• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Oregon Basketball Rape Case (NWT)

sometimes whether you'll get a conviction or not isn't as important as filing the charges if you ask me.

for example a girl once said that i stole something from her. i didn't and wasn't there to defend myself against the allegations. so i was charged, found NG, but it was stressful, cost a lot of money, had to spend time in jail, etc...all with no evidence whatsoever. and now people will forever think i stole something because ordinary folk don't realize cops make baseless accusations (charges). some of us know better.

i say charge the fellas anyway, it sure as hell damaged my life, just speaking from experience.
 
Last edited:
sounds to me like she did protest, just not hard enough and waited too long, and showered, etc. all that sounds reasonable to me if you were recently the victim of rape. during the party i'm sure there were a lot of factors at play that would have made her not want a scene and the first time she went into the bathroom she didn't know she was gonna get raped. she reasonably expected that if she said no to something the others in the room would respect her wishes. maybe a bit naive, but what the guys did sounds criminal. her getting in the cab is confusing, but staying there afterwards when you have no ride makes sense.

the fact the guys were kicked off the team and the fact that thtey wanted to speak with her to see if she was going to go to the police are similarly telling. it probably is right not to prosecute, but that don't mean justice (if there even is such a thing) was served.
 
dmcheatw said:
sometimes whether you'll get a conviction or not isn't as important as filing the charges if you ask me.

for example a girl once said that i stole something from her. i didn't and wasn't there to defend myself against the allegations. so i was charged, found NG, but it was stressful, cost a lot of money, had to spend time in jail, etc...all with no evidence whatsoever. and now people will forever think i stole something because ordinary folk don't realize cops make baseless accusations (charges). some of us know better.

i say charge the fellas anyway, it sure as hell damaged my life, just speaking from experience.
Click to expand...

So, because something unethical was done to you it should be done to someone else. Got it.
 
no, not even close. i was using an anecdote to show how charges themselves can lead to a similar effect as an actual convcition in some cases.

the middle ground here seems to be charges w/o a conviction. people going forward need to know what these people were accused of, especially in light of multiple witnesses and that they're concerned about her going to the PD and they all got kicked off the team. do you disagree?

i'm an innocent until, proven guilty person time and time again. but, before before you flagrantly mis-characterize my position Which was to argue for a middle ground, please take more time to interpret what i said.

good attys don't just jump to conclusions when they're weakly supported. keep in mind you said you didn't doubt her story. what solution do you propose?
 
Last edited:
is dmcheat a wake grad? i'd think at some point he'd stop sharing these weird insights in to his life.
 
NCSU grad, but what makes these anecdotes "weird?" they're intended to point out other ways forward that can bring some modicum of closure to a woman who we (all?) agree was sexually violated.

i invite a private convo with you so you can elaborate on your sentence.

this is a message board. is it any more weird than 90% of the pit threads--and if so why? difference being, i'm trying to point out as best i can serious problems with the criminal justice system while still trying to protect the rights of the accused, and then beyond that propose a way forward that is as fair as possible to all parties.

IOW, i want the world to be a more equitable and better place with less suffering and voicing my opinion is the best way i know how.

not easy to do.

was accepted to wake though yes (what that has to do with the merits of my argument idk), i wanted to move farther from home though and a lot of my HS class (~30% of the peeps i chilled with on weekends were headed to NCSU.)
 
Last edited:
if you cant post on an internet message board, go to state?
 
what's with girls getting gang-raped and then having consentual sex 12 hours later. Reads as if she's a whore, wanted to bang one dude but then felt bad once she was with 3 dudes at once. Her friend tried to get her to leave for 20 minutes, she didn't appear that drunk, she flirted with the dude publicly after the first bathroom incident, and admittingly never said no once she got back to the house and just let em do whatever, until she started feeling badly and they stopped.
 
dmcheatw said:
no, not even close. i was using an anecdote to show how charges themselves can lead to a similar effect as an actual convcition in some cases.

the middle ground here seems to be charges w/o a conviction. people going forward need to know what these people were accused of, especially in light of multiple witnesses and that they're concerned about her going to the PD and they all got kicked off the team. do you disagree?

i'm an innocent until, proven guilty person time and time again. but, before before you flagrantly mis-characterize my position Which was to argue for a middle ground, please take more time to interpret what i said.

good attys don't just jump to conclusions when they're weakly supported. keep in mind you said you didn't doubt her story. what solution do you propose?
Click to expand...

