HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » The Steubenville 'Rape Cr...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:35 PM

The Steubenville 'Rape Crew' Trial Will Be on Display for the World to See

Source: The Atlantic Wire



ALEXANDER ABAD-SANTOS 12:18 PM ET

If you thought hackers and the media had brought a lot of attention upon the tough town of Steubenville, Ohio, just wait until everyone gets to see the legal fate of two of its high-school football stars accused of sexual assault play out in public there. In the culmination of a surprise development, the visiting judge in the case of Trent Mays and Malik Richmond ruled Wednesday that the media will be allowed in the courtroom when the proceedings begin in a little less than two months.

Judge Thomas Lipps moved the trial date from February 13 to March 13 at the request of attorneys for the two boys, but he also ruled that the trial will remain in Steubenville — the defense had long been pushing for a change of venue, citing "threats" after the spotlight descended upon the lower-middle-class town late last year from the media, and then again earlier this year when a group associated with the hacker collective Anonymous began releasing documents online.

"In Ohio, the decision to keep a juvenile case secret is left up to a judge," reported the Toledo Blade. But then there's the case of the alleged victim: "Prosecutors with the Ohio Attorney General’s Office told Judge Lipps that the trial should be sealed to protect the victim," the Blade report added. And WTOV-TV adds: "Another motion filed by defense attorney Walter Madison to refer to the teenage girl as 'the accuser' in this case was also denied." Though that may seem like squabbling over semantics, it will become serious business when the court decides just how the world will get to know the Jane Doe in this case — especially since preliminary testimony has already revealed some of the key witnesses in this case. Mays and Richmond are still being charged as minors, with photographic evidence of the girl being violated likely to be re-submitted as evidence and Mays facing a charge involving illegal use of a minor in nudity-oriented material.

But there you have it: For better or worse and in some form or another, the victim, the accused, and all court proceedings will be on display for public consumption. The ongoing public outcry over the case, though it has quelled while court proceedings developed these past two weeks, has centered on the idea that the details of this case has not been publicly exposed enough — and that this small football city was somehow colluding to obscure the facts and possibly hide a larger crime by what the hackers at LocalLeaks called the Steubenville "rape crew." Considering the amount of attention paid to what the New York Times called a "decaying steel town" small Ohio town over the past few weeks, exposure is probably not going to be the problem when the TV trucks inevitably descend in March.



Read more: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/01/steubenville-trial-news/61591/

41 replies, 5603 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 41 replies Author Time Post
Reply The Steubenville 'Rape Crew' Trial Will Be on Display for the World to See (Original post)
DonViejo Jan 2013 OP
blueclown Jan 2013 #1
LanternWaste Jan 2013 #24
yardwork Jan 2013 #25
blueclown Jan 2013 #32
MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #2
lunatica Jan 2013 #4
iandhr Jan 2013 #6
MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #11
lunatica Jan 2013 #15
MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #41
DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #22
Ash_F Jan 2013 #27
Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #20
yardwork Jan 2013 #26
Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #33
lunatica Jan 2013 #3
onehandle Jan 2013 #5
bluestateguy Jan 2013 #7
amandabeech Jan 2013 #18
Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #21
iandhr Jan 2013 #8
d_r Jan 2013 #10
d_r Jan 2013 #9
Judi Lynn Jan 2013 #12
lunatica Jan 2013 #16
JustAnotherGen Jan 2013 #29
dawn frenzy adams Jan 2013 #13
timdog44 Jan 2013 #14
lunatica Jan 2013 #17
TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #34
libdem4life Jan 2013 #19
eggplant Jan 2013 #23
limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #28
JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #40
siligut Jan 2013 #30
davidpdx Jan 2013 #31
TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #35
davidpdx Jan 2013 #38
dorksied Jan 2013 #36
polly7 Jan 2013 #37
Snagglepuss2 Jan 2013 #39

Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:36 PM

1. Not a big fan of trial by mob.

Hopefully the jury is sequestered.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to blueclown (Reply #1)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:21 PM

24. The trial is by jury, not mob.

The trial is by jury, not mob. The mob may merely observe, not render judgments nor sentences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:29 PM

25. I think that the trial will be heard by a judge, actually.

Since the case is being tried in juvenile court, I don't think that there will be a jury.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to LanternWaste (Reply #24)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:11 PM

32. The mob can influence the judgment indirectly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:40 PM

2. These two

are the sacrificial lambs, as it were.
They are being thrown to the wolves so the other guilty parties can go on with their lives.
It's bullshit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MynameisBlarney (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:44 PM

4. Poor innocent boys. They were just being boys!

fucking

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:53 PM

6. I think what the poster ment was...

... that there were more people involved then the two on trial and they should be held accountable as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:09 PM

11. Yup

Nailed it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MynameisBlarney (Reply #11)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:40 PM

15. In that case I apologize

This subject makes me very angry. I just want the world to see the trial.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #15)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 09:13 AM

41. Ah no worries



I do it all the time myself.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #6)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:55 PM

22. I hope the defendants name names from the stand.

They charged the one black kid and another whose family lacked clout.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lunatica (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:31 PM

27. I don't think that is what the poster meant.

For example, someone(likely an adult) sold those boys ruffies. They haven't been charged yet and it seems the police are not interested in asking them who it was.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MynameisBlarney (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:38 PM

20. Notably absent

members of the coaching staff who, if information is correct, hosted some of these "fun and games".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MynameisBlarney (Reply #2)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:30 PM

26. I agree. It looks like they charged the two who didn't have families with connections.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to yardwork (Reply #26)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:26 PM

33. It looks like they charged the two they had the best case against.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:43 PM

3. I hope he doesn't change his mind

Last edited Thu Jan 31, 2013, 09:17 AM - Edit history (1)

I'm sure the judge will get pressured to keep the public and the media out.

