Go to Admin » Appearance » Widgets » and move Gabfire Widget: Social into that MastheadOverlay zone
17-Year-Old Rape Victim Loses Her First Amendment Rights by Being Raped
17-Year-Old Rape Victim Charged for Tweeting Names of Convicted Rapists
“There you go, lock me up,” 17-year-old rape victim Savannah Dietrich tweeted after naming her rapists on Twitter. “I’m not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell.”
Another tweet read, “Protect rapist is more important than getting justice for the victim in Louisville.”
A brave and defiant Savannah Dietrich explained her outrage, “So many of my rights have been taken away by these boys. I’m at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it. If they really feel it’s necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don’t understand justice.”
Good point, Savannah. And although this is juvenile court, since when do we silence victims of violent crimes, especially when the perpetrators not only pleaded guilty, but passed pictures around of their crime – humiliating the victim even further? They sure weren’t silent. They didn’t protect her privacy. Why should they be granted protection they didn’t afford their victim?
Why should a rape victim be denied her first amendment rights in order to protect the reputation of convicted sexual assaulters?
And for the safety of other girls who will come into contact with these boys, I’m all for naming names. They’re guilty, they’ve been convicted.
Explaining how she had found out that she’d been raped after passing out at a party, she said, “For months, I cried myself to sleep. I couldn’t go out in public places.”
Part of healing for rape victims is learning to talk about their experience without shame, but the court accepted a plea deal without Dietrich’s input that forces her to stay silent and not name names. Attorneys for the sexual assaulters are asking that the Kentucky teenager be held in contempt of court for violating a court order.
Savannah was unaware of the terms of their plea bargain, and feels they got off easy. She told the Courier Journal, “I felt like they were given a very, very light deal. I wasn’t happy with it, at all.”
They pleaded guilty to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. They haven’t been sentenced yet, but according to Kentucky statute, they are guilty of a Class D felony and a misdemeanor. For the felony, they face (d) For a Class D felony, not less than one (1) year nor more than five (5) years. Wow. Compare that to other states where if the perpetrators were adults, they’d be facing automatic life imprisonment without the possibility of parole. Looks like Kentucky is the place to go for rapists. But truthfully, rape is both exceptionally under-reported and convictions are tough to get. The pictures probably did these teenagers in.
In some states, even minors who commit first degree sexual abuse are required to stay in compliance with residency restrictions, if not placement on the sex abuse registry.
Why? Because sex abuse in the first degree is when in the course of committing sexual abuse, the person causes another serious injury. In Kentucky, first degree sexual assault is a class C or D felony.
510.110 Sexual abuse in the first degree.
. (1) A person is guilty of sexual abuse in the first degree when:
. (a) He or she subjects another person to sexual contact by forcible compulsion; or
. (b) He or she subjects another person to sexual contact who is incapable of consent because he or she:
1. Is physically helpless;
2. Is less than twelve (12) years old; or
3. Is mentally incapacitated; or
. (c) Being twenty-one (21) years old or more, he or she:
1. Subjects another person who is less than sixteen (16) years old to sexual contact;
2. Engages in masturbation in the presence of another person who is less than sixteen (16) years old and knows or has reason to know the other person is present; or
3. Engages in masturbation while using the Internet, telephone, or other electronic communication device while communicating with a minor who the person knows is less than sixteen (16) years old, and the minor can see or hear the person masturbate; or
. (d) Being a person in a position of authority or position of special trust, as defined in KRS 532.045, he or she, regardless of his or her age, subjects a minor who is less than eighteen (18) years old, with whom he or she comes into contact as a result of that position, to sexual contact or engages in masturbation in the presence of the minor and knows or has reason to know the minor is present or engages in masturbation while using the Internet, telephone, or other electronic communication device while communicating with a minor who the person knows is less than sixteen (16) years old, and the minor can see or hear the person masturbate.
. (2) Sexual abuse in the first degree is a Class D felony, unless the victim is less than twelve (12) years old, in which case the offense shall be a Class C felony. Effective: July 15, 2008
While the perpetrators have yet to be sentenced for raping her, she’s facing up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine if convicted of violating the court order via Twitter. So, she names them and gets up to 180 days in jail; they rape her and show pictures of it to their friends and get between most likely 1 year with probation tacked on but given this is juvenile court, they may not even go to jail – (irony much, Kentucky?) and sealed court records.
