Girl Faces Jail Time for Naming Rapists

[cardgame]

I don't have a problem with sealed juvenile records. I do have a problem with silencing rape victims.

 

[MobBoss]

I don't have a problem with sealed juvenile records. I do have a problem with silencing rape victims.

Well, you cant have it both ways when you have a case like this with all minors involved. So whats your compromise?

Do you really think stuff done as a minor needs to label you the rest of your life?

 

[choxorn]

Let the victim talk about it, but don't mention it in the official court records?

 

[Flying Pig]

Yes, I agree you need to be prepared to accept the consequences. I'm just trying to comment on how ridiculous it is when people say "she should get punished because she broke the law". Rather, they should say why they think the law should stand the way it is.

That's then two arguments: one ought to be punished when one breaks the law regardless of how morally just said law is, because otherwise the courts and jails will be full of hippies who stole cars 'because a law enforcing property rights is against our natural rights, man!' Changing laws is a much more peaceful process and involves petitioning Parliament and getting them changed legitimately - there are several methods by which the courts can choose not to enforce a totally inadequate law, but most of those suffer from being either undemocratic, suspect, or Scottish.

I do have a problem with silencing rape victims.

What about theft victims? The problem with this one is that it's at heart an emotional response - rape is horrible, so we feel that its victims ought to have special consideration, which in fact isn't merited by anything we can call justice. Clearly, we can't build a legal system around reactions like that.

 

[Crezth]

I dont have a problem with courts sealing records when minors are involved. Do you?

Not by itself, but when circumstances become extenuating (as they often do, damn circumstances) you find there's a fuzziness in play.

 

[cardgame]

Yeah, after all, the people who will background check, the people who make the kids actually care about the sealed records, will not bother with a possibly libelous and dated tweet from a seventeen year old girl. What's so hard to understand about that?

 

[Flying Pig]

Yeah, after all, the people who will background check, the people who make the kids actually care about the sealed records, will not bother with a possibly libelous and dated tweet from a seventeen year old girl. What's so hard to understand about that?

People will. Once you've got a label like that, it sticks. We're not talking about background checks, we're talking about getting looked at shiftily in the street because Mary was telling everyone round the local about this thug who raped an innocent little girl. Be under no illusions that an allegation like that will only come into play when applying for a job with MI6. Even a 'not guilty' verdict in a rape trial can be life-ruining, which is one of the reasons our legal system is rather poorly designed in that area.

I think it has already been articulated quite a few times in this thread that the juvenile justice system is aimed more towards rehabilitation than retribution.

I don't think any justice system ought to be aimed towards retribution; it needs to be about sober judgements of the good of society, not 'people getting what they deserve' - that's mob justice, the avoidance of which is why we bother with all this pomp and ceremony in the first place!

 

[JollyRoger]

Yes, I agree you need to be prepared to accept the consequences. I'm just trying to comment on how ridiculous it is when people say "she should get punished because she broke the law". Rather, they should say why they think the law should stand the way it is.

I think it has already been articulated quite a few times in this thread that the juvenile justice system is aimed more towards rehabilitation than retribution. What is ridiculous is people spinning this justification as somehow motivated by wanting to protect rapists and hurt victims.

 

[MobBoss]

Let the victim talk about it, but don't mention it in the official court records?

Then whats the point of sealing the record?

 

[DinoDoc]

I dont have a problem with courts sealing records when minors are involved. Do you?

Yes, I do.

 

[cardgame]

To prevent background checks from finding it... not in silencing the victim.

 

[JollyRoger]

To prevent background checks from finding it... not in silencing the victim.

Background checks are not limited to court records.

 

[GoodGame]

The technicality of whether or not she deserves to be in jail is in my opinion, undisputed. She broke the law, and thus should be in jail.

I would say the law itself is at fault here, but she should still follow it, just like everyone else.

This goes back to the discussion I've had with other posters about anonymous. It doesn't matter if your cause is good. If you break the law, you will be punished. Plain and simple.

Frankly I hope those people that raped her are punished to the highest degree the law allows. But she should still abide by the law. Just like everyone is is held to that standard.

This reminds me of the Greek play Antigone.

 

[ParkCungHee]

What about theft victims?

Because rape is, by it's very nature, the violation of a persons ability to control their own bodies and their own actions. When a court orders a rape victim to be silent about the attack, they are repeating and reinforcing the crimes in a unique and unconscionable way.

 

[Formaldehyde]

I think it has already been articulated quite a few times in this thread that the juvenile justice system is aimed more towards rehabilitation than retribution. What is ridiculous is people spinning this justification as somehow motivated by wanting to protect rapists and hurt victims.

I don't really see what publicizing who has committed violent crimes in any way turns if from based on retribution to rehabilitation. What really needs to change with our culture is that the penal system should be changed from retribution to rehabilitation, and those who have been convicted of crimes shouldn't be treated as criminals once they get out of prison. But people should still be able to know they have committed violent crimes in the past, especially sexual crimes.

I also think the juvenile justice system can in no way be considered to be rehabilitative. They are more like schools for turning juvenile delinquents into even more violent criminals.

 

[JollyRoger]

Aspects of the juvenile system that make it less retributive and more rehabilitative include the sealing of the record to the extent possible. The system is not perfect, but a step towards retribution in the form of the elimination of gag orders is a step in the wrong direction.

 

[AlpsStranger]

Juvenile records remain sealed for a reason, but my heart does go out to this girl. Sorry if I've offended anyone.

you find there's a fuzziness in play.

No.

This is how the rule of law dies.

 

[Formaldehyde]

Aspects of the juvenile system that make it less retributive and more rehabilitative include the sealing of the record to the extent possible. The system is not perfect, but a step towards retribution in the form of the elimination of gag orders is a step in the wrong direction.

I think that is primarily due to how our culture treats ex-cons than anything else. It is just symptomatic of how screwed up the criminal justice system and our "law and order" fanaticism really are.

 

[MobBoss]

To prevent background checks from finding it... not in silencing the victim.

Background checks are not limited to court records.

This. In todays digital age, you can pretty much find anything on anybody that's been put out there.

Because rape is, by it's very nature, the violation of a persons ability to control their own bodies and their own actions. When a court orders a rape victim to be silent about the attack, they are repeating and reinforcing the crimes in a unique and unconscionable way.

They werent telling her to be silent about her ordeal - but simply to not release the names of the minors involved.

What if new evidence comes up, it goes to appeal and the 2 boys are somehow found then not guilty and all the convictions overturned? What then?

 

[JollyRoger]

I think that is primarily due to how our culture treats ex-cons than anything else. It is just symptomatic of how screwed up the criminal justice system and our "law and order" fanaticism really are.

If you acknowledge the problems with how our society views ex-cons, then you should recognize the importance of gag orders in juvenile cases.