Fuck you, Stockton, CA, University of the Pacific and your lame-ass rapist basketball team!

[El_Presidente]

(I should carefully note, this post refers to University of the Pacific, in Stockton, CA and NOT Pacific University in Oregon!)

Just saw a profile on 60-minutes that made my blood boil:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/04/17/60minutes/main20054339.shtml

Yep, your typical story. College girl gets drunk, then raped, but hey, she was just a drunken slut, and had it coming, right? Then the cowards in the police department, probably cowered into not angering the campus, talk her out of it. The college rewards the rapist basketball players by letting 2 of them back on the team after punishing them, and the third ends up on Idaho’s team with a scholarship (FUCK YOU TOO, University of Idaho).

The victim? She comes back to school but is treated as an outcast. After all, she was just a drunken slut who tried to ruin the Men’s basketball team, isn’t that right? Because its all about Division 1 sports, not the safety and well being of your students, isn’t that right? After being treated like the criminal, and not the victim, she eventually leaves, life ruined, but thats OK—we can still play fucking BASKETBALL.

Thank goodness the Obama administration is addressing this issue.

As for University of the Pacific: FUCK YOU. I hope your basketball program never, ever goes anywhere, and you end up getting shut down by the NCAA for recruiting violations. As for the three rapists, I hope all three of you pigs ends up in jail or dead, and your stupid basketball careers go nowhere. FUCK YOU, FUCK YOU AND FUCK YOU.

[Rand_Rover]

Oh good, you’ve discovered how to absolutely an unequivocally determine innocence or guilt simply from reading one news article about an alleged incident. Sure will save us all that money on investigators, prosecutors, judges, etc. etc. We just need a reporter and you and we’re all set.

[Zhen_ka]

UOP is a shit school. Like anyone cares what happens there.

[woodstockbirdybird]

And it’s not all that close to the Pacific, either!

[El_Presidente]

@Rand_Rover

Oh good, you’ve discovered how to absolutely an unequivocally determine innocence or guilt simply from reading one news article about an alleged incident. Sure will save us all that money on investigators, prosecutors, judges, etc. etc. We just need a reporter and you and we’re all set.

Well, Einstein, unlike you, I read the article and saw the TV program, and if you bothered to do so yourself, you would note that the school judiciary board found all three players guilty of sexual assault (code for “rape”).

I’m sorry, the point of your reply was what . . . . ?

[Rand_Rover]

@El_Presidente

Well, Einstein, unlike you, I read the article and saw the TV program, and if you bothered to do so yourself, you would note that the school judiciary board found all three players guilty of sexual assault (code for “rape”).

I’m sorry, the point of your reply was what . . . . ?

So they are guilty of violating the school’s policy against sexual assault. But they aren’t guilty of rape as defined by any other jurisdiction. And the schools judicial review board sounds like a rather bullshit affair–it’s headed by three students, a professor and an administrator, and it sounds like the accused weren’t represented by counsel.

Look, I have no dog in this fight, I just get pissed off by seeing people read a news story and believe that one person’s view of the facts is the absolute truth. Life is much more complicated than that. We have a justice system for a reason–you can’t just read news stories and decide that you know everything (well, you can, but you’d be an idiot).

[Gatopescado]

@El_Presidente

Thank goodness the Obama administration is addressing this issue.

Yeah, 'cause they got nothing better to do, and I’m sure they will get to the bottom of it. :rolleyes:

In 2015. If they are lucky. Maybe.

[Simplicio]

@Gatopescado

Yeah, 'cause they got nothing better to do, and I’m sure they will get to the bottom of it. :rolleyes:

In 2015. If they are lucky. Maybe.

To be clear, the DOJ is investigating the general problem of rape on college campuses, not this particular case.

But I don’t really understand why the girl doesn’t go ahead and press charges now. There’s apparently a video, two victims and a rape kit. Seems like that would be enough to get some convictions.

[El_Presidente]

@Rand_Rover

So they are guilty of violating the school’s policy against sexual assault. But they aren’t guilty of rape as defined by any other jurisdiction.

Well, that would have been possible had not the Stockton CA Police Department bullied and scared the girl from pressing charges, a common problem I see in rape cases.

And the schools judicial review board sounds like a rather bullshit affair–it’s headed by three students, a professor and an administrator, and it sounds like the accused weren’t represented by counsel.

There was another woman in the story who also made a similar rape accusation, under similar circumstances, in the same apartment complex populated by the basketball players.

The judicial board found three star basketball players guilty of rap—EEEER “sexual assault”. So the evidence must have been pretty damning. Too bad the school wimped out on their wink wink punishment, Im guessing they wanted to try and keep 2/3 of their stars, but expel one to make it look good, when all three should have been expelled. Shame on Idaho for offering a scholarship to the third ruled rapist.

Look, I have no dog in this fight, I just get pissed off by seeing people read a news story and believe that one person’s view of the facts is the absolute truth. Life is much more complicated than that. We have a justice system for a reason–you can’t just read news stories and decide that you know everything (well, you can, but you’d be an idiot).