Yahoo reports:
“[She] should not be legally barred from talking about what happened to her,” Gregg Leslie, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, told the Associated Press. “That’s a wide-ranging restraint on speech.”
The Courier-Journal and Dietrich’s attorneys agree. They “have filed motions to open the proceedings, arguing she has a First Amendment right to speak about what happened in her case and a right to a public hearing on the contempt charge.”
The result of this court’s decision is that Savannah has lost her first amendment rights because she was raped. Let Judge Deana “Dee” McDonald, Louisville, KY know how you feel about this via a Change.Org petition.
This is a sad, seedy, predictable story about small town protectionism, only in this story, rape protect ...
In today's wtf headlines, a California woman was forced to pay spousal support to her ex husband, who wa ...
The Lake County Sheriff's Office is reprinting their domestic violence and sexual assault flyers after d ...
Two Steubenville High School football players were found guilty this morning of raping a 16-year-old Wes ...
This is the story of Republican District Attorney Ken Kratz' sexual misconduct over a domestic violence ...
Corey Mondello
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:06 pm
i cannot understand why more woman, more conservative, republican, t-party, or conservative christian woman arent up in arms over this? no wonder there are so many females who love palin who didnt support equal pay for woman. is this a case of another self-hating minority?
Brigita Petrutis
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:21 pm
Not self-hate in essence, but an institutionalized, culturalized obeyance to the system that punishes the victim, thus promoting what seems like self-hatred but is more of a distorted survival mechanism.
Victoria
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 10:56 pm
The only problem is we are not a minority. We are 50.8%.
Jack Edwards
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 5:22 pm
First:
Not everyone whom are conservative (or liberal for that matter) are truly politically active.
Second:
The main difference between liberal & conservative is that liberals defend our rights to question the motives/agenda/conscience of our higher authority, wherest conservatives believe we are obliged to be faithful and patriotic to authority under anything less than abject tyranny.
Questioning the veracity of everything you’ve been taught in high-school civics class is a particular and exceptional process to develop through. So yes there will be more conservatives than liberals. It doesn’t translate to the majority being correct by default.
Maxson Green
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Wrong. The difference between Liberal and Conservative in the United States is that the *common* Liberal will defend Liberal authority to the point of tyranny, whereas the *common* Conservative will defend Conservative authority to the point of tyranny. Conversely, Liberals will attack all Conservative authority without regard to logic and reason and Conservatives will do the same with regard to Liberal authority.
It’s really just a color war, and in the end we both lose.
Maxson Green
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:05 pm
Last part of last sentence should read “with respect to Liberal authority.”
A Walkaway
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 9:55 am
If that were true, why did the damned conservative “Good Christians” insist on obedience to their authority even though it was destructive to us, and for them authority was good. When we started going to a UU church (true liberal), authority was to be questioned and obedience wasn’t insisted on. That extended to the individuals… the people in the conservative mainstream churches looked at authority and authority structures as something inherently good and to be protected and supported WITHOUT QUESTION, while the liberal individuals (and hierarchy) ENCOURAGED questioning and dissuaded blind obedience. The conservative structure was top-down, ALWAYS. The elites at the top had all the power and made the decisions, with lip service to democracy. The liberal structure? Purely democratic, and the people in the pews had the power (and would inform the leaders what to do).
The differences between conservative and liberal are gigantic, and it’s not, as you imply, blind adherence to their own philosophical point of view. Liberals as a rule encourage thinking (especially critical thinking) and conservatives discourage independent thought.
Those aren’t stereotypes… those are characteristics.
Col
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:47 pm
A minority status is developed in two different ways. First, most commonly minority statuses are developed using statistics. Second, minority statuses are also developed by systemic and organizational discrimination that is in place and is in favor of the “majority” (the majority being a group that holds the power differential). Therefore, women are not a number-minority, but women are a minority because of society’s organized and systematic discrimination. For me, it is important to recognize both definitions of a minority status so that all people know what is being talked about.
Dinah
Jul. 26th, 2012 at 7:05 am
Where in the hell are the parents of this child? Why aren’t they holding up photos of the criminals? I see a federal lawsuit on the horizon….. Facebook their photos NOW.
Tell the JUDGE you don’t accept their punishment.
Fred Phillips
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:10 pm
The American dream doesn’t belong to the People, it belongs to the crooks. This is not America, it is Iraq, Afghanistan and every other country that does not protect the victims. Do not think for one minute that America is a Christian nation; for Jesus Christ made it clear to protect and provide for the meek, the poor, children, and the victims of abuse (aka the masses of the world and USA). What is law if it protects the criminal and bully and makes everyone else the victim?
