<p>I’m not blaming the victims. I put blame on Duke and it wasn’t a victim. I put some blame on the coach for not taking control of the team before this happened. I don’t blame the boys - they were young and were let down by adults who failed to lead (off the field) and offer discipline when it was needed. I don’t have any desire to rehash that case, but I don’t see how anyone can say there weren’t lessons to be learned by all involved.</p>
<p>cartera:</p>
<p>If you are willing to blame in part the “hooligan” culture of the lacrosse players for what happened to them, then it follows that some legitimate rape victims can be held partly to blame for wearing provocative clothing, being out at night or in unsafe places, or, in the case of date rape, for putting themselves in a position to have been alone with a rapist, right?</p>
<p>Blaming the victim sure sounds different when it’s a girl who has been sexually assaulted and not a guy who has been falsely arrested.</p>
<p>No, those things don’t follow. Past behavior may indeed be relevant when judging a perpetrator. Remember, the team started out being judged as perpetrators, not victims. It is easier to see people as perpetrators when they engage in certain behavior. Hooligans will be hooligans so to speak. Past behavior is not always relevant when judging a victim, unless the behavior is on point or relevant. For example, a person who has, in the past filed a false charge may be thought of as being more likely to do it again. Dressing in a certain way is not relevant. Apples and oranges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Is this the 1 in 4 myth? There is no way that 20% of women in the US are the victim of any crime, much less one specific crime.</p>
<p>Umm…20% equals 1 in 5, not 1 in 4. Just saying.</p>
<p>Sounds more like a 1 in 5 myth, but since you graduated from my alma mater, I’m sure you know that. I can see the 1 in 5 being accurate - not rape necessarily, but some form of sexual assault including date rape. I was assaulted - not raped - twice in high school and the victim of an attempted date rape in college. Many women I know had similar things happen in high school or college.</p>
<p>crossposted with soozie</p>
<p>Hmmm, I just did a very quick google perusal. </p>
<p>According to RAINN (Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network):</p>
<p>"1 in 6 women and 1 in 33 men will be sexually assaulted in their lifetime. </p>
<p>College age women are 4 times more likely to be sexually assaulted.</p>
<p>60% of sexual assaults are not reported to police.</p>
<p>Approximately 74% of rape victims know their assailants.</p>
<p>Only 5% of rapists ever spend a day in jail."</p>
<p>[Statistics</a> | RAINN | Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network](<a href=“Statistics | RAINN”>Statistics | RAINN)</p>
<p>Just wondering, what percent of rapists in jail are innocent? Would love to compare/contrast.</p>
<p>cartera posted:
“No, those things don’t follow. Past behavior may indeed be relevant when judging a perpetrator. Remember, the team started out being judged as perpetrators, not victims.” </p>
<p>LOL…just discard the good analogy, but ok, let’s state it this way:</p>
<p>Past behavior may be relevant when judging a victim too. For example the Duke lacrosse self-appointed “victim” had a history of promiscuous behavior and false accusations. That is equally relevant.</p>
<p>Is it possible for a prostitute to be raped? Sure. That doesn’t stop her from being a victim, nor should it. Neither should the past (unrelated) behavior of the perpetrator make him any more likely to be guilty. It is illogical to assume that being a “hooligan” makes one more likely to be a rapist. Ask some of the parents on this board who have “hooligan” children themselves.</p>
<p>Purpleflurp, I agree that the past behavior of the victim is also relevant (ie. in the Duke case). </p>
<p>I’m not a lawyer and I am unsure if past behavior of the defendants or of the victim are admissible in a trial.</p>
<p>More than anything, what this case, as well as the Duke case, illustrates is the dangers of trying a case in the press. If the interest is in justice then the police do need to examine the background of the victim as well as they examine the background of a murder victim. As PD James is always pointing out in her novels, it is an incredible invasion of ALL privacy once a crime begins to be investigated.</p>
<p>Due to the work I do at a woman’s shelter, I can say I come into contact with women who have suffered the idignity and humiliation of rape, and sometimes not for the first time, and sometimes, most times, by people they knew. It is no joke and it is not to be taken lightly.</p>
