And completely dismantle that fucking football team! Let that town fade into complete obscurity and let the fuckers who would dare cover up something this heinous be charged with obstruction of justice!
I've been staying out of this thread because I didn't know enough about the situation. I still don't know a lot, but am going to add a few things.
1) I've seen people saying everyone involved should be charged with rape. While I completely understand the sentiment, it sounds to me (from what I have managed to put together) that there is only enough evidence to show the two idiots charged actually raped her.
Just so we are all on the same page, here is how Ohio defines rape (I'm only quoting the applicable sub-sections):
(A)(1) No person shall engage in sexual conduct with another who is not the spouse of the offender or who is the spouse of the offender but is living separate and apart from the offender, when any of the following applies:
(c) The other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age, and the offender knows or has reasonable cause to believe that the other person’s ability to resist or consent is substantially impaired because of a mental or physical condition or because of advanced age.
Here is how Ohio defines "sexual conduct:"
vaginal intercourse between a male and female; anal intercourse, fellatio, and cunnilingus between persons regardless of sex; and, without privilege to do so, the insertion, however slight, of any part of the body or any instrument, apparatus, or other object into the vaginal or anal opening of another. Penetration, however slight, is sufficient to complete vaginal or anal intercourse.
I can't find a link to Ohio's Jury Instructions, so I can't quote word-for-word what the state has to prove. So here is the summary.
a)
The defendant and the victim were not married. Easy to prove, if the defendant actually challenged this part. (Not likely.)
b)
Sexual contact (as defined in OH law) occurred. I don't know the evidence, so I don't know what all they have. Medical reports (if the victim went to the doctor soon enough) are obvious. Witness testimony (if there are eyewitnesses) is useful. Social media posts
made by the defendant admitting to what he did. (Posts made by anyone else - other than an eyewitness (i.e. "I watched Tommy bang some drunk girl last night.") - would be considered hearsay and be inadmissible.)
c)
The victim's ability to resist was "substantially impaired". This one could be tough. I found reference to a text sent from the victim to a defendant the next morning that seems to indicate she knew what was going on at the parties. If that exists (and I have no idea if it does), that would be a huge benefit to the defendants. (Having sex with someone who is drunk is not necessarily rape. The person has to be so drunk as to be "substantially impaired." I have no idea how OH defines "substantially impaired.")
d)
The defendant knew the victim was "substantially impaired." This one could be straightforward, or it could be a tricky point. If, for example, the victim was so drunk she had to be carried, or if the defendants slipped a date-rape drug to her, then there would be little question that the defendants knew. If, on the other hand, the victim was acting normal, never got a drink refill (i.e. appeared to be working on 1 drink all night), etc., then this point could be a lot harder to prove. Another thing that could make this tricky is if someone other than one of the defendants slipped the victim a date-rape drug. If she was acting somewhat normal, even with the drug in her system, the defendant may not have known that she was actually impaired.
Having said all that... The state has to have reasonable suspicion that the defendant is guilty before charges can be brought. It does not matter (legally) if 10 guys raped her. What matters is what evidence is available that could prove which guys did it. If each guy took her off alone (no eyewitnesses) and only 2 were stupid enough to brag about what they did, there may not be sufficient evidence to prove the other 8 actually had sexual contact with her. (Guy claims he was too drunk to get it up, so didn't penetrate = no rape.) An argument could be made for attempted rape.
2) This is probably going to be unpopular, but I disagree with disbanding the football team. Kicking off the guys involved with the party (even if they did not rape the victim), yes. If the group in Ohio that oversees high school athletics wants to punish the team in some way (barring post-season or something), fine. But disbanding the team punishes everyone who had nothing to do with the crime.
