Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Latest Breaking News

Ash_F

(5,861 posts)

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

Reply to lunatica (Reply #4)

Wed Jan 30, 2013, 08:31 PM

Jan 2013

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.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

41 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Steubenville 'Rape Crew' Trial Will Be on Display for the World to See [View all] DonViejo Jan 2013 OP

Not a big fan of trial by mob. blueclown Jan 2013 #1

The trial is by jury, not mob. LanternWaste Jan 2013 #24

I think that the trial will be heard by a judge, actually. yardwork Jan 2013 #25

The mob can influence the judgment indirectly. blueclown Jan 2013 #32

These two MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #2

Poor innocent boys. They were just being boys! lunatica Jan 2013 #4

I think what the poster ment was... iandhr Jan 2013 #6

Yup MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #11

In that case I apologize lunatica Jan 2013 #15

Ah no worries MynameisBlarney Jan 2013 #41

I hope the defendants name names from the stand. DollarBillHines Jan 2013 #22

I don't think that is what the poster meant. Ash_F Jan 2013 #27

Notably absent Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #20

I agree. It looks like they charged the two who didn't have families with connections. yardwork Jan 2013 #26

It looks like they charged the two they had the best case against. Comrade Grumpy Jan 2013 #33

I hope he doesn't change his mind lunatica Jan 2013 #3

Has the GOP told us if this was a legitimate rape yet? nt onehandle Jan 2013 #5

I have heard a lot of disturbing things in this case bluestateguy Jan 2013 #7

Definitely a change of venue and a change of judge. nt amandabeech Jan 2013 #18

Yeah, I don't see why Kelvin Mace Jan 2013 #21

A few questions... iandhr Jan 2013 #8

because there is no one in the town that hasn't already formed an opinion d_r Jan 2013 #10

I think this an attack on the victim d_r Jan 2013 #9

You're right. Absolutely wrong to expose this young woman. She's had enough of that. n/t Judi Lynn Jan 2013 #12

The judge can make them turn off the cameras when the victims testify lunatica Jan 2013 #16

+1 JustAnotherGen Jan 2013 #29

BINGO! dawn frenzy adams Jan 2013 #13

steubenville timdog44 Jan 2013 #14

I think this girl and others will be brutalized more without the cameras in the courtroom lunatica Jan 2013 #17

Try the original (ie town) prosecutor's son and... TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #34

How can something that seems so right, feel so wrong. I don't see how much good the other public, libdem4life Jan 2013 #19

Sunlight is the best disinfectant. eggplant Jan 2013 #23

Probably will be the biggest boost to the local economy in 50 years limpyhobbler Jan 2013 #28

Yes, Mr Reporter, we've always charged $12 for two eggs and toast. nt JustABozoOnThisBus Jan 2013 #40

Anonymous is not going to butt out just because this is going to court siligut Jan 2013 #30

Two thoughts I had from this article davidpdx Jan 2013 #31

Juvie. No jury. /nt TheMadMonk Jan 2013 #35

Oh good point davidpdx Jan 2013 #38

Make all trials a public affair, and try all kids as adults. It would stop a LOT of crime. dorksied Jan 2013 #36

This message was self-deleted by its author polly7 Jan 2013 #37

The only thing that will make a whit of difference... Snagglepuss2 Jan 2013 #39