Duke to forfeit games to Georgetown and Mount St. Mary's

[Ken '70]

[quote Jerseygirl]
I don't have any right-wing radio hosts to cite on this one, but do ya think that maybe, just maybe, some women recant because they don't want to go through the considerable stress of a trial? Or because they don't want the details of their sex lives detailed in public as evidence that they are not credible? Or because, quite simply, they don't think they're going to be believed? If someone recants, it doesn't mean no rape occurred. It means no one is going to get tried.

And, for what it's worth, I've had friends on both sides of this issue -- one of my male friends was accused of rape by a girl with whom he had broken up (she eventually recanted), and an acquaintance of mine was on her way home from a party and got picked up by two men. They followed her into her house and raped her. She went to the hospital but never pressed charges because she had been drinking and didn't think she would be believed that it wasn't consensual.[/quote]

I appreciate your honesty in relating the story of your friend who made the false claim.  But it's not quite correct to characterize this and the real rape your other friend experienced as being "both sides of this issue".  The issue we (at least I) have been discussing is to what degree we should take the Duke accuser's claim at anything approaching face value, as the Duke administration, campus zealots, and much of the press has.  The issue here is not a general consideration of rape in America.  I don't doubt there are unreported rapes and that the under-reporting may be significantly higher for this type of crime than others for the reasons you give.

I "put aside", as you asked me to, the specifics of the Duke accuser to the extent I considered some general statistics about rape and rape accusations that had bearing on this case and which supported my view that this rape claim was a fabrication.  On this score the news becomes more convincing every day http://www.herald-sun.com/durham/4-722409.html (but hey, Holy Cross beat Minnesota, so anything is possible)

As for the right wing radio host, he's not the source of this data but simply summarizing research/experience by:

- Eugene Kanin, Purdue sociology prof.
- Washington Post
- Linda Fairstein, NY DA Sex Crime Unit
- Craig Silverman, former CO prosecutor

I don't know to what extent Kanin, Fairstein or Silverman may have "right wing" views, but I'm pretty certain the Washington Post doesn't.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote Ken '70]
The issue we (at least I) have been discussing is to what degree we should take the Duke accuser's claim at anything approaching face value[/quote]

Fair enough. Everything needs to be investigated and nothing can be taken at face value.

as the Duke administration

Disagree. Everything the Duke administration has put out (at least that I've seen) has said "alledged", "if this is proven", etc. The only actions the administration has taken has been based on known facts (the inappropriate party, the disgusting email, simply the fact that (as agreed by the team) it would not be appropriate to continue the season at this point, etc), but the Duke administration has done nothing based on any presumption of guilt. Nor taking any accusation at face value.

campus zealots

Agreed. There has been jumping to conclusions on the part of certain portions of the Durham/Duke community. This does not include everyone who is outraged by these accusations, but only those who demand action based on no known facts.

and much of the press has.

Disagree. While there may be isolated examples, basically the reports have told the facts of "the victim alledges ___", "police say they found ___", "a source reports ____", "players say ___".

In the first week or two, almost all the facts that came out cast the team in a negative light. That may not be fair, but it doesn't mean the media shouldn't report the known facts. It is not the medias job to defend the accused, nor to interrogate the accuser, but merely to report what is known as such.

I don't know to what extent Kanin, Fairstein or Silverman may have "right wing" views, but I'm pretty certain the Washington Post doesn't.

Well, the Post *is* considered 'conservative', just like the Times is considered 'liberal', but I don't believe that eiother would let that impact their reporting of facts.


On the point of the 'campus zealots' jumping to conclusions. I only wish that you would realize that you've been just as guilty in that. It doesn't make it better because the conclusion you've jumped to is different. Nor does it make a darn bit of difference if the conclusion that you or they jumped to turn out to be correct - they are both equally inappropriate behaviors.

I know the remark was reasonably tongue-in-cheek, but I think the Holy Cross/Minnesota reference is actually pretty apt. It doesn't matter how likely or unlikely people find things, the system deserves its chance to determine the truth as best it can in this particular case. And its not helped by people declaring the accused guilty pre-emptively, or calling the alledged victim as a liar (, crack whore, etc) pre-emptively.