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:13 pm
Thats a big amen
Corey Mondello
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:23 pm
“As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion;”
~ Excerpt from: The Treaty of Tripoli – Tripoli of Barbary, Art. 11. – Authored by American diplomat Joel Barlow in 1796, the following treaty was sent to the floor of the Senate, June 7, 1797, where it was read aloud in its entirety and unanimously approved. John Adams, having seen the treaty, signed it and proudly proclaimed it to the Nation.
Daniel Ritter
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 10:49 pm
Thats not really the point Corey.I think the point is that most conservatives consider themselves christians and try and get a lot of milage out of it.I can imagine especially in Kentucky.The problem is conservatives do not practice the teachings of Jesus,they merely use his name to get votes and promote hatred.
A Walkaway
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 10:08 am
It runs far deeper than that. The conservative “Good Christians” follow a theology that insists on obedience regardless of the cost to the individual, and the religious form they follow is very much in support of a top-down hierarchy. Those “above” you are not to be questioned. If a person is richer than you or have higher social status, they’re better than you. That I suspect has a lot to do with this case (I’m not very familiar with it, but it fits the pattern). That’s also why you have so many young women who have been raped by their preachers and other clergy (in the conservative “Good Christian” churches), because another aspect of it is that with authority comes privileges as well as a lack of accountability towards the people thought to be below the person in power. Another assumption is that the leader (talking about preachers and other ministers in the “Good Christian” churches) has more knowledge than the people in the pews and thus what is told should be taken as fact (I’ve heard some of the STUPIDEST things come from preachers, and people ate it up like candy – like the lies about evolution and pushing the falsehood “Creationism”.) That’s why the NAR and the other forms of dominionism have gotten to the point of openly advocating overthrowing the constitution (or the government and then changing the constitution to suit them)… because nobody in those churches will stand up and tell their leaders “You’re full of shit!”
Much of their thinking is based on the false “Great Chain of Being” from centuries ago. That sort of thinking has infected much of Christianity since Jesus’ day, and actually existed before then.
It’s a mistake to think that conservatives are only using religion and don’t believe what they say. I’d say that in nearly all cases (granting that there may be a few people who are so hypocritical that they only go to church for appearance), they believe what they’ve been taught.
Jacob
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 3:50 pm
Sorry to inform you, but America has separation of church and state. America isn’t a “christian nation”. All people should have moral and ethical problems with silencing the victim of rape. I’m pretty sure the torah says stuff about protecting people, and I’m Jewish.
Corey Mondello
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:20 pm
america never has been and never was meant to be a christian nation
George Miler
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 11:59 pm
America was “intended” to be a petty-bourgeois utopia of Mammon-blinded Manichean heretics. Hate sex and love money, that whole deferred gratification thing gone virulent. That’s the whole Tea Party in a literal nutshell, and 48% of these psychotics keep voting for it. Keep you passport handy in case their empire comes to pass.
Kyle
Jul. 27th, 2012 at 2:48 pm
Corey, yes it was. Look at our past presidents. How many weren’t Christian?
Jacob
Jul. 30th, 2012 at 10:44 am
Yes, they were christian. But I would like you to look at the percentages of Christians to the number of any other religion in the world, there are so many christians that they vote christian and our president is there for christian.
kat
Aug. 2nd, 2012 at 10:51 pm
It looks like a whole lot of Christian voters this time around are about to vote Morman with their party, instead of Christian with the other party. What does that say about their loyalty to their religion versus their loyalty to their politics?
Josey
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:42 pm
Someone may want to look into the good judge’s past. According to her election filings [available on the Kentucky Law Review] on 11/4/2009 she lists the following address as:
EDITED OUT for privacy
Unfortunately, this doesn’t list Deana McDonald as the owner of record. Instead [according to the Jefferson County PVA Property Valuation Administrator] two other individuals are listed:
VAWTER DAVID M & VAWTER RACHEL EVE
It’s quite possible that the Hon Deana McDonald is renting or even the public record is incorrect, however, it’s not unknown for elected officials to list one address as their place of residence when in fact they live in an entirely different jurisdiction.
Sarah Jones
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 8:59 pm
Sorry but I had to edit out the judge’s home address for obvious reasons. Write her at work if you want to contact her.
