<p>It seems multiple partiers were reporting to each other, via Twitter, etc. that a felony had occured. They don’t seem to have reported it to the police. Thus, the man in question is admitting to a misdemeanor in Ohio. From the news reports, the partiers don’t seem to have had any doubt about what was happening.</p>
<p>As far as I’m concerned, the victim in this case doesn’t need to testify. Multiple people have written and published online accounts which agree with each other. While she was unconscious, others transported her to various parties. She was raped multiple times. </p>
<p>Does Ohio have a social host law? What is an adult supposed to do if party guests are hauling around unconscious females? Look the other way? I doubt it. The party hosts (several assistant coaches) should face significant peril for their failure to chaperone teen parties on their properties.</p>
<p>The Steubenville website has a lot of information. Interestingly, though they have background information about the police chief and police officers, the website does not clarify the allegations made about the prosecutor-- that her child attends the school in question, that he was at one of the parties in question, that one of the parties was at her house. Nor does it say when she delegated her authority to the state Attorney General.</p>
<p>There’s a site called slightlyopinionatedDOTcom I’ve no idea whether it’s legit, but it certainly seems to be. It identifies the 3 boys who belong to the football team who testified at the probable cause hearing. It summarizes the testimony of each. This is the summary of testimony by one of these 3 witnesses:</p>
<p>They know that if they say more (regardless of what they actually did, or whether Nodianus is still a student), there will be a firestorm of criticism from somewhere.</p>
<p>I’d also be interested in hearing what this war between men and women that austinareadad references is all about. I raised two loving, kind respectful young adults, one male and one female. They are not involved in any “war,” but both are equally horrified by stories like this, as would be the men and women they know. Assigning this kind of behavior to some kind of pervasive man/woman contention is a way of absolving individual responsibility.</p>
<p>Public schools have fundamentally conflicting obligations to respect First Amendment rights and provide safe/healthy work/educational environments. First Amendment absolutism often doesn’t fly in educational settings.</p>
<p>Doesn’t seem like Ohio State is interested in stopping rapists. I’d also like to know why the wresler who was an alleged rapist wasn’t put behind bars. If the facts were as the article states, he should have been. Was this one of those cases where campus police swept everything under the rug rather than doing a criminal investigation?</p>
<p>All I know is what’s said in the article. I just googled in an attempt to find out what OSU’s policies regarding sexual abuse are. I found that article. It does say that campus police were still investigating. In any event, base on it, I doubt OSU would expel Nodianus because of the video.</p>
<p>The vigilantism of this bothers me. As some of you may have seen, Anonymous posted the phone numbers and addresses of him and his parents. It erroneously gave the wrong area code for the mom’s phone and another woman with that number receive hundreds of threatening calls and had to cancel service on that number. Her name wasn’t released. It sounds as if she had a very frightening experience.</p>
<p>I have more confidence that justice will be done since the Ohio AG 's office is handling this case now.</p>
<p>As others have said, the video appears to be a lot more than objectionable speech (I have only read the details - could not bring myself to watch it). He at best witnessed the even and did nothing, at worst was involved. What a vile young man. I would not want him on my campus. </p>
<p>Whether OSU expel him or not, at least everyone on campus knows him (or soon will) for what he is. I doubt he will feel very welcome.</p>
<p>Sorry, jonri, wasn’t meaning to criticize you. </p>
<p>This is the part I missed the first time: The university disciplined the rapist for physical contact or other nonphysical conduct of a sexual nature in the absence of clear, knowing and voluntary consent. In English, we call that rape. So, after a year, the University allowed this rapist to return to their school, even though his victim was still a student (and other women who could be victims were also students). </p>
<p>It’s not even as if this was a matter where they thought the victim might be lying. They know he raped her, and they will let him back in school anyway.</p>
<p>“If half of what is said it true…”
“The video appears to be–(but) could not bring myself to watch it.” (Huh?)
“If the facts were as the article states…”
“Victim doesn’t need to testify–multiple people have written and published online accounts”</p>
<p>Really, I hope none of you are on a jury before the facts actually are determined.</p>
<p>My initial response was “Of course not.” But then I watched some of that video. I hope someone finds some way to punish the kid and everyone involved. Vile.</p>
We’re not on a jury. That is why we put qualifiers like “if” and “appears”. Is that so hard to understand?</p>
<p>I read part of the transcript of what he said, and, not being on a jury, I don’t feel the need to watch it any more than I would watch a video of the actual rape if it was out there.</p>
<p>Unless someone else is charged, there isn’t going to be a jury. The two defendants are going to be tried as juveniles before a visiting judge. </p>
<p>And, if anyone is trying this case in public, it’s defense counsel.</p>
<p>I did listen to the tape. To me, it sounds as if Nodianus admitted to being at least an eye witness and possibly a participant. What makes it bizarre is that he was AWARE that he was being filmed. Yes, films can be doctored, but I would expect someone to have made that claim long ago. </p>
<p>To me, the most convincing evidence is the testimony of three football players at the probable cause hearing. One was formerly the best friend of one of the defendants. I think it highly unlikely that they would make up a story and say the defendants did what they are accused of doing. They implicate themselves in the conduct to some extent. (One of the witnesses videotaped a sexual assault but later deleted in from his phone–at least that’s what he testified he did. He also says he showed it to several people before deleting it.)</p>
<p>The boys will have their chance in court. Moreover, they only have to establish a “reasonable doubt.”</p>
<p>This story is bringing back bad memories of the Glen Ridge, NJ rape case which happened about 20 years ago (book and movie were made about it.) Same kind of scenario–gang rape alleged, athletes from a worshipful small town involved, massive coverup. Eventually, several of the accused were tried in juvenile court and got light sentences. The whole thing stunk. i live nearby and was sickened by the attitudes of many of the people from that town sticking up for Our Guys ("Our Guys’ was the name of the book and movie.)</p>