<p>The problem is the investigation should not be done in the glaring light of the press. Innocent until proven guilty is something the press needs to get a hold of, here. The real shame is that so many girls who are raped don’t report for this very reason, and a girl like this ought to be brought to justice primarily because of what she does to the charge for the emotionally and physically battered women who do report a rape and do subject themselves to all sorts of indignities in terms of investigation in order to bring the perpetrator to justice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>False accusations - relevant. Past promiscuity - not relevant. As you said, a prostitute can be raped. The only relevant thing is consent. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I never said that it should be assumed from their past behaviors that they were rapists. I didn’t even say that the fact that one of the boys was convicted of assault suggests that he was a rapist. I said there were lessons to be learned - as in - don’t have a keg party and pay two strippers to attend. I’d certainly give my son that advice. I have to think that at least some of the parents of the boys said to them, “what were you thinking?”</p>
<p>cartera:</p>
<p>These were your exact words:</p>
<p>“Duke was not only at fault for throwing the boys under the bus, but they were complicit in allowing the lacrosse hooligan culture that contributed to the entire mess. The coach’s hands were not clean in that regard either.”</p>
<p>I am contending that the “hooligan culture” did not “contribute to the entire mess.” In fact, the entire mess was caused by one person, a lying “dancer” who was looking for monetary gain.</p>
<p>I personally do not condone the type of party that was thrown by the lacrosse players, and I would hope that none of my kids takes part in something like that. But the onus for what happened belongs with the dancer, with supporting roles by Duke (when it condemned the boys before an investigation) and the press, which as usual jumps on juicy material, even if it has no basis in fact. </p>
<p>Many college-aged boys throw that kind of party without having to suffer the repercussions that the Duke students did. And prostitutes are sometimes raped, but their “careers” do not contribute to the entire mess.</p>
<p>Fine - we disagree. I think that Duke’s (and the coach’s) treating of the lacrosse team as if they could do no wrong and continually looking the other way with regard their well documented boorish behavior helped put them in the situation that led to the false charges. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m not the only one who feels that way. One of the researchers concluded - </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A lesson - when athletes believe they can get away with anything, other people may believe it too.</p>
<p>cartera…I don’t see how their behavior has a whole lot to do with being falsely accused of rape. Did they engage in risky behaviors? Yes. But those behaviors are not the reason for why they were accused of rape. It was the fault of the young woman who made the claim. Did the Hofstra group of young men engage in risky behaviors? Yes. Group sex comes with risks. Was it their fault the girl claimed rape when it was consensual? No. In a made up scenario if a girl goes into the bar with very very low cut revealing top and a skirt that doesn’t cover her butt and drinks too much, has she engaged in risky behaviors? Yes. But that is not the cause of rape should she then be raped. The perpetrators in that scenario are at fault, not the victim. </p>
<p>Should people engage in risky behaviors? Well, ideally perhaps not. But even if they do, they don’t deserve to be either falsely accused (case of Duke LAX guys or Hofstra guys) or raped (case of my made up scenario of a girl who took risks). A case should not fall on any risky behaviors one has chosen as those are not against the law. Nobody asked for a crime to be committed against themselves. </p>
<p>So, we can criticize the Duke boys as much as we want for their rowdy and boorish behavior but they didn’t deserve to be falsely accused. We can criticize the Hofstra guys for group sex with a girl they just met but they didn’t deserve to be falsely accused. We can criticize a young woman who dresses inappropriately and drinks too much in a public spot to stay safe, but it is not her fault if a rape crime happens against her. </p>
<p>Risk taking is not a crime. I suppose if you sit at home and just watch TV and read the Bible and lock your door, you may never be at risk of bad things happening to you. It is not like I advocate taking risks, some of which are dumb ones, but crime is crime and false accusations are also criminal. Nobody deserves either, no matter what risks they took. </p>
<p>I can think of a UVM student who was walking alone and asked a man to borrow his cell phone. She was then raped and murdered. She should not have trusted or spoken to a stranger or walked up the street with him. But that is not the cause of the crime.</p>
