Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Burrito Al Pastor]

My issue is with the presumed guilt right out of the gate

every one of these men deserves jail time

There are a laundry list of very real issues with the US criminal corrective system - enforcement corruption, falsified prosecution, inhumane imprisonment, prison rape, felon's / sex offender's rights, systematic racism, etc. - and there are dialogues that should be had about every one of those issues. Rape cases are never the right context in which to raise those dialogues.

[Shinra]

Actually I do think shinra has what I said right, because I DO think is impossible for an 11 year old to consent to sex. NO matter what the circumstance or their actions. Yes, I do think that. I also think its fucking outrageous for anyone to think differently. There is no 'choice'. She is 11 years old.

I have a family member who passed for 16 when she was 11. 18-20 year olds would walk up to her in the mall and ask for her number. I'm not kidding. We have no idea what this girl looks like, how she portrayed herself to these men, or whether or not they had a reasonable expectation that she was not an 11 year old girl. As for choosing to have sex at 11...

Everyone take a second to marvel at Shinra managing to sound both misogynistic AND racist in only a few words.

An 11 year old has poor judgment, REGARDLESS OF GENDER. It's a fair bet she comes from an African American community because all of the accused are black men. The rape took place in an abandoned trailer, which wouldn't have been located in a high income area. African Americans are statistically more likely to be poor. Black women are overwhelmingly more likely to be single mothers or not present in the home for their children. Victims of sexual abuse are overwhelmingly more likely to either victimize or seek new sources of abuse. The point of that statement was to illustrate that we know nothing about her - for all we know, she was molested as a child and puts herself in these situations instinctively.

But let's just call me a racist and a misogynist.

[Shinra]

My issue is with the presumed guilt right out of the gate

every one of these men deserves jail time

There are a laundry list of very real issues with the US criminal corrective system - enforcement corruption, falsified prosecution, inhumane imprisonment, prison rape, felon's / sex offender's rights, systematic racism, etc. - and there are dialogues that should be had about every one of those issues. Rape cases are never the right context in which to raise those dialogues.

You're taking my quotes out of context. You know as well as I do that there's a tremendous difference in the sentencing between statutory rape and violent rape.

[Classic]

Someone can "choose" to do something and not consent to it. If you choose to do something over certain death, your consent isn't present in that "choice" for example.

Part of the point of statutes is that healthy youngsters are, by their essential nature, very easily pressured by their seniors. The consent of a minor to the request of an elder is questionable at best.

Shinra does have a point regarding the populace's bad habits regarding presumed guilt, and it takes courage to play the devil's advocate on such charged issues.

But frankly I don't want to give Shinra that kind of credit, and thankfully he's neatly saved me from needing to do so! Thank you, Shinra!

[Shinra]

You know very well what context I used 'consent' in. 'consenting' under threat of violence is still violent rape.

Part of the point of statutes is that healthy youngsters are, by their essential nature, very easily pressured by their seniors. The consent of a minor to the request of an elder is questionable at best.

I absolutely support this argument, but isn't this the reason statutory rape laws exist in the first place?

[patito]

Well, not all of them might be guilty, in particular those who were not even present or involved in the event but just got rounded up because of, as burrito pointed out, problems in the system. That's what the trial is for though.

I think the point that Shinra is trying to make, is that there's 2 different kind of outcomes for the guys who are in fact guilty, they get convicted for statutory rape or for just plain rape. This is also a decision for the courts though.

[Shinra]

Well, not all of them might be guilty, in particular those who were not even present or involved in the event but just go rounded up because of, as burrito pointed out, problems in the system. That's what the trial is for though.

I think the point that Shinra is trying to point out, is that there's 2 different kind of outcomes for the guys who are in fact guilty, they get convicted for statutory rape or for just plain rape. This is also a decision for the courts though.

That's exactly the point I was trying to make. The issue only bothered me in the first place because of the visceral reaction to the community asking these questions - bringing up issues of consent, not knowing the girl's age, or the possible lack of guilt that some of the men present may have. These questions need to be asked. The papers and media condemning them for having the audacity to ask the questions is just one more strike against these men when their day in court comes. Everyone deserves a fair trial, even if they are a tremendous piece of shit.

[Royal☭]

But let's just call me a racist and a misogynist.

Fine, but mostly because I don't know how else to define "thinking that poor, black girls tend to casually make the mistake of being gang raped."

The issue only bothered me in the first place because of the visceral reaction to the community asking these questions - bringing up issues of consent, not knowing the girl's age, or the possible lack of guilt that some of the men present may have. These questions need to be asked. The papers and media condemning them for having the audacity to ask the questions is just one more strike against these men when their day in court comes. Everyone deserves a fair trial, even if they are a tremendous piece of shit.

