<p>Kids who’ve been convicted of a number of offenses get expelled from school, and while the district arranges their education at continuation programs, they aren’t necessarily admitted back to their originating high school after serving their time.</p>
<p>I wonder how they plan to keep tabs on a registered sex offender all day long in school. Schools won’t hire registered sex offenders because of the risk they pose – why is having a student in a large high school any less of a risk? </p>
<p>^^ I agree with all the above, but all what is cited falls under discretion for there is no law that mandates additional punishment is due. Yes, schools are not compelled only by legal remedies, but they are also not compelled to meter out punishment just because others say so.</p>
<p>As I said, everyone is strictly following multiple laws and not doing anymore than what the law says. If more punishment is wanted, then change the laws to make sure the law indicates more punishment is due. </p>
<p>Awnctdb – we agreed on the other thread but have to disagree with you here, very strongly. Certainly the school has no legal OBLIGATION to mete out additional punishment. But the perpetrator of this disgusting crime has no RIGHT to be on the football team, which is a PRIVILEGE. High school athletes are held up as representatives of the school. They are celebrated as heroes. Think about high school pep rallies, support of cheerleading squads and marching bands and the like. They are glorified as the personification of the school and the vessels through which school spirit is channeled. Certainly it is appropriate to take into consideration the moral character of the students who are being put into that role. In my view, his moral character absolutely disqualifies him from playing such a role. Really and truly. He has a right to get an education and I hope he is able eventually to become a productive member of society thru gainful employment. But he does not have the right to be glorified as a hero in the way high school football players are glorified. It is abhorrent to me. </p>
<p>PS. Obviously the school has the discretion to allow anyone they want yo play on their team. I find the way that they exercised their discretion here to be abhorrent. I would not want my child to attend any game, any pep rally, or any event associated with this team. </p>
<p>@nottelling - I was careful to say he did not have a right to be on the team, but, I think the relevant questions are at what point can a school or any other entity decide enough is enough? And who decides that point?</p>
<p>This is not really a legal question, but a moral and societal one, as you aptly point out. The bigger picture you mention of moral character, which was also said by @Niquii77 and others, is understood. However, I feel uncomfortable taking a decision for others who have lived through a tough situation and for which the perpetrator has been legally punished. From the outside looking in, people in the town surveyed everything and decided the student was punished enough already and are trying to move on. It may not be a popular decision, but it had to occur some time and I see that as their decision. Now, if they had reduced his sentence or relaxed stipulated punishment, I would be against that. </p>
<p>OK, I agree the glorification thing in football is tough to get past, but what if that is the best way he can contribute back to the town?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Just saw this second post and I fully agree with it.</p>
<p>I think it matters that he was apparently convicted (and punished) as a juvenile. Part of the whole idea of a separate juvenile system is increased focus on rehabilitation.</p>
<p>“Obviously the school has the discretion to allow anyone they want yo play on their team. I find the way that they exercised their discretion here to be abhorrent.”</p>
<p>Right.</p>
<p>I actually think it is pretty ridiculous for this kid to be required to register as a sex offender for life. I think he should be on probation until he is about 25, and then relieved of the requirement, assuming that he has behaved himself. One would think that the purpose of the registry is to keep track of serial rapists and child molesters and others who have a likelihood of recidivism. He would not appear to fall in that category. (The other guy may be a different matter, since he seemed to totally lack remorse and not get it at all.)</p>
<p>I also think that although he should be educated, he should not be simply returned to the football team. That seems like a privilege that he has lost. As far as returning to the same HS, since the victim isn’t there, it seems acceptable. However, I would like to see him participate in a school-wide education program regarding underage drinking, sexual assault, gender roles, and bullying. In fact, helping to plan and lead such a program would be the best way for him to rehabilitate himself and show his worth as a person, IMHO. He could earn some really worthwhile respect.</p>
<p>One would also think that a rapist like this kid is, in fact, likely to be a re-offender. I have no problem with him being required to register as a sex offender, since he is one.</p>
