Next to the unofficial crime of DWB (Driving While Black), we can also add DWF (Drinking While Female) to that list. And just as every black parent I know has trained their kids how to deal with the indignity and outrage of having an incomplete set of civil rights, so should the parents of daughters teach them about things like this.
No, it’s not right. Not even a little. And it’s not fair. But goddamnit, it certainly is the way it is in most places, and young women should know that.
When I was a teenager, we used to go to frat parties at Penn. One of us always stayed sober, and it was her job to go around and make sure no one was in over their head. The designated doula duenna would collect everyone and make sure we were home in time for curfew.
I’ve always told my nieces all along not to assume good outcomes when groups of young men are getting shit-faced, and I’ve always told my sons not to assume anything about a drunken woman.
I wonder whether the next victim will think twice before reporting a rape.
UPDATE: Dave has more.
Very strange, indeed. The DA must have been very unfavorably impressed with the woman’s description or some kind of real weirdo. Sure, if the testimony doesn’t support conviction, let the guys off, but gosh…..file against the woman? Very strange, indeed.
Gug
Minor nitpick: “One of us always stayed sober, . . . The designated doula”
I wonder if perhaps you mean duenna? A doula is a maternity, labor, and delivery support person.
There were mutiple assailants and the judge still thought it was consensual? He honest-to-Pete believed doing her creepy boyfriend plus his two dirtbag friends was her idea?
Has Bush heard about this guy>? Y’know, just in case Alito doesn’t get in?
If the woman is obviously lying, then she should definitely prosecuted. Rape is a very serious crime, but IMHO falsely accusing someone of rape is worse.
In this case I don’t have enough info to judge, which is probably the situation with most everyone whose commenting on the Internet. If the woman did get raped and then charged with a crime for reporting it, then that would be a major tragedy, of course. However, I thought it was pretty weird how some people quoted in the Oregonian spoke as though the men actually did rape the woman, although the case against them was dismissed.
Also, it’s worth considering that prosecution of false accusations of rape could lead to a higher rate of prosecution in cases when rape charges are filed. If there are serious penalties for falsely filing rape charges, then fewer women will do that; as a result, judges and juries can expect that when charges are filed for rape, the accused would more likely be guilty.
Pandu das - Sex with a 17-year-old in Oregon is statutory rape, consensual or not.
Ken,
Good point, almost.
See here:
http://www.leg.state.or.us/ors/163.html
Section 163.345(1) States, “In any prosecution under ORS 163.355… in which the victim’s lack of consent was due solely to incapacity to consent by reason of being less than a specified age, it is a defense that the actor was less than three years older than the victim at the time of the alleged offense.”
In other words, consensual sex between a seventeen year old is legal with a person up to three years older; which would explain why they weren’t charged with statutory rape. Many sates have similar laws.
If the men were more than three years older than her, it would have been a case of “163.415 Sexual abuse in the third degree,” which is a Class A Misdemeanor; however, it appears that she accused them of “163.375 Rape in the first degree,” which is a Class A Felony. That’s a fairly big difference; but anyway, if it was consensual, then it wasn’t a crime at all.