Because I'm not based in the US, I didn't realize that as I was posting yesterday on the false he-said / she-said discourse surrounding rape cases that Anonymous was leaking disturbing video in the "Steubenville rape case." Actually, I didn't even know there was a Steubenville rape case, despite the NYTimes profile on it last month. But, now I'm unfortunately all caught up.
Now, quick explanation of Ohio for my non-Ohio friends. Ohio friends can skip it.
That said, Steubenville is in the Ohio Valley, which I'm very familiar with. And it comes across as essentially the exact kind of town you hear about all across Ohio. And unfortunately, the very disturbing rape that occurred there - and even the shocking responses of others present - could have happened in almost any city in Ohio, just like it could happen in France, India, or the UK.
As was noted yesterday, rape is global. And so is the rush of defenders to say that a woman was asking for it.
That's what Walter Madison, the alleged rapists's defense counsel, is doing. Now, I don't blame Mr. Madison for what he is doing; it's his job and the only way justice works is if you have robust, trained advocates on both sides of a case. But, I found this statement in the NYTimes post pretty disgusting:
Now, here's the thing. It sounds like Mr. Madison, who complains about the case being tried in the media, is actually attempting to try this case in the media.
Or he's watched one too many Law & Order episodes and is going to attempt to skirt the rules of evidence, and risk contempt of court, by introducing a line of questioning for which he will be repeatedly objected to and sustained (if the prosecutor and judge are worth their salt).
Since I don't know Mr. Madison, but he went to a good law school, has been licensed since 1999, practices in the same area as my brother, and has a coherent, professional looking website, I'm gonna guess it's not the latter. He's trying this in the media.
Here's a quick Ohio law lesson for the non-lawyers:* the Ohio Revised Code prohibits the introduction of evidence regarding a rape victim's sexual history. This is actually what it says:
It disturbs me that still today we have to have discussions of whether a woman's otherwise promiscuous behavior - if the online evidence even suggests she was - somehow constitutes consent. And it disturbs me that Mr. Madison would suggest this in public, in a newspaper interview. He should know better. Not just because he probably took the law of evidence and criminal law in school (both are at least now required courses at his alma mater),** but because he's clearly a well educated, intelligent, and accomplished lawyer.
The more I read on this tragic situation, the more disturbed I am by the actions of the others - the non-accused - in this story. It starts with Mr. Madison, who is trying to slut shame a girl who was drunk and apparently repeatedly rape. A victim who found out she was raped by reading a newspaper. A victim who then had to be subjected to seeing what happened to her via instagram and tweets. I'm disturbed because you can mount a defense to rape without blaming the victim (and if you can't, your defendant is guilty).
I'm also disturbed by other people in this story, but my disgust with them has been pretty well outlined in the stories I linked above. Still, a few thoughts:
Reno Saccoccia, the football coach, reportedly didn't bench players because, according to the NYT, "they did not think they had done anything wrong." What?? Since when do we allow 17 year old boys to decide whether they should suffer consequences? When did we stop teaching them morality? And he told the grandmother of one of the accused that the guy was "just in the wrong place at the wrong time"? What does that even mean? Did he mean to do it a half hour earlier when she simply couldn't consent but wasn't resembling a corpse? Did he accidentally slip his penis into an unconscious woman's vagina? That "wrong place wrong time" crap only works if the theories some are espousing - that this is a systematic practice and involves a large number of perpetrators from the football team - is actually true. Then, you could say, "Well, he did actually rape someone, but the only reason he's accused instead of someone else is because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time."
And then there's one of his nineteen coaches (for high school football?!), Nate Hubbard, who seemed to suggest this was a mass conspiracy of people trying to ruin football for the city. Because, you know, clearly the girl must be lying. She'd have to explain away her behavior and obviously the only way to do that is to claim rape??
Seriously, with the attitudes of these two men, the actions of their charges - and former charges - becomes slightly more understandable. If the men around you don't act like men - if they aren't grown ups who understand things like laws and consequences and how to respect other human beings - it's not a wonder that the children they are responsible for educating get a warped sense of both women and their own entitlement.
If nothing else, this story made me want to go home and hug every high school administrator and coach in my hometown. Yes, they wanted our athletes to do well; yes, they cared about encouraging and protecting them from having their lives ruined. But they would never have attempted this. There were consequences for screwing up.
