Girl Faces Jail Time for Naming Rapists

[Mise]

I'm not sure here. I don't know enough about the gag order. What I do know is that twitter is public broadcasting and it's well-nigh permanent. Liability already has employers filtering hiring through criminal background checks and facebook snooping. There is a functional, if not legal difference between telling people you know about those who committed a crime against you and publishing it permanently on the world wide web.

So the victim is stripped of her right to free speech right here, right now, just on the off-chance that some hypothetical employer at some hypothetical future time, Googles for their names, and, amongst the other 100,000 hypothetical hits, finds an angry tweet from 5 years ago containing the boys' names next to the word "rape". And, rather than relying on the official criminal records, decides that this tweet is proof that the boys are rapists, and puts a red mark on their application forms. And every other hypothetical future employer hypothetically does the same thing and hypothetically interprets it in the same way, and acts in the same way. Screw the official records, I'm going to base my hiring decisions on a 5 year old tweet from a 17 year old girl, is what every employer will say in the future.

Surely your solution is much better. Let's gag the rape victim instead, so that she can make a huge angry scene, generate vast amounts of international press, have the boys' names published in countless easily searchable sources, have the entire thing easily corroborated and verified in any internet search a hypothetical future employer makes in 5 years time instead.

EDIT: I might as well say, I understand gagging newspapers and local TV, but gagging the victim is just downright wrong on every single level. Serves no purpose but to silence the victims of rape.

 

[Farm Boy]

Well, if you look at the court's reaction I think you can see the pragmatism at work already, just too late.

And yes, all sealed juvenile records with gag orders strip the victims of 1st amendment rights. That's what those orders do. All the time.

 

[History_Buff]

While I'm vaguely in the camp of those who think the gag order is a bad idea (though I'm thoroughly in favor of Media Publication Bans), I think we're missing another important part.

This is the victim attempting to take the law into her own hands. What happened to her is a terrible thing, and the perpetrators deserve to be punished. But we can't have a court ordered sentence (was it mentioned in the OP? I didn't read it closely, did see plea bargain), and then have victims deciding it's not good enough and going off to do their own thing.

 

[Mise]

Well, if you look at the court's reaction I think you can see the pragmatism at work already, just too late.

And yes, all sealed juvenile records with gag orders strip the victims of 1st amendment rights. That's what those orders do. All the time.

That the courts regularly prevent rape victims speaking out against the men who raped them is just downright despicable...

 

[Farm Boy]

That the courts regularly prevent rape victims speaking out against the men who raped them is just downright despicable...

Do they regularly? I'm not aware of that. I know there are sometimes gag orders in place for juvenile criminal records. Now that everybody has access to publishing information publicly online rather than having to go through media outlets I do know gag orders have gotten more restrictive to individuals rather than say, simply, newspapers. I was under the impression that the majority of rape convictions result in a mandatory, public sex offender registration system. That doesn't really sound like prevention of speaking out to me?

 

[ParkCungHee]

While I'm vaguely in the camp of those who think the gag order is a bad idea (though I'm thoroughly in favor of Media Publication Bans), I think we're missing another important part.

This is the victim attempting to take the law into her own hands. What happened to her is a terrible thing, and the perpetrators deserve to be punished. But we can't have a court ordered sentence (was it mentioned in the OP? I didn't read it closely, did see plea bargain), and then have victims deciding it's not good enough and going off to do their own thing.

Well, that's only a problem if you think courts have any special legitimacy.

 

[Synobun]

Do they regularly? I'm not aware of that.

They do. There was a guy who raped a lot of girls in my town, but no one ever found out because the court would always disallow the victim of mentioning it. Then one day a girl decided to make a scene and all the other victims decided, "To hell with the court order" and all joined in the exposure.

Silencing victims is despicable and a reality.

 

[Farm Boy]

I have to admit total ignorance of Canadian law. Was this a juvenile case? The court repeatedly gagged victims after successive relapses and convictions on rape charges? He wasn't in jail or juvie? This either sounds like a complete collapse of competency, corruption, or an urban legend. Just because the court seals a criminal record to the public does not mean the court seals the record to itself when considering reviticism and sentencing.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I think the proper solution to this issue is quite simple. There should never be sealed records and gag orders in cases such as this. The public has a far greater right to know than the assailants have to supposed concerns of their privacy as minors. Furthermore, that aspect doesn't even make any sense in this particular case since they made their crimes public by posting the photos.

 

[Synobun]

This either sounds like a complete collapse of competency, corruption, or an urban legend.

Of course. Doesn't change the fact that all the victims were gagged from saying his name to anyone.

Also, I'll be sure to tell my sister that her rape is an urban legend.

 

[warpus]

She should be allowed to discuss who sexually assaulted her in public.

I agree, but didn't she post it on twitter? That is going beyond just "talking about it". That's informing the public at large.

 

[Farm Boy]

Of course. Doesn't change the fact that all the victims were gagged from saying his name to anyone.

Also, I'll be sure to tell my sister that her rape is an urban legend.

The intention there is that this sounds like an egregious enough lapse of any court system that it's hard to believe, not that it didn't happen. I reread how I worded my post and understand how you read it. I'm sorry that it came off that way to you.

The only point I'm making here is that society seals juvenile cases for a reason. If you feel those reasons are inadequate I would rather people would just simply state that they don't support the sealing of juvenile records rather than dithering about it.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I see no problem sealing the records in most cases. But I definitely think the public has the right to know in the case of sexual assault, aggravated assault, armed robbery, homicide, and the like.

 

[CELTICEMPIRE]

If the jail sentence carries through, I hope there is a significant public outcry against it.

 

[MobBoss]

That the courts regularly prevent rape victims speaking out against the men who raped them is just downright despicable...

I think your use of the word 'regularly' is misplaced here.

The bottom line is not all speech is free, and often it comes with ramifications. Rule of law exists for everyone involved, not just her. If one violates a court order, then one should expect to be punished accordingly.

 

[Synobun]

I think your use of the word 'regularly' is misplaced here.

The bottom line is not all speech is free, and often it comes with ramifications. Rule of law exists for everyone involved, not just her. If one violates a court order, then one should expect to be punished accordingly.

Except the court was completely okay with just shoving the situation under the carpet after striking a plea deal. These two individuals will move forward in life with no one except this girl and the court officials involved knowing that they made the conscious decision to rape a girl while she was unconscious.

Their names deserve to be exposed.

 

[MobBoss]

It wasnt 'swept under the rug'...I think what is not being said here is that all the kids involved in this were minors. State laws on this vary quite a bit, but its not unusual for such records to be sealed whether the victim or perpetrator is a minor.

My main problem with what she did was essentially vigilantism by taking the matters into her own hands. Now the court may show her some mercy in consideration of the circumstances, but she did violate a court order, and it should be addressed.

 

[peter grimes]

I completely agree with gag orders that preclude the state from disclosure, but an alleged victim?

That seems unreasonanle, especially if there was a conviction.

EDIT: I'm specifically referring to gags that protect minors.

 

[MobBoss]

I completely agree with gag orders that preclude the state from disclosure, but an alleged victim?

That seems unreasonanle, especially if there was a conviction.

EDIT: I'm specifically referring to gags that protect minors.

Some states in the USA also seal juvenile criminal records for the same basic reason. Perhaps this is one of those states.

 

[choxorn]

I completely agree with gag orders that preclude the state from disclosure, but an alleged victim?

That seems unreasonanle, especially if there was a conviction.

EDIT: I'm specifically referring to gags that protect minors.

Basically this.