Full Version: Duke's Men's Lacrosse Rape Allegations
Just speculating about what actually happened here: from what has come out so far it looks to me like the rape victim may have willingly gone to some location with the alleged rapists in hope of earning a little extra money by going further than just stripping. Judging from what has come out about a couple of the lacrosse players, one - or more likely more, this being a team sport - of the guys may have tried to go too far and suggested doing some things he would not do with a decent lady.
Here's this morning's wrap-up on the present state of this affair. My favorite line from this fellow-con: "Why shouldn't I profit from it?" That's going to sound real good before the jury. Link to story.
And as far as her wanting to feed her daughter, where's Daddy? :confused:
And as far as her wanting to feed her daughter, where's Daddy? :confused:
So, if a straight man beats up a gay man and calls him "faggot" it is a gay bashing but if he beats up a straight man and calls him "faggot" it is not. Well, technically he did not bash a gay man but IMHO it still counts as a gay bashing.
QUOTE
Ms. de Blazer:
So, if a straight man beats up a gay man and calls him \"faggot\" it is a gay bashing but if he beats up a straight man and calls him \"faggot\" it is not. Well, technically he did not bash a gay man but IMHO it still counts as a gay bashing.
Legal technicality: What if a straight man beats up a closeted gay man. Is that gay bashing?
So, if a straight man beats up a gay man and calls him \"faggot\" it is a gay bashing but if he beats up a straight man and calls him \"faggot\" it is not. Well, technically he did not bash a gay man but IMHO it still counts as a gay bashing.
If everytime a str8 guy called another str8 a fag, or gay, and ended up in a scuffle - and got prosecuted for it, our courts would get no rest. In fact, calling this a gay bashing dilutes the horror of the real gay bashing that goes on out there and how important it is to prosecute that...But, this incident does speak to this guy's mentality as do other floating facts in this case. Just as the stripper's criminal record and behavior speaks to her mentality, all of which do matter in trying to decipher who's telling the truth, or mostly the truth...
[ April 21, 2006, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Bryan ]
[ April 21, 2006, 10:50 AM: Message edited by: Bryan ]
As far as I'm concerned, noone should assault anybody, gay or straight. By the way, Tennis Guy, if the assailant beat up the closeted gay man because he was suspicious about the guy's sexuality then I imagine it would be a gay bashing. If not, then it's assault. Regardless, the attacker should be prosecuted accordingly.
This article came from this week's edition of the Washington City Paper. It will be available online at the CP website for the rest of the week; after that, you'll have to order it from the archives. I am putting it here in its entirety for archival purposes, which may not be acceptable vis-à-vis the fair use provision. Do what you feel best, moderators.
Another Lose-Lose Situation
[ April 22, 2006, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: twin58 ]
Another Lose-Lose Situation
QUOTE
CHEAP SEATS
April 21, 2006
Another Lose-Lose Situation
In the Duke lacrosse fiasco, shades of a D.C. sex scandal
By Dave McKenna
Mike O’Harro says he can’t stop himself from “devouring” newspaper and TV reports about the Duke lacrosse case.
“This all sounds so familiar to me,” says O’Harro.
If O’Harro’s name sounds familiar, either you spend a lot of time on eBay—he’s the site’s biggest single seller, having garnered 65,123 positive reviews as of the afternoon of April 17—or you know that for decades he was the king of this city’s nightlife. The Arlington resident is best remembered for founding what is recognized as our first upscale disco, Tramp’s, as well as the country’s first sports bar, Champions.
But he got out of the business that made him a local hero and a national celebrity in large part because of an incident that in many ways was a D.C. version of the current turmoil in Durham, N.C. In May 1990, a teenager accused four Washington Capitals players of raping and sodomizing her in a limousine parked outside O’Harro’s bar after a team party. O’Harro wasn’t on the premises the night of the alleged attack, but his business had hired the car in which it took place.
Nobody was ever charged criminally for whatever happened that night in the Georgetown alley. But by the time the case was over legally, the accuser had left town, the Capitals had decided to dismantle what to that point was the most successful team in franchise history, and O’Harro was on his way out of barkeeping. He sold Champions to a group of employees in 1992. It closed in 2002, and the cocktail lounge Blue Gin now occupies the sports bar’s former location.
The Caps of the mid-’70s were the worst franchise the league had ever seen. But in the 1980s, management had figured out a way to put together great regular seasons, even if those successes never translated to the playoffs. In the spring of 1990, though, things came together like never before. The Capitals defeated the division rival New Jersey Devils and New York Rangers and made it to the conference championships for the first time. Though the Caps were swept 4-0 by the Boston Bruins in the Stanley Cup semifinals, the future had never looked so bright heading into an offseason. On the night of May 11, the team held a party to celebrate its recent triumphs and upcoming glories at the only logical place in town: Champions.
Sometime after midnight, a young woman at the party left the bar and got into a limousine with Capitals players she identified as Scott Stevens, Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy. Ciccarelli and Courtnall were the team’s top scorers, Stevens its top defenseman. Sheehy, a Harvard man, was the team’s enforcer, with 291 penalty minutes that season. Hours after the encounter, the accuser told police that she had been drinking heavily at the bar and that she knew the players who had allegedly attacked her, because she was dating one of their teammates.
The named players denied that any forced sexual activity took place.
The accuser’s identity was never made public. However, the already ugly situation got even more unseemly when it was learned that she was just 17 years old. A group calling itself the Outraged Women of Washington protested the pace of the investigation and voiced support for the alleged victim at a rally held outside O’Harro’s bar.
Marty Langelan, a self-defense instructor and former president of the D.C. Rape Crisis Center, was among those who attended the rally outside Champions.
“My own personal view was that, yes, it was sexual assault, and no, it wasn’t being handled properly,” recalls Langelan. “To bring a [rape] case forward requires courage, particularly when the perpetrators are star athletes. She knew she was going to be vilified. She could be a nun and people would say she asked for it. But we weren’t there just for the legal situation. This was about public accountability for these athletes. No self-respecting man would take advantage of a child. Go play with people your own size.”
A week after the alleged rape, the D.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board launched an investigation to see if Champions had broken the law by serving a minor.
O’Harro says he found himself caught between letting his business be destroyed and going after an obviously troubled kid. He hired a private investigator to look into the accuser.
