165 replies to this topic

[Chad Vander Veen]

Don't schools have a dress code anymore? Or do you parents get up in arms and threaten lawsuits about that sort of thing now? I mean, I like T&A as much as the next guy, but even when I was in high school 7 years ago it was a big distraction. Kids can't wear clothes that promote violence right (i.e. gang wear, Raiders clothing) so why should they be allowed to wear clothes that promote sex? Trust me, as a guy I loved it at the time, and probably still do , but at least I am aware now that it is extremely inappropriate. Parents don't do any parenting anymore. I suppose if school officials dared send your daughters home becuase they dress like whores that there are among Folsom parents some that would sue.

[camay2327]

bishmasterb, I think it was just a Judge, not a jury in this case.

[bishmasterb]

QUOTE (camay2327 @ Jun 24 2004, 03:03 PM)

bishmasterb, I think it was just a Judge, not a jury in this case.

Really!? Shows what I know about it!

What about the 6th amendment? Does that not apply to juveniles who will serve time in adulthood? Will he be released before adulthood? Will he serve time as an adult without a trial by jury?

[Julio]

Putting ANY degree of responsibility on the female's behavior or dressing (or lack of) in the event of rape, molestation, sexual assault is ridiculous IMHO.

It makes the proponents of these views no different from the Muslim clerics who denounce women as evil temptresses, and lay down religious laws to shroud them head to toe "to protect the men."

You (proponents of the view) are goddamn shameless, and should not be classified as homo sapiens.

I don't give a damn if the woman is naked, and writhing in front of you, and teasing you.

If she says "No," it means exactly that: NO

Do you speak English?
Do you comprehend English?
What does "No" mean?

Even an illegal immigrant from Mexico understands what "No" means.

What the heck is wrong with you?

And, so what if you or the guy thinks the girl dresses like a slut?
Does being a slut remove her right to refuse sexual intercourse?
The regular modest dress sense of women here would still be considered slutty, even obscene by certain Muslim clerics in the Middle East.
So does that mean that they can rape your mom, sister, daughter then?

The kid is a pure loser.
Goddamn pothead. Druggie.
Spineless. Hedonist.

There is a concept that seems lost among the youth of today:
Discipline

There is NO EXCUSE for loss of control of your faculties in social dealings with a female.

If young men can be trained to retain control in the face of bullets, RPGs from enemies--i.e. likely death, I don't see how you can justify loss of control in a social situation.

Unless you are just a bunch of animals... and not human.
(In which case then you should be culled).

You make me sick.


Calling like it is,

-Julio

[bishmasterb]

QUOTE (Julio @ Jun 24 2004, 05:29 PM)

Even an illegal immigrant from Mexico understands what "No" means.

I would hope so! Seeing how the Spanish word for "no" is "no".

Nonetheless, I agree with your position wholeheartedly.

[tessieca]

QUOTE (bishmasterb @ Jun 24 2004, 01:59 PM)

One statistic I also came across for date rape is "73% of those forced to have sex fail to recognize their experience as rape".

Doesn't that kind of beg the question? How can you be raped if you were conscious but "not know it." That's simply someone else's subjective interpretation of a stranger's experience.

[Steve Heard]

Julio!

I can't believe it! We agree on something! I'm gonna buy a lottery ticket!

Your quote, "The regular modest dress sense of women here would still be considered slutty, even obscene by certain Muslim clerics in the Middle East."

Reminds of two incidents with a Muslim couple I am close to.

One day while waiting at a red light, a young girl, maybe 12 or 13 years old, crossed the street right in front of us, wearing shorts and a t-shirt.

I thought it was normal kid wear. My friend seemed offended, and said, "If I had a daughter, I'd NEVER let her dress like that! She is dressed like a hooker."

When they were preparing for a visit to Pakistan, I asked his wife if she had to cover up while over there. She replied, "I don't HAVE to, I WANT to.
Women are treated with respect in Pakistan. There is no whistling, ogling, hitting on, none of that".

I said, "As long as you are covered up, right?"

She said, "You just don't understand"

I know. Off topic.

[Julio]

QUOTE (stevethedad @ Jun 25 2004, 12:59 AM)

Julio! I can't believe it! We agree on something! I'm gonna buy a lottery ticket!

Oh man, steve's on a roll on moi here...


Take cover!
Take cover!


-Julio

[bishmasterb]

QUOTE (tessieca @ Jun 24 2004, 11:04 PM)

QUOTE (bishmasterb @ Jun 24 2004, 01:59 PM) One statistic I also came across for date rape is "73% of those forced to have sex fail to recognize their experience as rape". Doesn't that kind of beg the question? How can you be raped if you were conscious but "not know it." That's simply someone else's subjective interpretation of a stranger's experience.

I assume what's behind that statistic is that women were involved in some situation that either started consensually and turned otherwise or in which they were not adamant about their wishes, but nonetheless might have met the technical definition of rape as defined by the law (I think we all saw the 3000 word legal "definition" of rape that was posted earlier!).

In any case, leave it to the government to create a crime in which 73% of victims might not know they're a victim!

[disenchanted]

As a concerned, curious

[disenchanted]

As a concerned curious Folsom resident I attended the entire trial. Having two Folsom high school students, I wanted to learn for myself what actually happened, what the facts of the case were and see how these matters are determined.