Nobody said they don't deserve a fair trial. And I don't think anyone in here supports sending innocent men to jail over this for any reason.  What we take issue with is the undertones of "implied consent" that a lot of these people talked about. Even in the first article they slyly cast judgment on her attire and hanging out where she doesn't belong, as if rape is a natural, expected consequence of those actions.

Hell, let's look at an example from the article.

"She lied about her age. Them boys didn't rape her. She wanted this to happen. I'm not taking nobody's side, but if she hadn't put herself in that predicament, this would have never happened," said Angie Woods, who lives in Houston but grew up in Cleveland.

That person, right there, is a piece of shit.

But you're the one who had to come in and suggest that maybe, just maybe, a person like her might be on to something on than victim blaming.

[Joxam]

Statutory rape implies that the girl consented to sex and my line of reasoning is that she couldn't have.

Actually I do think shinra has what I said right, because I DO think is impossible for an 11 year old to consent to sex. NO matter what the circumstance or their actions.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

Shinra: I honestly believed that there was no relevant context for those quotes, and I apologise if you feel that I misunderstood your meaning. Lemme know if I'm understanding your point now:

The men accused in this case are definitely guilty of statutory rape, but may or may not be guilty of a more morally and legally serious accusation of violent rape, and the media should be giving the accused their constitutional rights of presumed innocence on the greater accusation but it's okay to go ahead and say they're guilty of at least the lesser accusation?

I am honestly impressed by your dedication to taking the middle ground between two extremes. Aristotle would be proud.

Joxam: I'm beginning to think that you have a poor understanding of either "consent" or "statutory rape" as legal concepts.

[Shinra]

But let's just call me a racist and a misogynist.

Fine, but mostly because I don't know how else to define "thinking that poor, black girls tend to casually make the mistake of being gang raped."

Except that's not what I said. What I said was more like;

"A poor, black girl from a broken home and bad circumstances is far more likely to seek out situations like this or consent to them". Considering that poor black girls are 2-3x more likely to have sex or become pregnant as a teenager, the statement is not exactly what I'd call a stretch.

[Royal☭]

Also please note that because an 11-year-old girl did not immediately report her RAPE (something that women of all ages have difficulty doing), then that's enough reason to think that maybe she consented!

[Joxam]

Did you see what she was wearing? She was asking for it.

[Burrito Al Pastor]

...Is everybody in this thread using the word "consent" in a different sense every single god-damned time the word gets used?

[Royal☭]

"A poor, black girl from a broken home and bad circumstances is far more likely to seek out situations like this or consent to them". Considering that poor black girls are 2-3x more likely to have sex or become pregnant as a teenager, the statement is not exactly what I'd call a stretch.

I will admit, poor people often consent in higher rates to unprotected sex.  I think you reach false conclusions from the pregnancy statistic though, correlating a higher rate of pregnancy with a higher rate of teen sex. Which may or may not be true, but is unsupported by what you linked. In fact, it's probably more correlated with effectiveness of proper sex education than upbringing.

So basically we're still at your assumption that poor, black girls are more likely to just give it up than other girls. Which still doesn't equate with the idea that the girl probably didn't consent to more than one partner, or to be videotaped.

Your argument still basically rests on the assumption that she is poor and black, so therefore there's a higher chance that she must have consented!

And for the record, I never called you a racist or a misogynist.  I said your statement sounded that way.

[Joxam]

Ok. Lets clarify I guess. He implies that statutory rape shouldn't be punished like 'violent rape'. Like I said, I do have problems with some of our current child sex laws, like 18 year olds getting into trouble for having sex with their 17 year old girl friends or two 16 year olds both getting into trouble simply because they're sixteen and fucking those types of things are bullshit, in my opinion. However, at 11 years old no I do not think that statutory rape should be prosecuted with any less penalty than violent rape.

[Shinra]

con·sent
   /kənˈsɛnt/ Show Spelled[kuhn-sent] Show IPA
–verb (used without object)
1.
to permit, approve, or agree; comply or yield (often followed by to or an infinitive): He consented to the proposal. We asked her permission, and she consented.
2.
Archaic. to agree in sentiment, opinion, etc.; be in harmony.
–noun
3.
permission, approval, or agreement; compliance; acquiescence: He gave his consent to the marriage.
4.
agreement in sentiment, opinion, a course of action, etc.: By common consent he was appointed official delegate.
5.
Archaic. accord; concord; harmony.

This is the definition I've been using.