I didnt mischaracterize your position at all. A prosecutor should only file charges against someone when they have a good faith basis they can prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If they do otherwise, that is unethical.

There is no "middle ground". The consequence is guilty people go free. It sucks, but it's far better than the alternative. We place a high burden of proof on the government and require its prosecutors to have a higher ethical code to only file charges on cases they can prove. Not on cases where they think someone did something, or they dont like the defendants...so, let's file charges anyway and ruin their lives. Apparently, that's what happened to you. That was wrong and unethical. What you are suggesting the prosecutors do in this case would be equally wrong and unethical, in my opinion.
 
Les Grossman said:
I didnt mischaracterize your position at all. A prosecutor should only file charges against someone when they have a good faith basis they can prove the crime beyond a reasonable doubt. If they do otherwise, that is unethical.

There is no "middle ground". The consequence is guilty people go free. It sucks, but it's far better than the alternative. We place a high burden of proof on the government and require its prosecutors to have a higher ethical code to only file charges on cases they can prove. Not on cases where they think someone did something, or they dont like the defendants...so, let's file charges anyway and ruin their lives. Apparently, that's what happened to you. That was wrong and unethical. What you are suggesting the prosecutors do in this case would be equally wrong and unethical, in my opinion.
Click to expand...

i think you dodged the questions in post 24.

i was simply saying there is a way to punish people via the criminal justice system for crimes almost everyone agrees happened but are uneasily proven due to (the mostly correct) structure of our justice system. I didn't say because an injustice was done to me, lets do it to someone else too. I said if justice can't be had for the victim due to the intricacies and practicalities of the legal system, partial justice can still be had by filing the charges or just filing something less serious and letting the defendants deal with the associated consequences.

let me know why you think prosecution for a crime you yourself believe happened would be unethical either because of or due to the possibility it might fail. I can't see the logic. It's also pretty clear you mis-characterized what I initially said and my motives, but to be fair to you I could have been clearer in what i meant.

I have a charge for petty larceny that i cannot expunge on my record by law. That would seem to be an institutionalized method of reaching a middle ground for people who likely committed a crime (such as this incident in the OP) but where the system was unable to return a guilty verdict.

That works well as long as the people in question did do what they were charged with. That doesn't seem unethical to me in the least. Now if the person didn't do the crime, that's unethical. And that last sentence would also be why i don't actually agree with the law, just point out a middle ground does exist, and formalized accusations (read: charges) themselves carry weight and real punishment.
 
Last edited:
Even if this was completely consensual, hard to understand why these guys (and apparently so many other guys) willing participate in a gang bang. Can't get much easier than hooking-up at U of Oregon (particularly as a student athlete). Have no idea why anyone would want to mess with his teammate's sloppy seconds. Add-in that all student athletes get the lecture that their schollies can and will be yanked and their future may be ruined in exactly this situation, it escapes me why this scenario seems to repeats itself so often.
 
palmab03 said:
what's with girls getting gang-raped and then having consentual sex 12 hours later. Reads as if she's a whore, wanted to bang one dude but then felt bad once she was with 3 dudes at once. Her friend tried to get her to leave for 20 minutes, she didn't appear that drunk, she flirted with the dude publicly after the first bathroom incident, and admittingly never said no once she got back to the house and just let em do whatever, until she started feeling badly and they stopped.
Click to expand...

she said no in the bathroom, tried to keep her clothes on, and had her phone taken from her. That was probably her most sober point (i.e. most control she had over the situation) for a while. What she did after that short of saying "I changed my mind I want to have sex with all of you," really shouldn't matter.
 
