PDA

View Full Version : 17-year-old sexual assault victim could face charges for tweeting names of attackers


mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:30 AM
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/lookout/savannah-dietrich-twitter-sexual-assault-louisville-174732753.html

17-year-old sexual assault victim could face charges for tweeting names of attackers
By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News | The Lookout – 7 hrs ago


Dietrich (Twitter)

A Kentucky girl who was sexually assaulted could face contempt of court charges after she tweeted the names of her juvenile attackers.

Savannah Dietrich, the 17-year-old victim, was frustrated by a plea deal reached late last month by the two boys who assaulted her, and took to Twitter to expose them--violating a court order to keep their names confidential.

"There you go, lock me up," Dietrich tweeted after naming the perpetrators. "I'm not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell." Her Twitter account has since been closed.

Attorneys for the attackers asked a Jefferson District Court judge to hold Dietrich in contempt for lashing out on Twitter. She could face up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine if convicted. The boys have yet to be sentenced for the August 2011 attack.

"So many of my rights have been taken away by these boys," Dietrich told Louisville's Courier-Journal. "I'm at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it. If they really feel it's necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don't understand justice."

Dietrich was assaulted by the pair after passing out at a party. They later shared photos of the assault with friends.

"For months, I cried myself to sleep," Dietrich said. "I couldn't go out in public places."

On June 26, the boys pleaded guilty to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. Terms of their plea agreement were not released.

"They got off very easy," Dietrich, who says she was unaware of the plea agreement before it was announced in court, said in her interview with the newspaper.

"They said I can't talk about it or I'll be locked up," Dietrich tweeted after hearing, according to the paper. "So I'm waiting for them to read this and lock me up."

"[Protecting rapists] is more important than getting justice for the victim in Louisville," she added.

A hearing for the contempt of court charge is scheduled for July 30. Attorneys for Dietrich want it open to the media, while the boys lawyers want it closed.

Both the Gannett-owned Courier-Journal and Dietrich's attorneys "have filed motions to open the proceedings, arguing she has a First Amendment right to speak about what happened in her case," the newspaper said.

An online petition asking the judge to throw out the charges against Dietrich, launched Saturday, has already accumulated hundreds of signatures.

"[She] should not be legally barred from talking about what happened to her," Gregg Leslie, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, told the Associated Press. "That's a wide-ranging restraint on speech."

mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:32 AM
17-year-old sexual assault victim could face charges for tweeting names of attackers
By Dylan Stableford, Yahoo! News | The Lookout – 7 hrs ago


Dietrich (Twitter)

A Kentucky girl who was sexually assaulted could face contempt of court charges after she tweeted the names of her juvenile attackers.

Savannah Dietrich, the 17-year-old victim, was frustrated by a plea deal reached late last month by the two boys who assaulted her, and took to Twitter to expose them--violating a court order to keep their names confidential.

"There you go, lock me up," Dietrich tweeted after naming the perpetrators. "I'm not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell." Her Twitter account has since been closed.

Attorneys for the attackers asked a Jefferson District Court judge to hold Dietrich in contempt for lashing out on Twitter. She could face up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine if convicted. The boys have yet to be sentenced for the August 2011 attack.

"So many of my rights have been taken away by these boys," Dietrich told Louisville's Courier-Journal. "I'm at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it. If they really feel it's necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don't understand justice."

Dietrich was assaulted by the pair after passing out at a party. They later shared photos of the assault with friends.

"For months, I cried myself to sleep," Dietrich said. "I couldn't go out in public places."

On June 26, the boys pleaded guilty to first-degree sexual abuse and misdemeanor voyeurism. Terms of their plea agreement were not released.

"They got off very easy," Dietrich, who says she was unaware of the plea agreement before it was announced in court, said in her interview with the newspaper.

"They said I can't talk about it or I'll be locked up," Dietrich tweeted after hearing, according to the paper. "So I'm waiting for them to read this and lock me up."

"[Protecting rapists] is more important than getting justice for the victim in Louisville," she added.

A hearing for the contempt of court charge is scheduled for July 30. Attorneys for Dietrich want it open to the media, while the boys lawyers want it closed.

Both the Gannett-owned Courier-Journal and Dietrich's attorneys "have filed motions to open the proceedings, arguing she has a First Amendment right to speak about what happened in her case," the newspaper said.