“There’s always an initial rush to judgment in these situations,” he says. “People think the worst of people; that’s human nature. The media loves chasing tales of boys behaving badly. This was my first and only, mind you, experience with something like this. I initially assumed something really did happen, that maybe the girl was raped as she said. It was clear that nobody was going to come out of this a winner. Nobody ever does in these situations. We found out a lot of things about the girl, about her history, that weren’t pretty. She was a teenager running wild—somebody who looked much older than she really was, with all sorts of fake IDs and living as an athletic groupie with all sorts of adult athletes. The whole thing was awful.”
As has happened with the Duke case, D.C. law-enforcement officials gave comments to the press without the evidence to back them up. Lt. Reginald L. Smith, then a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police Department, told the Washington Post that the cops “have sufficient grounds to believe that a criminal offense did occur.”
But the closest the investigators ever got to a witness to the alleged assault, other than those involved, was the driver of the limousine, and he told police he was standing outside the vehicle when whatever took place took place.
“One thing I can tell you for certain: There were no screams for no help,” recalls the limo driver, who requested his name not be used in this story. “She knew exactly what she was doing. She knew she was going to roll those dummies under a damn bus when she got through with them.”
U.S. Attorney Jay Stephens’ office brought the case to a grand jury a month after the incident, but it refused to return any criminal indictments against the players. No civil suits were ever filed in the matter.
Despite the lack of a criminal case, Capitals management quickly rid the roster of the players involved. The team let Stevens sign as a free agent with the St. Louis Blues in the offseason. Before his 2004 retirement, Stevens had won Stanley Cups as a member of the Devils, and he’s a sure-thing first-ballot NHL Hall of Famer. Courtnall was traded to the Blues that summer, too, and played another 10 years in the NHL. Sheehy never played another regular-season game for the Caps. Ciccarelli, who came to Washington from Minnesota in 1989 in a trade for future Hall of Famers Mike Gartner and Larry Murphy, was given away by the Caps in 1992. Ciccarelli is the only eligible player with 600 goals not to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.
Just as the Duke lacrosse situation has laid bare Durham’s divisions, by the time the case was over, class and race were made a part of the Capitals story. The Chicago Tribune ran a piece under the headline “Violence, crime tarnish exclusive capital enclave’s tony image,” which spoke of “Georgetown as the neighborhood of the Washington novel, the cobbled streets where, once upon a time, the young Jack Kennedy lived with his wife, the glamorous Jacqueline,” and mentioned the myth that Metro was designed to keep blacks out of the “predominately white neighborhood.”
“But whatever the disposition of events, the life of Georgetown these days seems a long way from Camelot,” read the piece’s kicker.
O’Harro says that, by 1990, he thought he had gotten used to the limelight. Years earlier, he had produced a poster of himself posing with a cocktail, decked out in riding gear and leaning on a Bentley over the heading “Poverty Sucks.” He says it became the biggest-selling poster of all time, outselling even Farrah Fawcett in a swimsuit.
And he was already a legend in the bar business. He opened Tramp’s in 1975—years before Saturday Night Fever or Studio 54 foisted such nightlife on the masses. (He founded the International Discothèque Association and is a member of, ahem, the Disco Hall of Fame.) In 1983, down an alley in the same neighborhood, he and partner Jim Desmond opened Champions, which is considered the prototype of the American sports bar. Soon enough, it was selling more beer per square foot than any bar in the United States, and copycat establishments were showing up in every hotel, airport, and strip mall in the country. ESPN the Magazine put Champions on its 2004 list of the greatest innovations in sports history, along with the salary cap and Air Jordans.
O’Harro, named Cosmopolitan magazine Bachelor of the Month in 1976, also had his share of dealings with scandalous females. He dated Elizabeth Ray, the former Miss Virginia, before she brought down Rep. Wayne Hays in 1976 by publicly confessing to drawing a $14,000-per-year salary as a congressional staffer with no legislative tools: “I can’t type. I can’t file. I can’t even answer the phone,” was how Ray famously described her skill set to the Washington Post after Hays married another woman. And he was involved with Paula Parkinson, who, also in the mid-’70s, was rumored to have had affairs with as many as eight members of Congress. And with Colleen Gardner, who in 1976 was outed for being another paid member of a congressional staff, in this case Texas Democrat John Young’s, while lacking any obvious skills.
“I’m a lucky guy, fortunate to be around beautiful women all my life,” O’Harro says.
But the Ray, Parkinson, and Gardner scandals all had some degree of humor to them, and everybody involved was an adult. The Capitals mess didn’t leave anybody laughing. Champions, like the Caps, was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing. But the heat that the alleged sexual assault put on him and his business caused O’Harro to rethink just how much he loved the nightlife.
“This was a very traumatic, unpleasant time,” he says. “That didn’t hit me immediately, because so much was going on, and I wasn’t going to run and hide from it. But once this was resolved, I figured I was getting too old for this business. I just said, ‘Maybe it’s time for me to move on.’ And I got out.” CP
April 21, 2006
Another Lose-Lose Situation
In the Duke lacrosse fiasco, shades of a D.C. sex scandal
By Dave McKenna
Mike O’Harro says he can’t stop himself from “devouring” newspaper and TV reports about the Duke lacrosse case.
“This all sounds so familiar to me,” says O’Harro.
If O’Harro’s name sounds familiar, either you spend a lot of time on eBay—he’s the site’s biggest single seller, having garnered 65,123 positive reviews as of the afternoon of April 17—or you know that for decades he was the king of this city’s nightlife. The Arlington resident is best remembered for founding what is recognized as our first upscale disco, Tramp’s, as well as the country’s first sports bar, Champions.
But he got out of the business that made him a local hero and a national celebrity in large part because of an incident that in many ways was a D.C. version of the current turmoil in Durham, N.C. In May 1990, a teenager accused four Washington Capitals players of raping and sodomizing her in a limousine parked outside O’Harro’s bar after a team party. O’Harro wasn’t on the premises the night of the alleged attack, but his business had hired the car in which it took place.
Nobody was ever charged criminally for whatever happened that night in the Georgetown alley. But by the time the case was over legally, the accuser had left town, the Capitals had decided to dismantle what to that point was the most successful team in franchise history, and O’Harro was on his way out of barkeeping. He sold Champions to a group of employees in 1992. It closed in 2002, and the cocktail lounge Blue Gin now occupies the sports bar’s former location.
