Right, but with this story in the media, everyone at his school already knows what is up.
I don’t think a court case is likely to make things any worse for him than they already are.
If they were 11 and they removed clothes without touching, probably.
Elementary. He was in 5th grade. 
Yes and no.
I am guessing (were I in his shoes) I’d want the whole thing to go away.
We already have:
- The incident
- The video
- Media attention which is growing (and I feel bad I added to it to some extent by posting here)
If it goes to court it will continue. Remember the ages here. Kids will take sides regardless of right or wrong but based on popularity. Considering these girls stripped him I am guessing he was an “easy” target. He’ll lose the popularity contest and be seen as a “dick”. Kinda like a guy who rats on people and runs to mommy for protection.
The kid is doomed. He has no good way out. He rolls over he’s fucked. He fights he’s fucked.
What would you do if this was your kid?
People use new social technologies in various ways to mean various things. Don’t be a pedant to imaginary rules.
This isn’t bullying. This is sexual assault. This is gang rape.
As far as the school is concerned, suggesting they can’t do anything because the rape occured off school grounds, how is it they can fire a teacher for appearing nude on a playboy photo shoot in some studio not on school grounds, which I seem to recall happening more than once. ( I may be wrong)
They aren’t imaginary rules. They are my personal rules. I think people who say they like puppy-kicking are weird. You can befriend all the puppy-kicking-likers if you want.
If anyone really wants to criticize me for this then feel free to start a new thread. It’s a weird thing to get pitted for but if you want to go ahead. I might not bother reading it though because I still have an episode of Doctor Who to catch up on.
I suggest we try to get this thread back on topic.
I apologize for any typos/rambling - posting from my iPhone here.
Let me clarify my position further:
0- thank you for the criminal justice lecture (sincerely). It’s an area I happen to be extremely familiar with. And, while I’m not familiar with Florida law, typically the juvenile criminal system is less concerned with deterrence than it is with rehabilitation. With all due respect, the juvenile court system typically IS about the perpetrator and identifying the appropriate action to take to rehabilitate them into a productive member or society.
1- I am against the crime committed here (regardless of gender).
2- I understand and support the mother’s decision not to press charges. I do not think she wants to subject her already mortified son to a trial.
3- I do not think the State requires a victim’s cooperation to prosecute a case particularly a felony, BUT:
4- Sometimes I think a victim’s rights trump the state’s interest in prosecution. Happens all the time and should happen when it’s appropriate.
5- The corollary is true as well: sometimes the state’s interest in prosecution trumps a victim’s rights as well.
6- I’m happy, in this case, with deferring to the parent’s request not to prosecute and the district attorney’s choice to abide by that request. I don’t know everything they know. I don’t know what the girls’ criminal history/school performance/other factors is or are. I don’t know how vehemently the mother (or the son) objects to going forward with a trial. And I do believe these things are appropriate for the DA to consider when deciding whether or not to pursue criminal charges.
7- doesn’t mean I’m not horrified and bothered at what they did. I’m just not horrified and bothered at the decision not to address it in a criminal court.
8- I reject the slippery slope argument at the end of your post. There are other negative reasons (parental discipline, public shame, eg) not to engage in this type of behavior. I doubt very much we will see a linear progression of bad behavior simply because the state decided to leave this one to the parents after being requested to do so by the victim’s mother.
I think you are right but there is a distinction between students and teachers.
Teachers are employees and have no fundamental right to their job.
Students have a fundamental right to an education.
That makes the comparison unequal.
That said I think I have heard of cases of students getting busted for actions outside of school property. (Wasn’t there a Supreme Court case where a student posted a sign off school property and the school punished him? I forget and a quick Google search didn’t help.)
ETA: Here it is (free speech case):
Not sure how relevant. School sponsored event but looks to me like he was off school grounds (albeit across the street).
What the hell is wrong with you? Is this supposed to be a joke?
The youth of the girls plays into this. They’re only eleven. This was bullying, but calling it a “sexual assault” is a bit much.
Plus, the double standard is not without validity. I support the double standard, I think it makes sense, that it exists for a reason, and that it’s silly to pretend it’s all exactly the same.
I agree “sexual assault” goes too far.
I think you need to expand on when and where you think a double standard is ok (I made a case for it upthread and distinguished it from this case).
A question for the lawyers.
We know that the State is not required to have the victim’s cooperation to bring charges, but does the fact that the victim is not cooperating (testifying) hurt the chances of a conviction?
The boy was 11, the girls were 8th graders. 13 or 14.
It looks like the elementary school the victim attended was a Title I School, which if I understand correctly means it has a high percentage of low income students. I wonder if part of the problem here might not be Girls vs. Boys but Wealthy vs. Low Income.
Actually I want to qualify that.
I stand by that a charge of sexual assault goes too far but I cannot help but wonder if the genders were reversed if a charge of sexual assault might have been sought for the boys.
No one can say for sure but my gut tells me (FWIW) that such a charge would be a distinct possibility against boys doing the same thing.
At that age I doubt that’d be much of a factor.
Hard to say…anything is possible but so far I see nothing to suggest this was more than simple bullying that kids are wont to do.
It might seem more intimidating to a poor family to go up against one that can afford a good lawyer. This is something you used to hear about women who were raped too, that poor women going against wealthy families had an especially tough battle ahead.
Does the video qualify as child porn?
Often in rape cases of the sort you are talking about it is a case of he said/she said and are notoriously hard to prove. In those cases the rich family often buries the hapless woman.
In this case, even if we assume a large disparity in family incomes (which I have seen no evidence for), it’d be the State bringing charges and pitting their lawyers against the girls’ lawyers.
Further, there does not seem to be a he said/she said case here. The girls filmed the event and posted it online. Not sure what cover even a rich girl’s attorney could find from that. I suspect a rich girl’s attorney would seek a plea that amounted to a slap on the wrist but that would assume the State bothered to even bring charges.