An online petition asking the judge to throw out the charges against Dietrich, launched Saturday, has already accumulated hundreds of signatures.

"[She] should not be legally barred from talking about what happened to her," Gregg Leslie, executive director of the Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press, told the Associated Press. "That's a wide-ranging restraint on speech."
I really hope that it's not against the law for Savannah to tell her own story. IMO, she's being assaulted again except by the judicial system.

Wigglytuff
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:10 AM
That's so fucked up. There is no real justice for rape victims.

miffedmax
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:19 AM
Most participants in an ongoing case are prohibited from commenting on a case until it is resolved. Since the assailants have not yet been sentenced, it's an ongoing case. I seriously doubt she'll get anywhere near the maximum sentence, but even though (thankfully) used Twitter as her tool (rather than a gun or knife) she still went outside the law and essentially took justice into her own hands. The legal system tends to frown on that.

Barktra
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:24 AM
I am friends with all 3 of them

delicatecutter
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:26 AM
I am friends with all 3 of them

Maybe you shouldn't be friends with two of them anymore? :unsure:

Barktra
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:28 AM
Maybe you shouldn't be friends with two of them anymore? :unsure:

i haven't seen them in a while though.

I was at the party to and that was the last time I saw them.

I don't really want to go into detail about it though

mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:41 AM
I am friends with all 3 of them
Her lawyer should be able to get her off but why the plea deal and she wasn't made aware of it. Not only did they sexual assault her they showed people pictures. They shouldn't have gotten a plea deal because of the pictures for sure. How humiliating for her.

miffedmax
Jul 23rd, 2012, 03:21 AM
The plea deal may have been the best way to secure a conviction and keep this girl from having to go through a trial, where the defense would have probably turned it into a trial of her reputation, impugned her integrity, argued that it was consensual and in general made her life miserable. It will be interesting to see what the sentence is.

mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 03:25 AM
The plea deal may have been the best way to secure a conviction and keep this girl from having to go through a trial, where the defense would have probably turned it into a trial of her reputation, impugned her integrity, argued that it was consensual and in general made her life miserable. It will be interesting to see what the sentence is.
The problem I have is that they didn't make her aware of it before she went to court which is what probably hurt her the most.

debby
Jul 23rd, 2012, 09:44 AM
That's fucked up and crazy !!!

I agree with Miffedmax, in a sense I can understand she didn't have rights to do so, but OTOH it's so fucked up to talk about jail for her while the others might not go there ! christ.... hopefully she will be fine and the guys will be punished ! that's awful, awful awful !!!!

Chris 84
Jul 23rd, 2012, 10:08 AM
the rules are in place for a reason and nobody should violate them. i have the deepest sympathy for the girl and a deep loathing for anyone who commits acts like that. however, if everyone goes round naming their attackers or alleged attackers, then there is chaos. it would be awful to see her punished, but people can't disregard the rules...

debby
Jul 23rd, 2012, 10:23 AM
the rules are in place for a reason and nobody should violate them. i have the deepest sympathy for the girl and a deep loathing for anyone who commits acts like that. however, if everyone goes round naming their attackers or alleged attackers, then there is chaos. it would be awful to see her punished, but people can't disregard the rules...

That's true, that's exactly how I feel.

Though I understand her and don't blame her for that.

Sammo
Jul 23rd, 2012, 10:57 AM
That's fucking sick.

Bijoux0021
Jul 23rd, 2012, 11:04 AM
the rules are in place for a reason and nobody should violate them. i have the deepest sympathy for the girl and a deep loathing for anyone who commits acts like that. however, if everyone goes round naming their attackers or alleged attackers, then there is chaos. it would be awful to see her punished, but people can't disregard the rules...
The rules are f**ked up. Not allowing victims to name their attackers is saying to those criminals it's okay to do what they did. And guess what? A lot of them become repeat offenders. Once it's been proven that the attackers are guilty, they should not be protected.

This girl should continue to speak out even if she's put in jail. Her attackers need to be exposed, and the rules need to be changed.

Mynarco
Jul 23rd, 2012, 11:11 AM
It really sounds harsh but she knew it was wrong to reveal the names and she still did it. Rules are rules (in this case, it's a COURT order), she still had to respect it.