Josey
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 6:43 pm
As I stated in my post, the address is in the public record. Maybe if you used your internet more often you would realize that.for more than just channeling other news organization you’d have some credibility in the journalism department.
BFB
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:30 pm
www.yourmapper.com/detail...
This is the public record. The seller is listed as Thomas McDonald. Just because they sold their house in 2010, does not mean that she is a criminal. Election records are from 2009.
More disturbing is the Bluegrass Bat connection. Both kids are lacrosse players and the Kentucky Juvenille Justice Department is a top tier contributor to this team. One of the player’s mothers (NOT one of the two assailants) works in the Grants Management Group of the Juvenille Justice Department.
One of the assailants mother’s is president of the “Shamrock Moms” which appears to be a booster club for this private school which explains why they were not expelled.
That is the real stinky underside of this.
Shiva (Moderator)
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:45 pm
Now that is some interesting data
A Walkaway
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 10:10 am
Critical information IMO, and explains much (and also confirms what I thought about the situation… elites being protected by the “Justice” system).
somebody
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 9:21 pm
Could you please do something with that enormous toolbar at the bottom left? Every time I page down I have to go back up a bit to read what is covered by the ridiculous “toolbar.”
Fred Evil
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 11:24 pm
No doubt. What an obnoxious PoS that little box is.
Ingrid Buxton
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:33 am
I agree.
Reynardine
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 9:31 pm
As these young men have published defamatory material against her, it appears she has a civil cause of action at least for that, and although I don’t know the technicalities of the law in the Commonwealth of Kentucky, it seems service would be had on the parents as next friends and guardians. Her Honor’s order, even if valid, would technically not be violated. Perhaps Her Honor has an overindulged son whom she is raising to be her penis to screw the world with. Perhaps she simply wants to emulate Ayn Rand.
majii
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 9:37 pm
This case reminds me of the one from a couple years ago in which a TX cheerleader was kicked off the cheering squad because she refused to say her rapist’s name in a cheer. It’s funny how some conservative females will side with the rapist in cases like the cheerleader’s and Savannah’s. Republicans in Congress didn’t want to vote for the renewal of the Violence Against Women Act because it covered undocumented immigrants. For a party that talks about how Christian its members are, one hardly ever sees proof of this claim in the way their politicians vote or the positions they and their supporters take on issues involving women. Vaginal probes are okay, giving employers’ power over their female employees’ healthcare is okay, banning the healthcare services Planned Parenthood provides for low income women is okay, banning the teaching of sex education is okay, etc.
linda seaton
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 9:55 pm
this is what I advise you to do. act demure. meanwhile, quietly place the names of these boys everywhere…..let us do the talking for you.
play the game and win what you want to accomplish with sisterhood, brotherhood, humanhood.
we’ll do what it takes.
together, we stand.
A Walkaway
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 10:28 pm
I think I know why this happened.
(1) She went to a party, (2) she obviously consumed adult beverages or some sort of drug, and (3) she consumed so much that she passed out.
Obviously her mistake was #1. #2 and #3 contributed. Can’t have fun you know.
(Sarcasm off)
(I must also say I’ve heard those exact sentiments before in some of the churches I used to attend, regarding young women who were raped at parties where they had too much to drink.)
I really don’t understand how a deal like that could have been reached without her knowledge and consent since it affected her in multiple ways. Since she wasn’t party to the deal, they can’t make rules that limit her. If her lawyer helped made that deal, he or she needs to be disbarred and thrown in jail instead of Savannah.
I hear of settlements like that fairly often (where one’s freedom of speech is taken away)… but usually when big corporations are involved. They settle but the settlement requires that their victims sign away their rights, and they use the threat of economic destruction of a “little person” to force them into accepting the loss of freedom.
In any case, they’re protecting monsters and punishing the innocent… which is nothing new. Nice justice-doing legal system – NOT.
A Walkaway
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 10:30 pm
Oh… and PLEASE get rid of the toolbar. It was irritating enough when it took up space on the left of the thread, but now it’s doubly irritating (and for me, entirely useless). You might consider putting it at the bottom or top of the column on the right of the thread… maybe about where the “Facebook” stuff is.
john R.
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 11:08 pm
yes the toolbar is a real distraction
Stephanie
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 10:46 pm
This is another reason why so many women who have been sexually abused are afraid to speak out.