And then, of course, there's perhaps the biggest a--hole in the entire story: Michael Nodianos, the guy who was named as the one in the video. The one who jokes continuously about how dead and raped the victim was. I know, how is it that the biggest a--hole in a story about rape is not the alleged rapists themselves? But, Nodianos, unlike potentially the other guys in the video, is actually a legal adult. He should've been a leader here. He should've been a man. But he wasn't. He was the most juvenile person in the video - and instead, apparently, was left to receive lectures about how to treat women by guys younger than him. And more importantly, how disturbingly psychopathic does he sound in that video? Clearly he had no empathy, but he also didn't have any remorse when he was called out.
Now, this is not to excuse the actions of the other guys in the video, but at least they were still minors. We don't expect them to be men yet, and I can imagine it would've been a weird situation for them. They should've manned up - hell, a five year old knows to stand up for people who are being wrongly treated - but at least they weren't engaged in the mocking that Nodianos was. I seriously hope OSU reviews this and kicks him out; I also hopes the Ohio Attorney General looks into filing charges of aiding and abetting rape and kidnapping.
Which brings me to the final people I'm disappointed in: the Ohio Attorney General's office, who are prosecuting the crime. Yes, these are two 16 year olds and I generally think we shouldn't prosecute 16 year olds as adults. But, I also think this crime was particularly horrific - even moreso than a 17 year old kid getting scared while robbing a liquor store and shooting the owner. Perhaps more relevant, though, is that it feels like these guys are getting a different treatment than they would if they weren't football stars or if they weren't from a small town like Steubenville.
So to the Ohio Attorney General's office, I have to ask: if these were were basketball players from any high school in inner-city Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, or from a school like Euclid or Garfield Heights, would you still be trying them as minors? I seriously doubt it.
Let's treat these boys like the average criminals they are. If they were 16 and from an urban area, if they were part of a gang instead of a football team, these guys would likely be tried as an adult. So unless someone from the OAG can pony up a good reason for why these kids are different, then I think it's shameful that they dropped the adult charges in favor of juvenile ones.
*Disclaimer: This is a discussion and commentary. It is not legal advice. I am not a criminal lawyer and do not practice criminal law. Nothing in this blog or this blogpost should be construed as legal advice. Nothing associated with this post or the blog creates an attorney-client relationship and (this should be obvious) nothing you share on or through this blog is protected by attorney-client privilege. If you need legal advice, seek a lawyer.
** My brother and I just had a debate via email as to whether evidence and criminal law would cover the "rape shield" standard. I know we did in my fed rules of evidence - it resulted in one of my more embarrassing stories from law school. I may choose to share that story at some point in the future, but that will wait.
---
UPDATE: I actually forgot someone I wanted to call out by name. In the Cleveland Plain Dealer article on this case, Rachel Dissell cites the school's superintendent Mike McVey as saying, he "plans to address the current allegations and the way the students responded only 'if it interferes with the learning process.' When told of the taunting surrounding the case on social media, he said that technology is a 'gray area.' But the kids should know 'what’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong. . .. We’re not going to be witch-hunting everyone down,' he said."
Seriously?? What is wrong with the adults in this town?? How can you be responsible for the safety of all your students - including all your female students - and say, "Oh, our kids should know not to rape and taunt people, so even though it's happening and we know about it, we're just not going to talk about it." Talk about an ostrich!
Once again, thank you to my home town administrators for not being complete and utter wastes of space. You actually did better than that - but sadly, Mike McVey and the others in Steubenville are worse than wastes of space. They are horrific examples for their students as both citizens and human beings.
So to the my hometown administrators: thank you that when specific complaints were made about our students' behavior in public, you addressed in. You told us about it. And you made sure we understood the consequences, both in school and in society. It's probably why all the other suburbs were kicked out of a certain high-end establishment while we continued to enjoy our prom there.
Now, quick explanation of Ohio for my non-Ohio friends. Ohio friends can skip it.
Yes, this is in Ohio. Yes, it's even in NE Ohio. But google maps tells me it's a 2 hour 13 minute drive if you take the toll road. Ohio is large and vast and has a lot of different types of cities and towns to it, and Steubenville is nothing like my hometown. Steubenville's that little red dot on the map. To get to my home, go to the top right hand corner of the state, and then go in two counties (the non-square things delineated by the lines), and then keep going a little bit more.
It's in the tri-state area of Ohio, West Virginia and Pennsylvania. According to google maps, within 12 minutes you can drive from Ohio through West Virginia and into Pennsylvania; it's closer to a large city in Pennsylvania than it is to any of the large cities in Ohio.
To my recollection, I've never been to Steubenville. I don't know the people involved.