My personal opinion is that the verdict was absolutely shocking in light of the overwhelming evidence presented on behalf of the defense counsel to support the boy's innocence of the charges leveled against him. There was more than reasonable doubt in this case and having watched all the testimony from all parties, I feel a grave injustice happened inside that courtroom. It was as if there was no trial - the judge seemed to simply ignore some very significant testimony. For example, a young man who was a family friend of one of the alleged victims had the courage to come forward to authorities and testify that the girl flat out told him "it was a lie, I don't want to go along with it anymore, it was a big joke". It was obvious that the boy was very credible and in fact pained to have to testify against his friend but told the judge he came forward because he wondered what if someone had done this to him. Also, the high school vice principle testified that one of the girls father's called the school the next day and told the vice principle that intitially the main girl who claims she was raped told his daughter that the sex was consensual. I saw four honors chemistry students testify that they went into the bathroom while this was going on in a bathroom stall and saw her jump up on the toilet to hide when they came in. Although I did not see testimony from the alleged rape victim as the public was excluded from that portion, I did see the two other girls who discussed having been sexually battered by the boy sticking his hand up their skirts. I found their testimony to lack any credibility at all. They seemed entirely coached and under cross examination simply got out of answering questions by saying "I don't know, I'm not sure, can you repeat the question" The defense counsel played a police recorded audiotape of one of those girls saying that her friend was a liar, that she was capable of making up the story just to get attention. One of the girls initially reported the boy simply stuck his hand up her skirt and then weeks later added more to her story by saying he had grabbed her wrists and tried to drag her to a bathroom. Wouldn't that be the first thing you'd remember when telling a police officer something? The girl who says he raped her failed to tell the police the first two times she was interviewed about the boys coming in the bathroom. Why? Is it possible she hoped no one would come forward and tell on her attempting to hide ? Her father testifed that two or three days into the investigation he told his daughter that a police officer told him that if the allegations were shown to be false than she would be prosecuted for perjury. Another boy testified he came into the bathroom and heard moaning like a girl on a porno video. The judge disregarded this boys testimony on the basis that he didn't approve of his values because he viewed pornography. Well I don't either but it was still very credible and significant testimony.

What happened in that courtroom in my opinion is nothing new to any of us. We know that our justice system stinks, that guilty often go free and sometimes innocents get convicted. I am certain that had that trial been in front a a jury, the boy would have been acquited.

I believe that rape laws and victims rights advocacy today has swung so far that if you are accused of rape, you are going to get convicted. We have become a culture that is not allowed to question a woman's claim she was assaulted. We have been fed and fed the notion that girls and women will NEVER lie about it. It is simply illogical to say that no female would ever lie about it, especially teenagers who have a motive like not getting in trouble, seeking attention and not wanting to disappoint dad and mom about their choices. I have a daughter and a son. I know the intense sexual pressure they encounter at school and I know that many girls are sexually agressive and instigate sexual activity with boys. We have evolved in so many ways, yet the boys still seem to take the fall in the end.

There was something else at play in that courtroom and it did not have to do with the evidence and facts. In my opinion, the verdict was shocking and defied all logic and common sense.

[forumreader]

disenchanted:

Since I was not present at the trial, and only have the information that I've read, I do not want to comment on the specifics of this case. However, you bring up a very important point. Has the pendulum swung too far?

This calls to mind a conversation I had recently with a friend regarding taking her child to a regular pediatric check-up. My friend was concerned because her 4-yr-old has been going through a clumsy phase, and has quite a few bruises and scrapes. She was worried that the pediatrician might question the bruises and report her to Child Protective Services. (First of all, there are not really not that many bruises, and they look like normal kid stuff. Secondly, I know this family well. They are great parents.) -- The point is, why should a good parent even have this concern? I've heard other young parents wondering whether or not a swat on the behind was considered "abusive" these days. Has the pendulum swung a little too far? The intentions of protecting children are good, but .....?

Regarding acquaintance rape, perhaps we should also be concerned that the pendulum has swung too far. In the noble interest of informing women about acquaintance rape, and prosecuting the assailants, has the legal system has put the accused in a prejudiced state? I don't know if that is the case. But it is important enough to cause concern.

Rape, acquaintance or stranger rape, is clearly a violent crime involving control, power, and violation. Unfortunately, in our sexually permissive society, the gray area regarding acquaintance/date rape and issues of consent has ballooned and complicated the definition of the crime.

Not making reference to this case in Folsom, we can't forget that each false accusation of rape hurts all the legitimate victims of rape. It increases the chance that women will not report the crime, and puts rape survivors in the position of not being believed.

[Hanalei]

Disenchanted, well said. Thanks for you articulate, well thought out reply. You said exactly what I was thinking. I don't know about the guilty or the innocent, but I too, think the pendulum has swung too far.
I only hope, that IF the girl who was raped was in fact lying, that her conscience would convict her so strongly that she would tell the truth to set him free.
And if not, well then, let's pray justice was served in his guilt.

It seems to me, that if it wasn't a clear cut case and there was any sort of speculation of lying involved, that he would have gotten a much lighter sentence. Seems like the judge had something to prove and wanted to make an example of him.

[FolsomJunior00]

4 Honors chem students.....two were my very good friends. So they did testify. I wonder where FolsomDad forget to mention this as well as the other evidence......

I do think the pendulum (sp sorry :/ ) has swung too far as well

[FolsomJunior00]

And another thing, FolsomDad mentioned that the judge "thought the three girl witnesses were credible"

Well, i was wondering, does he mean there was proof of truth in what the girls said, or did they just sound credible? I mean, put me on the witness stand for some crime i have no idea about, and i can probably sound credible too with a little coaching from an attorney. I hope he didnt base his decision on just that piece of evidence