But, having followed this case from onset, I disagree that the Duke boys were "drunken testosterone filled, athletic jocks". Yes, there were alcoholic beverages present. I've seen not an iota of evidence which suggests the boys were drunk. I've seen ample evidence that CGM was not of a sober bearing whether results from drugs and/or a combination of drugs/pills.
Frankly, and IME, I've seen much more violence coming from children in the K-12 levels of over-prescribed ritilin-like drugs; but hardly the outcry from "community" members over such erratic behaviors in the young.
Secondarily, I find it silly of those who wish to place the blame squarely on "jocks who drink". lol. As most college administrators posit: The college levels are a place for inquiry. And deep research. One could just as readily posit the Duke boys were following that prescribed mantra to a T. Should the same "morally outraged" writers opine upon students who engage in trashing pro-Republican signs and offices during elections? Not a word, ever. Do they opine upon those who block traffic just to make a "social justice" statement? No. Do they ever stand up for those students in politically correct classrooms who are grade-punished and/or vilified in classrooms? No.
Silly is as silly does.
If CGM had not made up these heinous lies, no one anywhere would have known or commented upon "jocks drinking". It's just a stupid out for the pretend moral "outrage-ives".
The Klan was about - power and money. The NAACP is no different. To fool the simples into believing it was about "skin color": "Pay attention to the pot; but not the kettle".
It's newer name is "by any means necessary"; and finally, aptly coined.
Your logic is excellent.