Outraged
Jul. 22nd, 2012 at 11:12 pm
Maybe I missed something in the article, but how did this travesty of justice and violation of a young woman’s 1st Amendment rights turn into a generalized attack on conservative, Republican, Christian women? Why is there discussion about whether the U.S. is a Christian nation? Are some more interested in promoting a political agenda than doing something to help this woman?
Susan Rudofsky
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:22 am
I lost my job because I chose not to work with the man who had broken into my apartment, had sex with me, and stole my money.
Ray
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:24 am
This is what is wrong with the justice system – The criminals have all sorts of rights and the victim has none. If this judge does not redress this wrong she needs to be removed from the bench and prevented from ever practicing law again! These rapists gave up any claim to the right of privacy when they posted pictures of their crime publicly.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 9:53 am
Don’t forget another huge problem… that there are many innocent people in prison or jail right now, and that people have been regularly executed for crimes they didn’t commit (as we find out years later).
The whole system is broken… from the damned pigs who abuse their authority and stop people for bogus reasons (2/3 of the times I’ve been stopped were bogus) and have been known to railroad innocent minorities, clear up to Citizens United, with brokenness in each stage.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 9:54 am
(BTW… Referring to the Innocence Project, and all of the people that have been found innocent because of their actions, including several from this county.)
George Miler
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 1:18 am
Is there any way to get her tweet so I can repost? Or has the court suppressed the info?
mikeyhatesit
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 12:25 am
her tweets are protected; you’ll have to ask to follow her. however, you can copy/paste the quote into your feed.
Erika
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 4:30 am
This is infuriating. I can only imagine her pain and disgrace in herself. I’m a counselor in training and I know from my education and experience that victims of rape lose a facet of themselves in the crime. This young girl should NEVER be told she cannot speak of what happened to her. Speaking and being heard is part of healing after the tragedy. This country was originally founded as a secular nation where our rights were to be honored, not thrown in the garbage. I’ve saw a lot of people blaming this, as well as other tragedies on us not being a ‘christian nation’ but allow me to remind you we were never meant to be that and I am thankful we are not. I don’t want to see the pain that has befallen this girl be turned into any kind of religious propaganda bullshit.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 10:09 am
I think that applies to anyone who has experienced traumatic crime or trauma… and even injustice.
That’s one of the reasons I REALLY hate the “Good Christians”, because they insist on “Forgive and Forget!!!” – and if you try to talk about the things that happened to you, they literally shut you up and tell you that you’re sinning by “not letting it go”! The Dominionists… if a girl gets raped by someone important in their church and she seeks help from anyone in the church, they label her a “Jezebel” and punish her!!! (I’ve met several “Jezebels” in the last 20 years… and how the damned hell a little girl (once a toddler) could seduce a preacher… or force one into having sex with her… !!!)
I’ve helped too many women who were raped as girls/young women… been an accepting listening ear who understood, to be shocked at this. Enraged, well, I’ve heard similar enough regarding the “Good Christian” churches. People sometimes wonder why I’m so angry at this country and the churches… well, this is the sort of thing I’m used to hearing about. America honors justice through its lack.
Padma Thornlyre
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 5:54 am
First, she is raped by the two boys, and now she is raped by the courts? What message does this send to my daughter?
A Walkaway
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 10:15 am
Looks like she was raped by the courts because she had the temerity to try to get justice against the brats of 1%ers.
audrey
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:48 am
yet if she shot them both she could plead temprary insanity hmmmmm…….
rj
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 9:13 am
this is bull shit my heart is in shreds for these girls there are alot of things that should be said. but the most important being that these guys are worthless self serving wastes of skin and my blood boils and sturs for rapists. this girl is beautiful and they deserve nothing less then to be raped them selves in jail.to the rapists. blow your fuckin heads off you scum
Anonymous Hackers
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 9:15 am
We should spread the names of the rapists all over the Internet, to all places so they never disapear and may be found for ever.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:10 pm
You DO know that there are a number of people who have been found guilty of rape, but later exonerated through such things as genetic testing?
I agree that people who have committed crimes should not be allowed to bury those crimes (except maybe by years of living right), and that coverups like this are wrong. But you could do an innocent person great injustice by doing exactly what you propose.
