Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Rape Victim facing fine for naming victims

Options
24567

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,935 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    No source links, so have to ask the obvious question...

    ... was she actually raped? Or sexuallly assaulted?

    Did she even make these claims?

    I mean, there appears to have been no rape trial. The focus of the issue seems to be on them taking pictures and that's it. And there's an obviouls solution to not having embarrasing pictures of you taken when your passed out at parties....

    They pled guilty to sexual assault, not rape, it seems from reading


  • Options
    #33
    humbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭humbert


    malachyscott wrote: »
    She could be fined or jailed for naming the two lads who did it. I don't get the confusion ?

    I assume she's guilty of naming the perpetrators, there is only the one victim?


  • Options
    #34
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    Well she was passed out. There was pictures. And rape doesn't only have to involve one thing. Oral rape is still rape so... yeah.

    Rape in the legal sense requires penetration. Even so, you can still sexually assualt someone without rape, and it's still a serious crime, so why was there no trail for at least one of those accusations?

    Someone said they plesaed guilty - to what? And what was the sentence?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #35
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    titan18 wrote: »
    It's applicable in this case, she's 16, they seem to be 16 too, and it was tried in a juvenile court

    That might be the crux of the matter - if the case was held "in camera".
    A pain for her in this case - but "in camera" cases are there also to protect other victims also so its a double edged sword at times.

    There is also the fact that the culprits might have been passing around explicit images if my reading is right?
    That too would by most modern states, be illegal also despite their age.

    I still find it hard to read above in the article (badly written if that was a reporter) where it states they were convicted.


  • Options
    #36
    NegativeCreep
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,351 ✭✭✭NegativeCreep


    childsplay wrote: »
    Jesus H Christ, the world has gone feckin' nuts :mad:. These types of stories are getting far too common for my liking. And why is it that young men seem to get the benefit of the doubt more often than girls.....that just plain enrages me:mad::mad::mad:. Just because men have penises doesn't mean that they should get away with awful behaviours. Now I'm making sweeping statements I know but that's my view of it all and it makes me mad and some might even say cynical.

    Fair play to this young woman though. She is sticking it too her attackers and taking a stand. That must be incredibly hard considering the situation. I salute her bravery and courage.

    Just because women have tits doesn't mean they can't be held accountable for their actions. She got justice and then still felt the need to identify the (probably) underage perpetrators. Which is apparently against the law. She broke the law and that's that.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    childsplay wrote: »
    Jesus H Christ, the world has gone feckin' nuts :mad:. These types of stories are getting far too common for my liking. And why is it that young men seem to get the benefit of the doubt more often than girls.....that just plain enrages me:mad::mad::mad:. Just because men have penises doesn't mean that they should get away with awful behaviours. Now I'm making sweeping statements I know but that's my view of it all and it makes me mad and some might even say cynical.

    Fair play to this young woman though. She is sticking it too her attackers and taking a stand. That must be incredibly hard considering the situation. I salute her bravery and courage.

    Whereas if you drink so much that you black out, you are absolved of all responsibility?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #38
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Rape in the legal sense requires penetration. Even so, you can still sexually assualt someone without rape, and it's still a serious crime, so why was there no trail for at least one of those accusations?

    Depends on the state or country.
    But after some googling I did learn from here:
    http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/510-00/chapter.htm

    Rape could technically have happened.


  • Options
    #39
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    The boys pleaded guilty on June 26 to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. Dietrich says she was unaware of a plea agreement until just before it was announced in court.

    The teens are to be sentenced next month, and the judge could reject or modify the terms of the proposed agreement. When Judge Dee McDonald admonished everyone at the hearing not to speak about what happened in court or about the crime, Dietrich said she cried.

    Source

    If it's a legal issue that they can't be named by their victim then it's a dumb law that protects convicted sex offenders and this girl is brave for ignoring it.

    Dumb laws deserve to be ignored.


  • Options
    #40
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Rape in the legal sense requires penetration. Even so, you can still sexually assualt someone without rape, and it's still a serious crime, so why was there no trail for at least one of those accusations?

    Someone said they plesaed guilty - to what? And what was the sentence?

    They plead guilty to felony sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism

    The sentence given wasn't reported


  • Options
    #41
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Whereas if you drink so much that you black out, you are absolved of all responsibility?


    im 99% sure you've jumped down peoples throats in the past for "victim blaming" .....


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Brutal Deluxe wrote: »
    Depends on the state or country.
    But after some googling I did learn from here:
    http://www.lrc.ky.gov/krs/510-00/chapter.htm

    Rape could technically have happened.