[Jacob 03]

[quote DeltaOne81]Well, the Post *is* considered 'conservative', just like the Times is considered 'liberal', but I don't believe that eiother would let that impact their reporting of facts.
[/quote]

(Disclaimer about how inaccurate quick binary political labels for particular media are part of the problem and blah blah blah, and they're not really applicable in this or any real life situation...)

You have your Posts mixed up there.  In the world of "Metropolitan areas shalt have two major publications, and one shalt be respected by other journalists and liberal, and one shalt be conservative and usually tabloid formatted and owned by Murdoch, how things play out in real life notwithstanding," The Washington Post is liberal.  When these newspapers are classified in such simple ways they are *considered* to be paired up as follows:
New York Times (L)
New York Post (C)
Washington Post (L)
Washington Times (C)
Boston Globe (L)
Boston Herald (C)
St. Petes Times (L)
Tampa whatever (C)
etc...

I can't think of anyone who bothers to use such a format who would put the New York Times and Washington Post on opposite sides.

[ugarte]

First of all, Spelling Cop time: alleged. Thanks.

[quote DeltaOne81]

as the Duke administration

Disagree. Everything the Duke administration has put out (at least that I've seen) has said "alledged", "if this is proven", etc.[/quote] This part strikes me as a bit naive. I assure you that (a) the coach was forced to resign; (b) the school doesn't give a shit whether or not the players agree that the season should be cancelled and (c) a party featuring strippers isn't enough to get a season cancelled.

I don't know what happened (and figure the truth, as is often the case with fifth-hand information I hear, is in between the accounts of the accuser), but Duke is engaged in damage control and is willing to act in ways that presume guilt.

I return to expressing no opinion whatsoever regarding guilt or innocence as, from my perch in SoHo, it is hard to get an accurate read.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote ugarte]
[quote DeltaOne81]

Disagree. Everything the Duke administration has put out (at least that I've seen) has said "alledged", "if this is proven", etc.[/quote]

This part strikes me as a bit naive. I assure you that (a) the coach was forced to resign; (b) the school doesn't give a shit whether or not the players agree that the season should be cancelled and (c) a party featuring strippers isn't enough to get a season cancelled.[/quote]

It's not as naive as it may've sounded.

(a) very possibly, dunno

(b) agreed, but they did... which gives credence to (c)

(c) Correct. But what is reason is the controversy surrounding the allegations (better spelling? ). If they had played, they would have been doing so knowing the may end up in court and jail - not a way to have a good season. The game would have been surrounded by protests which may have been intimidating, and you would be subjecting the other team to it, etc.

The reason to cancel the season was because of everything swirling around them, causing protests, and significantly distracting them from the course of their normal lives, and subjecting players, their family, and visiting teams to (yet another) ugly situation. In away games, the team may have faced threats or insults lobbed at them due to the situation. The fact that the players agreed it wasn't a good idea to play backs this up, because they surely don't seem to agree that they're guilty.

I think it was a move of caution, not making a bad situation worse, and not inflaming tensions - not one of pre-judgement.


To be even more clear I think -

- the party/stripper lead to the two games of no-contests, not to the rest of it
- the discusting email lead to that particularly player being suspended from school
- and everything I just discussed lead to all further no-contents/total cancellation

[Jerseygirl]

[quote Ken '70][quote Jerseygirl]

And, for what it's worth, I've had friends on both sides of this issue -- one of my male friends was accused of rape by a girl with whom he had broken up (she eventually recanted), and an acquaintance of mine was on her way home from a party and got picked up by two men. They followed her into her house and raped her. She went to the hospital but never pressed charges because she had been drinking and didn't think she would be believed that it wasn't consensual.[/quote]

I appreciate your honesty in relating the story of your friend who made the false claim.  But it's not quite correct to characterize this and the real rape your other friend experienced as being "both sides of this issue".  The issue we (at least I) have been discussing is to what degree we should take the Duke accuser's claim at anything approaching face value, as the Duke administration, campus zealots, and much of the press has.  The issue here is not a general consideration of rape in America.  I don't doubt there are unreported rapes and that the under-reporting may be significantly higher for this type of crime than others for the reasons you give.

