• news
  • SATURDAY JUNE 2 2007 2:00 PM

Maybe She Wanted to be Raped

Submitted by Bitch_PhD

Edited by erin_broadley

Tags: rape, consent



You may or may not have heard the story about the UK barrister who argued that a 13-year-old girl was "glad of the attention" when she was gang-raped by three boys -- because, after all, she was fat.

Well, now we've got a California DA who refuses to prosecute a gang rape, apparently because

it would be difficult to prove the high school student was too drunk to consent.


Now, admittedly witness testimony can be challenged. But does this sound like a hard-to-prove case?

"We heard and saw a girl tapping on this door in the kitchen saying 'There is a girl in there with eight guys," explains Chief Elk.

They say they tried to get into the room, but were confronted by a baseball player.

"[He said] 'Mind your own business; she wants to be in here' and slams the door," says Grolle.

What they saw through a crack in the door horrified them.

"When I looked in, I saw about ten pairs of legs surrounding a girl, lying on the mattress on the floor and a guy on top of her with his pants down and his hips thrusting on top of her," recall Chief Elk. "And when I saw that I knew immediately something wasn't right. It just didn't look right."

"I saw that this young girl did not want to be in there, and that's when we just went 'We're getting this girl out of there,'" says Grolle.

April and Lauren -- along with a third soccer player named Lauren Breayans -- broke down the door and were shocked with what they found.

"This poor girl was not moving. She had vomit dribbling down her face. We had to scoop vomit out of her mouth [and] lift her up. Her pants were completely off her body," says Chief Elk. "She had her one shoe one, her jeans were wrapped around one of her ankles and her underwear was left around her ankles. To the left of the bed there was some condom thrown on the ground."

"When they lifted her head up, her eyes moved and she said 'I'm sorry,'" says Grolle. "One of the guys who was in the room said 'This is her fault. She got drunk and she did this to herself.'"


Forensic tests determined that the vomit wasn't hers. Bet she consented to that too.

The 17-year-old girl Monday gave Grolle and Chief Elk Saint Christopher Medals, which they were wearing Tuesday night.

"We were basically her protectors that night and she gave these to us to represent that -- although there is no way to compare what happened that night -- she is grateful that we are her voice and speaking for her about what we saw that night," says Chief Elk.


The victim isn't capable of testifying, on her own behalf, that she didn't consent to being gang-raped and vomited on?

I'm not a lawyer. And I accept -- celebrate, even -- that DAs and judges and juries have to operate within the boundaries of reasonable doubt. But in what fucking universe is it "reasonable" to believe that a young woman consents to being raped with a pool cue or vomited on? That a 13-year-old would agree to fuck three guys because, you know, she's fat and girls nowadays dress slutty?

Anyone who thinks that shit is reasonable is a suck fuck and should be locked up themselves, as a preventative measure.

In any discussion of a case like this, some asshole will argue that hey, some chicks are kinky. And since we also know that kinky chicks are lying sluts, it's totally reasonable to believe that a girl would not only consent to this crap, but then file a false rape report afterwards.

The motives of guys who would fuck a woman in such a state that she'd "consent" to such a thing, on the other hand, never seems to come up.

Bitch_PhD knows some guys and girls who are into pretty kinky shit--and for the record, people like that believe more strongly in the importance of explicit consent than the general population. As they damn well should.

  • PERMALINK
  • PRINT
  • Digg This
  • Email To A Friend
 

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 17

Next

Comments
DeadBilly

DeadBilly

Burnt Cabins, PA
February 2004

JUN 02, 2007 03:38 PM

SkaRambo said:
Just one bullet in their throat, no courts fees, no containment costs, it's simple and affordable.



Sadly, the shooter, justified or not, would most likely be the one in front of the jury.

OntotheNext

OntotheNext

USA
April 2006

JUN 02, 2007 03:44 PM

hmmm i like attention...

maybe i should go to a party and get shitfaced, vomitted on, pussy fucked by a pool cue, and raped by a bunch of pimplefaced douchefucks...

i am chubby and kinky afterall...

They should be shot.

Madeleine

Madeleine

SUICIDEGIRL

Canada

JUN 02, 2007 03:48 PM

This is disgusting. The three women who saved that girl are, indeed, heroes - especially in a world that tends to turn an increasingly deaf ear to things it feels are not it's business.

Gillionaire

Gillionaire

Manchester, NH
February 2007

JUN 02, 2007 03:48 PM

Ick. Being gang-raped is disgusting and humiliating enough. Then the vomit got added to the equation.

I just don't understand people sometimes. I really don't.

almostfamous

almostfamous

NEWSWIRE

United Kingdom

JUN 02, 2007 03:50 PM

Ascanius said:
I don't know how it works in the UK, but in all the US law I'm familiar with if you are drunk, and it sounds like this girl was certainly drunk, you cannot actively consent to sex. That's not the hard part to prove.



So if you have one drink you can't consent to sex?

What if you consent and then get drunk?

el_duderino2

el_duderino2

Kyrgyzstan
April 2006

JUN 02, 2007 03:51 PM

that made me sad beyond words.

almostfamous

almostfamous

NEWSWIRE

United Kingdom

JUN 02, 2007 03:58 PM

SocietysPliers said:
There exists no question whatsoever in my mind as to the posibility of a 'good' lawyer getting the guys acquitted; that has NOTHING to do with whether or not they should be tried. In them edical field I often have to do stuff that may prove pointless. I've performed CPR for exhausting amounts of time knowing full well that the chances of the patient surviving were roughly equivalent to experiencing a sudden blizzard here in Florida. I also took an oath which h made me keep alive and treat (and do so with an air of compassion) three times a week someone without whom the world would be decidedly better off. I would like to think a prosecutor should be somehow bound to try anyone(s) who may pose a threat to Society.



