HS cheerleader kicked off squad for refusing to cheer for her rapist

[Sarah Valentine]

That's really fucked up.

[Rageaholic]

To be fair, the guy was never convicted of rape so I can't blame the courts for not taking her side. What I can blame the courts for is calling this a frivolous lawsuit. Because if she was raped, than the school is taking his side over hers. If she wasn't, than it's just one girl being passive aggressive. I would think the rape is much worse than being mildly passive aggressive.

[Plaidman]

To be fair, the guy was never convicted of rape so I can't blame the courts for not taking her side. What I can blame the courts for is calling this a frivolous lawsuit. Because if she was raped, than the school is taking his side over hers. If she wasn't, than it's just one girl being passive aggressive. I would think the rape is much worse than being mildly passive aggressive.

Problem is, he DID rape her, plenty of witnessess to that. He even admitted it. It's why he got such a lesser charge due to a plea bargan.

[Andara Bledin]

To be fair, the guy was never convicted of rape so I can't blame the courts for not taking her side.

He copped a plea of assault. While it may not be rape, he did victimize the girl. However, he didn't take that plea until well after the events of this last case, so it could not have held merit. I suspect that her side accepted that plea just to get a conviction on him and get it over with.

After reading the actual decision, it's apparent that they came to the correct decision in the first place and an appeal would be pointless.

The problem here is that her lawyers are going after the wrong people, or rather, too many people. The only actionable harm came when the grand jury refused to indict originally due to racial issues, which would likely raise a case of them violating her right to equal protection. Whoever pushed for suing the school was gravely mistaken. If they had left it to just going after D.A. Sheffield, there may have been a dramatically different outcome.

^-.-^

[Shangri-laschild]

Having a better understanding of the timeline, I can see how, while the school was uncaring and supporting the wrong side in this, legally until the boys were convicted of anything they might not have had much grounds. I know there are codes of conduct but I'm not sure how much legal standing they would have had to kick the boys out at first. I'm not saying it doesn't seriously suck but if they had kicked them out I could see how the boys could then go after the school in court saying that it had not been proved (by court ruling) that they did anything wrong. I could be wrong on this one but it's possible.

None of that takes away the fact that the people running that school were completely insensitive and horrible to a rape victim. It also doesn't mean that the school wanted the boys gone but just had their hands tied. The school definitely screwed up. Just not necessarily from a legal stand point maybe.

While I can see the point that cheerleaders are there to cheer for the team as a whole and not pick and choose. But the correct thing would have been to find a way to take them off the team.

[Andara Bledin]

But the correct thing would have been to find a way to take them off the team.

Not at that point. You don't kick athletes off the team when all you have is an accusation.

The school was completely insensitive to the issue and should have made arrangements to accommodate both parties. Unfortunately, the fact that they didn't isn't a legal matter.

^-.-^

[Rageaholic]

I'm confused because last I heard, she was eventually let back on the team, but dropped for GPA reasons. So what exactly was she suing for?

[Plaidman]

I'm confused because last I heard, she was eventually let back on the team, but dropped for GPA reasons. So what exactly was she suing for?

Emontional damages, and rights violations. likely.

Having your name dragged through the mud, made fun of, humilated because you dared to refuse to cheer for your rapist. In that town's mind, it doesn't matter what any star atletic does. They could get away with murder as long as their good. So what if they raped a cheerleader? To them, that's what the cheerleaders are there for. Fuck dolls and to cheer their teams on.

[Rageaholic]

And yet despite all the emotional damage, they still claimed it was a frivolous lawsuit?

WTF is wrong with these courts?

[Andara Bledin]

I'm confused because last I heard, she was eventually let back on the team, but dropped for GPA reasons. So what exactly was she suing for?

As Plaidman said, rights violations for being kicked off in the first place.

Also, part of the suit was against the DA for the allegation that people not involved in the case harassed her based on knowledge that should only have been known to her, him, and the grand jury who refused to indict the first time. The fact that others knew that was part of her case, and that is really the thing that her lawyers should have been focusing on.

The "frivolous" ruling I think is really out of line and would be willing to wager that it was decided as a chilling effect against others attempting to protect their rights in similar circumstances.

^-.-^

[wolfie]

She was also told to not eat in the cafeteria and to not participate in homecoming activites because "she might upset her attacker"

Her attacker definitely NEEDS to be upset - in the metalworking sense of the word.

[Gibbo]

You see films and TV programmes where high school footballers/basketballers do these kinds of things and never get kicked off the team because the team winning games is more important than punishing the player involved and I always thought that it couldn't happen in real life but the OP is proof that it does. If something like that happened over here in the UK they would be thrown out of the team, even if they were the teams star player.

[insertNameHere]

has anyone yet referenced Kobe? I forget. If not there you go, if your a good athlete they can ignore shit which is wrong. To bad that the star players who "set an example" aren't actually held to the same standards if not actually stricter ones.

[Rageaholic]

has anyone yet referenced Kobe?

No, but I was thinking of OJ Simpson.

[kibbles]

Kobe was not convicted, nor did the case even go to trial. If an athlete or anyone is not proven beyond a reasonable doubt to have done something wrong, why does society so often demand that the person be shunned?

Isn't it at all possible that the other party has lied? I'm not saying that there are absolutely no occurrences of athletes getting away with light treatment by the law, but just because someone is accused of something doesn't always make it true. JMO.