The Caps of the mid-’70s were the worst franchise the league had ever seen. But in the 1980s, management had figured out a way to put together great regular seasons, even if those successes never translated to the playoffs. In the spring of 1990, though, things came together like never before. The Capitals defeated the division rival New Jersey Devils and New York Rangers and made it to the conference championships for the first time. Though the Caps were swept 4-0 by the Boston Bruins in the Stanley Cup semifinals, the future had never looked so bright heading into an offseason. On the night of May 11, the team held a party to celebrate its recent triumphs and upcoming glories at the only logical place in town: Champions.
Sometime after midnight, a young woman at the party left the bar and got into a limousine with Capitals players she identified as Scott Stevens, Dino Ciccarelli, Geoff Courtnall, and Neil Sheehy. Ciccarelli and Courtnall were the team’s top scorers, Stevens its top defenseman. Sheehy, a Harvard man, was the team’s enforcer, with 291 penalty minutes that season. Hours after the encounter, the accuser told police that she had been drinking heavily at the bar and that she knew the players who had allegedly attacked her, because she was dating one of their teammates.
The named players denied that any forced sexual activity took place.
The accuser’s identity was never made public. However, the already ugly situation got even more unseemly when it was learned that she was just 17 years old. A group calling itself the Outraged Women of Washington protested the pace of the investigation and voiced support for the alleged victim at a rally held outside O’Harro’s bar.
Marty Langelan, a self-defense instructor and former president of the D.C. Rape Crisis Center, was among those who attended the rally outside Champions.
“My own personal view was that, yes, it was sexual assault, and no, it wasn’t being handled properly,” recalls Langelan. “To bring a [rape] case forward requires courage, particularly when the perpetrators are star athletes. She knew she was going to be vilified. She could be a nun and people would say she asked for it. But we weren’t there just for the legal situation. This was about public accountability for these athletes. No self-respecting man would take advantage of a child. Go play with people your own size.”
A week after the alleged rape, the D.C. Alcoholic Beverage Control Board launched an investigation to see if Champions had broken the law by serving a minor.
O’Harro says he found himself caught between letting his business be destroyed and going after an obviously troubled kid. He hired a private investigator to look into the accuser.
“There’s always an initial rush to judgment in these situations,” he says. “People think the worst of people; that’s human nature. The media loves chasing tales of boys behaving badly. This was my first and only, mind you, experience with something like this. I initially assumed something really did happen, that maybe the girl was raped as she said. It was clear that nobody was going to come out of this a winner. Nobody ever does in these situations. We found out a lot of things about the girl, about her history, that weren’t pretty. She was a teenager running wild—somebody who looked much older than she really was, with all sorts of fake IDs and living as an athletic groupie with all sorts of adult athletes. The whole thing was awful.”
As has happened with the Duke case, D.C. law-enforcement officials gave comments to the press without the evidence to back them up. Lt. Reginald L. Smith, then a spokesperson for the Metropolitan Police Department, told the Washington Post that the cops “have sufficient grounds to believe that a criminal offense did occur.”
But the closest the investigators ever got to a witness to the alleged assault, other than those involved, was the driver of the limousine, and he told police he was standing outside the vehicle when whatever took place took place.
“One thing I can tell you for certain: There were no screams for no help,” recalls the limo driver, who requested his name not be used in this story. “She knew exactly what she was doing. She knew she was going to roll those dummies under a damn bus when she got through with them.”
U.S. Attorney Jay Stephens’ office brought the case to a grand jury a month after the incident, but it refused to return any criminal indictments against the players. No civil suits were ever filed in the matter.
Despite the lack of a criminal case, Capitals management quickly rid the roster of the players involved. The team let Stevens sign as a free agent with the St. Louis Blues in the offseason. Before his 2004 retirement, Stevens had won Stanley Cups as a member of the Devils, and he’s a sure-thing first-ballot NHL Hall of Famer. Courtnall was traded to the Blues that summer, too, and played another 10 years in the NHL. Sheehy never played another regular-season game for the Caps. Ciccarelli, who came to Washington from Minnesota in 1989 in a trade for future Hall of Famers Mike Gartner and Larry Murphy, was given away by the Caps in 1992. Ciccarelli is the only eligible player with 600 goals not to be inducted into the Hall of Fame.
Just as the Duke lacrosse situation has laid bare Durham’s divisions, by the time the case was over, class and race were made a part of the Capitals story. The Chicago Tribune ran a piece under the headline “Violence, crime tarnish exclusive capital enclave’s tony image,” which spoke of “Georgetown as the neighborhood of the Washington novel, the cobbled streets where, once upon a time, the young Jack Kennedy lived with his wife, the glamorous Jacqueline,” and mentioned the myth that Metro was designed to keep blacks out of the “predominately white neighborhood.”
“But whatever the disposition of events, the life of Georgetown these days seems a long way from Camelot,” read the piece’s kicker.
O’Harro says that, by 1990, he thought he had gotten used to the limelight. Years earlier, he had produced a poster of himself posing with a cocktail, decked out in riding gear and leaning on a Bentley over the heading “Poverty Sucks.” He says it became the biggest-selling poster of all time, outselling even Farrah Fawcett in a swimsuit.
And he was already a legend in the bar business. He opened Tramp’s in 1975—years before Saturday Night Fever or Studio 54 foisted such nightlife on the masses. (He founded the International Discothèque Association and is a member of, ahem, the Disco Hall of Fame.) In 1983, down an alley in the same neighborhood, he and partner Jim Desmond opened Champions, which is considered the prototype of the American sports bar. Soon enough, it was selling more beer per square foot than any bar in the United States, and copycat establishments were showing up in every hotel, airport, and strip mall in the country. ESPN the Magazine put Champions on its 2004 list of the greatest innovations in sports history, along with the salary cap and Air Jordans.
