"Rape Crew" in small town Ohio

[KevinNYC]

RBA defending rapists.

Yeah, that's not what he is doing.

I'd like to hear more in-depth thoughts from you on this topic. Everyone knows where I stand. I think the trial and the false narrative put out there prior to the trial speak for themselves. Now that we know the facts of the case, it is pretty easy to see how this evolved.

I would like to hear a more impartial viewpoint, though. I'm willing to discuss this, but it is pretty obviously close to my heart since I know many of the people involved. As you can imagine, this has been an emotionally trying eight months. I'm glad it's over.

I think you have been right on the big issues on this case, but I don't think you have always been impartial. I think because you were making your points in the face of the false narrative that was being pushed-- "that the whole town was willing to cover up a rape because it involved the football team" -- that you went too far in your defense. These were football players, after all.

there's more I could get into, but I have some work to do. However, I never bought into the whole "hackers" discovered a treasure trove of evidence that the authorities were just because it seemed unlikely. I didn't look into this case until that idea was already pushed. I figured that guy from Ohio state was not part of it, just from how he was talking. Also it's obvious that some high school kid gave this info to Anonymous. It's been proven, time and time again, that professional journalists for all their faults do a better job than blockers, hackers, message board commentators, etc on the whole. So I never thought Anonymous had the truth of what happened. I guess when I started looking at this story, my first question is how do they know this is true?

[NoGunzJustSkillz]

I swear sht like this only happens in Cleveland.[COLOR="White"] i kidd, i kidd mr. rba[/COLOR]

[Rubio2Gasol]

It's not sketchy.

It's not new.

It's a legal principle that has been around for a while. What you are talking about is retracting consent which is a different thing.

But the principle is straightforward. Let's say you pass out at a party. A man came in and undressed you and went down on you. He can't claim it was consensual because "you didn't say no." It was nonconsensual, thus a crime because you were in no condition to give your consent because you weren't conscious. There's absolutely nothing sketchy about this.

It's similar to a claim of self-defense when someone is killed. There's nothing sketchy about defending yourself if your life is in danger, but for individual cases the prosecutor has to decide if that standard has been met. If the prosecutor thinks it was self-defense they won't bring a case, but if the standard hasn't been met they can prosecute for manslaughter and during the trial the jury will decide whether the standard of self-defense has been met.

Sorry. I was probably mistaken.

I thought the girl had given consent - but that consent had been invalidated by her condition at the time. Which would be a problem, regardless of how drunk she was. What is consent exactly in this case though? Because it seems wrong if a dude hooks up with a drunk girl who doesn't resist and then all of a sudden gets slapped with a rape charge.

[ace23]

In this case the girl was vomiting and slurring her speech.

Haha, so what? Don't drink your ass off at a party and cry rape when you get ****ed. Whole thing sounds pretty stupid to me.

Don't mind me, though. I'm not very informed on the details of the case.

[InspiredLebowski]

Haha, so what? Don't drink your ass off at a party and cry rape when you get ****ed. Whole thing sounds pretty stupid to me.

Don't mind me, though. I'm not very informed on the details of the case.

gross

[sick_brah07]

off topic

but man do i miss high school parties

[RedBlackAttack]

I think you have been right on the big issues on this case, but I don't think you have always been impartial. I think because you were making your points in the face of the false narrative that was being pushed-- "that the whole town was willing to cover up a rape because it involved the football team" -- that you went too far in your defense. These were football players, after all.

I think that is probably a fair assessment. However, I think the context of what was happening all around me helps explain why I was forced into such a defensive posture. Until you've been through something like this, you can't truly understand the helpless feeling that comes with it.

When I say "this," I mean being thrust into the national spotlight based on things that simply weren't true, and you KNOW that they're not true. But, especially at that time, getting people to understand just how off-base most of this stuff was seemed like an impossible task.

I also thought my comments about these guys "not being football players" was taken out of context. That was one tiny detail of a much larger argument I was making and it was an attempt to refute the notion that these guys were already some kind of star athletes in Steubenville when neither of them had taken a single rep on the varsity team. They weren't and I still stand by that. Not that it really matters one way or the other, but I was up against such a tide of misinformation, that is one area that -- at that point -- I could verifiable discount... They hadn't played for the varsity team yet and weren't well known in the community prior to the night in question.

Now, months later, that the facts are all on the table and I can refute the more important aspects of the media and social media frenzy, that is such an insignificant detail, I would never bring it up in a discussion like this. However, back then, with all of this unsubstantiated nonsense floating around, I grabbed onto what facts I could in an effort to stem the tide.

And, I never argued that I was impartial. I'm the furthest thing from impartial when it comes to this case. That said, I'm also in a position where I know things about the people and the community that outsiders simply jumping into the cyber lynch mob could never know.

I KNEW this stuff was off the wall nonsense back then... I just couldn't prove it. Now, the truth has come out and a lot of people who were thrown under the bus have been vindicated. There is no need to latch onto minor details in an attempt to show a false narrative. That false narrative is there for everyone to see.

This has nothing to do with the victim or the two boys convicted, btw. I never defended them, other than to say they deserved their day in court. They received a fair trial and I thought the verdict was a just one. I expected it to go that way.

My objection was always to the way this was being presented and the wide net of blame being cast on people who absolutely didn't deserve it.

there's more I could get into, but I have some work to do. However, I never bought into the whole "hackers" discovered a treasure trove of evidence that the authorities were just because it seemed unlikely. I didn't look into this case until that idea was already pushed. I figured that guy from Ohio state was not part of it, just from how he was talking. Also it's obvious that some high school kid gave this info to Anonymous. It's been proven, time and time again, that professional journalists for all their faults do a better job than blockers, hackers, message board commentators, etc on the whole. So I never thought Anonymous had the truth of what happened. I guess when I started looking at this story, my first question is how do they know this is true?