I suggest looking at the Innocence Project (for one example) of how wrong this “Justice” system gets things, and they also often point out why it fails (bigoted prosecutors, for one thing).
kat
Aug. 2nd, 2012 at 11:04 pm
The people in question are definitely not among those who might be innocent, even after their conviction. They have pictures of themselves in the act, and apparently have flaunted these pictures. A lot of people, myself included, believe their faces and names should be known to the public.
shane
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 9:47 am
Real America, where the justice, sorry I meant legal system is designed by criminals to protect criminals. if that means a rapist, armed robber or murder gets off, that doesn’t matter. because it is the middle/lower classes that are affected, rarely the 1%. the fact that this brave young lady is standing up on her own is heroic, but every mother, every daughter, every sister and every man that respects women should be standing shoulder to shoulder with her. maybe then the courts will realise how braindead the system actually is. Good Luck Savannah, I hope (real) justice will done, and I also hope your fellow Americans wake up enough to support and stand with you.
Frank
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 10:43 am
This is a very irresponsible headline and thesis. The article doesn’t indicate whether or not she’s actually a named party to any order or decree by the court. Assuming for the sake of argument that she is, she like all parties to the matter is under an order of the court to not discuss the case because juvenile offenders (and victims) are all afforded the protection of laws that assume that if they break the law before they’re 18, they’re not fully capable of comprehending the impact of their decisions. Hence the court seal on those records. She didn’t “lose her 1st amendment rights by being raped” — as a minor victimized by other minors, they don’t have full first-amendment rights. (Recall cases of in-school speech). In this one instance that may seem like an injustice, but you have to weigh society’s interest in the privacy of ALL juveniles against a small minority of cases like this one.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:50 am
Nice argument, protecting the rapists from being exposed and carrying the DESERVED stigma from their crimes. Just like I’m used to seeing (especially from “Good Christians”).
FYI… even children have freedom of speech, and the young lady has a RIGHT to see justice done for her. The constitution doesn’t say “but this doesn’t apply when you’re under 18!”… and even if she is a “minor”, she has the ABSOLUTE right to say what happens to her body, and that is paramount over any “rights to privacy” that the worthless little rapists might try to claim. What was done was minimal justice, and I’d bet that the boys were either the children of 1%ers or possibly sons of families with enough money to buy a little (in)justice.
Of course, they could be the sons of politicians or other local elites too. If they hadn’t been so brain-dead stupid as to put the pictures online, I’d bet that she would have been denied justice altogether, and if like usual, told to shut up.
robert
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 1:17 pm
Shut Up Frank! We are talking about justice, not technicalities that protect the guilty!
Jack Edwards
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 6:23 pm
The problem (i.e. the entire point of the article)
is:
—
The rapists were given full juvenile protection.
The victim was supposed to have similar privacy.
—
The rapists shared photos of the crime.
The victim was ordered not to identify them.
—
The rapists are convicted yet unsentenced for the
breach of privacy. No penalty- even for the rape.
The victim breaches privacy, in protest of the
rapists not being punished, and gets 180 days.
—
Basically: the victim was supposed to recieve the same privacy-protection treatment as the rapists- and didn’t.
Just Al
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:00 am
The jokers who endorsed Judge Mcdonald for office:
www.citizensforbetterjudg...
Their endorsement page for their “buddies”:
www.citizensforbetterjudg...
Pretty ironic as always the group pretends to endorse those who will protect the public with better judges.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:00 pm
Someone should do some backgrounding on the members of that organization. The name alone is setting off alarm bells.
A friend and I have done that before, and found out that local groups were really dominionist fronts. We even uncovered moles in a ecumenical homeless support organization (which was at last count, going to hard-sell proselytizing even though they advertised as being not hard-sell and accepting of all religious persuasions).
Just Al
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:06 am
Judge Deana “Dee” McDonald — Phone: (502) 595-4960 — Fax: (502) 595-3270 (Fax) — 600 W. Jefferson St., Louisville, KY 40202
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:55 am
Are you an agent provocateur? Do you realize how stupid and wrong it is to do something like that? THAT’S THE BEHAVIOR OF A REPUBLICAN/TEA PARTY, NOT a liberal/Democrat.
The damned conservatives could use your attempts to make us look like the “Good Christians” (terrorists, like the “Army of God”) to try to get Romney in power!
Rap Tor
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:12 am
Wow, Sarah. This is a deep story. Very brave young lady. It could change the way victims and perpetrators are shielded by law.
Rebecca
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:14 am
This girl is so brave, and I applaud her!!
