Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

44 Replies - 1445 Views - Last Post: 23 July 2012 - 07:35 PM

#16 h4nnib4l  Icon User is offline

  • The Noid
  • member icon

Reputation: 1181
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,673
  • Joined: 24-August 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 07:19 AM

I would be willing to bet $500 that $500 will be raised to pay any fine she is handed.

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

Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#17 Choscura  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover


Reputation: 461
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,219
  • Joined: 18-October 08

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:05 AM

I've never been raped, and nobody's ever posted pics of me naked online, so I don't have a lot of perspective in this.

This means I have to ask- is there ever a point at which the rapist has been rehabilitated, and has paid his dues, and can no longer be treated as guilty of this offense?

If there isn't, why aren't rapists executed?

If there is, why are we suggesting castration and other disfiguring punishments as a first response rather than punishments that are more severe but less permanent?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#18 h4nnib4l  Icon User is offline

  • The Noid
  • member icon

Reputation: 1181
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,673
  • Joined: 24-August 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:36 AM

I think the point with disfiguring punishments is prevention, rather than determining whether or not the person can be "rehabilitated" into a gee-whiz good member of society. As a young adult (before I was caught making the level of mistakes that helped me decide to enlist), I committed many crimes, from petty theft to breaking-and-entering, and all kinds of things in between. If I had thought that I could lose my hands if caught stealing, I probably wouldn't have done it. I'm not advocating this specifically, just using it to make a point. Tattoos and castration won't stop serial rapists, but they might have made those two boys at a party pause. Maybe not, who knows? (I think that the real problem (in this case) lies much deeper, with the fucktarded youth and lack of parenting and underlying moral structure prevalent in this country, but that is another debate.)

Many crimes are committed in "the heat of the moment" and the consequences aren't held in consideration. Heinous punishments would not prevent these. But we are willing to let rapists and murderers back out to commit their crimes again, so we are showing disregard for their potential future victims' right to be free from rape and/or murder. How about, instead of erring on the side of the charged, that we err on the side of the victim. We are so concerned with avoiding cruelty to our convicts, but we show much less concern for the victims of crimes. In this case, why is the victim supposed to conform to a set of rules regarding behavior that carry a steeper consequence than the much more heinous rules that the perpetrators broke? The legal system is IMMEDIATELY concerned with two rapists' civil rights, but didn't care as much for the 17 year old girl that they raped. She broke a rule regarding the treatment of criminals, so she should PAY!!!

And for the record, I'm sure that most of the responses regarding violent/disfiguring punishments (mine included, to an extent) come from an emotional, rather than logical standpoint. I dated a girl who was drugged and similarly raped at a party, and said nothing because the FIRST two guys to take a turn came from extremely wealthy, extremely well-connected families. I also have a daughter. I take a violently dim view of rape, and I can't even begin to imagine where I'd be were I the father of Savannah Dietrich. Most likely in jail, held without bail, awaiting trial.
Was This Post Helpful? 3
  • +
  • -

#19 Celerian  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Regular


Reputation: 144
  • View blog
  • Posts: 384
  • Joined: 30-March 12

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:36 AM

Even the more severe punishment of being put on a sex offender list doesn't do a whole lot, especially if the person doesn't register like they should. I'm sure plenty of people on that list don't do it again, but they're marred for the rest of their life as a sex offender, maybe for something that didn't really happen or a stupid mistake that they shouldn't have made or did't intend to make.

Maybe the Sex Offender Registry should have some sort of expiration point, where if the individual hasn't committed a crime in 10-15 years, then their name gets wiped. These two certainly deserve at least 5 years of being marked as a sex offender, but I'm not sure about 10-15 years let alone their whole life. I understand that they KNEW what they were doing and very well knew that it was WRONG, but until we start charging all crimes like this equally, then you'll have these periods where its either being basically ignored or a full punishment.

If our justice system was a little more through and could say that a vast majority of the time (99.9%) they have the right person beyond a shadow of a doubt, then maybe you could enact harsher penalties. The worst thing that could happen is you put several crimes into an unforgivable bucket and say, the punishment for X crime is this, and it should be carried out immediately and then you end up punishing a bunch of people who are truly innocent. What is acceptable punishment for these sorts of things? Rape the rapists? Kill the murders? If you are caught stealing from someone do you return it in person and then your victim is allowed to take something from you that is of equal or lesser value?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#20 modi123_1  Icon User is online

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 8915
  • View blog
  • Posts: 33,427
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:40 AM

Quote

This means I have to ask- is there ever a point at which the rapist has been rehabilitated, and has paid his dues, and can no longer be treated as guilty of this offense?


Data suggests they have a low recidivism rate.. example:

Quote

This report describes the recidivism rates of Washington State sex offenders.

Compared with the full population of felony offenders, sex offenders have the lowest recidivism rates for felony offenses (13 percent) and violent felony offenses (6.7 percent) but the highest recidivism rates for felony sex offenses (2.7 percent).

cite
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#21 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7564
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,682
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:44 AM

I agree entirely with the emotional reaction to this case, but god help us if the law is ever determined by your emotional reactions or mine.