O’Harro, named Cosmopolitan magazine Bachelor of the Month in 1976, also had his share of dealings with scandalous females. He dated Elizabeth Ray, the former Miss Virginia, before she brought down Rep. Wayne Hays in 1976 by publicly confessing to drawing a $14,000-per-year salary as a congressional staffer with no legislative tools: “I can’t type. I can’t file. I can’t even answer the phone,” was how Ray famously described her skill set to the Washington Post after Hays married another woman. And he was involved with Paula Parkinson, who, also in the mid-’70s, was rumored to have had affairs with as many as eight members of Congress. And with Colleen Gardner, who in 1976 was outed for being another paid member of a congressional staff, in this case Texas Democrat John Young’s, while lacking any obvious skills.
“I’m a lucky guy, fortunate to be around beautiful women all my life,” O’Harro says.
But the Ray, Parkinson, and Gardner scandals all had some degree of humor to them, and everybody involved was an adult. The Capitals mess didn’t leave anybody laughing. Champions, like the Caps, was ultimately cleared of any wrongdoing. But the heat that the alleged sexual assault put on him and his business caused O’Harro to rethink just how much he loved the nightlife.
“This was a very traumatic, unpleasant time,” he says. “That didn’t hit me immediately, because so much was going on, and I wasn’t going to run and hide from it. But once this was resolved, I figured I was getting too old for this business. I just said, ‘Maybe it’s time for me to move on.’ And I got out.” CP
[ April 22, 2006, 06:10 PM: Message edited by: twin58 ]
Hmmm ... wasn't Tramp's a successor, or neighbor, to "Lost and Found?" Now THERE was a good nightclub back in the day! wink
I'll say. L&F was at Half and O Streets SE. The site is now an office building, or it will be bulldozed for the new Nationals stadium. Tramp's, I couldn't tell you.
Please, people, can't we all just get along?
Ballpark Blues
Please, people, can't we all just get along?
Ballpark Blues
A short blurb I read in the paper this morning was a cogent reminder of just how casually the average man treats the right to molest women in public. It concerned the establishment of no-grope trains in three major cities around the world including, to my surprise, the (so I thought) staid environment of Tokyo Japan. Lest we think the USA is immune to such abuse I found this rather satirical story in which the offense is considered as much a joke as a problem.
Sort of related.
Reining In Academy Drinking
Reining In Academy Drinking
QUOTE
Reining In Academy Drinking
Shore Patrol Tries to Curb Midshipmen's Off-Campus Alcohol Excesses
By Ray Rivera
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 25, 2006; Page B01
It's Tuesday night at Riordan's Saloon, a popular hangout for U.S. Naval Academy midshipmen. They muster in their black-and-gold uniforms along the wooden bar, drawn here by $2 drafts and specials on Buffalo wings and chicken melts.
A few do shots: Jager Bombs are a favorite, a syrupy mixture of Jagermeister liqueur and Red Bull. Only one midshipman appears drunk: His jacket is off, his white blouse untucked. He's thrown up once already, one of his comrades says.
....
The Naval Academy is unlikely to make the list of top party schools anytime soon: On a campus renowned for discipline and honor, students are held to a strict behavioral code. Only seniors are allowed to drink on academy grounds, and underage drinking can be punished with demerits, even expulsion.
But the academy has not escaped the problems -- and tragedies -- that alcohol has brought to many other campuses. Last year, a junior accidentally fell to his death from a fifth-floor dorm window after a night of drinking. Another, also intoxicated, fell and died in 2002.
More frequently, drinking plays a role in sexual assaults: It was a factor in two-thirds of the 45 cases The Washington Post was able to review in detail.
Aware of its problem, the Naval Academy started sending patrols onto Annapolis streets last fall to look for drunken midshipmen and conduct random Breathalyzer tests to ferret out underage drinkers. The academy has also launched ethics training that addresses the connections between drinking and sexual assault.
....
Shore Patrol Tries to Curb Midshipmen's Off-Campus Alcohol Excesses
By Ray Rivera
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 25, 2006; Page B01
It's Tuesday night at Riordan's Saloon, a popular hangout for U.S. Naval Academy midshipmen. They muster in their black-and-gold uniforms along the wooden bar, drawn here by $2 drafts and specials on Buffalo wings and chicken melts.
A few do shots: Jager Bombs are a favorite, a syrupy mixture of Jagermeister liqueur and Red Bull. Only one midshipman appears drunk: His jacket is off, his white blouse untucked. He's thrown up once already, one of his comrades says.
....
The Naval Academy is unlikely to make the list of top party schools anytime soon: On a campus renowned for discipline and honor, students are held to a strict behavioral code. Only seniors are allowed to drink on academy grounds, and underage drinking can be punished with demerits, even expulsion.
But the academy has not escaped the problems -- and tragedies -- that alcohol has brought to many other campuses. Last year, a junior accidentally fell to his death from a fifth-floor dorm window after a night of drinking. Another, also intoxicated, fell and died in 2002.
More frequently, drinking plays a role in sexual assaults: It was a factor in two-thirds of the 45 cases The Washington Post was able to review in detail.
Aware of its problem, the Naval Academy started sending patrols onto Annapolis streets last fall to look for drunken midshipmen and conduct random Breathalyzer tests to ferret out underage drinkers. The academy has also launched ethics training that addresses the connections between drinking and sexual assault.
....
The article on groping does indeed act as though it is very funny. I can assure you it is NOT FUNNY to anyone on the receiving end. It is NOT fondling, it is assault.
Meanwhile, this case is starting to resemble Natalee Holloway. No news, but endless rehash, mostly about the woman and all the things she did wrong and how she put herself in a bad situation and she drank and well we are not really saying she deserved it but honestly didn't she really bring it all on herself?
Meanwhile, this case is starting to resemble Natalee Holloway. No news, but endless rehash, mostly about the woman and all the things she did wrong and how she put herself in a bad situation and she drank and well we are not really saying she deserved it but honestly didn't she really bring it all on herself?
Ms de Blazer, I'd disagree with you. I don't think the news media has focused on Natalee making poor decisions at all, but have been very sympathetic to her and her parents. She made some bad decisions, particularly going off with guys she doesn't know. Does that mean that if those guys did something to her that they shouldn't be in trouble? No, not at all.
In this Duke case, yes it may seem like she put herself in a bad situation, but she also seemed to be aware of it when the two left after being asked to use a broomstick. The 2nd woman seemed to be very upset with them later on and called the police.