WowWow
Jul 23rd, 2012, 11:27 AM
That's so fucked up. There is no real justice for rape victims.

Yes, it pretty much boils down to this.

stromatolite
Jul 23rd, 2012, 11:35 AM
At an emotional level I understand and sympathize with Savanna's actions (as I'm sure the judge will in deciding her penalty), but she was warned against doing this and would have been wise to heed that warning.

The main purpose of the recent name-and-shame fad is to give victims and those who identify with them a sense of "getting one back" on the perpetrators. It doesn't undo the crime itself, and if anything makes the chances of reoffending - the usual justification used by name-and-shame media - greater, not smaller. It leads to social marginalization, which decreases the chances that an offender will attempt to come to terms with his behaviour and seek help in making sure he doesn't do it again. And in contrast to the criminal justice system, which can and does take reoffenders' past crimes into account (and which therefore has a real deterrent effect), once a sex offender has been named he really has nothing further to lose in terms of public humiliation. They are more likely to think "everybody already thinks I'm a sleazebag, I might as well act like one".

Vigilante justice=bad idea. Leave it to the professionals.

NadalSharapova
Jul 23rd, 2012, 11:38 AM
that is encouraging rape, knowing that the victim can't even do anything.

Ryan
Jul 23rd, 2012, 12:17 PM
That's true, that's exactly how I feel.

Though I understand her and don't blame her for that.


This.


The rules are f**ked up. Not allowing victims to name their attackers is saying to those criminals it's okay to do what they did. And guess what? A lot of them become repeat offenders. Once it's been proven that the attackers are guilty, they should not be protected.

This girl should continue to speak out even if she's put in jail. Her attackers need to be exposed, and the rules need to be changed.


You need to learn how the justice system works. :shrug: She's not allowed to name them, either because they're minors/being tried in juvenile court (don't think this is the case) or because the Court hasn't finished the case, i.e., they haven't been sentenced.

Their names would go out into the public soon, just not until they've been given a fair trial (even criminals deserve fair trials). This could be because they didn't actually do it (not the case here obviously, but still - you can't have a plaintiff naming names when the accusers may not be guilty), or because they haven't been sentenced (which is the issue here IMO).

Anyway, I feel awful for her and its upsetting that her lawyer wasn't able to tell her about a plea deal (would like to know why that was necessary, maybe to make the "secondary" attacker rat out the principal?). Unfortunately, she still needs to respect the justice system/process, until its been completed.

NadalSharapova
Jul 23rd, 2012, 12:39 PM
rapists should get their penis chopped off, burglars should get their hands chopped off. If this happened there will be no rapes or burglaries

miffedmax
Jul 23rd, 2012, 12:50 PM
rapists should get their penis chopped off, burglars should get their hands chopped off. If this happened there will be no rapes or burglaries

You realize crime rates are actually much lower in the Western world since such Draconian measures were eliminated?

Ferg
Jul 23rd, 2012, 12:55 PM
The legal system is so fucked up sometimes. Have to give major credit to the girl for being so vocal and strong about it.

mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:27 PM
The rules are f**ked up. Not allowing victims to name their attackers is saying to those criminals it's okay to do what they did. And guess what? A lot of them become repeat offenders. Once it's been proven that the attackers are guilty, they should not be protected.

This girl should continue to speak out even if she's put in jail. Her attackers need to be exposed, and the rules need to be changed.
My sentiments exactly.

NadalSharapova
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:29 PM
thats why i said rapists should get the penis chopped off so they can't reoffend

NadalSharapova
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:30 PM
You realize crime rates are actually much lower in the Western world since such Draconian measures were eliminated?

have you never heard of reoffenders before?

JN
Jul 23rd, 2012, 01:44 PM
Right or wrong, I stand with the victim 100%. She's living a hell while her attackers are being coddled by the justice system.

Mary Cherry.
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:43 PM
Why has the victim been named as well? I thought that was against the law too.

Ryan
Jul 23rd, 2012, 02:58 PM
I wonder if it was because she took it public, via twitter? I can't imagine her name was released until she essentially gave it to the media, through her comments?

hablo
Jul 23rd, 2012, 03:34 PM
Sounds like her attackers have the better lawyers! :sad:

Dominic
Jul 23rd, 2012, 04:00 PM
Right or wrong, I stand with the victim 100%. She's living a hell while her attackers are being coddled by the justice system.

