165 replies to this topic

[Chad Vander Veen]

Ughhh...what an ugly incident as a whole. The worst part about this kind of case is that the boy could conceivably have raped her according to the law without knowing that is what he was doing. I am not saying that is what happened, only a possibility with the way the laws are written.

Everyone is a loser in this case, no one won anything.

[FolsomJunior00]

Wow, i am stunned, but there had to have been great evidence to convict the boy, and i for one admit i was wrong about it. And now i see what truly happened with the rape: It was consensual, until she said stop, but he kept going. That is rape, by law. Sad, but true. I hope everyone learned a lesson from this. This kids life is ruined, and by all accounts im sure this kid was a good kid, who screwed up

[Steve Heard]

Chad

You are correct. Many men rape women believing that:

a) They want it
b) They all say 'no' as a false protest
c) That that's the way people have sex

There is so much miscommunication and misunderstanding about communication between the sexes, and from parent to child about responsibility, as well as what people hear from their peers and see in the media.

I am sure many men have had sex with women who initially said 'no' but finally gave in.

In fact, many of us have heard women say that they did not go out with, or have sex with a particular guy, because he wasn't persistent enough.

Having said that, guys must learn that it is not worth the risk to keep on when a woman says 'no'. Like it or not, he's got to stop.

At the very least, this guy should know that it is inappropriate to grab girls, fondle them, and have sex with them on campus.

Does morality have any role in this?

[FolsomJunior00]

I must say also that i, for one, dont really like how the law is written about rape. It sounds to me that the rape was consensual until she said "no"

Now, i can imagine (never done it myself) that once you get into the swing of things with sex, its hard to stop. I think the law should be re-written, saying something like you must say no before sex occurs or something. At the top of my head i cant think of anything that would contradict that law and make it bad, but if anyone else does please post it.....i just feel that many people, mostly guys, are in kind of a bad situation with this rape law...

[Steve Heard]

I am not a lawyer, but I believe it has been interpreted to mean that the woman can say 'no' at any point.

Also, at what point is it sex?

[slowthegrowth]

"No" means "No"....no matter what point of the act they may be in. Otherwise, the person saying "no" is doing it against their own will.

This goes for both sexes of course (I had to say that).....

[slowthegrowth]

I will add that I think the sexually permissive environment that these kids grow up in (certain music videos, certain rap music, certain radio station DJs/personalities, certain video games, the internet in general) creates a different version of what is socially acceptable outside of these genres (in the real world).

You can't them listening to women being degraded all day through their cd's and then expect that they're going to respect a girl when she says "no".

[Chad Vander Veen]

It is a tough, tough question. Certainly the circumstances leading up to the actions should never have taken place.

Now, before I ask this next question, please keep in mind I am asking only because I want to hear your opinions, not that this is what I believe. Ok, here goes...Does a person who feels they were raped after initially consenting, then changing their mind, bear some responsibility? I can think of no other situation wherein a consenting party can back out in the middle of the agreed upon action and then charge the other consenting party with a felony crime.

[forumreader]

Steve: Yes, morality has quite a bit to do with it. Any decent code of morals would prohibit a violent crime. Let's not forget, that after you strip away all the veneers of confusion ("Does 'no' mean 'no'?", "Was it first consensual", etc.), rape is a violent crime.

In societies that are less sexually permissive and are not filled with the harmful media images, as mentioned by slowthegrowth, the classification of rape as a violent crime is much more clear. According to a 2001 Department of Justice report, the U.S. has one of the highest per capita of rape in the world. One must wonder why.

If only we could embrace the value that sexual activity should be limited to a committed, adult relationship, preferably marriage. This was obviously not a message that that this boy got.

But with 11 counts & 3 victims, this boy obviously also missed a lesson in non-violence.

[Chad Vander Veen]

QUOTE

the U.S. has one of the highest per capita of rape in the world. One must wonder why.

My guess for why that is the case is because laws in the US are very heavily in favor of the accuser. I'll bet in other nations this isn't the case, so less rapes are reported.

[forumreader]

QUOTE (FolsomJunior00 @ Jun 23 2004, 10:50 AM)

Now, i can imagine (never done it myself) that once you get into the swing of things with sex, its hard to stop. I think the law should be re-written, saying something like you must say no before sex occurs or something. At the top of my head i cant think of anything that would contradict that law and make it bad, but if anyone else does please post it.....i just feel that many people, mostly guys, are in kind of a bad situation with this rape law...

Junior:

One could say that once someone gets into the swing of things with greed, or addictive drugs, or gambling, it's hard to stop. Because it's hard to stop, does that justify the action that follows, let's say theft or robbery to support a habit? Of course not.

Once a woman says "no," the whole situation has changed. That's the law.