In this Duke case, yes it may seem like she put herself in a bad situation, but she also seemed to be aware of it when the two left after being asked to use a broomstick. The 2nd woman seemed to be very upset with them later on and called the police.
Deleted - Just saw this was posted earlier. Sorry.
[ April 25, 2006, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Maddog ]
[ April 25, 2006, 12:31 PM: Message edited by: Maddog ]
I'm sorry, illini, maybe I was not clear. When I said it was like the Holloway case I mean wall to wall coverage with little to no real news. I agree that treatment of Holloway has been very sympathetic. After all, she is the All American white woman, pretty, blonde. She may have gone somewhere she probably should not have, but it would be most impolite to say so. Whereas at least the cable news all seems to be about what this woman did "wrong".
I have no doubt she was in a situation that was not ideal. But as I have said repeatedly, the question is "did these men rape this woman?" If the answer is yes, and I am not claiming any special knowledge BTW, there is no time, no place and no situation that makes it OK.
I have no doubt she was in a situation that was not ideal. But as I have said repeatedly, the question is "did these men rape this woman?" If the answer is yes, and I am not claiming any special knowledge BTW, there is no time, no place and no situation that makes it OK.
This is the 'toughest' time for the prosecutor and alleged victim right now because the DA can't really say much and will not be getting any more 'results' back til mid-May. And they aren't going to unleash all the evidence of the case until at least after that.
Whereas now you have the defense filing pretty harsh stuff, badmouthing the woman and pretty much feeding the media everything they want to get out there. I found it funny that in a discussion of the case the other night, one of the news programs had the mayor of where one of the guys is from who knows the family talking about how great a kid he is. I'm sorry, but your family friends, let alone your parents know the 'true' you in college. Usually parents are oblivious to this type of college behavior when it comes to drinking, rowdy parties and in this case strippers (this also goes along with the Holloway case...with the mom saying her daughter would never mess around with a stranger in a car).
The defense motion yesterday was a good example of the public opinion battle. Her past mental history and such has nothing to do with this case. It's rarely admissable because it only matters if at the time of the alleged attack she was mentally unstable or what not.
Whereas now you have the defense filing pretty harsh stuff, badmouthing the woman and pretty much feeding the media everything they want to get out there. I found it funny that in a discussion of the case the other night, one of the news programs had the mayor of where one of the guys is from who knows the family talking about how great a kid he is. I'm sorry, but your family friends, let alone your parents know the 'true' you in college. Usually parents are oblivious to this type of college behavior when it comes to drinking, rowdy parties and in this case strippers (this also goes along with the Holloway case...with the mom saying her daughter would never mess around with a stranger in a car).
The defense motion yesterday was a good example of the public opinion battle. Her past mental history and such has nothing to do with this case. It's rarely admissable because it only matters if at the time of the alleged attack she was mentally unstable or what not.
Duke lacrosse player to be tried in D.C. 'gay' assault
QUOTE
Prosecutors void plea deal as lawyer denies attack was based on bias
By JOSHUA LYNSEN | Apr 25, 1:26 PM
Duke lacrosse player Collin Finnerty must face trial for a D.C. assault last year in which the victim was allegedly called \"gay\" and \"other derogatory names,\" a court ruled Tuesday. District prosecutors voided an earlier plea agreement involving the Georgetown incident as a result of Finnerty's indictment on rape charges in North Carolina.
....
D.C. prosecutors, who had declined to prosecute the incident as an anti-gay hate crime, previously allowed Finnerty to perform 25 hours of community service as punishment but voided that agreement April 25.
The misdemeanor simple-assault charge Finnerty faces would have been dismissed under the terms of that diversion program, but the terms of the deal also required he not commit any criminal offenses.
By JOSHUA LYNSEN | Apr 25, 1:26 PM
Duke lacrosse player Collin Finnerty must face trial for a D.C. assault last year in which the victim was allegedly called \"gay\" and \"other derogatory names,\" a court ruled Tuesday. District prosecutors voided an earlier plea agreement involving the Georgetown incident as a result of Finnerty's indictment on rape charges in North Carolina.
....
D.C. prosecutors, who had declined to prosecute the incident as an anti-gay hate crime, previously allowed Finnerty to perform 25 hours of community service as punishment but voided that agreement April 25.
The misdemeanor simple-assault charge Finnerty faces would have been dismissed under the terms of that diversion program, but the terms of the deal also required he not commit any criminal offenses.
[quote]illini n milwaukee
[QB] [QUOTE] This is the 'toughest' time for the prosecutor and alleged victim right now because the DA can't really say much and will not be getting any more 'results' back til mid-May. And they aren't going to unleash all the evidence of the case until at least after that. [/quote]Exactly. The defense is putting the woman on trial and can pretty much say anything they want, true or not.
[quote]The defense motion yesterday was a good example of the public opinion battle. Her past mental history and such has nothing to do with this case. It's rarely admissable because it only matters if at the time of the alleged attack she was mentally unstable or what not. [/quote]See above discussion on attitudes towards mental illness. All they have to do is hint this woman is "mentally ill" and it automatically conjures visions that she is unreliable, makes things up, lies, etc. etc.
[QB] [QUOTE] This is the 'toughest' time for the prosecutor and alleged victim right now because the DA can't really say much and will not be getting any more 'results' back til mid-May. And they aren't going to unleash all the evidence of the case until at least after that. [/quote]Exactly. The defense is putting the woman on trial and can pretty much say anything they want, true or not.
[quote]The defense motion yesterday was a good example of the public opinion battle. Her past mental history and such has nothing to do with this case. It's rarely admissable because it only matters if at the time of the alleged attack she was mentally unstable or what not. [/quote]See above discussion on attitudes towards mental illness. All they have to do is hint this woman is "mentally ill" and it automatically conjures visions that she is unreliable, makes things up, lies, etc. etc.
Illini, don't forget that anything that relates to her credibility - not just in terms of her honesty, but also in terms of her ability to recall AND testify at the time of trial - is admissible on that issue. Jurors who come to this trial in good faith and with open minds, not burdened with bitterness or their own agendas, will be able to separate the evidence admitted at trial from what transpired beforehand, whether in the event itself or its reportage. That's what we all want from our jurors, right?
If she was depressed 5 years ago GMG, it does NOT relate to this case. All that matters is her state at the time of these events.