The world needs to see this. I'm sick of assholes trying to change the definition of rape and always blaming the victims.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:49 PM

5. Has the GOP told us if this was a legitimate rape yet? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:56 PM

7. I have heard a lot of disturbing things in this case

But I support strongly the right to due process and a fair trial.

A change of venue might also be a really good idea here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:45 PM

18. Definitely a change of venue and a change of judge. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bluestateguy (Reply #7)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:38 PM

21. Yeah, I don't see why

he is denying a change of venue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 03:57 PM

8. A few questions...

1. Is having the trial public good for the victim?

2. Why would the defense want to change the venue? I thought people in the town are publicly supporting the alleged rapists because the football players are all kings.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to iandhr (Reply #8)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:05 PM

10. because there is no one in the town that hasn't already formed an opinion

and for the defence, that is bad thing. Hard to form any opinion on this that would be good for the defence. They can try and keep some evidence (cell phones might have been tampered with etc.) out of the trial, but there isn't any one in this town that hasn't already seen it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:03 PM

9. I think this an attack on the victim

forcing a minor girl to go in front of tv cameras and testify.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to d_r (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:20 PM

12. You're right. Absolutely wrong to expose this young woman. She's had enough of that. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to d_r (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:44 PM

16. The judge can make them turn off the cameras when the victims testify

But the fact of the matter is trials are open to the public. Anyone can go to one. If the media is there that means those of us who would like to be there can watch it.

It's the circus aspect of it that makes judges hesitate to allow cameras. But even without cameras in the courtroom there will be a circus outside anyway. there will be drawings and journalists will be in the courtroom.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to d_r (Reply #9)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:48 PM

29. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:21 PM

13. BINGO!

When the right-wing, anti-abortion, Rick Santorum supporting Ohio Attorney General, Mike DeWine, took over the case, the victim was going to be victimized, again. I would not want DeWine within 1000 miles of this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:33 PM

14. steubenville

I agree. This girl is going to brutalized again.
And I also agree that these two guys are fall guys. There were many more than just two in this travesty. Parobably a coaches son, or a mayors son, or some muckety muck. The bullshit nose is twitching.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #14)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 04:45 PM

17. I think this girl and others will be brutalized more without the cameras in the courtroom

I doubt most of the public will sit idly by if the victims get brutalized.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to timdog44 (Reply #14)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:42 AM

34. Try the original (ie town) prosecutor's son and...

 

...her home as one of the venues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 05:05 PM

19. How can something that seems so right, feel so wrong. I don't see how much good the other public,

national trials have done as to reducing sexual battery. The only participants that win here are the local lodging, food and bar establishments, the MSM and the attorneys who get both publicity and high fees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:16 PM

23. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.

There will be zero hope of actually rooting out this sort of institutionalized brutality if it is kept under wraps. It is within the judge's discretion to protect the victim(s) while also letting the world see the process in its entirety. And while the crime here is horrifying, it is its institutionalization of such behavior that is the real crime. Without exposure like this, the chances that anyone other than the two suspects ever sees a trial would be zero.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 07:37 PM

28. Probably will be the biggest boost to the local economy in 50 years

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to limpyhobbler (Reply #28)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:35 AM

40. Yes, Mr Reporter, we've always charged $12 for two eggs and toast. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 09:09 PM

30. Anonymous is not going to butt out just because this is going to court

It seems they have a real good idea of what happened from the emails and other online sources.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 11:01 PM

31. Two thoughts I had from this article

One, I'm wondering if the jurors will be under intense pressure by those in the town to acquit the two defendants given it is such a small town (it is the same size town I grew up in so I'm familiar with what that is like) and people know each other. The change of venue is usually to give the defendants a fair trial, but I wonder if they can find 12 people who are going to not be biased by the whole thing.

Second, only two of the people involved have been charged. I think between the actual violation of this young woman and the cover up there are a hell of a lot more people involved. It is an absolute shame more of the people involved didn't get charged.

Ps-OP thanks for the update. I was sitting here this morning wondering what was going on with this case.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to davidpdx (Reply #31)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 12:45 AM

35. Juvie. No jury. /nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TheMadMonk (Reply #35)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 03:59 AM

38. Oh good point

I didn't know that.

It looks like they were in custody for a couple of months and are now only confined to their houses.

I wonder though if under Ohio law (which I know nothing about) what the maximum penalty is for what they are charged. I'd think the worst would be that they would be held until they are 21. If they are 16 now, they'd probably be closer to 17 in the event they were convicted. In that case it would be about 4 years.

Does anyone know what Ohio law is?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 01:56 AM

36. Make all trials a public affair, and try all kids as adults. It would stop a LOT of crime.

As a juvenile, I raised hell because I knew I wouldn't be held accountable for any of it once I turned 18. I set fires, smashed windows, stole a car once. (I'm much more mellow now, and regret it all.) When I was caught, I found it funny and got to know several of the officers at Juvenile Hall pretty well... but if the laws were different, if such crimes were tried as adults, I would not have done any of it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DonViejo (Original post)


Response to DonViejo (Original post)

Thu Jan 31, 2013, 07:19 AM

39. The only thing that will make a whit of difference...

is a degree of collective punishment. The only thing that matters to "The Rape Crew" and their various supporters, enablers, and hangers-on is their precious football team. The only consequence that will ever penetrate their almost impenetrable indifference would be to to ban high-school football for a generation, say 25 years.



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread