And the difference between a boyfriend/girlfriend statutory rape charge and this case is that this was *just* rape, with no qualifying adjectives. There MUST be a difference. Justice is (in theory) blind, sure, but it's not supposed to be deaf and have a low IQ. In the boyfriend/girlfriend case, both parties are complicit. We say that the youngest member of the relationship doesn't have the capacity to make adult decisions for themselves (thus the qualifying statutory), but both parties willingly participated (and were minors). THIS was not Savannah's fault. I don't care if she passed out drunk at a party, this is rape. I don't care about any other factors in the case, the pertinent facts (in my eyes) are as follows: (1) Savannah Dietrich did not want to have sex with those two boys; (2) they had sex with her anyway (3) they passed around pictures of the non-consensual sex to others. Simple. They should have rapist tattooed on their foreheads. And no, this doesn't apply to the unfortunate overlap in statutory rape laws that allow consensual relationships to end with statutory rape charges, because this isn't a statutory case (or at least shouldn't be considered one). They raped her, and she wasn't satisfied with the outcome (probation) of the trial, so she tweeted their names. If they aren't considered adults when committing rape, how the hell is she going to be treated as an adult and fined/jailed for an emotional response?
This post has been edited by h4nnib4l: 23 July 2012 - 07:19 AM