You are saying 60 Minutes is not a reliable news source? They just make up stories? This was three black men ruled guilty of raping . . . oh, I am sorry, “sexually assaulting” a white woman, if the story were untrue, I would imagine every civil rights leader in the country would be condemning 60 Minutes and The University of the Pacific for their ruling if the story was not true.

[Giraffe]

I think rape should be illegal.

[friedo]

@Giraffe

I think rape should be illegal.

But what about rape rape?

[sqweels]

@El_Presidente

You are saying 60 Minutes is not a reliable news source?

Not as unreliable as Anderson Fucking Cooper!

[Stendhal_Syndrome]

All I have to say is this

[astro]

@El_Presidente

You are saying 60 Minutes is not a reliable news source? They just make up stories? This was three black men ruled guilty of raping . . . oh, I am sorry, “sexually assaulting” a white woman, if the story were untrue, I would imagine every civil rights leader in the country would be condemning 60 Minutes and The University of the Pacific for their ruling if the story was not true.

No dog in the scuffle either, but WRT 60 Minutes and other major news organizations they are not always 100% reliable. Everybody has an angle. In the effort to make a narrative compelling and good television a lot of stuff can happen to the how the story is presented and understood. That’s just TV.

See 60 minutes wiki

Unintended accelerationOn November 23, 1986, 60 Minutes aired a segment greenlit by Don Hewitt, concerning the Audi 5000 automobile, a popular German luxury car. The story covered a supposed problem of “unintended acceleration” when the brake pedal was pushed, with emotional interviews with six people who sued Audi (unsuccessfully) after they crashed their cars, including one woman who had killed her six year old boy. Footage was shown of an Audi 5000 with the accelerator moving down on its own, accelerating the car, after an expert witness employed by one of the plaintiffs modified it with a concealed device to cause it to do so.[20] Independent investigators concluded that this was most likely due to driver incompetence, where the driver let their foot slip off the brake and onto the accelerator. Tests by Audi and independent journalists showed that even with the throttle wide open, the car would simply stall if the brakes were actually being used.[21]

The incident devastated Audi sales in the United States, which did not reach the same level for another fifteen years. The initial incidents which prompted the report were found by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration and Transport Canada to have been attributable to operator error, where car owners had depressed the accelerator pedal instead of the brake pedal. CBS issued a partial retraction, without acknowledging the test results of involved government agencies.[22]

A rival to 60 Minutes, Dateline NBC, would be found guilty of similar tactics years later regarding fuel tank integrity on General Motors pickup trucks.

[armedmonkey]

@friedo

But what about rape rape?

Yes, non consensual sex with canola should also be illegal.

[astro]

@Simplicio

To be clear, the DOJ is investigating the general problem of rape on college campuses, not this particular case.

But I don’t really understand why the girl doesn’t go ahead and press charges now. There’s apparently a video, two victims and a rape kit. Seems like that would be enough to get some convictions.

Further on in the article.

Four days after the alleged assault, university police questioned the three basketball players Beckett had identified on the tape as her assailants: Michael Nunnally, Steffan Johnson and Michael Kirby. School officials urged Brennan to report the assault to Stockton Police.

A few weeks later she talked to a detective there, and after that conversation, she decided not to file criminal charges.

“He explained to me the system with cases that involve rape and kinda laid out the facts about it’s a ‘he said, she said’ and kinda scared me,” she said. “He used an example of a girl who was, like 16 or 17 who was on the stand for, like 16 hours. I can’t even imagine.”

The school suggested another option: testify before the university’s judicial review board, an internal school disciplinary panel that would guarantee Brennan’s identity wouldn’t be revealed.

Her parents, Jane and Barry, believed this would be the best course of action. “We were fearful for her safety at that point, just her own mental health,” Jane Brennan explained.

[Simplicio]

Yea, but just because she didn’t file charges then doesn’t mean she can’t file them now, right? Her original reasons for not filing seem kinda moot, given that she hasn’t been able to remain anonymous, the school proceedings don’t seem to have given her the justice she wanted and given that she’s talking to the press, she’s apparently reached a point where she can discuss what happened on the stand.

[Bryan_Ekers]

Is it January again already? Where does the year go?

[BigT]

@Simplicio

Yea, but just because she didn’t file charges then doesn’t mean she can’t file them now, right? Her original reasons for not filing seem kinda moot, given that she hasn’t been able to remain anonymous, the school proceedings don’t seem to have given her the justice she wanted and given that she’s talking to the press, she’s apparently reached a point where she can discuss what happened on the stand.

What good would getting her to testify in the university proceedings do if there wasn’t some type of agreement not to prosecute? At the very least, I would suspect her continued enrollment to depend on not breaking her word.

[Simplicio]

@BigT

What good would getting her to testify in the university proceedings do if there wasn’t some type of agreement not to prosecute? At the very least, I would suspect her continued enrollment to depend on not breaking her word.

I think the article would’ve mentioned it if she had made such an agreement.

Plus, I kinda doubt a school would require someone to make such an agreement in order to access its disciplinary system.

Plus plus, I can’t imagine its legal for a school to expel someone for pressing criminal charges, agreement or no.