoctrination on how to treat women, i.e., sexual harrassment classes, why if it is wrong to hit a woman (and I generally believe this), why is it appropriate to have them in combat?
Perhaps the O admin hopes to run all terrorists into federal court on violence against women charges?
As someone mentioned at the start of this, Steubenville is a disaster area, and the only thing they have any pride left in is this winning football team. The girl amounts to little more than a human sacrifice, which they are willing to give as she is not a local.
The town has lost its humanity. It has lost its soul.
She was drunk but she never said “yes”.
Also she was underage which begs a bigger question “who got her the booze”????
Yes such nice /sarc jocks and their booze. Hope each one looses their scholarships.
She was passed out drunk. An underage girl passed out drunk. Yet no one has questioned where she got the booze? That in itself is a crime. Then there’s the fact the damn jocks raped her while she was passed out. All of whom, I might add, were also underage to be drinking.
When the assailant was sentenced to several years in prison for a related crime the same night (sexual contact with a 15-year-old), there was a national outcry that the sentence was too severe and that he should be freed. His supporters demanded that his record be expunged and that he be allowed to pursue his football career.
The bottom line to me has always been that Genarlow Wilson raped a 17-year-old girl, with videotaped evidence as proof, and that he deserved every single year he was sentenced to. Yet even here on Free Republic, he had his defenders.
Wow. I just learned something new: if you're a really drunk girl, that means it's "okay" for guys to rape you. Boy-howdy! I'm glad I learned this before it was too late. /oh, yes, certainly sarc>
You are right. Hopefully she has a redneck dad who will make sure those rapists don’t have the ‘equipment’ to do it again.
“Genarlow”? Sounds like yet another miscreant Amish youth.
No, I disagree.
She likely did not have 27 beers before this happened. It’s more likely that she had one drink, but it was laced with GHB or something similar.
Am I surprised that a teenager got passed out drunk and raped? Unfortunately no and unfortunately it’s not a recent phenomenon. Not that ever was ‘right’ or ‘good’ or anything of the sort. Am I surprised that there is not a father on trial for beating the rapist to death? Again, unfortunately no. That however “IS” a recent phenomenon. Then again, 30 years ago one would be hard pressed to find a jury that would convict him or a cop to arrest him to begin with.
There are MANY things we need to regress on. This ‘enlightened’ society we live in is anything but.
While the defense is making the case it has to make, I wouldn’t be surprised if the rapists and their parents are actually buying into it. That would be even more shameful. Do none of these jerks have sisters, or the least bit of empathy? There is something very, very wrong.
I don’t really understand how the game of Football can usurp basic morality with some Freepers.
Did you see the Peen St pedo threads? I thought I was on DU.
I'd wager on that.
Sure it does. Being drunk impairs judgement. Her poor judgement does not make her sex partners, criminal.
I was also taken aback when it was obvious that the whole Penn State University administration was basically covering what was happening in the Sandowsky affair, but certain Freepers couldn’t see the value in Punishing Penn State over it.
According to the ABA, "...The basic duty defense counsel owes to the administration of justice and as an officer of the court is to serve as the accused's counselor and advocate with courage and devotion and to render effective, quality representation."
While I suppose qualitative arguments can be made regarding definitions for your term, "best case," and the ABA's terms, "effective, quality representation," I would contend that from a purely ethical and moral standpoint, neither the "best case," nor "effective quality representation," consist of blaming or smearing the victim.
Certainly, I understand that in the real world, many prosecutors and defense attorneys have less interest in justice being done than they do in chalking up a win, but at least in theory, a defense counsel's duty is to justice, and ensuring that the defendant's rights are respected in regard to the application of procedure.
And you are a chauvinist: what of it?
And you have never had sex without "saying" yes?
I hate KOS, but for some reason they seem to have sources (guess inside the crime) that extends past the news.
If this is true it is alarming and further sickening:
“At the end of the night she was deposited on the front steps of her parents home.”
I apologize for the source?
See my post #26. I am ashamed at the source but that is where I googled it. I despise KOS more than DU. But they seem to have an inside to crime material.
We’ve all been drunk out of our wits before, but doubt any deserved to get raped
Just as I have learned "rape" is any sex the girl regrets later.
The reason rape was so brutal to prove back in the seventies was because it was the standard "out" for pregnant girls in the fifties.
What always amuses me is how women want "equality" right up until that equality puts them at risk of "losing."
This is absurd.
And your reasoning for such speculation is....?
How is Kos worse than DU?
They are both insane, but KOS admits it.
What makes you think they don't, and that this is nothing more than "regret" on her part?
No, I meant that during the Penn St pedo scandal, I thought I was at DU with all the supposed conservatives defending the place, like they were blameless for the crap going on.
The fact that people have been arrested for doing it since “The Mickey”?
My take on WV is that he father is probably just like you described. Pretty similar to TX. Not good for perps. Yes, it looks like a crime to me. They could dance around this without the videoes, but they are there.
oh they did that and more.
This wasn’t a simple story of drunk boys feeling lucky - this is an especially nasty bunch.
The fact that arson has existed since man discovered fire does not say a thing about why someone's house burned down.
Have you read about the case?
They are an especially nasty group of boys — and any teenager that was a witness that night is devoid of a conscience.
No one called 911
Everyone had their fancy phones for fun pics - but no one called 911
You’re not really this stupid are you? You’re just playing devils advocate or something, right?
Tell us you already know this is a black on white crime
No, but if she is under age, their poor judgement does.
Was she kicked and punched?
google Michael Noidanos (sp?) and watch the video.
While he is talking - she is unconscious in the yard. They urinated on her.
So by that logic, I can come by your place tonight and steal your car. That's ok. You weren't awake to positively tell me not to. And hey, it was your poor judgement to leave it outside anyway. So I wouldn't be criminal in your eyes, right? Where'd you say you live?
You see, IMHO, her "sex partners" - let's be realistic, her rapists, are criminals. In what twisted universe is it ok to have sex with someone who is passed out? This is the same insane logic that says if you don't expressly and explicitly forbid it, it must be ok. No, that's what leads to warning labels on hammers that say "don't strike body parts with hammer" and others that say "don't use electrical equipment near water.." etc. etc. Really, insultingly dumb sh*t warnings because someone got the bright idea that if it isn't expressly forbidden it must be ok. So liability lawyers have a field day "you didn't say not to ..." Same thing with the stupid "defense" these guys are apparently putting up.
Not at all. There is a history of it. That’s why people might think it likely. And apparently this is news to you?
So those who were there are less qualified to make a judgement than you who heard about it through a media filter?
“And you have never had sex without “saying” yes?”
Actually, this is a good point. Not saying “yes” is not the equivalent to saying no. I would guess that with the billions of times people have sex every week, the partners almost NEVER say “yes”. Men or women...
BTW, that doesn’t in any way suggest that I agree with papertiger about this case. I would say though, that if there is ANY doubt as to the willingness of the girl, then the prosecution maybe over charged in this case.