View Posth4nnib4l, on 23 July 2012 - 09:19 AM, said:

They raped her, and she wasn't satisfied with the outcome (probation) of the trial, so she tweeted their names.

And in doing so, she broke the law. I hope it was worth it, because it was illegal. Sorry, that's the way it is.
That she was not satisfied with the outcome of the trial justifies nothing, unless you're in a Hollywood revenge thriller. In the real world, even victims of crimes have to obey the law - you don't get a "commit one crime free" card when someone violates your person or property.

If you want, it would be plausible to see this as an act of civil disobedience, but in that case she has to take her penalties as they're given. That's what civil disobedience is.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#22 DarenR  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover

Reputation: 431
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,995
  • Joined: 12-January 10

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 08:48 AM

The being juvinile is just bs. I knew exectly what I was doing when I was 13 or younger let alone 16 or 17. As for having this follow you for the rest of your life-- it should-- they committed a crime that they knew was wrong ----this is taught in all schools---- and then they said they are to young---please... Their names should be released and everyone should know who it was. I don't want to hear anything about ohh their futures will be messed up--- so what they started down the road and now let them fix it. Why should they get off just because they are 16 or so. The plea should never have had happened if the lawyers actually asked the girl what she wanted. I always thought that the victim needed to be notified every step of the way in a case... to me the lawyer should be thrown in jail as well for their failure to prosecute and inform their client.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#23 h4nnib4l  Icon User is offline

  • The Noid
  • member icon

Reputation: 1181
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,673
  • Joined: 24-August 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:02 AM

@Daren - dude, I nearly started arguing against the points that I was trying to make after reading your post. Minors should GENERALLY not be held as accountable for their actions as adults: whether or not they are should, as it is now, be considered on a case-by-case basis. I think that this case is a specific example where they justice system failed to properly try them as adults, but this is not a case that proves that the system in general is a failure (do you think the Colorado shooting proves that guns should be utterly eradicated from our lives?). And this is not a civil trial: the boys were not being tried for raping Savannah Dietrich, but for committing the crime of rape. The DA did not represent Savannah, and therefore had no obligation to notify her of changes in the handling of the case.

@Jon - I agree with you: she broke the law and should pay, just like I should pay for skinning a man for raping my daughter. I'm merely commenting on the tragic irony of the fact that she could end up with a more severe punishment than the rapists (the social consequences of their crimes cannot, and should not, be considered part of the legal punishment), and that they got the benefit of being treated as imprudent minors but the rape victim may not.

@ modi - I'm confused by part of that quote:

Quote

Compared with the full population of felony offenders, sex offenders have... the highest recidivism rates for felony sex offenses.


Did part of that get lost or something?

This post has been edited by h4nnib4l: 23 July 2012 - 09:03 AM

Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

#24 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7564
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,682
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:08 AM

View PostChoscura, on 23 July 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

This means I have to ask- is there ever a point at which the rapist has been rehabilitated, and has paid his dues, and can no longer be treated as guilty of this offense?


I don't think that anyone reverts to a "not-guilty" status without a reversal of the conviction. Even a pardon simply says, "you're guilty, but not subject to further punishment or censure".

However, the question I think you're getting at is not whether they're guilty of the previous crime, but whether they're likely to offend again. And there we have a very complicated question, and I'm not even going to start in on it now. Modi's given a start of an answer, but that doesn't even start to address the sorts of things that are called "rape" in this world.
Looking at your questions as a whole, I get the feeling you're thinking of the case of violent assault by a stranger, which, when I was being trained up as a feminist in the '90s, was held to be far and away the least common case.
People are much more likely to be raped or assaulted by someone they know, probably someone related to them or in a position of authority, than by a stranger.
What does this imply? Well, I frankly don't know that I could unravel all of this, or that there's much by way of useful fact available to rely on.
It's worth talking about though, if we want to get closer to understanding any of it.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#25 DarenR  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover

Reputation: 431
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,995
  • Joined: 12-January 10

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:08 AM

View Posth4nnib4l, on 23 July 2012 - 12:02 PM, said:

The DA did not represent Savannah, and therefore had no obligation to notify her of changes in the handling of the case.



IM sorry but where in the article does it say a DA was involved?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#26 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7564
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,682
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:17 AM

View PostDarenR, on 23 July 2012 - 10:48 AM, said:

The being juvinile is just bs. I knew exectly what I was doing when I was 13 or younger let alone 16 or 17. As for having this follow you for the rest of your life-- it should-- they committed a crime that they knew was wrong ----this is taught in all schools---- and then they said they are to young---please... Their names should be released and everyone should know who it was. I don't want to hear anything about ohh their futures will be messed up--- so what they started down the road and now let them fix it. Why should they get off just because they are 16 or so.


If you believe any of this, you can try to change the laws. As it happens, that's not the way it works. Sorry.

Quote

The plea should never have had happened if the lawyers actually asked the girl what she wanted. I always thought that the victim needed to be notified every step of the way in a case...


You seem to be laboring under the misapprehension that criminal law exists to give satisfaction to the victim of a crime. This is not the case. If you want personal satisfaction, you have to address the issue in civil court, where the case is "Victim vs. Offender". In a criminal case, the case is "the state vs. Offender", and the offense is against the state.