<p>And what about some sensitvity for the victim and her family? Do they not have rights also? Yes, this convicted rapist is entitled to a free and appropriate education, but that doesn’t necessarily mean it has to be located at Steubenville High School. What about alternative schools and homebound instruction? As for football, if one of my Ss was playing with this kids, I’d pull him off the team for his own protection. </p>
<p>
It’s possible that this will happen, unless the law prohibits it. Normally a judge would have the power to do this.</p>
<p>I don’t think that I, personally, would let the kid back on the football team. But there is a sentencing judge and a probation officer, presumably, who have input into these decisions.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I would think that he would likely be a re-offender if he hadn’t been caught and had continued to think that this kind of behavior toward women was acceptable. But given his demeanor in court and his stint in jail, it is possible that he now understands. He was very young, and surrounded by punks who buy into “rape culture.” One can hope that now he does not. Being on probation until he was reasonably mature would help ensure that he really is rehabilitated. Participating significantly in an effort to change the culture among his peers would help prove it.</p>
<p>The other kid seemed to be unrepentant. I have less hope for him.</p>
<p>The girl doesn’t go to that HS and never did. She doesn’t have to see him, and wouldn’t hear about him either if he was kept off the football team. Unless he re-offends.</p>
<p>I have mixed feelings about this. </p>
<p>This is the kid who had a very weak family structure. He was sort of a semi-foster kid. I am willing to cut a kid like that more slack. He really may not have had much guidance in this area. Maybe the facility where he was incarcerated–which is a sort of boot camp for teen sex offenders–WAS able to turn him around. I may not be articulating this well, but I think he may have been one of those kids who really did not understand that it was not only legally but morally wrong if there was no penetration. Maybe he now understands this. The facility where he spent the 10 months has a better than average track record for rehab. It specializes in juvenile sex offenders. It’s not as though he spent that 10 months in a regular old juvenile detention facility. </p>
<p>But, if I ruled the world, he wouldn’t be allowed to play for Steubenville. I think there is sufficient evidence that Steubenville’s coaches and school officials were involved in obstruction of justice and they and others in the town sent BOTH of the young men the message that what they did was just a “prank” and it was outrageous that they were being prosecuted for it. So, for Richmond’s own good, I don’t think he should go back to a school where all the therapy he got MAY be undone by the less than subliminal message that he’s the one who “got shafted” here. In other words, when a kid was in an environment where he got into trouble, I don’t think you send him back to it.</p>
<p>As I understand the registry requirement in Ohio, he can apply to be removed from it in a few years. ETA: according to local news , juveniles names aren’t included on any publicly accessible websites,</p>
<p>You would think raping another student would be enough to get a kid expelled. Let him go through the school with more structure for troubled kids and no extracurriculars.</p>
<p>My niece was expelled from her HS for getting in a fight in another town on a Friday night. She appealed because, although she was there, she was not involved. The expulsion reason was changed to “not breaking up a fight between two other people.” She ended up graduating from an alternative HS. Obviously she did not play football.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is a very good point. I hadn’t thought of that.</p>
<p>Magnetron, it sounds as if your niece was the victim of an injustice.</p>
<p>My niece did just fine in life (now a CPA) with her alternative diploma and kind of enjoyed her time there. They called her “the smart girl.” I just used it to illustrate how capricious the justifications can be when enforcing their biased decisions. </p>
<p>Another student at the same HS, while waiting for the bus, roughed up one of the special ed kids, threw him down into the storm drain, put the grate back on, then urinated on him. He got a one day suspension. Yes, on the football team.</p>
<p>No wonder the NFL does not punish abusers and wife beaters! </p>
<p>There is so much ethically and morally wrong with this. Someday, they will look back on this kind of thing and be as horrified as we are by the casual racism of the past. </p>
<p>You say that like we are horrified of the casual racism of today. :)</p>
<p>culturally we are. There is far more stigma to being a racist, now, and you will lose your standing in the community. Actors and public figures will be called out on it. You are too young to remember the way it used to be.</p>
<p>ETA: I don’t mean that as “I’m older than you, I know more…” I just mean it used to be different.</p>