That said, Steubenville is in the Ohio Valley, which I'm very familiar with. And it comes across as essentially the exact kind of town you hear about all across Ohio. And unfortunately, the very disturbing rape that occurred there - and even the shocking responses of others present - could have happened in almost any city in Ohio, just like it could happen in France, India, or the UK.
As was noted yesterday, rape is global. And so is the rush of defenders to say that a woman was asking for it.
That's what Walter Madison, the alleged rapists's defense counsel, is doing. Now, I don't blame Mr. Madison for what he is doing; it's his job and the only way justice works is if you have robust, trained advocates on both sides of a case. But, I found this statement in the NYTimes post pretty disgusting:
He said that online photographs and posts could ultimately be “a gift” for his client’s case because the girl, before that night in August, had posted provocative comments and photographs on her Twitter page over time. He added that those online posts demonstrated that she was sexually active and showed that she was “clearly engaged in at-risk behavior.”Ahhhhh. That "at-risk behavior" we women are so fond of demonstrating. Like drinking or flirting or even engaging in consensual sex.
Now, here's the thing. It sounds like Mr. Madison, who complains about the case being tried in the media, is actually attempting to try this case in the media.
Or he's watched one too many Law & Order episodes and is going to attempt to skirt the rules of evidence, and risk contempt of court, by introducing a line of questioning for which he will be repeatedly objected to and sustained (if the prosecutor and judge are worth their salt).
Since I don't know Mr. Madison, but he went to a good law school, has been licensed since 1999, practices in the same area as my brother, and has a coherent, professional looking website, I'm gonna guess it's not the latter. He's trying this in the media.
Here's a quick Ohio law lesson for the non-lawyers:* the Ohio Revised Code prohibits the introduction of evidence regarding a rape victim's sexual history. This is actually what it says:
Evidence of specific instances of the victim’s sexual activity, opinion evidence of the victim’s sexual activity, and reputation evidence of the victim’s sexual activity shall not be admitted under this section unless it involves evidence of the origin of semen, pregnancy, or disease, or the victim’s past sexual activity with the offender, and only to the extent that the court finds that the evidence is material to a fact at issue in the case and that its inflammatory or prejudicial nature does not outweigh its probative value.
...
Prior to taking testimony or receiving evidence of any sexual activity of the victim or the defendant in a proceeding under this section, the court shall resolve the admissibility of the proposed evidence in a hearing in chambers...These standards are similar in the federal courts as well. So unless the victim has facebook posts or tweets saying "Omg, I love it when someone sexually assaults me when I'm unconscious!" or "I consent to all future sexual activity, regardless of where it comes from!" or "I can't wait until tonight's party when I'm planning to have lots and lots of sex with these two football players!" I don't really see how her online activity will be relevant and admissible.
It disturbs me that still today we have to have discussions of whether a woman's otherwise promiscuous behavior - if the online evidence even suggests she was - somehow constitutes consent. And it disturbs me that Mr. Madison would suggest this in public, in a newspaper interview. He should know better. Not just because he probably took the law of evidence and criminal law in school (both are at least now required courses at his alma mater),** but because he's clearly a well educated, intelligent, and accomplished lawyer.
The more I read on this tragic situation, the more disturbed I am by the actions of the others - the non-accused - in this story. It starts with Mr. Madison, who is trying to slut shame a girl who was drunk and apparently repeatedly rape. A victim who found out she was raped by reading a newspaper. A victim who then had to be subjected to seeing what happened to her via instagram and tweets. I'm disturbed because you can mount a defense to rape without blaming the victim (and if you can't, your defendant is guilty).
I'm also disturbed by other people in this story, but my disgust with them has been pretty well outlined in the stories I linked above. Still, a few thoughts:
Reno Saccoccia, the football coach, reportedly didn't bench players because, according to the NYT, "they did not think they had done anything wrong." What?? Since when do we allow 17 year old boys to decide whether they should suffer consequences? When did we stop teaching them morality? And he told the grandmother of one of the accused that the guy was "just in the wrong place at the wrong time"? What does that even mean? Did he mean to do it a half hour earlier when she simply couldn't consent but wasn't resembling a corpse? Did he accidentally slip his penis into an unconscious woman's vagina? That "wrong place wrong time" crap only works if the theories some are espousing - that this is a systematic practice and involves a large number of perpetrators from the football team - is actually true. Then, you could say, "Well, he did actually rape someone, but the only reason he's accused instead of someone else is because he was in the wrong place at the wrong time."
And then there's one of his nineteen coaches (for high school football?!), Nate Hubbard, who seemed to suggest this was a mass conspiracy of people trying to ruin football for the city. Because, you know, clearly the girl must be lying. She'd have to explain away her behavior and obviously the only way to do that is to claim rape??