There is one thing in this article that really jumped out at me and rather rubbed me the wrong way (and is factually incorrect.) It says that sexual abuse in the first degree includes serious injury other than the abuse itself, then lists the definition of that crime and nowhere does it mention any other kind of injury.
I just want to point that out, because the seriousness of sexual assault really does not need any additional validation by tacking on that there was another physical injury involved. There wasn’t… and there doesn’t need to be. Sexual assault in any form is one of the most violent acts a person can perpetrate against another, point blank.
Rebecca
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:15 am
Dear Moderator, please remove my last name from the above comment. I’m not sure why it popped up when I hit Post Comment.
Christopher
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:29 am
I’m confused. Aren’t convictions a matter of public record? Doesn’t sound like this girl is telling us anything we either don’t already know or couldn’t find out in other ways.
Rebecca
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 11:51 am
No, they were granted sealed court records as part of their plea bargain. I think when minors are tried as minors, the court records are not released to the public. Either way, no one would have even heard about this case if she hadn’t tweeted about it… so yes, she is sharing information that would not otherwise be available or heard about.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:02 pm
It sounds to me like they totally ignored the wishes or needs of the victim of their crimes – didn’t even let her know. If anyone, she should have first say as to their punishment and she has a RIGHT to know what is going to be done for justice FOR her.
Kelly
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:01 pm
Freedom of Speech! This is NOT fair!!
Bob Doyle
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:07 pm
My Wife is a Kentuckian not pleased with her “Home State” as y’all keep Mitch McConnel in the Senate & have added in Rand Paul. To add injury to injury, the system of Juvenile Justice in Louisville KY is broken by added actions the Court for the Victim.
Wackoville fits .
DM
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:16 pm
I like how liberals think the politicians they support don’t receive money from corporations or wealthy individuals.
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 12:41 pm
And what does that have to do with this injustice?
Take your foolish trolling elsewhere. Run along, now.
Jack Edwards
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 6:02 pm
People who support Obama as party Democrats might have that delusion, but deep liberals like Occupy protesters &etc. have been staunchly oppositional to the act of granting money to politicians for a reward of bills passed in support.
robert
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 1:23 pm
Austin Zehnder and Will Frey
Alpharius
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 3:31 pm
The internet is forever.
Courtney Marcainte
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 3:36 pm
I was so shocked to hear this! Are they really PUNISHING a RAPE VICTIM? This makes Kentucky look bad. I feel if she was raped and exploited than she has every right to put their names on whatever she see’s fit…I mean they were convicted and they are guilty. One year and probation does not do any justice to the emotional turmoil the victim and her family has to deal with. Minor my ass I hope someone beats the shit out of them and rapes their ass in jail. Now re-tweet that.
KEKEKE
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 4:52 pm
She wasn’t allowed to announce who the rapist were, yet she did anyway. That is 100% on her for her ignorance to the law and equal rights. Yes, it sucks she was raped, but just because she’s a victim doesn’t mean she’s above the law. The same can be applied to other cases as well.
Jack Edwards
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 5:44 pm
Rapists’ privacy being legally protected wherest her victim’s privacy is unprotected is a precise opposite to equal rights.
A complex of laws invented by an exclusive group of rich people is no substitute for reasoning or morality.
Jack Edwards
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 5:49 pm
*their victim
A Walkaway
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 6:11 pm
To know that there was a plea deal between the state and the rapists, they had to tell her. From what has been reported, they didn’t tell her and then went to punish her when she talked about the rape. So your argument is invalid.
Her wishes about their punishment should have been paramount, and she should have had at least some say in what they received. From all reports I’ve read, she had no say whatsoever.
BTW… you also seem to have no concept of the emotional and mental damage rape does to a person, and the need to communicate about it. Preventing a rape victim from talking about it is about the worst thing you can do… and it only serves to protect her rapists and their precious reputations (wrong – precious FAKE reputations).
