Lets get this straight.
Rape a defenceless girl and you get 2 years. Tell everyone that it happened and is being hushed up and you get 10 years.
Anyone see a problem there?
Four teachers indicted in Steubenville social media rape case
Ohio's attorney general has announced that four more school staff, including a supervisor, have been indicted for interfering with the investigation of a teenager who was raped in Steubenville last year, attracting the attention of hackers from Anonymous. The investigation by the state began after a 16 year-old girl was …
-
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 01:04 GMT Trevor_Pott
Answer your own question, prole.
Obviously, not nearly enough people see this as a problem, otherwise it wouldn't be so.
Computer "hackers" will OMG NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS and CHILD PORNOGRAPHY and STEALING AMERICAN JOBS. If you don't support harsher punishments for them than for rapists (or those who knowing assist rapists) you just aren't thinking of the children. And really, what kind of person does that make you?
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 04:29 GMT Irony Deficient
getting this straight
Will, some background can be found at this blog entry from June at Slate: a ten-year sentence is not a given for Lostutter.
Why were there two-year sentences for the rapes? Actually, one of them received a one-year sentence. The rapists and the victim were all 16 at the time of the rapes, thus all minors in Ohio. The rapes in this case were “digital penetration”, involving the rapists’ fingers rather than their genitalia. Their acts met the statutory definition of rape in Ohio because the victim, as a minor, could not grant consent to those acts in Ohio, even if she had been sober, had been asked, and had assented. The rapists were tried in juvenile court and found delinquent (analogous to guilty in Ohio juvenile court), and are serving their sentences in juvenile detention. Their sentences are minima; there is the possibility that both could remain incarcerated until they turn 21, and a future hearing will determine whether or not their names will be added to the sex offender registry once they turn 21 . Since the one who received the two-year sentence was also convicted of disseminating child pornography (because of posting pictures of the 16-year-old naked victim online), due to that concurrent sentence he could remain behind bars until age 24.
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 12:27 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: getting this straight
Terribly sad for all the teens (and their families) concerned. This incident will haunt them for the remainder of their lives. However, it does sound like the offenders received punishment appropriate for their ages: severe, but without ruining their futures completely (they are kids, and kids have been known to make terrible decisions -- the job of adults is to help them live through the consequences).
The adults, on the other hand, need to have the book thrown at them, if in fact, their goal was a coverup to "do what was best" for the football program. There's absolutely no excuse for this kind of behavior on the part of school authorities. Sexual assault is a serious crime and it should have been reported immediately they became aware of the incident.
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 13:44 GMT squigbobble
Re: getting this straight
“digital penetration”
Not to make light but that would make a great name for a politically incorrect pen testing firm. Corporate tagline- "Climbin' in yo' network, snatchin' up yo' data."
Hopefully a sufficiently prominent pre-trial media campaign will bias the jury enough to let the IT guy off the hook.
-
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 07:37 GMT Hud Dunlap
@ Will Godfrey, they were not convicted of rape
They were found guilty of delinquency, hence the two year sentence, until they become adults. This means they are not convicted felons.
This just seems like an extension of the original coverup. This whole deal of covering up for H.S. athletes is very common.
Another article to get you blood pressure above safe levels.
http://www.ibtimes.com/steubenvilles-former-naacp-president-says-rape-victim-was-drunk-willing-exclusive-1149517
El Reg needs to do a better job of getting their facts straight.
-
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 21:27 GMT Tom 13
Re: conflating the maximum sentence for an offence with a sentence that has been given
Yeah.
I hate Anonymous with a passion because I've seen the physical damages from the assholes behind the group. I hate hackers with an almost equal passion. And if I could sit on the jury hearing the case and the defense could present evidence that the guy was trying to get that specific crime prosecuted, I'd let the guy walk.
-
-
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 21:18 GMT Tom 13
Re: Lets get this straight.
The "mitigating factor" on the 2 year sentence is that the perps were under age.
But typically if you're someone like me who thinks that's a load of crock and they should have been tried as an adult you get labeled a troglodyte and downvoted.
Your rules, suck it up and get over it.
-
-
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 10:30 GMT Gordon 10
Re: Aha it's the "Mfg, possesion, distribution of CP" that gets them.
In fairness some thought seems to have been given to these laws - well more than in the UK at any rate. The fact that in general (ignoring this case for a sec) a lot of this is treated as juvenile "crime" at least offers a way out without the horrors of permanent attachment to a sex offenders register - suggests that there was a modicome of sanity and common sense present when they were written.
Not to say its perfect, and of course in this case could be abused to get the Jocks off, but at least in general someone had the bravery to say - lets not permanently criminalise kids for sexual exploration.
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 12:42 GMT John Smith 19
Re: Aha it's the "Mfg, possesion, distribution of CP" that gets them.
"The fact that in general (ignoring this case for a sec) a lot of this is treated as juvenile "crime" at least offers a way out without the horrors of permanent attachment to a sex offenders register - "
That's not what happened in at least one other US case El Reg has reported where it was not rape, just basically sending indecent selfies to BF/GFs
That case went down as Mfg, possession and distribution of CP despite all involved being consenting and no physical behavior.
What it really seems to come down to is a)Is it an election year b)Does the DA want to get reelected c)Does he feel the need to play the "Tough on crime" card quite so hard?
rea
-
Tuesday 26th November 2013 12:56 GMT Valeyard
Re: Aha it's the "Mfg, possesion, distribution of CP" that gets them.
I'm trying to decode your hidden message. what does "not really physical despite that" refer to? The location of a supernuke or are you and jaitch just having little bold-text sext conversations and i should wait for his reply?
-
Wednesday 27th November 2013 14:54 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: John Smith is a bold character
John, how many actual published books have you read where every sentence contains emboldened words for emphasis?
Oh, that's right, none.
Well I'd guess that the number of published books you have ever actually read would be similar, but that's not the point.
The key issue here is that written language isn't just a direct emulation of your playground-level, over-embellished whining.
There are other methods we use to get across our intended message. Usually these are both more subtle and more effective than sprinkling < b > tags all over the place. Not least, the result is also much nicer and easier to read.
-
Wednesday 27th November 2013 16:15 GMT John Smith 19
AC@14:54
"Oh, that's right, none."
Actually you're wrong. But you're leading with style, not substance. And I am clearly bolder than you by definition.
"playground-level, over-embellished whining."
That actually sounds like a real grievance. What exactly am I "whining" about, AC?
Perhaps you could articulate it?
-
-
-
-
This topic is closed for new posts.
Biting the hand that feeds IT
