Skip to comments.'She didn't affirmatively say no': Silence means consent according to defense...(Steubenville rape)
Posted on 03/12/2013 8:26:48 PM PDT by Morgana
FULL TITLE: 'She didn't affirmatively say no': Silence means consent according to defense in Ohio high school rape trial where passed out, drunken teenage girl was 'sexually assaulted' by multiple football players
Defense lawyers in the coming trial of two high school football players charged with raping a nearly passed-out-drunk 16-year-old girl are expected to argue on the issue of consent.
In the case that has shocked the nation, prosecutors state that the inebriated girl was taken to a number of parties by a group of drunk teenagers, supporting her to walk when she wasn't physically capable.
The prosecution claims that the group later sexually assaulted the girl while she lay unconscious.
But attorney Walter Madison, who represents one of the accused boys, argues she was drinking voluntarily and left willingly with the group of boys.
As reported by the Cleveland Trader Madison said: 'There's an abundance of evidence here that she was making decisions, cognitive choices.' 'She didn't affirmatively say no,' he stated.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
Not giving the answer you want is not a lack of ability to answer.
Assuming the thing you're trying to prove is "circular reasoning" by definition.
You are assuming she was totally unresponsive for the entire ordeal.
Has that been established?
Bear in mind, even a momentary smile could be construed as “consent” in some circumstances.
You are if you took great pains to associate with the muggers, practiced deception to facilitate the association, and perhaps even provoked said muggers through word or deed.
Then who will your children work for?
I’m not trying to “prove” anything. You can over-think these things, you know...
No, you can't, but thanks for acknowledging your approach to the question.
My children are very successful in their own right and wouldn’t work for the likes of yours. I know you think you are clever but boorish is not the same as clever
Actually, yes you can. You can be stupidly wedded to a position that you did not arrive at by means of being on the scene and witnessing first-hand what the hell happened, or you can be like others, who say if it was rape, the boys should be punished; if it was not rape, the boys should be found “not guilty.”
Yes, you really CAN over-think these things.
Because your adolescent antipathy is a so much more nuanced approach.....
What do you plan to spring on me next? "I know you are, but what am I?"
I think rather than pontificating on "over think" you should address the plank in your own eye and correct your "under-read."
Find a handful of posters on this thread who've said "if it was rape."
That’s right. I forgot about that.
I’m not sending anyone anywhere. Have you heard? There is a trial going on. As far as what evidence is allowed - or not - is something we will soon see.
It's pretty obvious you're too stupid (or crazy) to give rational answers.
I remember that. I was disgusted with some so called FReepers.
[...even a momentary smile could be construed as consent in some circumstances.]
That’s a disturbing statement.
I think, you’ve taken a step too far in the defending these barbarians.
Anyone who would use that statement as a defense should have his own ‘circumstances’ in life examined.
??? ‘two minutes hate’ ???
and when you are old and sick and dying and my offspring are caring for you I will laugh
Take a hint from Moira Lasch, the humiliated prosecutor of the William Kennedy Smith rape trial: don't assume your own sex life is a standard.
You'll save yourself much embarrassment.
I've got to hand it to you; you've demonstrated an even greater level of impotent vindictiveness than even my own jest suggested.
Wow what a contentious thread....i did not know about this case till today and am uninformed
When i grew up in the early 70s i saw girls intoxicated or on quaaludes or even fairly sober indulge in gang bangs or group sex....it was hardly rape...they actually carried on like it was profoundly pleasurable to them....i was not into that being so close to other bare johnsons
I have known girls/women in my life who liked all sorts of exploitative stuff like trains and group or S and M or rough play and so forth
Some pretty startling and frankly unexpected
Before the knitters here go ape i am describing observations...i have enjoyed many gals but always treated even the full blown freaks with affection respect and whatever effort required to please to whatever their satisfaction level was
I’m no prude..pillow biters are boring but abusing women even if requested was not my thing
Now i have also known women assaulted by someone familiar...a bad thing
And women brutalized with fear of being killed by a home invader.... heinous vicious crap....that is very very bad
I do think today we call rape a bit too readily.....fembots seem to like it both ways
In this case....i simply don’t know the facts
Being high and having sex you are ashamed of the next morning and being forcibly held down and penetrated or worse are very different things
And there are degrees of that....which is why we have aggravated charges
I will say this sort of thing frequently involves jocks and alcohol
My boys know i will light them up i catch them doing this crap...invited or not
Caligula Barge behavior is bad form....
They peed on her....geez
I would think banging a comatose drunk woman..obviously...no consent i assume is rape or battery or assault
I knew some jocks who crapped on a drunk guys face....the refrain for weeks around school was “pinch off another big one jimbo”
The guy did nothing about it....
The college where things can get really stupid....but i think more consent actually like especially the group stuff
If what u describe is accurate then the prosecution likely has some sort of case
As i said i did not even know about this till now
I do not think gang bangs even if intoxicated are by default rapes nor do i agree with all underage constructs today....some of which are quite new and rather absurd like charging an. 18 year old boy with 17 year old girl
But what you are describing does sound criminal just casually absorbing that synopsis
Most of what we know comes from hackers so it will be interesting to see what is admissable in court.
The victim can’t offer much - it appears most of the evidence is self inflicted by the perps and other party-goers. Tweets/FB/cell phone pics/texts.
What does that have to do with what I said?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.