At least part of the DNA tests being waited on has to apparently deal with DNA found under her fingernails.
And as for the whole substance issue, it is sounding more and more that it was a date rape drug (the other dancer did not drink the mixed drink they gave to them when they arrived). What kind of crime is that?
At least part of the DNA tests being waited on has to apparently deal with DNA found under her fingernails.
And as for the whole substance issue, it is sounding more and more that it was a date rape drug (the other dancer did not drink the mixed drink they gave to them when they arrived). What kind of crime is that?
The Duke lacrosse team story is the cover story for the May 1, 2006, issue of Newsweek.
The Newsweek article is pretty well written. It covers many different aspects.
On the same note, almost starter Mark Sanchez of USC was arrested for sexual assault as well.
On the same note, almost starter Mark Sanchez of USC was arrested for sexual assault as well.
Here's this morning's wrap up on events, detailing the accuser's prior accusation. The report is of note for telling how the Essence reporters got their story, and for confirming that her ability to recall and testify at the time of trial is relevant. Giving someone a "roofie" is at least an assault and battery, and in many states, a sexual battery. Illini, get out of that office and into court! wink Link to story.
HOW COULD ANY OF YOU STILL BELIEVE THE VICTIM!!! Please read on:
None of the new developments make any sense. Are you a lawyer Illini? I will be sitting for the bar in 2007.
Here is your reasonable doubt, nay, preponderance of the evidence currying against a rape even occuring that night:
The Broomstick: Why would no D.A. or cop ask for it in any search warrant yet filed? Why would the D.A. ask for DNA tests that he said, in the memorandum in support of his motion, would "exonerate" the innocent? A broom would leave no DNA, it would only leave splinters. OUCH!
The Granville County Rape Accusation: This is either (1) the most incredible coincidence EVER, (2) evidence that the victim was the victim of a past sex crime, and retains unfortunate psychosis about it, or (3) that this is some sort of fantasy that the victim has -- to be pounded by 3 guys.
Intoxicated Behavior, I.D., and Rape Kit (the totality of the evidence probative of a rape occuring): This is reasonably explained by option (2) above. Perhaps the victim entered a psychosis and hallucinated the event? Perhaps she became paranoid and combative and decided to frame these jerks? Perhaps she vaginally and anally injured herself with the broom while in a psychotic state? Who knows?
The point is, in light of all we know, these are (amazingly) reasonable doubts.
All in all, I really think people need to stop bashing the victim. If she did make this up, which of course she did, she's really deserves some help...not going on the lam.
None of the new developments make any sense. Are you a lawyer Illini? I will be sitting for the bar in 2007.
Here is your reasonable doubt, nay, preponderance of the evidence currying against a rape even occuring that night:
The Broomstick: Why would no D.A. or cop ask for it in any search warrant yet filed? Why would the D.A. ask for DNA tests that he said, in the memorandum in support of his motion, would "exonerate" the innocent? A broom would leave no DNA, it would only leave splinters. OUCH!
The Granville County Rape Accusation: This is either (1) the most incredible coincidence EVER, (2) evidence that the victim was the victim of a past sex crime, and retains unfortunate psychosis about it, or (3) that this is some sort of fantasy that the victim has -- to be pounded by 3 guys.
Intoxicated Behavior, I.D., and Rape Kit (the totality of the evidence probative of a rape occuring): This is reasonably explained by option (2) above. Perhaps the victim entered a psychosis and hallucinated the event? Perhaps she became paranoid and combative and decided to frame these jerks? Perhaps she vaginally and anally injured herself with the broom while in a psychotic state? Who knows?
The point is, in light of all we know, these are (amazingly) reasonable doubts.
All in all, I really think people need to stop bashing the victim. If she did make this up, which of course she did, she's really deserves some help...not going on the lam.
Of course she made it all up! You know that for a fact, right? I mean, no one is ever slandered? No statement is ever misinterpreted? Al Gore really said he invented the Internet, right?
Sadly, some women are raped more than once.
Why have the accused become so holy? Where is the investigation of them? Were they ever drunk? Did they ever lie? Did they ever get in trouble? Have mental health "issues"? No, they are men, they are white, they are therefore presumed honest.
Nothing said about past rape allegations tells anyone whether or not these men raped this woman.
THIS IS THE SAME OLD SHIT. Put the woman on trial. So now the debate is whether or not SHE is "innocent". Moral of the story: unless you are the Virgin Mary, and maybe even if you are, you are either making it up or it's all your fault.
Sadly, some women are raped more than once.
Why have the accused become so holy? Where is the investigation of them? Were they ever drunk? Did they ever lie? Did they ever get in trouble? Have mental health "issues"? No, they are men, they are white, they are therefore presumed honest.
Nothing said about past rape allegations tells anyone whether or not these men raped this woman.
THIS IS THE SAME OLD SHIT. Put the woman on trial. So now the debate is whether or not SHE is "innocent". Moral of the story: unless you are the Virgin Mary, and maybe even if you are, you are either making it up or it's all your fault.
And, just because she said she was raped, she was!?
The truth of the matter is that none of us know whether this woman was raped. None of us.
The truth of the matter is that none of us know whether this woman was raped. None of us.
No one. That's life on earth baby! Doesn't it suck?
Ms De Blazer,
I'm not trying to be curt, but radical, man-hating feminism went out of style with the Doc Martin Shoe and the Indigo Girls -- maybe around 1995. Though, I'm sure you've preserved your cassettes somewhere in your VW to this day. You may want to get with the times.
Shrilness aside, I agree with absolutely everything that you've said. In this case though, we really do not need to put the WOMAN trial at all. I say let her be, f**k, let's rub her feet and buy her a new house! I know that Reade & Collin will be when settlement time rolls around!
Even though it's never the defense's job to prove themselves innocent, they are MEN with PENISES after all and are therefore EVIL. Fine, I'm down, maybe I am a little evil. I will prove them innocent then (as though this were Iran or something).
Let us look at the evidence that doesn't go to character AT ALL:
-no DNA found, this has been confirmed twice now
-over thirty, albeit evil penis-having, lax players maintaining one, single, unwavering story
-reade selligman's recipts, cellphone calls, eyewitness testimony, and card entry into the dorms. (All the kid was doing was enjoying a nice hamburger at the time)
-as far as we know, no confessions from anybody, and I think we'd know
-the other stripper said that NO RAPE OCCURRED, she did change her story to say that it was possible, but maintained that she saw nothing happen.
