"God is the name by which I designate all things which cross my path violently and recklessly, all things which alter my plans and intentions, and change the course of my life, for better or for worse."
-C G Jung
To suggest a teenage girl, with hormones raging and in a society which almost glorifies drunken sex, would never be suggestive with drunken teenage boys is ludicrous. Is that what happened in this specific case? I have no idea. All I'm saying is I'd say it's a very real possibility. And if you approach this without bias, you'll know it too.
A prosecutor has a duty to only bring to trial cases it believes it can win. If the prosecutor does not feel as if they can win the trial, it is their duty to not bring the case to trial. A trial is not like a trip to the principal's office, where both sides tell their story and the situation can be re-visited. A trial is a very serious and very expensive thing with very serious ramifications. For example, if the prosecutor brought a losing case to trial and evidence turns up after the boys were guilty, then the boys can never be tried again.Regardless though, this is why a trial is needed.
A trial is only when the prosecutor has a legitimate reason to believe he/she can win.
No, it sounds too much like a situation where parents allow their children to go out and get so drunk they make very bad choices. And I'm talking about both the girl and the boys.Sounds too much like small town mid-west teenage athlete is being protected at expense of small town mid-west teenage girl.
In this case, age and alcohol cannot be held against one and not the other.
That's a double standard. If I get drunk and have sex with a drunken girl, do I get to accuse her of rape? Or is it only the woman who can get drunk and accuse the man of rape?Further, an enlightened society must never allow drunkenness to absolve someone of evil acts. A blind drunk woman can NEVER give consent. A blind drunk man had better keep it in his pants.
If both parties are drunk, then either both parties are responsible for their sexual habits or neither of them are. To say women cannot control their hormones while drunk but men should be held fully responsible is not only a double standard, it's also rather demeaning to women.
I have an answer for everything...you may not like the answer or it may not satisfy your curiosity..but it will still be an answer. ~ Kal'Stang
My mind and my heart are saying I'm in my twenties. My body is pointing at my mind and heart and laughing its ass off. ~ Kal'Stang
If a man can be held responsible for his drunken sexual habits, then so can a woman.
Absolutely. And the girl should be charged with alcohol consumption by a minor (as should the boys).If anything, the police should have taken extra efforts to go after whoever the hell was providing the alcohol, too. Providing alcohol to minors and accesory to sexual assault.
I don't think there's any evidence of lying, here - as there is evidence which supports the claim . . . all it comes down to is a town hating an outsider, and hating a girl who was just a victim all because the offender was a precious football player.
I find it to be disgusting - and it should go to court and be decided there (video evidence and statements that support the victim's claims are substantial enough).
Further, after they moved back to their old house it was set fire to a'la arson.
Yeah, anyone who looks at all of this and goes 'but she might have been lying' is being blind. At the least, it's worthy of a full investigation. This family is the target of small town bull**** - and people questioning it from the outside aren't helping.
A screaming comes across the sky.
It has happened before, but there is nothing to compare it to now.Pynchon - Gravity's Rainbow