<p>
</p>
<p>From the reports, the issue of Missouri’s “Romeo and Juliet laws” makes using the statutory rape charge problematic because the suspect’s age at time of the incident meant he was covered under that law.</p>
<p>Ahh…crossposted with OHMomof2.</p>
<p>[Special</a> prosecutor named to investigate alleged Maryville rape case - chicagotribune.com](<a href=“Chicago News - Chicago Tribune - Chicago Tribune”>Special prosecutor appointed to investigate Missouri rape case)</p>
<p>Jean Peters Baker, the prosecutor in Jackson County, in the Kansas City area, has been asked by a judge to reexamine the case, which was dropped by the county prosecutor in Maryville even though the girl had identified a 17-year-old high school football player as her attacker.</p>
<p>At a Monday news conference, Baker said her office would “thoroughly review” the case “without fear or favor.”</p>
<p>I’m glad they have appointed a special prosecutor. </p>
<p>There’s a county near us where several shameful incidents by both the police and detectives have resulted in cameras being required in all police cruisers and during all interrogations. The statement by Rice that Daisy Coleman and her mother somehow derailed the case by invoking their 5th amendment rights just doesn’t ring true to me. I may be wrong, but wouldn’t it be nice if those interactions had been filmed as part of the public record?</p>
<p>For the sake of the victims, and any other young woman out there watching (and prosecutors,for that matter), what is most important is that they see this is serious, that what happened to them does matter and is a legal matter worth examining. </p>
<p>This is how things change. It’s not perfect. It is a start.</p>
<p>completely agree with you Poetgrl. It is a start.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As one of the people who commented on this issue, let me be perfectly clear: I think there are good people and bad people everywhere: in my small town of 7K, in ritzy suburbs of 20K, in cities of hundreds or thousands or millions, and in all regions of the country. </p>
<p>What I am G-D sick and tired of is people flogging the supposed moral superiority and supposedly superior “values” of people in the so-called “heartland” and in small towns in the South, the Plains, etc; ie, everywhere but the coasts. This has been a common theme in the political culture wars. It makes me furious. </p>
<p>The constant regional stereo-typing I read on CC is also infuriating. And yes, it flows in all directions. But the way it is used in political posturing is what REALLY bothers me.</p>
<p>Carry on.</p>
<p>I’m with you Consolation. It flows both ways.</p>
<p>Argybargy makes a good point, that if the girl continued drinking, her BAC at the time of the test would be high. The issue with that from what I know of the case is had she continued to drink continuously after the rape (to which there is no evidence she did, I might add) she likely would have suffered severe hypothermia being left out in the cold like that, from what I read, she was out there a while in the cold, and recently ingested alcohol causes a person to lose body heat faster then someone who had stopped drinking a while before. It isn’t proof by any means, but it is indicative that she may not have continued drinking after the incident…plus if she had continued to drink, I would think her bac would be higher than .13 when the test was taken <em>shrug</em>.</p>
<p>Someone where I work mentioned the case, and he said that under missouri law having sex with an underage minor who had any alcohol at all is considered non consent, and if that is true then it wouldn’t matter, she had been drinking before she went to the guys house, they admitted she drank there, which if what my friend said is true, the guy is guilty, she could be ‘buzzed’ and he would be guilty, if the law is different for underage kids and adults.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not to mention someone of her age/height/weight is far less likely to be able to metabolize the alcohol than someone who’s older/taller/heavier. </p>
<p>Considering her BAC, it wouldn’t take very much to suffer alcohol poisoning and/or possibly even death from its effects…especially considering the weather was when she was left outside in the cold. </p>
<p>It’s something I’m extremely aware of considering a few older adolescent neighbors got into trouble for being caught drinking at 11-13+ along with learning about alcohol/drug effects on the human body from a graduate from Columbia University’s Medical school during my high school years.</p>