    Splittign hairs. Either she was assualted and why wasn't there a trial? Or she wasn't and what is she claimign she was (if hse even claimed she was)?

    You don't claim someone sexually assulted you and then NOT take them to court.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #43
    humbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭humbert


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Whereas if you drink so much that you black out, you are absolved of all responsibility?
    In this case, yes, absolutely.


  • Options
    #44
    Killer Wench
    Registered Users Posts: 2,386 ✭✭✭Killer Wench


    humbert wrote: »
    If she reported something that was untrue she'd be guilty of libel/slander.

    Further censorship seem very difficult to justify and IMO when the law and justice diverge breaking the law is completely justified.

    They plead guilty to felonies of sexual abuse, correct? Not knowing their ages, but knowing enough about sex offenses, sex offenders will be required to register as such for the remainder of their lives. They will not be able to live within certain limits of schools and public areas; when they relocate, they will have to re-register with the new jurisdiction. This will affect their jobs, impact their reputation in the community, and dog them for the rest of their lives. If they are 16, that means that they are facing 60/70 years of being a social outcast. The rape is a heinous offense and publicly broadcasting the act is reprehensible, but I wonder if a 16 year old is the same person at 76?

    This was an extreme case in which the boys posted photos of her. However, there was a recent case in which a young woman accused a high school friend of raping her in the stairway. He had been promised an athletic scholarship to a big time university, and instead, was pressured into accepting a plea agreement that led to him being imprisoned for 5 years. After his release, the "victim" sent him a friend invite on facebook. He accepted and she asked him to meet up for coffee. They met and she confessed that she made false allegations of rape because she wanted to sue the school. She and her mother had received a million dollar settlement. This guy served time in prison, had to register as a sex offender, and had his reputation shattered because a girl made false allegations for money. Luckily, there was a happy ending for him. But, what if she had made these allegations during this time when facebook is so easily accessible?


  • Options
    #45
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Like it or not - she did break the law it appears.
    ...Judge Dee McDonald, who presided over the case, included a confidential order to keep the names of the victims and criminals out of the press. This outraged Savannah who then tweeted...
    Source: http://www.examiner.com/article/why-most-americans-hope-savannah-dietrich-keeps-talking


  • Options
    #46
    childsplay
    Registered Users Posts: 169 ✭✭childsplay


    Originally Posted by Ikky Poo2
    Rape in the legal sense requires penetration. Even so, you can still sexually assualt someone without rape, and it's still a serious crime, so why was there no trail for at least one of those accusations?

    Here's the Irish definition of rape. It is clearly not just defined as penetration of the vagina without consent.

    Common Law rape

    This is defined in section 1 of the Criminal Law (Rape) Act, 1981(as amended). It says that a man commits rape if he has sexual intercourse with a woman who does not consent and, at the time, he either knows that she does not consent or is reckless as to whether or not she consents. Common law rape can only be committed by a man against a woman. However, a woman may be found guilty of common law rape as an accessory, if she has assisted a man to commit rape. The maximum penalty is life imprisonment.

    Section 4 rape

    This takes its name from Section 4 of the Criminal Law (Rape) (Amendment) Act 1990. It involves penetration (however slight) of the anus or mouth by the penis (known as Section 4(a) rape), or penetration (however slight) of the vagina by an object held or manipulated by another person (known as Section 4(b) rape).

    Section 4(a) rape can only be committed by a man, against either a man or a woman. Section 4(b) rape can only be committed against a woman, but by either men or women. The maximum penalty for both types of rape is life imprisonment.


  • Options
    #47
    Chuck Stone
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Whereas if you drink so much that you black out, you are absolved of all responsibility?

    So you think she has to accept a potion of the blame for being sexually assaulted, having it photographed, and passed around?

    Is that what you're saying?


  • Options
    #48
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,935 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    Biggins wrote: »
    That might be the crux of the matter - if the case was held "in camera".
    A pain for her in this case - but "in camera" cases are there also to protect other victims also so its a double edged sword at times.

    There is also the fact that the culprits might have been passing around explicit images if my reading is right?
    That too would by most modern states, be illegal also despite their age.

    I still find it hard to read above in the article (badly written if that was a reporter) where it states they were convicted.

    They haven't been sentenced yet. They pled guilty to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. I presume they had to cos of evidence and they hope to get off with a smaller punishment. As it's still an ongoing case, the judge rightly told the girl to not speak about it, and as it's a juvenile case, it holds more weight.

    The girl says she can't say what the plea deal punishment was because of a court order it seems, but decided to break the other aspects of that order.

    That's all I can gather about it so far.


