Quote from: Miss Celies Blues on April 10, 2006, 11:51:52 PMI already answered this. How would you know that there would be a media storm? People make similar allegations all the time -- including across racial lines -- but it doesn't get picked up by the press.[qote] With all the high profile rape cases, everyone knows that even a proven false allegation can totally ruin lives.Yes, but who's usually involved with high profile rape cases? High profile people.I hate to break it to you sports people, but Duke lacrosse isn't high profile in the way that Kobe Bryant is.
I already answered this. How would you know that there would be a media storm? People make similar allegations all the time -- including across racial lines -- but it doesn't get picked up by the press.[qote] With all the high profile rape cases, everyone knows that even a proven false allegation can totally ruin lives.
she didnt have to anticipate a media storm. rape accusations ruin peoples lives whether they are widely publicized or not.
I think everyone knew these players behaved badly, whether or not they actually raped the stripper. I'm not sure you should blame them for being "uncooperative" though. These were smart kids--they knew not to talk to police and instead just say, "lawyer." Good for them. I've heard commentators say how this situation would have been totally different if it had been a black team raping a white girl, and they're right--do you think a bunch of poor black kids would have hired lawyers? They probably would have ended up in a police station spilling their guts to detectives.
I'm just saying, most confessions will come from poor/stupid people. Rich people know not to talk to detectives, even if they are innocent (which seems to be the case with Duke LAX). If it had been a rich, preppy groups of black athletes, they probably would have acted the same way as the rich, preppy Duke athletes. However, you don't see that many rich, preppy all-black sports teams.
This information shouldn't change anyone's opinion about the guilt or innocence of the players because they should have always been considered innocent until proven guilty. The extreme willingness that the players demonstrated (through their lawyers) when using DNA evidence should also have been a big warning sign that they knew that this particular form of evidence wouldn't demonstrate guilt.Regardless of their guilt, I still think they're scum. Let's look at the issues here, a team held a party with only teammates present where they hired a stripper to come perform. She was chased out under questionable circumstances, after which one player emailed his buddies about skinning her alive. When attention is brought to the case, everyone lawyers up and refuses to cooperate with the investigation any more than they are required by law, all the while insisting that they would never turn on each other and continuing to harangue the accuser.Now imagine how this could have played out. After the accuser made her allegations, the players insist upon their innocence but come forward to talk about issues of privilege and power. Horrified by the idea of being unjustly accused of rape, they volunteer their time at a local shelter for women who are victims of rape and domestic violence. They attend many of the forums being held at this time and talk about what it means to hire a stripper to attend a student party, about issues of respect, and so forth. Maintaining their innocence all along, they decide to work with both the police and protesters to make sure the truth comes out. At a joint panel of the sexual assault advisory group and the lacrosse team, the players and advisors discuss ways for Duke to reduce the incidence of date rape and gang rape on campus and some of the players join the organization, having better understood the issues after this ordeal.Not one student even came close to handling this in a sensitive and respectful matter, innocent or not. Personally, if I were the president, the lack of respect showed in the handling of this situation would cause me to cancel next year's season as well.
it implies you were talking about the impact on numerous people -- not the extent of harm in an individual's life. (I can't think of a time when someone would use "wider" to describe that. Usually "unusually destructive" or "extent" is the phrase.)