<p>Maybe the special prosecutor can do a better job of getting cooperation from the victim and her mother. The first prosecutor said that the reason the case didn’t go forward originally had to to do with the victim’s family asserting their 5th amendment rights. What were they afraid of being charged with? Was it alcohol possession and use, and providing alcohol to the 13 year old? If so, it seems that an agreement could be made not to press charges on those issues if the family cooperated otherwise. Or was there a concern about perjury/obstruction/whatever because the story they told was not 100% consistent? </p>
<p>Maybe this made sense to others, but the 5th amendment excuse sounded to me like the prosecutor finding a way not to prosecute.</p>
<p>The 13yo who was in Melinda Colman’s custody was raped (and btw that case was successfully concluded). Its seems to me Coleman might well have some legal exposure herself, which might be why she invoked the 5th Amendment. </p>
<p>From the reports the point they stopped cooperating was the slam-dunk charge in this case- the endangering the welfare of a child part. One or multiple of the boys could have been convicted on that based on what we know.</p>
<p>According to what we have heard, the girls were drinking late at night in Ms. Coleman’s bedroom, having sneaked alcohol in. Argybargy, are you a parent? I have a feeling that actual parents here are not going to be so convinced that adequate supervision of a teenager requires sitting in her bedroom at one in the morning to prevent her from drinking alcohol that she obtained without your knowledge.</p>
<p>Are there any parents here who go into their teenagers’ bedrooms in the middle of the night when the teenagers have friends overnight? That is not something I ever did.</p>
<p>I dont think this is up for debate- parents have liability for teens drinking. </p>
<p><em>Especially</em> if you have a 13 year old in your care the liquor cabinet should be under lock and key. Did she not check on them at all? Can she not tell a kid who has been drinking for hours? Smell alcohol? How are they sneaking out of the house at 1am?</p>
<p>If Paige was your child would you ever trust this woman with her again, even if nothing else happened.</p>
<p>Whatever the practical or moral judgments may or may not be, it is entirely plausible that Ms. Coleman had some legal liability for the kids drinking in her house.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I actually went to sleep at some point even when my kids had friends over. I don’t know any parents that stay up all night to oversee sleepovers.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Moving from victim blaming to mom-of-victim blaming. Anyone but the actual guys who had sex with 13 and 14 year olds, I guess.</p>
<p>Two separate issues, OhMomof2. The rape was perpetrated by the rapists.</p>
<p>The 13-year old girl got drunk at Ms. Coleman’s house. I don’t know what the social host law is in this state, but civil or even criminal liability is a possibility.</p>
<p>[Social</a> Host Liability in Missouri | The Carson Law Firm](<a href=“http://thecarsonlawfirm.com/social-host-liability-in-missouri/]Social”>http://thecarsonlawfirm.com/social-host-liability-in-missouri/) </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I understand speculating that this is why she took the 5th, but object to the idea that it is the mom’s fault that this happened.</p>
<p>It isn’t the mom’s fault that this happened. Full stop.</p>
<p>It is the fault of the rapists. Who are animals.</p>
<p>Ms. Coleman could face liability, as well. To be honest with you, I would be so out of control with rage that if it were my kid, I would sue her until she was destitute even if my kid had fallen while drunk at her home and no raping animals were involved. However, I know that I am a crazy person about my kids and most normal people would probably not react the way that I would.</p>
<p>I think there is a difference between providing alcohol to kids and kids sneaking it while a parent sleeps. The parents of the boys hosting the party would bear responsibility for the drinking that went on in THEIR house too, if Daisy’s mom would.</p>
<p>If my D were drinking at someone’s house she would have to answer to me but I cannot see suing the friend’s parents unless they were serving her alcohol or knew she was drinking and didn’t intervene. The buck stops with my kid on that.</p>
<p>Zoos, if one of your kids at age 14 had sneaked alcohol into your house and shared it with a friend in the middle of the night, would you expect to know about it? I’m sure no one here would approve of one of our children doing such a thing, but I doubt that all of us would have detected it.</p>