Underage Sexual Assault Victim Faces Jail Time...For Tweeting the Names of Her Attackers (UPDATED)

[AgedGrunt]

I'm pretty okay with sex offender having to deal with society knowing they're sex offenders. And apparently the court is, too.

I think most of us can agree in principle, I simply disagree with the course of action (and to reiterate, unless I've missed information, the court didn't reverse its position, the motion was withdrawn, reason being the damage had already been done).

 

[lacktheknack]

And the courts wonder WHY they are held in contempt.

I find it mildly horrifying that I now know her name - Savannah Dietrich - but am not allowed to know her attacker's names.

 

[Electrogecko]

I share a lot of people's opinion; That she shouldn't have done it, but shouldn't necessarily go to jail for it.

I'm fine with here being fined. (no pun intended) It's actually rather strange how she thought exposing the names of her offenders (who had already basically exposed themselves) was worth violating a court order.....It's hard to think that she did it for any reason other than to bring more attention to it.

 

[Clearing the Eye]

Welp, the legal system still has a load of issues. This was a... sad case.

Now, how to fix the system... Give me a second...

 

[merf1350]

if it ever becomes public that a person was involved in a crime that's even vaguely related to sex they will never have a decent job again in our society. And maybe if it's a 40 year old rapist that's okay, but a couple high school kids? That's fucked up.

but to demonize it more than torture and murder

On these two points, I don't see a problem with sex crimes ruining the lives of the perps, no matter how old they are. There is an alarming rate of sexual abuse committed in that manner, and if some of these idiots have to have their whole futures go up in smoke because of it, then maybe others will learn a lesson from that. Alternatively, we could go eye for an eye...you want your name kept private and your life not ruined, when you get caught, then the victim gets to have you restrained and allowed to violate you in return. How many guys would pass on party rape if they either had to face a choice between forever being publicly known as a sex offender, or facing the same shame by having their victim get to strap them down and force a dildo up their rectums? I don't know too many teenage guys who would be able to get over that. And IMO it would serve them right to get a taste of what they did to the girl.

However, this second point will negate my whole tit for tat option.

Do you think that there are many women out there, who were victims of rape, that would not argue that the lingering shame and vulnerability that many feel makes rape a form of torture?

 

[GTwander]

So they plead guilty to a lesser charge... but only on the condition of anonymity. What idiot agreed to that in the first place.

I see a wizened old judge shaking his head and letting out a small laugh, as he states "boys will be boys", and then lets them off to enjoy the rest of their summer.

 

[Tanis]

Good for her.
Just because you're not 18 doesn't mean you should be able to HIDE when you're a rapist.

It's one thing to be ACCUSED, it's another thing to be GUILTY HAS HELL.

 

[mooncalf]

Shouldn't go against a court that is there to deliver justice fairly, but really you can't help but feel skeptical about the suggestion that such attackers should have a cloak of anonymity.