17-year-old sexual assault victim could face charges for tweeting names of attac

Started by neoteny, Jul 22, 2012, 03:57 PM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down


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

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 think if she's willing to give her name -- which she apparently does --, then she should be allowed to name her convicted attackers.
The spreading of information about the [quantum] system through the [classical] environment is ultimately responsible for the emergence of "objective reality." 

Wojciech Hubert Zurek: Decoherence, einselection, and the quantum origins of the classical

dr e

So she gets so drunk she passes out at a party and then is a victim of sexual assault?  I'd like to know more of the details to this one.  Imagine a man got drunk and passed out at a party and was robbed of his wallet.  Would people be blaming him for being drunk?   :cyclo: 
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.


 I wonder if this could work in reverse for men falsely accused of rape?

The women's name's are always protected because it is a "sex" crime even if no rape has occurred.

Would anyone sign a petition suggesting that the false accuser be named and shamed when a man's life has been destroyed?

I would.


According to what I have read so far she got drunk passed out then a couple guys took pics of them having sex with her while unconscious then passed the pics around via the internet.....IF this is true then I don't see a problem with what she did as long as she is willing to endure the wrath of a judge.
Imagine waking up tomorrow to find
that unbelievably rape is now legal.

You would be freaking out, telling everyone you ran into this is crazy- something needs to be done... now!!! And then every man you told this to just very smugly and condescendingly says...

"Hey... not all men are 'like that.'"


Who wants to bet that the sentence what very 'light' because it was a case of he-said, she-said.  She was probably drunk and horny, had a slutty night but got made when she was 'outed' as a tramp when the guys posted a video of her online....and the 'rape' charge was her revenge.

Any bets?


Go Up