Enough? I'll be happy to dig up more if you're still unsatisfied.
Do you want a rape to have occurred to move an agenda? It seems like many feminists actually do. That's absolutely sickening. As a gay man perhaps I was oblivious, but until this story broke, I didn't realize what a scourge feminism really was on this country.
What you are going to end up doing is shifting public opinion the other way. Rape shield is great, but if you keep over-defending women after it becomes apparent that their story may be, at best, a little shaky, people will start to become dissatisfied. So while you and Nancy Grace may be helping this victim, you could very well be hurting thousands of truly injured women in the future.
Jeff
Ms De Blazer,
I'm not trying to be curt, but radical, man-hating feminism went out of style with the Doc Martin Shoe and the Indigo Girls -- maybe around 1995. Though, I'm sure you've preserved your cassettes somewhere in your VW to this day. You may want to get with the times.
Shrilness aside, I agree with absolutely everything that you've said. In this case though, we really do not need to put the WOMAN trial at all. I say let her be, f**k, let's rub her feet and buy her a new house! I know that Reade & Collin will be when settlement time rolls around!
Even though it's never the defense's job to prove themselves innocent, they are MEN with PENISES after all and are therefore EVIL. Fine, I'm down, maybe I am a little evil. I will prove them innocent then (as though this were Iran or something).
Let us look at the evidence that doesn't go to character AT ALL:
-no DNA found, this has been confirmed twice now
-over thirty, albeit evil penis-having, lax players maintaining one, single, unwavering story
-reade selligman's recipts, cellphone calls, eyewitness testimony, and card entry into the dorms. (All the kid was doing was enjoying a nice hamburger at the time)
-as far as we know, no confessions from anybody, and I think we'd know
-the other stripper said that NO RAPE OCCURRED, she did change her story to say that it was possible, but maintained that she saw nothing happen.
Enough? I'll be happy to dig up more if you're still unsatisfied.
Do you want a rape to have occurred to move an agenda? It seems like many feminists actually do. That's absolutely sickening. As a gay man perhaps I was oblivious, but until this story broke, I didn't realize what a scourge feminism really was on this country.
What you are going to end up doing is shifting public opinion the other way. Rape shield is great, but if you keep over-defending women after it becomes apparent that their story may be, at best, a little shaky, people will start to become dissatisfied. So while you and Nancy Grace may be helping this victim, you could very well be hurting thousands of truly injured women in the future.
Jeff
QUOTE
Ms. de Blazer:
...Why have the accused become so holy? Where is the investigation of them? Were they ever drunk? Did they ever lie? Did they ever get in trouble? Have mental health \"issues\"? No, they are men, they are white, they are therefore presumed honest. ...
I don't know anyone in this debate, on this board or elsewhere, who's ever said these guys were "holy." As for the investigation of them, well it turned up Collin's gay bashing in DC, no? And they probably were all drunk at that low-rent party in Durham, if not while waltzing thru DuPont Circle as well. Your lumping together all these things that never were just to stroke your androphobia is demonstrably false - and in this particular case, literally presumptuous.
...Why have the accused become so holy? Where is the investigation of them? Were they ever drunk? Did they ever lie? Did they ever get in trouble? Have mental health \"issues\"? No, they are men, they are white, they are therefore presumed honest. ...
Ms. De blazer, I imagine that as the weeks go by, more of the their troubled histories will come out to the media. It's only a matter of time. And as you know, media outlets will jump at any shred of information they can get their claws on.
Exactly how many accusations of rape are eventually shown to be without foundation is the subject of this report. I hope the DA is considering this potential expert testimony now, because if he goes to trial he may well have to confront it then. Link to story.
Well, Jeff, that was quite the seminal ejaculation. I find it hard to reply, even after several days, as it has so little to do with anything I've ever said. And I never owned a VW.
It is now coming out that a lot of the smears against the woman came from a news story at Duke that was not based on any official source. If you print it, it is too often assumed to be true.
I really have no idea, not having been there, if those men raped that woman. But it is the only question. Not what she may have said at 14, not what she did for a living, how much she drank, whether or not she ever suffered from any ailment in the past.
As for false reports, of course there are some. There is a big diagreement between law enforcment and some of the "men's rights" (anti women's rights) groups, who basically say most of them are made up. Unable to prove and made up, it should be noted, are not the same thing at all. I was unable to prove a sexual assault. I did not make it up.
It is now coming out that a lot of the smears against the woman came from a news story at Duke that was not based on any official source. If you print it, it is too often assumed to be true.
I really have no idea, not having been there, if those men raped that woman. But it is the only question. Not what she may have said at 14, not what she did for a living, how much she drank, whether or not she ever suffered from any ailment in the past.
As for false reports, of course there are some. There is a big diagreement between law enforcment and some of the "men's rights" (anti women's rights) groups, who basically say most of them are made up. Unable to prove and made up, it should be noted, are not the same thing at all. I was unable to prove a sexual assault. I did not make it up.
Ms. Deblazer, meaning no disrespect, but why do you consider "mens rights" groups anti-woman? I just thought it was an interesting description. Would the civil rights movement be considered anti-white? I just thought maybe you could elaborate.
Terry, I absolutely do not consider civil rights groups anti white. The reason I referred to so-called "men's rights" groups as anti-woman is based on their own statements and their own claimed purposes, which is to decrease or eliminate the rights of women. For example, the "men's rights" groups demand that men be able to veto a woman's abortion or alternately require her to have an abortion if he wants her to. They have demanded that women who are raped be publicly identified and oppose laws that prevent their sexual history from being paraded in the courtroom. Other "men's rights" groups have opposed women being able to equally participate in the military, women having equal access to sports, etc. So I am just calling them what they are. They are parallel to groups that call themselves names like the "National Association for the Advancement of White People".
If a "men's rights" group campaigned for men to be able to take paternity leave without repercussions, for example, I would most definitely not call them anti woman.
If a "men's rights" group campaigned for men to be able to take paternity leave without repercussions, for example, I would most definitely not call them anti woman.
I too was wondering the same thing, and the response is simply amazing. If it was reversed, and this was being said about women's organizations, there would be an almost certain outcry of blatent sexism. What a double standard. 
