Savannah Dietrich case

Parent Cafe
1

<p>I haven’t seen any threads about this. I think the case raises important questions. I’m hoping that the thread will remain civil and therefore won’t have to be closed. I know I can’t control the postings, but I ask that people focus on the policy issues raised rather than the kids’ behavior.</p>

<p>As I understand it, Savannah had a party at her home while her parents were absent. The booze flowed freely. Savannah passed out. Two of the boys present, whom Savannah describes as “friends of friends,” removed some of her clothing, including her underpants. They inserted their fingers into her vagina and took photos with their cell phones. They then put her clothes back on.</p>

<p>When Savannah came to, she realized that her clothing was in disarray and was upset but she didn’t know what had happened. Some time later, she found out about the photos and the fact that the boys had shared them with others, including a lot of the boys at her high school. She was identified in the photos. </p>

<p>She went to the police. A search warrant was issued to search the boys’ cell phones and there were in fact photos of Savannah’s nude pelvic area with the boys’ fingers inside her. The boys were arrested and charged with a crime. A plea deal was reached; the boys were given 50 hours community service each. Savannah alleges–but the district attorney denies–that she had no input into the sentencing. She was furious and felt the sentence was too lenient. She alleges that when she complained to the district attorney he told her that it was time to “move on” with her life and she should see a therapist if she couldn’t.</p>

<p>The boys also were to have some sort of house arrest–they could go to school, etc., but they were not to have contact with each other and couldn’t socialize, etc. An exception was made to allow college visiting.( At least one of the boys is an athlete who is being recruited.) Since they were juveniles, the record was sealed.</p>

<p>A social worker was put in charge of enforcing the probation details. The boys’ attorney called her and she apparently agreed that both of them should be allowed to go to their junior prom. They went and posted photos of the two of them together at the prom.</p>

<p>Savannah saw the photos on the facebook page of one of them, which was not private. She lost it. She sent out a twitter, identifying the boys and saying what they did to her. She also complained about the lenient punishment they had received. (I have not read the actual twitter.) The attorney for one of the boys immediately moved in court to hold her in contempt for naming the boys since the plea deal was part of a sealed juvenile record. He claims that Savannah called the boys “rapists” and that she has “ruined” the life of his client, who was in line to get “an athletic scholarship to an Ivy League school” until Savannah sent out her twitter. He wanted Savannah punished severely for identifying his client publicly.</p>

<p>Savannah’s twitter went viral. The press got interested. The contempt motion was withdrawn, presumably because the effort to silence the victim of a sex crime infuriated a lot of people. A local newspaper made a motion to see the file. The judge allowed this in large part. She held that the case raised important questions, because Savannah claimed she had no input into the plea deal and that the DA had told her she should just get over it and move on with her life.The DA has essentially called Savannah a liar, insisting that she was informed of developments in the plea bargain. </p>

<p>Savannah then gave a press conference at her attorney’s office. She does not name the boys in the portion I saw. She is not the least bit apologetic for outing the boys. She says they made her life a living hell and there is no way to get the photos back and destroy them. Although she doesn’t expressly say so, she implies that it is perfectly reasonable for her to retaliate by sending a twitter that they can’t put back in the box either. </p>

<p>Now, obviously,drinking so much you pass out is not a good idea. And, just as obviously, what the boys did is absolutely despicable. But when a juvenile record is sealed, does that mean the victim of a crime has to keep quiet about it? Does it make any difference this is a sex crime? Does a victim who is unhappy about a plea deal have a right to criticize the DA? Does the victim of a crime committed by a juvenile have the right to know what punishment the juvenile got when the record and terms of the plea bargain are sealed?</p>

<p>Here’s a link to the latest development:
<a href=“http://www.wave3.com/story/19421244/savannah-dietrich-cout-files-released[/url]”>http://www.wave3.com/story/19421244/savannah-dietrich-cout-files-released&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>Apparently, the boys’ families were upset because Savannah’s mom called their high school and told the administration what they had done to her daughter. She suggested they be kicked off their teams.</p>

2

<p>I read about this a few weeks ago. Are there current developments? Can she file a civil suit against the guys?</p>