[\\quote]

Ken, please read what I wrote. I said a MALE friend of mine was falsely accused of rape. I don't know the woman who accused him and eventually recanted the accusation. That is one side of the issue of reporting/falsely reporting/not reporting a rape. The other side is the acquaintance who didn't press charges after being raped because she was afraid of not being believed since she was drunk at the time she was attacked. Maybe it's not like opposite sides of a coin, maybe more like different sides on the octagon of rape claims or whatever. I brought up the first issue because I want you to understand that I do recognize that making a false rape claim is an extremely reprehensible, damaging thing that does happen.

This is what I have a problem with:

"Women are their own worst enemy when it comes to cedibility [sic] and rape charges. Approx. 40% to 50% of all rape charges are eventually recanted by the women who initially brought them (see [www.glennsacks.com] as one of many on this topic). And how many false claims are never recanted?"

And how many real claims are never brought to the attention of law enforcement? How many of these rencanted claims are actually real? How many women are raped but decide it's easier to try and forget what happened than have their body treated like a crime scene and eventually testify or give a deposition/affidavit, etc. and have to live what happened all over again? Sorry, I'm just pretty fucking sick of people, mostly men, who seem to think that pressing rape charges is as psychologically easy for the victim as for other crimes, or that recanted claims or claims that go unreported are simply false or didn't happen. In my acquaintance's case, she was afraid she'd be accused of inviting her attackers in for a little "after party." Do you think she would have felt the same way if she had just been robbed?


Sorry to take up bandwidth on this, because I am discussing rape in general and not this particular case (on which I have no opinion, because, like other posters have said, all I have to go on is fifth hand or worse information). And yeah, I do agree that the Duke case looks more doubtful as time goes on, but then again, that's because the defense attorneys are starting to talk. But why should they be more credible than the DA? Sure, he's up for reelection, but if they win this case, they'll be sitting pretty too. Book deal, anyone?

[Liz '05]

[quote Jerseygirl] How many women are raped but decide it's easier to try and forget what happened than have their body treated like a crime scene and eventually testify or give a deposition/affidavit, etc. and have to live what happened all over again? Sorry, I'm just pretty fucking sick of people, mostly men, who seem to think that pressing rape charges is as psychologically easy for the victim as for other crimes, or that recanted claims or claims that go unreported are simply false or didn't happen. [/quote]

I agree with Jerseygirl.

One of my closest friends was raped at a party she threw, in the house she grew up in, by a friend of a friend who she'd never met before.  I don't pretend to know exactly why she didn't press charges, although I suspect the alcohol involved would make it difficult to prove it wasn't consensual, but she didn't talk to anyone at Cornell about it for nearly a year, and even now, mostly tries to ignore it.  Clearly, her psyche wasn't (and isn't) ready to handle the emotional and psychological turmoil associated with pressing rape charges.  

Assuming a rape occurred, it takes a lot of courage to press charges, knowing that you will likely be dragged through the mud.  As such, you have to take any rape claims at face value.  The victim's credibility should certainly not be based on her(/his) profession, sexual history, etc.  Find inconsistencies in their story or something.

[Tangent: I never understood why someone who's "slutty" would make a less credible rape victim.  Wouldn't a woman who's slept around be less likely to later regret it and press charges than someone, who, say, just lost their virginity?]

[Ken '70]

http://www.nbc17.com/news/8602612/detail.html

Who woulda' thunk it?

[Beeeej]

Although it's not exactly relevant to the Duke situation, there's an interesting and thoughtful column in today's Sun about the inherent difficulty of defining consent.

http://www.cornellsun.com/news/2006/04/12/Opinion/Questions.About.no.Means.No-1844609.shtml

Beeeej

[nyc94]

ESPN says the case will go before a grand jury on Monday.

[WillR]

is it just me or is this case now just as dead as the Duke lacrosse season?