Quote

to me the lawyer should be thrown in jail as well for their failure to prosecute and inform their client.


If you think there was some malfeasance or incompetence, then, as I said, this is an issue for the local jurisdiction to address. It's entirely possible that the problem stems back to funding - this has always been an issue, and the recent successes of the anarchist party are hurting all areas of local funding, including this one. You might want to see whether your local representatives have supported insupportable tax cuts, and getting rid of them if they have.
Was This Post Helpful? 2
  • +
  • -

#27 h4nnib4l  Icon User is offline

  • The Noid
  • member icon

Reputation: 1181
  • View blog
  • Posts: 1,673
  • Joined: 24-August 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:20 AM

I'm sorry, I should have said CA (Commonwealth's Attorney). It might not have been tried by the specific person who holds the title of CA, but prosecutors tend to work for the government, and it most likely would have been the CA's office who handled the case for said government.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#28 Choscura  Icon User is offline

  • D.I.C Lover


Reputation: 461
  • View blog
  • Posts: 2,219
  • Joined: 18-October 08

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:23 AM

View Postjon.kiparsky, on 23 July 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

View PostChoscura, on 23 July 2012 - 10:05 AM, said:

This means I have to ask- is there ever a point at which the rapist has been rehabilitated, and has paid his dues, and can no longer be treated as guilty of this offense?


I don't think that anyone reverts to a "not-guilty" status without a reversal of the conviction. Even a pardon simply says, "you're guilty, but not subject to further punishment or censure".

However, the question I think you're getting at is not whether they're guilty of the previous crime, but whether they're likely to offend again. And there we have a very complicated question, and I'm not even going to start in on it now. Modi's given a start of an answer, but that doesn't even start to address the sorts of things that are called "rape" in this world.
Looking at your questions as a whole, I get the feeling you're thinking of the case of violent assault by a stranger, which, when I was being trained up as a feminist in the '90s, was held to be far and away the least common case.
People are much more likely to be raped or assaulted by someone they know, probably someone related to them or in a position of authority, than by a stranger.
What does this imply? Well, I frankly don't know that I could unravel all of this, or that there's much by way of useful fact available to rely on.
It's worth talking about though, if we want to get closer to understanding any of it.



Those are questions that are worth asking, but they aren't what I'm asking. What I want to know is specifically this: after the rapist has been convicted, punished, done his time / paid his debt to society, and after he (inevitably he) has been rehabilitated in some way- re-education, psychological conditioning, or whatever other methods might have been used - can the guy be considered innocent of the crime?

Can anyone, in other words, get Jesus-style forgiveness as a result of penance on this side of the grave, without resorting to divine intervention? Not in the sense of being "Not guilty", but in the sense of "guilty and have paid the price for it"?
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#29 jon.kiparsky  Icon User is offline

  • Pancakes!
  • member icon


Reputation: 7564
  • View blog
  • Posts: 12,682
  • Joined: 19-March 11

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:31 AM

Quote

Can anyone, in other words, get Jesus-style forgiveness as a result of penance on this side of the grave, without resorting to divine intervention? Not in the sense of being "Not guilty", but in the sense of "guilty and have paid the price for it"?


After you've finished your sentence, traditionally, you're considered guilty of the crime, but no longer subject to penalty or sanction. You've done the sentence, it's over. (though it's legitimate to consider the guilty status in some situations - future criminal cases, or when you're being considered for a job or an apartment, that sort of thing)

So the answer is, yes and no.

Since the advent of exclusion zones and such for certain offenders, this has changed, and now people convicted on certain crimes are becoming legal pariahs to the extent that many of them are unable to work or live in their homes. This has been found to be problematic.
Was This Post Helpful? 0
  • +
  • -

#30 modi123_1  Icon User is online

  • Suitor #2
  • member icon



Reputation: 8915
  • View blog
  • Posts: 33,427
  • Joined: 12-June 08

Re: Savannah Dietrich: Victim With A Voice

Posted 23 July 2012 - 09:31 AM

Has anyone actually heard what the recommended sentencing was? At best all I could find was:

Quote

The two boys pleaded guilty to first-degree sexual abuse and voyeurism as part of a plea bargain.

While terms of the plea bargain, such as what the recommended sentence is, are not known to the public, Dietrich feels the agreement is too lenient.
cite

Quote

Sexual abuse in the first degree is a Class D felony, unless the victim is less than twelve (12) years old, in which case the offense shall be a Class C felony.
cite2

Punishment:

Quote

(a) At least one (1) but not more than five (5) years shall be deemed a Class D felony;


Voyuerism:

Quote

Voyeurism is a Class A misdemeanor.
cite

Quote

Class A Misdemeanor Up to 12 months imprisonment and/or fine up to $500
cite3



@Choscura - what? Are you asking if the guilt is done when he was rehabilitated? Well seeing no one has got around to living up to 'Time Cop' yet what has occurred in the past still occurred.
Was This Post Helpful? 1
  • +
  • -

  • (3 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3