Pilchard said:
Even if this was completely consensual, hard to understand why these guys (and apparently so many other guys) willing participate in a gang bang. Can't get much easier than hooking-up at U of Oregon (particularly as a student athlete). Have no idea why anyone would want to mess with his teammate's sloppy seconds. Add-in that all student athletes get the lecture that their schollies can and will be yanked and their future may be ruined in exactly this situation, it escapes me why this scenario seems to repeats itself so often.
Click to expand...

pretty much all guys like the idea of being attractive to the point of turning girls into can't get enough cock sluts, this is just an extension of that.
 
RChildress107 said:
she said no in the bathroom, tried to keep her clothes on, and had her phone taken from her. That was probably her most sober point (i.e. most control she had over the situation) for a while. What she did after that short of saying "I changed my mind I want to have sex with all of you," really shouldn't matter.
Click to expand...

Over half of my past girlfriends routinely say no when they really mean yes. you can say no playfully or forcefully. The taped phone conversations sound like guys who don't know they were doing anything wrong, yet they all stopped the second she was crying everyone agreed. Seems as if she could have stopped it by acting out.
 
palmab03 said:
Over half of my past girlfriends routinely say no when they really mean yes. you can say no playfully or forcefully. The taped phone conversations sound like guys who don't know they were doing anything wrong, yet they all stopped the second she was crying everyone agreed. Seems as if she could have stopped it by acting out.
Click to expand...

That's some shit rapists say.

Only somewhat joking.

A lot of the language around education concerning rape and such is around consent. All participants need to know what they want and communicate it. Obviously, this is especially true for women.
 
PhDeac said:
That's some shit rapists say.

Only somewhat joking.

A lot of the language around education concerning rape and such is around consent. All participants need to know what they want and communicate it. Obviously, this is especially true for women.
Click to expand...

the most often no response will come from trying to go down on them, I only had one girlfriend where this was an issue with actual penetration. I've found just having the girl guide you in solves all problems there.
 
Charging when you have little chance of a conviction is a terrible idea for lots of reasons... It would represent a waste of tons of government resources for a long period of time.
All of those resources would be distracted from investigating and prosecuting other cases which might have a greater chance of a conviction. Finally, and possibly most importantly, the victim would be absolutely dragged through the mud and embarassed - her life would be ruined as much as theirs - and all for a not guilty verdict? How many other girls would be convinced to never come forward after witnessing what she went through? The rigors of a trial would be worth it to a victim if there is a pay-off at the end - a conviction - without it? Not really.
 
RChildress107 said:
she said no in the bathroom, tried to keep her clothes on, and had her phone taken from her. That was probably her most sober point (i.e. most control she had over the situation) for a while. What she did after that short of saying "I changed my mind I want to have sex with all of you," really shouldn't matter.
Click to expand...

You're right, what happened after the first trip in the bathroom shouldn't matter... But it does. In a situation of he-said, she-said, with little or no physical evidence of what went down, you have to rely on all the contextual clues to decide what really happened.

If, after the first trip to the bathroom, she had left the party with her friend, told her friend what happened while being visibly upset, went to the hospital to be checked out and called the police - what would have happened? They would have been arrested and charged and there would have been a good chance of conviction.

Instead, her behavior the rest of the night is not really consistent with someone who just suffered a traumatizing sexual assault at the hands of multiple men. I really want to believe her and don't doubt that she was not happy with what was going on but I am having a hard time understanding her subsequent behavior - and I am not even on a jury where I am required to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.
 
Pilchard said:
Even if this was completely consensual, hard to understand why these guys (and apparently so many other guys) willing participate in a gang bang. Can't get much easier than hooking-up at U of Oregon (particularly as a student athlete). Have no idea why anyone would want to mess with his teammate's sloppy seconds. Add-in that all student athletes get the lecture that their schollies can and will be yanked and their future may be ruined in exactly this situation, it escapes me why this scenario seems to repeats itself so often.
Click to expand...

Wonder where these guys end up. The one guy was also accused of sexual assault at Providence. I get why getting a conviction would be problematic, but I can't imagine a coach reading the police report would be anxious to have any of these guys in their program. Given that 55 schools have been identified as treating rape/sexual assault too casually, I can't see athletic directors or college presidents wanting any part of these guys.

Getting a hummer in a bathroom while playing sword fights with two other guys-no thanks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top