I have to admit that when i first heard this it all sounded credible and i figured one of those bastards was guilty.  Now i guess that was a bit premature.  No doubt if it turns out that no crime was commited, by the lax team at least, then they got royally screwed and i kind of feel bad for them.

[billhoward]

[quote WillR]is it just me or is this case now just as dead as the Duke lacrosse season?

I have to admit that when i first heard this it all sounded credible and i figured one of those bastards was guilty.  Now i guess that was a bit premature.  No doubt if it turns out that no crime was commited, by the lax team at least, then they got royally screwed and i kind of feel bad for them.[/quote]

It took a sensational charge that now appears unlikely or unfounded to draw out the problems of a team out of control on a campus whose atmosphere is more removed from Cornell than we thought:

- The team has an impressive record of citations and arrests for stupid, uncontrolled things such as urination in public and underage drinking. Not that a lot of Cornellians aren't guilty of at least the latter. At least the Duke players got caught at it a lot (1 citation for every 3 players) which suggests it happened an awful lot.

- There was the inredibly stupid, dumb, racist remark by one of the players that he'd like to kill and skin, or was it skin and kill, another exotic dancer. Even stupider to put it in an email, not voice it in a bar.

- The campus seems to have used the issue, or non-issue, of the maybe, now-maybe not rape to say the Duke lacrosse team lived apart from and above a lot of the rules of decency. And that brought forth the comparisons of just how apart the Duke campus and students are from the town -- more of a gulf than the kind of town-gown gap in Ithaca, said another poster who's been at both Cornell and Duke.

- The off-campus house was a public nuisance, just about everyone felt, other than the players.

- There was the complaint by a Duke prof, a former lax player, that the coach was scheduling morning practices that forced players to skip class.


... so take away the accusation and the attendant publicity, and the other issues probably would not have come to the fore. But they still were real, probably should have been dealt with, and probably wouldn't.

[DeltaOne81]

[quote WillR]is it just me or is this case now just as dead as the Duke lacrosse season?

I have to admit that when i first heard this it all sounded credible and i figured one of those bastards was guilty.  Now i guess that was a bit premature.  No doubt if it turns out that no crime was commited, by the lax team at least, then they got royally screwed and i kind of feel bad for them.[/quote]

Its not dead, but it becomes significantly, significantly more difficult to prove. ESPN legal analyst said the same thing. That if you have other evidence found at the scene, circumstantial evidence, testimony, etc, you can still prove it, but its much more difficult.

Of course, if the pictures/video of her already injured and significantly out of it does indeed exist, then its pretty much dead. Although I've heard some legal analysts ask, if it does, then why not release it? Of course, if it doesn't, then why lie? Guess we'll see.


Bill brings up a good point that its hard to feel too too bad for them as a history of irresponsible behavior and problems with the team deserved to be taken care of, but no means would that justify false rape allegations (unless she was just high/hallucinating and didn't know she was lying), and wouldn't've deserved the cancellation of the whole season.

[Ben Rockey 04]

Lawyers for Lacrosse Players at Duke Say They Expect Indictment in Rape Case http://www.nytimes.com/2006/04/13/sports/sportsspecial1/13lacrosse.html

I don't think any D.A. would be stupid enough to seek an indictment unless he thinks he can actually get the conviction, especially when considering how much money these kids probably have to spend on high quality defense lawyers.  Nifong has had plenty of time to back off if he really doubted the alleged victim's story, and I'd personally take this move as a sign that he feels he has a strong case.

[Ken\'70]

[quote billhoward]

- There was the inredibly stupid, dumb, racist remark by one of the players that he'd like to kill and skin, or was it skin and kill, another exotic dancer. Even stupider to put it in an email, not voice it in a bar.

[/quote]

You're perpetuating another myth about this case.  Here is the email text in its entirety:

To whom it may concern

tomorrow night, after tonights show, ive decided to have some strippers over to edens 2c.  all are welcome.  however there will be no nudity.  i plan on killing the bitches as soon as they walk in and proceding to cut their skin off while cumming in my duke issue spandex.. all in besides arch and tack please respond

41

Please point out the racist remark.

What exactly are the substantiated racist remarks they're accused of?