  • Options
    #49
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar wrote: »
    im 99% sure you've jumped down peoples throats in the past for "victim blaming" .....

    I'd need a specific case, (not denying it). In any case, people are goign to blame in a case like this. Just to be clear, though, this is more a case of me trying to find out what they actually did. Information is vague at best.
    humbert wrote: »
    In this case, yes, absolutely.

    If there was rape, I agree. There is responsibility to not get hammered drunk though and black out. As I said before, if you don't want embarrassing pictures of yoruself passed out at parties on the internet, there is an easy way around that, and that's not blaming. That's just advising responsibilty.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #50
    humbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭humbert


    Biggins wrote: »
    Like it or not - she did break the law it appears.

    It was established from the outset that she broke the law?


  • Options
    #51
    mauzo
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,033 ✭✭✭mauzo


    Just because she didnt say no, doesnt mean she was saying yes.
    Of course being passed out absolves her from responsibilty!!!! She had no say in the matter!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Madam_X
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,327 ✭✭✭Madam_X


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Whereas if you drink so much that you black out, you are absolved of all responsibility?
    Makes the attacker even worse IMO - if the subject of their attack is that vulnerable (male or female).

    But if she broke the law, she broke the law - even if it's felt the law's an ass.


  • Options
    #53
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    Chuck Stone wrote: »
    So you think she has to accept a potion of the blame for being sexually assaulted, having it photographed, and passed around?

    Is that what you're saying?

    Nope.

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #54
    humbert
    Registered Users Posts: 5,238 ✭✭✭humbert


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    If there was rape, I agree. There is responsibility to not get hammered drunk though and black out. As I said before, if you don't want embarrassing pictures of yoruself passed out at parties on the internet, there is an easy way around that, and that's not blaming. That's just advising responsibilty.

    This isn't about embarrassing pictures of her blacked out, this is embarrassing pictures of her getting sexually assaulted....


  • Options
    #55
    Tombi!
    Registered Users Posts: 6,689 ✭✭✭Tombi!


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    Nope.

    So what does being passed out and taken advantage of have to do with any kind of "blame" on the victim?


  • Options
    #56
    Sir Digby Chicken Caesar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 23,556 ✭✭✭✭Sir Digby Chicken Caesar


    Ikky Poo2 wrote: »
    I'd need a specific case, (not denying it). In any case, people are goign to blame in a case like this. Just to be clear, though, this is more a case of me trying to find out what they actually did. Information is vague at best.



    wasn't attacking your or anything was just... puzzled :)

    iirc the footballer rape story of a few months ago where a footballer and a friend brought some drunk girl back to their hotel room and let somebody else have sex with her.. i dunno, dont remember much about it.. I just remember the 5000 page after hours thread and the war of words therein.


  • Options
    #57
    fasttalkerchat
    Registered Users Posts: 5,652 ✭✭✭fasttalkerchat


    Once they plead guilty and the court case has finished it should be up to her to tell who she likes!


  • Options
    #58
    Princess Consuela Bananahammock
    Registered Users Posts: 33,154 ✭✭✭✭Princess Consuela Bananahammock


    humbert wrote: »
    This isn't about embarrassing pictures of her blacked out, this is embarrassing pictures of her getting sexually assaulted....

    ... again, if so (and i would agree with you if that's the case) then why aren't this guys getting a much stiffer penalty?

    Everything I don't like is either woke or fascist - possibly both - pick one.



  • Options
    #59
    titan18
    Registered Users Posts: 11,935 ✭✭✭✭titan18


    fasttalkerchat wrote: »
    Once they plead guilty and the court case has finished it should be up to her to tell who she likes!

    Case aint finished though


  • Options
    #60
    Biggins
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 34,567 ✭✭✭✭Biggins


    Lets be clear about one thing.

    Name of victims and of the guilty are ordered to be kept out of the press sometimes so that:

    (a) a victim who wishes not to be exposed, is not done so and

    (b) so that a victim might not be exposed (even locally within her living neighbourhood) by the further the naming of the culprits whom also might be previously well known, often in small communities, much equally known.

    People in communities are at times able to put two and two together and often work out who a victim was (then gossip/bitch?) by just knowing who the culprits was in possible other cases.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    Boombastic
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,496 ✭✭✭Boombastic


    The teens are to be sentenced next month, and the judge could reject or modify the terms of the proposed agreement.

    Read more: http://www.abcactionnews.com/dpp/news/national/savannah-dietrich-kentucky-teen-faces-charge-for-naming-attackers-on-twitter#ixzz21ToSPLn5


Advertisement