It's sad, but the courts are full and the prosecutors have departmental budgets. That gives them time and money they have to ration. I don't doubt the person that made this call wishes they didn't have to go this way, there's no crime that unifies people in disgust like rape, and whatever they may have to say in public I'd wager off the record they wouldn't hesitate to call these guys rapists.
We can only hope that by making this call, those resources were allocated to a case that did succeed in getting a threat to society off the street. I know that doesn't make up for it, but at least it would be something, which, I guess, is what the prosecutors have to tell themselves at times like these.

thatoneguy23

thatoneguy23

Ewa Beach, HI
October 2005

JUN 02, 2007 04:09 PM

You never know... maybe the 13 and 17 year old girls should be brought up on rape charges.

It is BLATANTLY obveous that they infact raped the 3 and 8 (respectively) guys that were with them... they seduced these poor innocent men and then forced them to have sex with them. With pool cues... poor bastards.

(I am sorry, but I couldn't help but make SOME sort of smart assed remark here)

Look fucked up things happen... it is a VERY ugly world we live in, but its nothing new. Shit, take a gander at the average history book of any culture and you'll see that things have been going on this way forever.

Now that I've gotten my cynical thoughts out of the way, I'll agree with the general consensus and say that these guy should be punished...

Jennifer_

Jennifer_

Venezuela
November 2006

JUN 02, 2007 04:15 PM

almostfamous said:

Ascanius said:
I don't know how it works in the UK, but in all the US law I'm familiar with if you are drunk, and it sounds like this girl was certainly drunk, you cannot actively consent to sex. That's not the hard part to prove.



So if you have one drink you can't consent to sex?

What if you consent and then get drunk?


My impression is that the laws are quite strictly enforced in Britain - even if you just had one drink, it would be assumed no consent could be given, as the courts are trying new methods to raise their absimal 3% conviction rate for rape.

Also, its not possible to 'consent and then get drunk', as consent always takes place immediately before and during the act of sex. If you consented a few hours ago, but then get drunk and say stop, that will always - and has always been - rape.

Morgan said:
This makes me want to cry and fucking punch someone at the same time. I hate that this kind of thing happens in our world.


I feel the same way.

Signon

Signon

Austin, TX
June 2005

JUN 02, 2007 04:21 PM

...frankly, I'm surprised that they didn't try a plea bargain with at least one of the suspects. Thirteen's thirteen, and this isn't necessarily going on a kid's permanent record.

Regardless, if the girl's unconscious, she's no longer in a position to consent to anything, and moreover, witness testimony and circumstantial evidence both point clearly toward a rape.

Moderncutthroat

Moderncutthroat

Philadelphia, PA
May 2006

JUN 02, 2007 04:22 PM

almostfamous said:

Ascanius said:
I don't know how it works in the UK, but in all the US law I'm familiar with if you are drunk, and it sounds like this girl was certainly drunk, you cannot actively consent to sex. That's not the hard part to prove.



So if you have one drink you can't consent to sex?

What if you consent and then get drunk?



She was so drunk that she could barely MOVE. One drink does not equal shitfaced and you fucking know it. Stop being a smartass.

The Law in the United States says that if you were so drunk or drugged that you passed out and are unable to consent, it was rape. Both people must be conscious and willing participants.

The key question is: did she consent or not? Regardless of whether you were drunk or sober, if the sex was nonconsensual, it is rape.

That is the law and I am confused to why this isn't being prosecuted. I'm going to ask my lawyer family for answers.

Oh and it still shocks me that people think that Kinky people need alcohol to get their kink on. Part of the fun of doing things outrageous is that you are CONSCIOUS while doing it. I mean whats the point of being gang-banged if I don't have the memories later on.

Nokturn

Nokturn

United Kingdom
April 2006

JUN 02, 2007 04:24 PM

'This is her fault. She got drunk and she did this to herself.'"


OK I take back what I've said about gun laws in the past; there are certain situations where people should be able to carry them, like for this guy.

Although castration and the like would be a good way to prevent re-offense, it isn't really the answer.
The answer to most violent crimes is very simple- more jail time in worse jails.
It really worries me at the moment that in the UK they seem to be cutting jail time for just about everything as they 'can't afford to keep prisoners inside'.
It's menial stuff now but you can bet it won't stay that way.
In many ways rape can be worse than murder- the old 'at least with murder the victim doesn't have to live with it' thing.
So fingers crossed there will be more very shit jails on the way for these 'people' soon.

Lord_Frous

Lord_Frous

Brazil
September 2003

JUN 02, 2007 04:30 PM

Very well-chosen topic, and kudos for the very last paragraph of the posting!

Cheers,
Lord_Frous

GadflySystem

GadflySystem

Santa Rosa, CA
April 2007

JUN 02, 2007 04:37 PM

The motives of guys who would fuck a woman in such a state that she'd "consent" to such a thing, on the other hand, never seems to come up.



+1

When I read that the vomit wasn't hers my brain fused, WTF!?

puke

mydogfarted

mydogfarted

Oakland, NJ
June 2003

JUN 02, 2007 05:14 PM

"You can't really dust for vomit."

Previous

PAGE: 

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6

 ... 17

Next

featured interviews