Hey...here's something to ponder. Not everyone wants to oppress women, blacks, gays, etc. I mean really, isn't it hard to be a victim ALL the time?
Hey...here's something to ponder. Not everyone wants to oppress women, blacks, gays, etc. I mean really, isn't it hard to be a victim ALL the time?
QUOTE
shep71:
...here's something to ponder. Not everyone wants to oppress women, blacks, gays, etc. I mean really, isn't it hard to be a victim ALL the time?
Not if you're a Democrat! ...here's something to ponder. Not everyone wants to oppress women, blacks, gays, etc. I mean really, isn't it hard to be a victim ALL the time?
(Sorry, couldn't resist; self-punishment duly administered! wink )
Ms Deblazer thank you. I thought you brought up valid points regarding those groups, especially in regards to abortion. I do have to bring up the issue of the military, however. Ms. Deblazer, I myself, have no desire to go into front line combat but being a male in this society, I imagine I would have very little choice. Not only would my patriotism be questioned but other men (and probably a lot of women, you have to admit there will be) will question my manhood. I would be thought of as a deserter and probably some other choice words I won't repeat here. But if I were a female, I would be seen as strong, unafraid to say she's opposed to military action, and probably have a Lifetime movie based on my life. NOW representatives would probably have me speak at their luncheons and I would have Oprah calling me 24/7. Guess what? If I were a female fighting to serve on the front lines of combat, I would still get the same response. Conservative senators would eventually concede that I'm capable of taking care of myself in combat and I would be seen as a pioneer fighting for women to have a choice in the military. For male soldiers, they will never have that choice because it's something they're suppose to do. I imagine the term "just be a man about it and do it" will be thrown around. Again, your other points were very valid but the military issue is a sticky one for me.
The accuser's parents were interviewed on CBS and they shared some information about their good innocent girl: She had another man's baby while married, her marriage ended so she moved back to durham and took up adult entertainment. She made a similiar gang rape accusation three years ago but the accusation fell apart. She also stole a car one night from a client and took a nice long drunk ride pulling the police along with her for a half hour. This woman's a mess and clearly isn't stable or trustworthy. Yet the Durham African American community have vilified the lacrosse players...Is this about this specific case or about the past?
Bryan, what you are doing is no better than what some people are doing making this completely a racial issue. You are looking at things in black and white. She accused someone of rape in the past...but didn't feel safe going on with testifying. She had a baby not in the 'sanctity of marriage'. Welcome to the 21st century. At least she takes care of it...where's the dad?? She's a college student...so she obviously has absolutely no ambition.
I mean, come on. Nobody's saying she's a saint, but you're doing exactly what you're complaining of.
With the now 3rd player indicted, my favorite quote came from the headmaster of the guy's high school saying this would not be in his character. And I'm sure he would have said that about his other 2 issues with police as well. And just like how the other guy is such a sweet young man who would never do that......but he'll go beat a guy up in public and call him a fag. OK.
I mean, come on. Nobody's saying she's a saint, but you're doing exactly what you're complaining of.
With the now 3rd player indicted, my favorite quote came from the headmaster of the guy's high school saying this would not be in his character. And I'm sure he would have said that about his other 2 issues with police as well. And just like how the other guy is such a sweet young man who would never do that......but he'll go beat a guy up in public and call him a fag. OK.
Innocent.
This case is political bullshit.
This case is political bullshit.
I didn't say anything about race except that the Durham black community is blindly accepting that she's telling the truth...I'm not saying anything positive about the lacrosse players because I don't know what they're capable of - and you could probably go to any college campus in America and find multiple alcohol excess infractions but that doesn't mean they're capable of rape...but I do know that this woman has made serious allegations against these guys so the pressure and the focus should be on whether she's telling the truth. Her criminal record and her behavior, anything that speaks to character, are very, very relevant. Her story's changed amongst other inconsistencies...And remember it's innocent until proven guilty...She must prove her case.
i would really like to see what the whole story would be if it was a rich white girl and the players would be black from poor backgrounds. I think the whole story would be a hell of a lot
different
different
But it isn't...and that's irrelevent, and are you living in some old movie? If you accuse someone of rape, you have to prove it...that's the law and the reality. Like many others, you're assuming her innocence and their guilt.... Let's deal with facts. Her past is relevent to a certain extent as is theirs...but the burden of proof is still on the prosecution.
I'm not assuming anything. I just think its very interesting that all the rich lawyers are fighting against a poor girl and a small down town da. Just remember these guys arent little sweet and innocent boys.
Rape now which is a real shame that you are going to open your life open to anything. Which is a real shame
Rape now which is a real shame that you are going to open your life open to anything. Which is a real shame
No Bryan I'm not living in some old movie. I just made a comment and I'm sticking to it.
Everyone has assumed WAY too much about both the accuser and the accused. It's clear NONE of them are saints. It's clear at least 2 of the accused have skeletons in their closets, and it's clear the accuser does, as well. There's also no question that there is a racial and class undercurrent to this case, but I think that's a given in American society today. We shouldn't presuppose that these men are guilty simply because of their economic status, but nor should we presuppose that the accuser is being truthful because of her class and gender.
Exactly. Assuming the lawyers and the boys are guilty because they're "rich" is as silly as assuming the girl is innocent and pure because she's poor...
[ May 16, 2006, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: Bryan ]
[ May 16, 2006, 12:35 PM: Message edited by: Bryan ]
By the way Bryan, your point about how the Durham black community has villified those who are indicted......
This case involved more than just the rape related charges. There is no denying from the men and their attorneys that there were inappropriate things being said and done. They suggested for her to use a broom, they made racial slurs such as 'tell your daddy thanks for my cotton shirt' and other inappropriate actions. So even if you do throw out the rape accusation, there are still racial rifts with this incident.
This case involved more than just the rape related charges. There is no denying from the men and their attorneys that there were inappropriate things being said and done. They suggested for her to use a broom, they made racial slurs such as 'tell your daddy thanks for my cotton shirt' and other inappropriate actions. So even if you do throw out the rape accusation, there are still racial rifts with this incident.
Doesn't every debate in American society eventually come down to race and socio-economic status, sometimes to the point of overshadowing the actual issue?
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.