Althouse: "If I had the courage to come back to Waco and face my rapist and testify, you could at least have had enough respect for me to show up today."

December 11, 2018

"If I had the courage to come back to Waco and face my rapist and testify, you could at least have had enough respect for me to show up today."

"You both will have to live with this decision to let a rapist run free in society without any warning to future victims.... It must be horrible to be you... To know what you did to me. To know you are a rapist. To know that you almost killed me. To know that you ruined my life, stole my virginity and stole many other things from me."

Said the victim, quoted in "Accused of rape, former Baylor fraternity president gets no jail time after plea deal" (WaPo). She was addressing the prosecutors, who did not attend the hearing, and — beginning with "It must be horrible to be you" — the accused.

The WaPo article links to Star Telegram in "Ex-frat president at Baylor gets no jail time in rape case as judge accepts plea deal."

30 comments:

Narayanan said...: Baylor has other travesties under Ken Starr presidency earlier.; 12/11/18, 5:40 AM
Ralph L said...: It took over a year and a half to get an indictment, so she probably didn't report it immediately, destroying any physical evidence. Looks like the defendant would want the apparent exculpatory information to be publicized. Can he do that? I doubt she was the first girl he drugged, if that's what happened.

Frat presidents used to be the sober or less reckless ones to keep the others from getting out of hand.; 12/11/18, 5:57 AM
Ralph L said...: Baylor expelled him--what more could they do?; 12/11/18, 5:58 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Seems weird to force a plea deal on a winner of a case in the #MeToo era.; 12/11/18, 5:58 AM
Matt Sablan said...: This only furthers my belief that whatever benefits plea deals had, they have lost them. Exculpatory information is bring withheld so long as the accused chooses not to gamble on a trial? Who agrees to that? Reveal that information and let a jury of his peers decide. I'm sick of elites saying we're too dumb to come to what they believe is the right decision.; 12/11/18, 6:02 AM
Matt Sablan said...: Also... Isn't it a good thing juries find it hard to convict without concrete proof?; 12/11/18, 6:04 AM
David Begley said...: “It’s my opinion that our jurors aren’t ready to blame rapists and not victims when there isn’t concrete proof of more than one victim.”

One free rape in Waco?

Assistant district attorney lost one case and is afraid to lose another?; 12/11/18, 6:07 AM
Matt Sablan said...: More likely they didn't have a strong case but believed the victim.

Or, they cut the routine plea deal they cut in all similar cases because justice is often lazy, and never expected the victim to actually want justice for the actual crime they accused someone of as opposed to just "justice."

Either way, this reflects poorly on the prosecution.; 12/11/18, 6:11 AM
Eric the Fruit Bat said...: The beauty of the so-called "victim's rights movement" is the popular media get to put out some halfway decent theater every now and then.; 12/11/18, 6:19 AM
Ralph L said...: "Judge Strother had access to all the statements that have ever been made by all people involved"

That's an interesting construction.

There's no comment from the defendant's side, and no statement that it was requested.; 12/11/18, 6:25 AM
Matt Sablan said...: What could the defense say better than there was no concrete proof of wrong doing and not have it twisted or misconstrued in some way? This if an excellent story for the defendant.; 12/11/18, 6:32 AM
Ralph L said...: An earlier article said she found out about the plea from the news. That IS insult to injury.; 12/11/18, 6:39 AM
Lawrence Person said...: There's something deeply wrong in Waco, from the police response to the Twin Peaks shooting (four of the deaths were probably due to police overreaction and incompetence) to the Baylor gang raps culture, something there seems to be deeply, deeply wrong.; 12/11/18, 7:12 AM
Tina Trent said...: She had varying recollection of what she did. He didn't give her the drink. Was she in fact drugged, or was it impossible to know if she was just drunk by her own volition? The hospital would have drawn blood. Is that the exculpatory information? She doesn't remember if she consented. This is a bad case. And no, she didn't almost die. She is now saying she was found and rescued from aspirating on her vomit but reported earlier that she found her friends and left the party. So it's a bad case for that reason.

The campus rape movement isn't about rape. It's identity politics weaponized to condemn men in general. And as such it is greedily destroying our hard earned ability to address unambiguous cases of sex crime in the courts because it is creating cynicism and injecting politics and elitism into an already overwhelmed prosecutorial system.

Of course rapes happen on campuses. And as is shown at Baylor, some cases are prosecuted successfully and some are not, though Ken Starr is a tool for intervening in an unrelated child molestation case.

These campus feminist types all simultaneously work with the leftist anti-incarceration movements. They just want certain types of people to be punished.

If feminists had kept pushing for real reforms for real cases of injustice, such as the practice of trying serial rapists for one offense and shelving the others, and supporting sentencing reform to really put violent criminals away for good, even if they're youths, then we wouldn't have so many stories of serial offenders raping 100 women or killing 10 or 30 or 90 women before being properly investigated across state lines and properly prosecuted. I don't blame the prosecutor here. She is doing triage. The complaint is just character assassination. What is her record of successful cases? People are just accusing her of outrageous violations of her responsibility. I blame the narcissistic activists who want to make criminal cases out of regretful morning afters that cannot be adjudicated reasonably by the courts while also working with organizations that make it harder and too expensive to convict and incarcerate the worst offenders.; 12/11/18, 7:13 AM
FIDO said...: How is the WaPo covering Epstein again?; 12/11/18, 8:14 AM
Florence said...: Judge Ralph Strother of the 19th District Court said most of the comments he has seen on social media and emails fall into three categories: "not fully informed, misinformed or totally uninformed."; 12/11/18, 8:20 AM
Rick said...: “Conflicting evidence and statements exist in this case making the original allegation difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt,”

They never get to specifics so understanding is difficult. But I note the accusations about events occur in different places with different lead ins. In one she says she was passed out and woke "in a pool of her own vomit", and in the other she says he raped her repeatedly. The certainty of the latter statement seems incongruent with the first. Did she originally say she passed out and is then summarizing other evidence to conclude he was the rapist?