Whether or not an 11 year old can rationally permit something, is not being questioned. According to the Texas state government, nobody under the age of 17 can rationally consent to sexual intercourse. That's why the statutory rape law exists.

Forced rape is a first degree felony in texas. Statutory rape with a person more than three years younger than you is a second degree felony. Statutory rape involving someone not more than three years younger than you is a third degree felony.

The maximum sentence of a 1st degree felony is 99 years. The maximum sentence of a 2nd degree felony is 20 years. The maximum sentence of a 3rd degree felony is 10 years.

The men accused in this case are definitely guilty of statutory rape, but may or may not be guilty of a more morally and legally serious accusation of violent rape, and the media should be giving the accused their constitutional rights of presumed innocence on the greater accusation but it's okay to go ahead and say they're guilty of at least the lesser accusation?

I'll admit to hyperbole. It's possible not all of the men involved were actually guilty of the crime. But there is video of a crime taking place. If a crime occured and there's solid evidence of a crime occuring, then obviously someone is guilty of something. The issue is proving what kind of crime it was.

[Royal☭]

It's perfectly legitimate to say that people accused of rape deserve a fair trial. This tends, however, to ignore that those accusing others of rape rarely receive a fair trial. While I agree that black men are often punished FAR, FAR more severely than white men in rape and violent prosecutions, I do not believe that the victim must sacrifice her sense of judgment just to prevent bad things from happening to her assailants.

Where Shinra went wrong was right out of the gate, saying

...the idea of the girl consenting to what occured the most outrageous concept in the world. This occured months ago and wasn't reported by the victim.

Which implies that unless a woman reports it immediately, she must have been asking for it. This ignores a history of rape-shaming in this country, as well as the humiliation that rape victims often feel. Usually they want the whole thing to just go away and be forgotten. There a great many rape cases which never make it to trial for just this reason.

But then to stick to his own foot in his mouth, he ends with

Something horrible happened to that girl, I have no doubt, but whether she was forced to do what she was doing, or she chose to do what she was doing - because of lack of judgement, the part of society she came from and her upbringing (or lack thereof) - remains to be seen.

Which, I just can't shake is almost like saying "Well of course she would have consented to sex, she's poor AND black!  Come on, that's not ridiculous!"

But what really gets me is how much both the original article and the follow up town hall reek of "implied consent", the concept wherein unless a woman SPECIFICALLY says she doesn't want sex, then she is fair game because of how she dressed, who she associates with, where she hangs out or any other reason that basically avoids that she never said "yes".

None of us on here ever, ever thinks people should be punished for crimes they didn't commit. What we took offense to was the implication that somehow, someway, evidence must clearly fall on the side of an 11-year-old girl consenting to a gang rape.

[Shinra]

Ok. Lets clarify I guess. He implies that statutory rape shouldn't be punished like 'violent rape'. Like I said, I do have problems with some of our current child sex laws, like 18 year olds getting into trouble for having sex with their 17 year old girl friends or two 16 year olds both getting into trouble simply because they're sixteen and fucking those types of things are bullshit, in my opinion. However, at 11 years old no I do not think that statutory rape should be prosecuted with any less penalty than violent rape.

The age difference comes into play in most states. If you're only a year older you're less likely to receive severe punishment and the maximum punishment you can receive is substantially lower. The difference between so-called 'statutory rape' and 'violent rape', is one crime is perpetrated by someone without the use of physical force or threat thereof. Criminal sexual conduct with a minor Vs; Aggravated Sexual Assault. They are very different things. And as I pointed out, they're the difference between spending 20 years of your life in jail and 99.

Which, I just can't shake is almost like saying "Well of course she would have consented to sex, she's poor AND black!  Come on, that's not ridiculous!"

I never said she consented. I said there was reason to believe she may have. Reasonable doubt is the lynchpin of our justice system.

Not reporting a crime occurred when it occurred - even if that crime was a terrible thing that filled you with shame, even if it was a horrible, traumatic experience - is enough in and of itself to at least make you question whether or not a crime occurred in the first place! If we didn't ask this question, anybody in America could walk into a courthouse tomorrow, accuse someone of rape, say it happened months ago and put their entire life in jeopardy.

[Thad]

...really don't know quite how to respond to Shinra at this point, except to say "You should probably choose your words very carefully in this conversation."

Meanwhile:

Yeah, for all everyone's mad now by the time election season comes round again all of this will be forgotten

One: People don't forget losing their jobs or benefits.
Two: The primaries are less than a year off.

The GOP's pulled a lot of shit that initially made people angry but was forgotten by election time.  This is not one of those times.