I'll tell you this, the incident has forever changed the way I view the mass media machine in the United States. It is hard to understand its immense power and destructive possibilities until you are in the middle of one of their firestorms. This thing was so sensationalized from the start, with some of the claims so bizarre they would have been funny if real people weren't being severely impacted.

They decided on their narrative early on (football culture, corrupt town) and never even attempted to report anything which didn't adhere with their chosen story of what happened and why it happened.

Worst of all, now that we know the truth, there have been no signs of retractions or an attempt to correct the record. It seems they will just simply move on to the next big story and leave this giant mess for the city to deal with in the decades to come.

Note: While bloggers started these outlandish rumors and Anonymous perpetuated them, the media was also complicit in spreading untruths and giving a national and international platform to the lies being told.

It is easy to blame all of this on the bloggers and Anonymous, but I lost a lot of faith in the integrity of the media along the way. I will never react to a big news story the same way again. I'm sure there were times I was guilty of jumping on a bandwagon just because I expected the mainstream media not to miss the mark this badly.

It was a real wake-up call.

[RedBlackAttack]

Sorry. I was probably mistaken.

I thought the girl had given consent - but that consent had been invalidated by her condition at the time. Which would be a problem, regardless of how drunk she was. What is consent exactly in this case though? Because it seems wrong if a dude hooks up with a drunk girl who doesn't resist and then all of a sudden gets slapped with a rape charge.

The real catalyst for these charges was the way in which this girl was cyber-bullied in the days following the incident. They took pictures of her in various states of undress and passed them around.

Eventually, word got back to the girl's father of what was happening online and HE decided to press charges, not the girl. She testified on the stand that she begged him not to go to the police, but he did.

Without the picture taking and the discussion of the night's incident on Facebook and Twitter by kids that were either there or saw the pics/tweets, I firmly believe (actually, I know) that there would have never been any charges and no one outside of this small group of kids would have ever known what happened, rightly or wrongly.

The girl is obviously a victim in all of this, in more ways than one. She WAS digitally penetrated while in an inebriated state. She WAS cyber-bullied in the days following the incident. She did not want to go to police, but was forced to and thus thrust into the national spotlight. She was the centerpiece of bizarre tales of deviant behavior, most of which turned out to be untrue. Her real name was repeated in public numerous times over the course of the discussions leading up to the trial and during the live online stream of the trial itself.

I truly feel for the victim, even beyond the crime which was committed. She didn't ask for any of this.

[Scoooter]

off topic

but man do i miss high school parties

Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuck. Yes.

[Scoooter]

That's messed up. No one deserves to get raped. She certainly didn't do herself any favors though by getting wasted.

Or having a vagina.

[Myth]

That's messed up. No one deserves to get raped. She certainly didn't do herself any favors though by getting wasted.

The problem I have with this statement is that almost everybody gets wasted at some point in their life. I'd hate to go partying, get drunk and pass out, just to find out later that some guy raped me and then have my horrible experience somewhat invalidated by somebody saying "Well, you didn't do yourself any favors by getting drunk." Everybody deserves to party some and not have to fear getting raped.

[Myth]

Or having a vagina.

Exactly. How many males ever think they are going to get raped if they drink too much?

[KevinNYC]

Note: While bloggers started these outlandish rumors and Anonymous perpetuated them, the media was also complicit in spreading untruths and giving a national and international platform to the lies being told.

It is easy to blame all of this on the bloggers and Anonymous, but I lost a lot of faith in the integrity of the media along the way. I will never react to a big news story the same way again. I'm sure there were times I was guilty of jumping on a bandwagon just because I expected the mainstream media not to miss the mark this badly.

It was a real wake-up call.

Was this case sensationalized until the Anonymous or whoever it was started talking about this in December? Again, I didn't live though this case, but the few articles I looked at had the Anonymous allegations as part of the story, that is those allegations were driving the story, so covering the story meant covering the allegations. Now there's a responsible and irresponsible way to do that, but you're right, even wide circulation of responsibly reported allegations are going to leave a mark.

[KevinNYC]

I'm not invalidating what happened to her by any means. I'm not vindicating the dudes who took advantage of her. I understand that as a guy I, for the most part, don't have to walk around with the fear of being raped/taken advantage of sexually against my will. And whatever those guys did they're wrong for on all accounts.

I'm just saying when you do certain things, you should go into them knowing the potential consequences whether it's (underage) drinking to the point of inebriation or smoking until your lungs off. Unfortunately it took a situation like this for her to (hopefully) learn this unfortunate truth instead of it already being instilled in her by her parents.

And you've always done everything your parents told you? Even though you tried to soften the statement, you're blaming the victim here.

[KevinNYC]

Interesting

Shortly after the courtroom cleared, Attorney General Mike DeWine announced that a grand jury would be convened on April 15 to investigate whether charges would be filed against others.

It will use information gathered by more than 15 state investigative agents who have already interviewed 56 people including, the school district's principal, superintendent and 27 football coaches. Sixteen people refused to cooperate.

The grand jury will have the latitude to question witnesses and send out subpoenas for information.

DeWine said the community "desperately needs to put this behind them" but they also needed assurance that "no stone has been left unturned."

DeWine said possible charges included, but weren't limited to, failure to report a crime and tampering with evidence. He would not specifically comment on a question about Head Coach Reno Saccoccia, who was discussed in text messages during the trial as knowing about the rape.

However, he did say that teacher and coaches have a mandatory obligation to report any type of child abuse.