Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Mo Trauen on May 8, 2011 at 2:56pm

I would say that getting the superintendent fired would be a good start.  This whole case would never have arisen if he hadn't behaved like an ass.

Permalink Reply by Misty: Baytheist Living! on May 8, 2011 at 4:10pm

I doubt we are the only people screaming for his head. 

 

But 'getting someone fired' is a HUGE goal with a whole scope of possibilities. 

What do you  have in mind?

Letter writing? Email campaign? Calling the school? Calling the state Representative? 

 

I guess we should do some framework on our objectives before we start taking on cases. 

Permalink Reply by Mo Trauen on May 8, 2011 at 7:45pm

Practically, yes, it is probably not going to happen, but it is worth the trouble to try.  Complaining to the school district and local authorities can be helpful.  Even if the person isn't fired, the complaints can have the result of making him look bad in the eyes of his superiors and peers.  Also, it sends the message to other such idiots that such behavior will be met with disapproval from the community--which is the only thing such knuckleheads understand in most cases.

 

BTW, targeting the judge who ordered the girl to pay costs is also worthwhile.  Again, it will probably have no tangible results, but I have seen situations where such people's careers were effected by the complaints.  I think people who would do this sort of thing are in positions that are not fit to occupy, so shortening their careers seems like a good idea even if  we can't get them fired.

Permalink Reply by Atheist Exile on May 14, 2011 at 9:55am

I don't get it.  If this self-confessed "misdemeanor" assailant participated in a rape (whether or not he actually consummated the deed), why did he get off with just a misdemeanor assault conviction and return to school?  Was there really a rape?  If he didn't do it, who did?  And what happened to him?  Something's not right here somewhere.

But taking just the facts(?) as they were reported, the guy did accept a misdemeanor assault conviction.  So he must be guilty of at least that much.  Surely, that's enough to warrant special consideration from the superintendent.  Instead, the superintendent completely insulted and disrespected the girl (HS) and gave her situation no consideration at all.  Not exactly the kind of treatment that encourages cooperation!

But that's all from an ethical point of view . . . not a legal one.  It appears that the courts were no more sympathetic to the girl than the superintendent was.  This, once again, makes me wonder how accurate the article really is.  Also, the article was not written with the unbiased detachment of a professional journalist.  I would have to have more details from a trusted source before I could surmount the doubts raised by the omissions and incongruent reporting mentioned above.