This is outrageous as it's presented but I can't help but suspect someone - maybe the reporters, maybe the prosecutors - is hiding the true reasoning.; 12/11/18, 8:35 AM
Ralph L said...: because it is creating cynicism

And the activists (and media) win big in cases like this one, because the alleged victim lost badly. A conflict of interest.; 12/11/18, 8:36 AM
hombre said...: Every sex crimes prosecutor has lost cases with facts similar to those reported here. Nevertheless, this kind of a deal is inappropriate, particularly without consulting with the victim. This is essentially a deferred dismissal. It is worse than a loss. It is a slap in the face to the victim.

It is no mitigation that the judge accepted the plea. Judges are, by and large, defense-oriented pussies.; 12/11/18, 10:10 AM
AZ Bob said...: Put 12 in the box and let the chips fall.; 12/11/18, 10:13 AM
virgil xenophon said...: Tina Trent speak Heap Big Medicine!; 12/11/18, 11:08 AM
Joe said...: Nevertheless, this kind of a deal is inappropriate, particularly without consulting with the victim.

What bullshit. The point of our justice system is that the state takes justice upon itself. The notion that a victim has say in how a case shall be prosecuted cuts against that entire concept.; 12/11/18, 11:10 AM
AlbertAnonymous said...: Sounds similar to the Stanford Swimmer case, though there I think he was tried and convicted (IIRC). The mob rises up and attempts mob justice rather than actual justice.

In the Stanford case the mob wanted to recall the Judge for the “inappropriately light” sentence, and there were all kinds of claims of privilege for the white boy defendant, rich kid, etc.

I had a friend complaining (in line with the mob) about how unfair it was and so I looked into the details. Female DA, female probation officer doing the sentencing report, report shows the sentence range he should get and the judge accepted the sentence recommendation.

So if that’s all done, now the mob wants the judge to disregard all that work and the recommendations of the professionals and throw the book at him? And what happens in a case where the defendant is black ? If the Judge ignores the sentencing recommendation and throws the book at him he’ll be recalled as racist.

This is the world the SJWs and DEMs have wrought....; 12/11/18, 12:11 PM
Jupiter said...: If the young woman believes she has a case that will stand up in court, she can certainly sue the guy she claims raped her. If she does, she will not have to prove her case beyond a reasonable doubt, but only by a preponderance of the evidence. It seems fairly clear, from what the prosecutor and the judge have said, that they do not believe a jury would convict this defendant of raping this woman.; 12/11/18, 1:00 PM
jg said...: If it were even five years ago I'd think "this woman was probably raped". No more.; 12/11/18, 2:16 PM
narayanan said...: Florence said... Judge Ralph Strother of the 19th District Court said most of the comments he has seen on social media and emails fall into three categories: "not fully informed, misinformed or totally uninformed."

Judge blowing out his ass - How can the Public comment be informed - when there is no trial to bring out details; 12/11/18, 2:32 PM
Thorley Winston said...: I agree with Tina Trent that if the victim has changed her story multiple times, it’s likely that this could result in an acquittal. As unsatisfying as it is, this could be the best outcome that the prosecutor could get. I also agree with Jupiter that the woman could still bring a civil suit against the man she claims attacked her. Even with the lower burden of proof (preponderance of the evidence instead of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt) there’s no guarantee that she’d prevail but that avenue should still be open to her.; 12/11/18, 2:52 PM
Rosalyn C. said...: Not this again. After all those lectures about agency you'd think young women would get the message they have the right and responsibility to take care of themselves. If they want to go to a frat party and hook up with a guy to have a sexual experience, fine, own it. No guilt. I'm sure plenty do and get drunk to get in the mood. If they don't want that don't drink alcohol, don't get inebriated, and most importantly don't go off with a guy to a tent or bedroom. Not excusing the guy for his predatory motivation and behavior (he looks like a SOB), but he didn't drag her against her will or threaten her to get what he wanted. How can you call what happened rape? More like she was being personally AWL. Charge them both with poor judgement and see if that changes behavior.; 12/11/18, 2:53 PM
Rosalyn C. said...: What about someone who is not a college student and goes to a bar to socialize instead of a frat house? If a young woman meets a guy and gets drunk and willingly goes to his place or her place and they have sex and then she or he regrets it, would that ever be called rape? I don't think so. So why is it so different if this takes place on a college campus?; 12/11/18, 3:18 PM
Florence said...: narayanan said...
Florence said... Judge Ralph Strother of the 19th District Court said most of the comments he has seen on social media and emails fall into three categories: "not fully informed, misinformed or totally uninformed."

Judge blowing out his ass - How can the Public comment be informed - when there is no trial to bring out details

Or maybe it’s the public that is blowing comments out their ass since they admittely don’t know the details?; 12/11/18, 4:09 PM