<p>Soozie - I agree with you. My original point was that, even in the face of the gross injustice done to the boys, there were lessons to be learned. That is really it. I think that had the school and coach done their jobs a little better and a little earlier though, the situation could have been avoided. What we all want is for the situation to be avoided, especially when it comes to our kids. The true culprits were the girl who falsely accused them and the ridiculously corrupt prosecutor and the way the Duke administration handled the allegations from the beginning. I still would have said to my son - “what were you thinking? Never again do you act in such a way that people find it so easy to think the worst of you.”</p>
<p>“I still would have said to my son - “what were you thinking? Never again do you act in such a way that people find it so easy to think the worst of you.””</p>
<p>I don’t disagree. I also think this particular kind of advice would have been beneficial to the good Professor Gates, who behaved in a confrontational, racist, and highly rude fashion that he himself, with his education and experience, knew would be likely to set off a cop. When you behave well, it is much harder for others to think poorly of you.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Then why did you call them hooligans? How would you feel if someone used a similar term
to a female that was raped?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Well, we agree there.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I don’t. Perhaps you should read Until Proven Innocent or Pressler’s book. Everything that I’ve read indicated that he was a very strict coach. Most parents know that you can’t watch your young adults all the time. Try doing that with 30 young adults.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I’m sure that most everyone involved learned a lot.</p>
<p>But I hope that those observing have also learned about the character and stature of
the three arrested from their trial under fire.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>This is untrue. The police initially told the boys that nothing will come of this. It was when higher-ups more concerned with politics and a certain nurse got hold that it became a media fiasco.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I see. So our legal system and society are supposed to be biased. This is the way
you want legitimate rape cases to go, right? What behavior did they engage in that
made them perpetrators? Their high GPAs? Their huge number of volunteer hours?
Did you see pictures of the party? Basically the pictures showed boredom. One of
the boys that she initially accused was in a city an hour away. The police said pick
another one as he couldn’t have done it. Do you condone the bias or should justice
be blind?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Why do you call them hooligans? Seligmann, by all accounts, was a choirboy. Are you
calling him a hooligan?</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>None of the lacrosse players, to my knowledge, was ever charged with rape.</p>
<p>None of them were, eventually the case was dismissed and Nifong was disbarred. The three went on to sue Duke, Durham and Nifong. Duke has settled, but I believe the Durham lawsuit is still pending.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>It’s always good to read source documents for claims like this.</p>
<p>One of the source documents stated a 0.3 precent rate in the previous
12 months. Rape is primarily a crime commited against youth for women
with 54 percent of reports from 12 to 17 years. BTW, the survey was
conducted as a telephone survey of 8,000 people. The source document
that I looked at didn’t provide further details of the survey
methodology. So the numbers are cumulative. What would be interesting
is trend information.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I did not review source documents for this statistic.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I did not found this data in the source document claimed. However
I did find rape rates and the are at 0.5% for 2006. They have declined
sharply from 1973 when they were at 2.5%.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>I read this in one of the source documents. I did not look at the
sources for the source document. But I don’t think that this is a
useful statistic for the current discussion.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>This is on the front page and links to a page on “The Offenders”. On
that page there is no substantiation for the claim. It appears to me
that this statistic was pulled from the documentation page but not
pulled from the main page. At any rate, it is always good to look at
source documents before quoting them. It is even better to look at
documents with a view opposing your own. It’s too easy to find sources
that agree with you.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>As long as the number is > 1, the number is too many.</p>