3

<p>Personally, I think it’s disgusting that any victim should have to keep silent about what happened to her. </p>

<p>As a survivor myself, I understand her pain. I understand her fear. I understand the fact that she feels she got so shafted by the criminal justice system that she almost thinks she shouldn’t have come forward. </p>

<p>I understand that they are minors, but when you tell a victim to keep her mouth shut, what incentive is there for a victim to come forward?</p>

<p>Oh and YES, absolutely the victim has a right to criticize the DA. Absolutely. My abuser was never brought to justice but a slap on the wrist to him would have been a slap in the face to me.</p>

4

<p>I concur that no victim should be required to remain silent and understand why the young women did what she did. My sympathy lies entirely with her, despite her mistake in throwing a party, with alcohol, while her parents were away.</p>

5

<p>The idea that the VICTIM should be denied free speech is simply astonishing. The comments on the linked story include a link to a great YouTube piece on the subject.</p>

<p>The sentence meted out to the two boys was ludicrous. What kind of “house arrest” allows you to go to the Junior Prom and play on sports teams? It seems clear that the prosecutor has a major conflict of interest and should have recused himself. And yes, of COURSE a person has the right to criticize the DA.</p>

<p>Yes, what she did what stupid and put her in a vulnerable position. Quite possibly the boys were drunk too. But no decent person would have the impulse to do what they did. It would simply not cross their mind. One hopes that other girls will learn from Savannah’s example: don’t drink until you pass out, and don’t be afraid to speak out. I admire her for taking charge of her fate.</p>

6

<p>Today’s update [Judge:</a> Teen can’t contest prosecutor involvement - SFGate](<a href=“http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Judge-Teen-can-t-contest-prosecutor-involvement-3830958.php]Judge:”>http://www.sfgate.com/news/article/Judge-Teen-can-t-contest-prosecutor-involvement-3830958.php)</p>

<p>Sentencing for the boys is scheduled for September 14. The victim plans to speak at the sentencing and ask that the plea deal be modified.</p>

7

<p>Aside from how appalling it all is, the idea of the ability to keep the idenity of a juvenile offender confidential these days is an interesting one. Way back when, people could tell each other, over the phone or in person or by letter, but there wasn’t a way to really tell LOTS of people. Now with twitter and facebook, anyone can “publish” information that the established press can’t publish.</p>

8

<p>

I thought the Ivy’s didn’t give athletic scholarships.</p>

9

<p>They don’t. He may have been a recruited athlete, although I tend to doubt that any Ivy coach would take a kid who had this kind of legal trouble on his record. And if he didn’t reveal it, well…</p>

<p>BTW, Will Frey plays…wait for it…lacrosse. :rolleyes: He has a youtube of himself playing available. Presumably for recruiting.</p>

10

<p>In my opinion,</p>

<p>the DA made the deal and the courts sealed the record. Savanah is neither the DA nor part of the court system. She is a private citizen, as a result she can do whatever she wants with the information she has.</p>

11

<p>Oh, I wasn’t going to mention it…but they both play lacrosse. Indeed, they both play on some sort of traveling team. Someone posted a link to the team’s page; the page has now been taken down. It had a list of donors. One was…the Kentucky Juvenile Justice Department. The poster said that one of the people on the grants committee that dishes out the state $ is the mother of a lacrosse player at Trinity. The name was listed; I just don’t remember it. </p>

<p>Thus,according to the now removed website, the Department of Juvenile Justice gave public funds to a traveling lacrosse team. </p>

<p>According to Savannah, when she found out about the photos, she contacted the boys and asked them not to share them anymore. They blew her off. After the police contacted them, they started emailing her… That’s not hearsay…the emails are in the documents just released.</p>

<p>A judge issues a gag order against the sexual assault victim and her mother, but nobody issued an order that the [then] alleged perps not contact the complaining witness?</p>

12

<br>

<br>

<p>Did she know that there was a gag order?</p>

<p>Is the DA elected or appointed?</p>

<p>The two guys basically admitted that they did it so that isn’t in question.</p>

<p>And the question of whether or not she can file a civil suit is a good one.</p>

13

<p>What a disgrace. I hope they get a much more severe sentence. 50 hours community service for what they did is just disgusting. This was a sexual assault. </p>