Seriously, with the attitudes of these two men, the actions of their charges - and former charges - becomes slightly more understandable. If the men around you don't act like men - if they aren't grown ups who understand things like laws and consequences and how to respect other human beings - it's not a wonder that the children they are responsible for educating get a warped sense of both women and their own entitlement.
If nothing else, this story made me want to go home and hug every high school administrator and coach in my hometown. Yes, they wanted our athletes to do well; yes, they cared about encouraging and protecting them from having their lives ruined. But they would never have attempted this. There were consequences for screwing up.
And then, of course, there's perhaps the biggest a--hole in the entire story: Michael Nodianos, the guy who was named as the one in the video. The one who jokes continuously about how dead and raped the victim was. I know, how is it that the biggest a--hole in a story about rape is not the alleged rapists themselves? But, Nodianos, unlike potentially the other guys in the video, is actually a legal adult. He should've been a leader here. He should've been a man. But he wasn't. He was the most juvenile person in the video - and instead, apparently, was left to receive lectures about how to treat women by guys younger than him. And more importantly, how disturbingly psychopathic does he sound in that video? Clearly he had no empathy, but he also didn't have any remorse when he was called out.
Now, this is not to excuse the actions of the other guys in the video, but at least they were still minors. We don't expect them to be men yet, and I can imagine it would've been a weird situation for them. They should've manned up - hell, a five year old knows to stand up for people who are being wrongly treated - but at least they weren't engaged in the mocking that Nodianos was. I seriously hope OSU reviews this and kicks him out; I also hopes the Ohio Attorney General looks into filing charges of aiding and abetting rape and kidnapping.
Which brings me to the final people I'm disappointed in: the Ohio Attorney General's office, who are prosecuting the crime. Yes, these are two 16 year olds and I generally think we shouldn't prosecute 16 year olds as adults. But, I also think this crime was particularly horrific - even moreso than a 17 year old kid getting scared while robbing a liquor store and shooting the owner. Perhaps more relevant, though, is that it feels like these guys are getting a different treatment than they would if they weren't football stars or if they weren't from a small town like Steubenville.
So to the Ohio Attorney General's office, I have to ask: if these were were basketball players from any high school in inner-city Cleveland, Columbus, Cincinnati, or from a school like Euclid or Garfield Heights, would you still be trying them as minors? I seriously doubt it.
Let's treat these boys like the average criminals they are. If they were 16 and from an urban area, if they were part of a gang instead of a football team, these guys would likely be tried as an adult. So unless someone from the OAG can pony up a good reason for why these kids are different, then I think it's shameful that they dropped the adult charges in favor of juvenile ones.
*Disclaimer: This is a discussion and commentary. It is not legal advice. I am not a criminal lawyer and do not practice criminal law. Nothing in this blog or this blogpost should be construed as legal advice. Nothing associated with this post or the blog creates an attorney-client relationship and (this should be obvious) nothing you share on or through this blog is protected by attorney-client privilege. If you need legal advice, seek a lawyer.
** My brother and I just had a debate via email as to whether evidence and criminal law would cover the "rape shield" standard. I know we did in my fed rules of evidence - it resulted in one of my more embarrassing stories from law school. I may choose to share that story at some point in the future, but that will wait.
---
UPDATE: I actually forgot someone I wanted to call out by name. In the Cleveland Plain Dealer article on this case, Rachel Dissell cites the school's superintendent Mike McVey as saying, he "plans to address the current allegations and the way the students responded only 'if it interferes with the learning process.' When told of the taunting surrounding the case on social media, he said that technology is a 'gray area.' But the kids should know 'what’s right is right and what’s wrong is wrong. . .. We’re not going to be witch-hunting everyone down,' he said."
Seriously?? What is wrong with the adults in this town?? How can you be responsible for the safety of all your students - including all your female students - and say, "Oh, our kids should know not to rape and taunt people, so even though it's happening and we know about it, we're just not going to talk about it." Talk about an ostrich!
Once again, thank you to my home town administrators for not being complete and utter wastes of space. You actually did better than that - but sadly, Mike McVey and the others in Steubenville are worse than wastes of space. They are horrific examples for their students as both citizens and human beings.
So to the my hometown administrators: thank you that when specific complaints were made about our students' behavior in public, you addressed in. You told us about it. And you made sure we understood the consequences, both in school and in society. It's probably why all the other suburbs were kicked out of a certain high-end establishment while we continued to enjoy our prom there.
No comments:
Post a Comment