Wow did you finally buy some common sense? :cheer: I 100% agree.

miffedmax
Jul 23rd, 2012, 04:34 PM
Sounds like her attackers have the better lawyers! :sad:

We don't know. A plea bargain doesn't necessarily mean that the attackers are being coddled or going to get a weak sentence.

Something like 90% of the cases in US court system are resolved through plea bargains. Usually, yes, the level of charge is dropped, but the judge still has a tremendous amount of discretion in the sentences he passes.

It's pointless to make a judgment on the sentence until the sentence is actually rendered.

JN
Jul 23rd, 2012, 05:04 PM
Wow did you finally buy some common sense? :cheer: I 100% agree.

I've always had common sense and it seems someone's loaned you theirs temporarily.

Wigglytuff
Jul 23rd, 2012, 06:29 PM
the rules are in place for a reason and nobody should violate them. i have the deepest sympathy for the girl and a deep loathing for anyone who commits acts like that. however, if everyone goes round naming their attackers or alleged attackers, then there is chaos. it would be awful to see her punished, but people can't disregard the rules...

If by chaos you mean, warning to future victim than yes.

Wigglytuff
Jul 23rd, 2012, 06:37 PM
Sounds like her attackers have the better lawyers! :sad:

No, it's just that the system in America always has and continues to favor rapists over the victim. And it's only going to get worse. Republicans across the country have introduced bills to redefine rape, to make that definition harder to meet, this they are doing to make it harder for women who have been raped to seek and get abortions. You would think that they would want tougher sentences for sexual crimes, but nope, they decided to go after the victim and not the offenders.

This that is happening to this girl is just one of the many thousands of ways the "justice" system is set up to punish and deny rights to rape victims.

Frankly, I fully support any rape victim taking matters into their own hands because they will get none from the "justice" system.

Olórin
Jul 23rd, 2012, 06:37 PM
A plea bargain doesn't mean they were going to get off lightly.


I don't see what "right" (other than the legal one) the attackers had not to be exposed, but I can't help but feel that the defendant acted rashly, perhaps in the heat of the moment. She should have waited until the sentence was at least pronounced.

Dominic
Jul 23rd, 2012, 07:17 PM
I've always had common sense

:haha: please, no need to lie to yourself

JN
Jul 23rd, 2012, 07:34 PM
:haha: please, no need to lie to yourself

I realize the Chris Rock thread has left you severely butt hurt, however, stalking me around the forum and derailing other threads isn't gonna help you. Take your lumps like a man and quit acting like a scorned bitch.

Dominic
Jul 23rd, 2012, 07:54 PM
I realize the Chris Rock thread has left you severely butt hurt, however, stalking me around the forum and derailing other threads isn't gonna help you. Take your lumps like a man and quit acting like a scorned bitch.

You're one to talk, everytime I MENTION Serena's name you're there in a hurry whining your ass off and getting out your big arsenal of juvenile insults you learnt in kindergarden, which is like a century ago :lol:

Onslow
Jul 23rd, 2012, 07:57 PM
too many people seem to forget the principle "innocent until proven guilty".

Dominic
Jul 23rd, 2012, 08:00 PM
too many people seem to forget the principle "innocent until proven guilty".

So are you saying she should indeed be punished for revealing their identities?

Onslow
Jul 23rd, 2012, 08:05 PM
So are you saying she should indeed be punished for revealing their identities?

if that's the law, yes. but if they can't prove damages caused, it shouldn't be significant punishment (she won't go to jail for that in any case, unlike she suggests)

mykarma
Jul 23rd, 2012, 09:06 PM
too many people seem to forget the principle "innocent until proven guilty".
If they're innocent then why the plea bargain?

Wigglytuff
Jul 24th, 2012, 12:24 AM
too many people seem to forget the principle "innocent until proven guilty".

If you plead guilty, than you've already been proven guilty sooo.

Mynarco
Jul 24th, 2012, 12:31 AM
So are you saying she should indeed be punished for revealing their identities?

well she did breach court order :shrug:

miffedmax
Jul 24th, 2012, 02:05 PM
well she did breach court order :shrug:

She's lucky that (apparently) her breaking the terms of the plea bargain didn't invalidate it and potentially put a pair of sexual predators back on the streets.