<p>I hope the prosecutor loses his job as well. He sounds like someone who should not be in the job as he apparently has more sympathy for molesters than their victims.</p>

14

<p>

</p>

<p>In her tweet, after tweeting their names, she says something like I’m not going to keep quiet about people who ruined my life. The rights of rapists matter more than the rights of victims in Louisville. She also said something like if she has to go to jail to tell the truth, then she’ll go to jail. “Go ahead and lock me up.”</p>

<p>So, she thought there was a gag order. The boys’ attorneys moved moved for contempt the next day, so they obviously thought there was a gag order. They wanted to silence not only Savannah, but her mom who called Trinity H.S., told them the charges and demanded the boys be expelled…and eventually they were.</p>

<p>After the press got involved, the judge stated that she had NOT issued a gag order. She claims she only said that the juvenile court proceedings were confidential and that nobody could talk about what happened in court, which would include the plea bargain. Savannah’s legal aid attorney, who was representing her at that point, and the boys’ attorneys, Savannah herself and her mom all said the judge said nobody could talk about the incident and described the penalties for violating that.</p>

<p>The Louisville Courier intervened and in an extraordinary decision, the file was opened to the public. The result of that is that some sort of videotape or transcript of the hearing will be released and it may be possible to find out exactly what the judge said.
…</p>

<p>Part of the reason why the contempt motion was dropped was that the gag order was not in writing. So, it’s hard to know whether Savannah and/or her mom violated it.</p>

<p>It’s going to be interesting to see what exactly the judge said. Transcript is supposed to be released today.</p>

<p>This is really extraordinary because usually juvenile hearings are completely closed. If nothing else, Savannah has succeeded in having some light shed on a secret process. </p>

<p>There’s a big distinction between blabbing what happened in the hearing and talking about the crime. Savannah’s knowledge of the crime isn’t based on info she got from the court proceedings. So, I think a good argument can be made that the judge had no right to prohibit Savannah from talking about what the boys did to her IF IN FACT the judge did that. </p>

<p>I think the Courier has a good chance of getting a Pullitzer out of this if it continues to do a good job investigating.</p>

<p>A local TV station has published the names of the boys.
<a href=“Parents of juveniles accused of sexual assault upset that names are public”>Parents of juveniles accused of sexual assault upset that names are public;

15

<br>

<br>

<p>One could parse words here - a tweet is writing. Perhaps the formal gag order covers all forms of communications.</p>

16

<p>This is certainly an interesting case.</p>

<p>I read somewhere where it said Kentucky is one of only 11 states that bar any access to juvenile proceedings. Does anyone have any evidence that opening access to juvenile proceedings has improved the lives of juvenile sexual assault victims?</p>

<p>Can someone explain the difference between a plea deal and a sentencing? I thought the 50 hours of community service and house arrest arranged by the plea deal was the sentence.</p>

17

<p>Was Savannah under 18? How is this not child pornography as well as rape? Are they not subject to lifetime sex-offender registration? I do not understand protecting their identity.</p>

18

<p>

</p>

<p>Great point! There should have been another charge against these guys.</p>

19

<p>As a woman and a mother of a daughter, this makes me sick…especially in light of all the ridiculousness over Todd Akin/Paul Ryan and “forcible rape.” And the idea that we are supposed to care about these little twerps’ potential lacrosse scholarships–despite the fact that they seem completely lacking in character and remorse–is ridiculous.</p>

<p>This video does a nice job summing up the situation from a social media standpoint.</p>

<p>[Twitter</a> Rape Victim Punished!? - YouTube](<a href=“Twitter Rape Victim Punished!? - YouTube”>Twitter Rape Victim Punished!? - YouTube)</p>

20

<p>It makes me sick as well. And when you read that the boys “thought it would be funny”. Really? They deserve to have their names out their and be on a sex offenders registry. They were not 6 year olds that did not understand what they were doing - they were 16. What sort of place is this where the court puts more emphasis on protecting these sexual predators that it does on their victim. </p>

<p>They need a harsher punishment and that prosecutor needs a new career. Sounds like another rape excusist to me and therefor not fit for this job…</p>