If people don't want to accept on, grounds of morality, that sexual activity belongs only in a committed, adult relationship (preferably marriage), then maybe they will accept it on grounds of common sense. Don't play with fire!

[Orangetj]

QUOTE (FolsomJunior00 @ Jun 23 2004, 10:46 AM)

Wow, i am stunned, but there had to have been great evidence to convict the boy, and i for one admit i was wrong about it. And now i see what truly happened with the rape: It was consensual, until she said stop, but he kept going. That is rape, by law. Sad, but true. I hope everyone learned a lesson from this. This kids life is ruined, and by all accounts im sure this kid was a good kid, who screwed up

I hate to say this Junior, but it's fairly clear this kid was not a "good kid". Sure, he may have seemed alright, but ultimately he was a rapist. The fact is, if one of the partners in a sex act says "no", that's the end of it. There is NO excuse for continuing to force oneself on an unwilling partner. That this girl didn't fight back or even scream has no bearing on the matter - she said "no". As was stated previously, everybody reacts to situations differently. Some scream, some fight, some run and some freeze. Until a person is confronted with a dangerous situation or an attacker, there's no way of really knowing how one will react.

At this point, I can't believe you would have sympathy for a convicted rapist, stating that his life has been ruined, without even a thought toward the victims.

My thoughts are with the victims and their families.

[Hanalei]

She only became a victim at the point she said no.
Before that, she went into the bathroom with a boy and had consensual sex with him.

What he did was very wrong.
And in my opinion, what she did was incredibly foolish.

Everyone's gotta own up to their own responsibility.

Rape is never okay, but I hope SHE learned a valuable lesson too. Don't put yourself in harms way.

Very sad situation.
I feel so badly for the parents of the boy too. I can imagine how devastated they are at the prospect of his future.

[Steve Heard]

Why are we suddenly assuming that they were having sex when she said 'no'?

There has been no evidence in the papers to that effect. What we know is that he asked her to go in to the bathroom with him, because he felt sick.

Whether she believed him or not, she went in with him. They went in to a stall together. As I understand it, they kissed and did what used to be called 'heavy petting'. He wanted to take it further, and she said 'no'.

He forced her to have sex with him.

Men have used many excuses for raping women. 'She asked for it', 'she didn't put up a fight', 'she really didn't mean it', 'everybody knows she's loose', 'she gave me the look', 'she was wearing a revealing outfit'. They think, 'It's her fault! I'm just a man. I can't help it. If she didn't want it, she should not have....'

It's funny, we are not too unlike the Muslim nations. Although rape is rare in those countries, and is punishable by death, those who do rape use similar excuses: 'She was out unescorted', 'He face was uncovered', 'She was asking for it'.

And just like here, we feel so sorry for the poor guy who raped the woman. She ruined his life when she reported his attack.

What a load of crap. I don't have a son, but have plenty of nephews, I try to teach them lessons when I am with them, and lead by example.
I'd love them no matter what, but I wouldn't excuse them, or blame the victim.

[folsom_dad]

Its funny, people are still jumping to conclusions. This was not a case of consensual sex. How do I know? I was in court every day of the trial.

The thing about the Bee article is that, in my opinion, Ramon Coronado was trying to play both sides of the fence with his article. This is , again in my opinion, typical of Sac Bee journalists. This guy missed a critical 45 minutes of the prosecution's closing arguments. You can read the article and take away what you want.

Key point, the article says "the boy believed he had a "right of entitlement" after the rape victim consented to go inside the empty bathroom after lunch March 15. He asked the girl to go with him, claiming he was too sick to go alone." If consensual, why was the testimony from a separate boy in the class state that the convicted teen asked the victim to go to the nurse, he then asked him (witness) to go the nurse and then went back to the victim and she finally gave in and went with him to the nurse.

Why did the teacher testify that the victim asked her to stop the convicted teen from bothering her. The teacher testified that she would speak to him. She continued to testify that, to put the victim's mind at ease, she would speak to the convicted teen, but had no intention of speaking to him.

The judge mentioned that "No means no" only to point out that during the rape, she did communicate that she didn't want to do it and wanted to return to class and that this was a key point to be taken. This is a legal point where if he was confused, he should have heard her words.

The convicted teen's psychiatrist testified that the boy was hyper sexed, used pot and alcohol and used sex as a relief to tension caused by the parent's marital problems.

The judge also stated in his ruling that three of the girls were very believable, credible witnesses. They took the stand, did what needed to be done. I am very proud of all of the girls.

The character witnesses all took the stand and were asked, if found that the accused did force himself on these girls, would that change your opinion of him. They all testified that it would. Well Folsom, how do you feel now. Are our daughters still liars, sluts, bitches, etc? The teenagers at Folsom High should be embarrassed at their behavior. My daughter's life has been screwed up and you have made her out to be the perpetrator. Shame on you!!!