<p>Most lawyers do not keep their e-mails forever.</p>
<p>That is not what I wanted to read. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If only the victims had reported the crimes to police. Oh wait. The police didn’t shine in the Catholic Church child abuse cases either: [Toledo</a> Police Allegedly Cover Up Priest Scandals](<a href=“http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/31/AR2005073101031.html]Toledo”>http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/07/31/AR2005073101031.html). In Toledo, for 15 years, the police chief had a policy of not arresting priests.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>“To Kill a Mockingbird” is about racism and white privilege.</p>
<p>In part, but it is also about a false accusation of rape and the consequences. </p>
<p>The false rape accusation is used to demonstrate and explore racism and white privilege. The story of Tom Robinson has nothing to do with college boys falsely accused of rape, unless they happen to be black. Then that story may or may not be pertinent. The history of black men falsely accused of rape is a different conversation entirely than anything that has yet been discussed on this thread. It goes back to the fears of white men about those they had enslaved. It is a very complicated topic. Lots has been written on this subject. I am only vaguely aware of all the issues. But I am certain your comparison isn’t valid.</p>
<p>One of the stated purposes of the Klan was to protect the virtue of white women. The Klan was active in Harper Lee’s world both in the 30s setting of her story, and in the 60s when she wrote it.</p>
<p>To say nothing of the fact that Mockingbird involves the failures of the criminal justice system…including some of the reasons victims might lie when forced to testify publicly. Remember how the victim was afraid of what her father would do to her if she told the truth? </p>
<p>Lee,a female writer, uses a female narrator in a story that criticizes the status quo, the white old boys club (the patriarchy) </p>
<p>What I am sometimes objecting to in this thread has been my perception that same status quo is being defended here.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t we all want that from the internet?</p>
<p>“Do lawyers keep their emails forever? Do they ever destroy emails?”</p>
<p>Some do, some don’t.</p>
<p>Depends on whether you think that today’s email, when viewed years from now, is more likely to help you or hurt you. </p>
<p>I used to think that the truth would always set me free. I now think that “I don’t know” or “I can’t remember” always works as an answer.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And technically, the “accuser” in the criminal justice system is the State, not the victim, (although of course the most important evidence is likely to come from the victim). When talking about criminal prosecutions, people need to remember that such cases are not technically the <em>victim’s</em> case. They are not brought to make the victim whole (that would be a civil suit), rather their purpose is to protect society from the perpetrator. </p>
<p>Which is why the victim has so little say in the prosecution of the case, but at the same time has a civic duty to report the perpetrator in order to protect others. But those ideas have already been touched upon. This thread is becoming repetitive. On the other hand, the details that are being released by news sources about Jackie’s case are fascinating and continue to amaze. </p>
<p>I’m curious about this “due process” debate. We’ve talked about college tribunals like the SMB at UVA. We’ve discussed hypotheticals like firing a worker in an apartment building because of stealing. Some people didn’t agree with that while others did. To bring this back to UVA I would like to ask a question. On the UVA threads there has been a discussion about the honor code. </p>
<p>Apparently a student saw another student blatantly cheating. The student does not know the accused cheater. If the accused student denied the claim and it came down to a “he said-he said” situation what would each of you do? Let’s assume it is proven that neither party knows each other; nobody else saw anything; both have perfect records; finally, that the alleged cheating is as egregious an offense as has come before the Honor Court in a long time. </p>
<p>Without more proof, nothing could be done. Assuming there is no evidence to bolster one party or another’s claims, then the accuser has nothing more than his word. The other person’s word (without more) is just as good. The balance of evidence is even, so the accused ‘wins’.</p>
<p>I read through a few of the honor code ‘cases’ at UVa. Almost all were ‘not guilty’. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Ronald Reagan already proved that in Iran Contra. :)</p>
<p>@TatinG I can understand that. How about if another student had not seen the cheating but had noticed the accused acting very strangely and looking around surreptitiously quite often. </p>
<p>That’s not proof beyond a reasonable doubt, but if I’m on the HC I vote “guilty”</p>
<p>Hmmm. It’s still one student’s word against another students word so just because he adds seeing him acting strangely I don’t know why that changes anything. If a few other students chime in then I’ll vote guilty. But, when it’s one on one who knows what else is going on between these two. So, nope.</p>
<p>^^^Marie1234 It was a 2nd student who noticed the frequent looking around</p>
<p>Oh, sorry I missed that. Okay, I’m getting closer to guilty then.</p>
<p>Did anyone read the piece linked within the Roanoke article? It discusses that “gray area” we debate so much:</p>
<p><a href=“Total Sorority Move | Is it Possible That There Is Something In Between Consensual Sex And Rape…And That It Happens To Almost Every Girl Out There?”>http://totalsororitymove.com/is-it-possible-that-there-is-something-in-between-consensual-sex-and-rape-and-that-it-happens-to-almost-every-girl-out-there/</a></p>
<p>“I woke up with an “oh ****” feeling that quickly turned into an “oh well.” I didn’t really feel I’d been violated, though part of me knew I had. I wasn’t mad. I wasn’t hurt. I didn’t want vengeance. I didn’t even feel weird around him soon after. I didn’t feel much of anything. I certainly didn’t feel like I’d been raped. But what had happened the night prior was not consensual sex, and I didn’t like it. I wanted the flirting. I wanted the kissing. I wanted the sleepover. But I didn’t want to go all the way. And that’s very hard to explain to a man who is just as drunk as you are.”</p>
<p>And</p>
<p>“He was really drunk. He had no way of knowing I didn’t want it.</p>
<p>It happens to us with consistent hookups, first dates, boyfriends, and one-night stands alike. We have sex with guys, because sometimes it’s just easier to do it than to have the argument about not doing it. But no one talks about it. Talking about it makes it a big deal. It makes us feel like we’re whining. It makes us feel like we’re being dramatic. And we don’t want it to be dramatic. We don’t feel entirely violated. It doesn’t affect us forever. We just feel like we got the short end of the stick, and that sometimes, we have to do something we don’t want to do, out of politeness or social obligation. So why bring it up? Why risk wrongfully tagging a guy with a serious, heavy label he doesn’t deserve? And more importantly, why risk being wrongfully tagged as “the girl who cried rape,” when we’re not trying to say it was rape at all? We’re saying we don’t know what it was. We just didn’t like it. But by refusing to acknowledge the existence of these rape-ish situations, we’re continuing to subject ourselves to them indefinitely."</p>
<p>So the author did not want to necessarily label her experience as rape, or pursue a complaint. The man she slept with thinks it was a positive experience and does not realize she feels otherwise. How would he? She had an internal shift of feelings about what was happening, but said nothing. Did nothing to indicate otherwise, in fact smiled (albeit in a “fake” way) at him while they were having intercourse. The only sign he could have picked up on possibly, was the fact that she said she didn’t move much, but she admits he was just as drunk as she was, and so likely his senses were a bit dulled (and yes I know this is no defense under many college policies and laws).</p>
<p>As we have seen though, there are some people who would file a complaint in a situation exactly like this, perhaps immediately, perhaps after some thought. It made her uncomfortable, she knew it didn’t feel right, but she didn’t stop it. I am not trying to place blame here, but if it felt so wrong even before she started “making out” with the guy…where is her part of the responsibility? She had multiple occasions to stop the situation in its tracks. Is being drunk her excuse for not saying no or resisting or leaving the premises? I know some here would say being drunk is no excuse for the man’s behavior, so why is it an excuse for hers?</p>
<p>If she HAD, at some point, changed her mind and decided to pursue a complaint of non-consensual sex, would you kick him out?</p>