Reynardine
Jul. 23rd, 2012 at 7:50 pm
It would be justice if that judge were gang raped in front of a jeering crowd and then ordered to shut up about it while pictures were posted, wouldn’t it? But that never happens to her kind of people. It only happens to the youpeople.
mikeyhatesit
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 12:35 am
Umm, aren’t the rapists, of minor age or not, guilty of child p**nography for taking pictures of the sexual assault? Is there any Federal interest in this case? What happens if those pics make it online? I’m going to assume they were taken with a smartphone, which can be hacked. If other kids are charged with child p**n for sexting each other, than these brats need some actual time in prison.
mikeyhatesit
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 1:01 am
I understand her frustration. As a teenager, I was sexually assaulted by a family friend. In the two years between the initial arrest and the trial, the only witness passed away. The family of the defendant committed perjury to give him an alibi; this was discussed by his mother and aunt in the bathroom where they were overheard by my mother. As this was considered hearsay, the judge wouldn’t consider it when it was brought to her attention. The defendant had a history of sexual assaults against minors, but these were considered prejudicial to the jury under “no prior bad acts allowed in testimony”. Even though one juror quit the trial because I was badgered by the defense, and others complained to the judge, there was no starting over. The only good thing out of his winning the trial was that he wasn’t declared “innocent”.
That was a real victory for justice that day, wasn’t it? Had social media existed 25 years ago, I’d have felt braver and defended myself better because I wouldn’t have shut up about it. My mom was no help, because her attitude was go to school and pretend everything was okay. Bullshit- I think sexual assault, hate crimes, and the like can exceed the impact of murder because the victim is still alive. With social media, I’d have been able to express my rage and pain. I’d have been able to impact his life socially as much as he did my personal life.
Of course I have hatred. I was raped. But I do understand that he doesn’t represent all gay black males. I knew that then, for whatever reason. He only represents pedophiles, and there is no reforming them. I hope that Ms. Dietrich has this sort of comprehension, and remembers that whatever demographic her assailants come from doesn’t mean that all of them are rapists. The justice system is a game, and some people can rig it better than others. If she is willing to speak up for herself this loudly at this age, then I think she will be all right. Eventually.
Joan Hepsworth
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 8:54 am
With the Penn State crap and this at the same time. This country blows it’s own dick way too often!!!!!
Reynardine
Jul. 24th, 2012 at 9:37 am
As of this morning, the defense attorneys have dropped their contempt motion on the grounds that, as their clients’ names are all over the Internet, the horse is out of the barn anyway (technically known as “mootness”)
AJL
Jul. 26th, 2012 at 5:09 am
Just so you know, it is LIBERAL judges that cover the rights of the guilty in favor over the rights of the victim. They usually blame something other than the perpetrator. They are the “champions” of “the little guy” and are the ones that have made courts toothless when combating crime. They are the ones that want blanket amnesty for illegal aliens. They are the ones that refuse to enforce laws, so don’t go blaming conservatives for the erosion of your 1st Amendment rights. Blame the wingnuts on the left.
DA
Jul. 26th, 2012 at 10:13 am
So it turns out she actually didn’t get raped. reported July 26, 2012. She passed out topless after a throwing up violently from alcohol poisoning ….they only took pictures. The boys plead guilty to sexual assault because it has fewer repercussions than child pornography charges. Thus why the DA accepted the plea, in cases of “rape” plea bargains are very rare because evidence so incriminating can support the crime. It was only when she heard about the pictures MONTHS later and decided to take legal actions. The Courier Journal, who originally published the story, is facing a lawsuit for publishing false allegations because Dietrich used the words “rapists” and such when interviewed. She was not raped and the media now is painting the boys charged as rapists. Basically she’s embarrassed and angry about the photos thus why she took legal action only when they came out months later. Whiteness that were with Dietrich the entire night who assisted her while throwing up said she wasn’t raped. Reason for the plea and why these boys were slapped on the wrist.
Alealia
Jul. 29th, 2012 at 12:41 pm
Proof? Any links?
TQ White II
Jul. 27th, 2012 at 8:42 am
Please, someone explain how *their* conviction can be the basis for a judge telling her she can’t talk about what happened on *her* Saturday night.
She was not a party to the legal action. This was between the police and these guys. The plea bargain was between the judge and the boys.
I can understand how a judge can seal the boys records and prohibit discussion in court. I do not understand the premise of a judge saying, “You can’t talk about your experiences outside the courtroom.”
Could the judge have included *me* in the order? I don’t understand the basis of her gag order.
PJ
Aug. 1st, 2012 at 11:16 am
Those “men” should be publicly shamed, Shame is the only thing powerful enough to send a message.
The “judge” who ruled this case and allowed him to be manipulated by a corrupt and perverted defense, should be locked up too.
Is there any law against a minor possessing and distributing child pornography?? I think that should have been charged upon them as well, The Prosecution dropped the ball on this.
I hope they can get a woman’s rights group to send them a good lawyer to fix this tragedy.