Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Extraneous notes on the Bolton case..
Topic Started: Nov 10 2010, 08:03 AM (305 Views)
Quasimodo

http://justoneminute.typepad.com/main/2010/11/the-high-school-cheerleader-rape-debacle.html

Quote:
 
H.S., then 16, attended a party in her hometown of Silsbee, Texas, in October 2008. She said she was dragged into a room, thrown onto the floor by several youths and raped by Rakheem Bolton, a star on the school's football and basketball teams.

Bolton and a teammate were arrested two days later, but were allowed to return to school after a county grand jury declined to indict them. They were later indicted on sexual assault charges, but in the interim came the February 2009 incident on the basketball court.


H.S. was on the cheerleading squad and after her alleged assailant was permitted to resume play, she refused to cheer for him when he was playing, for which the school removed her from the cheerleading squad. The school was evidently see-sawing between legal positions...

Complication:


Quote:
 
In fact, Plaintiffs alleged, “[District Attorney] Sheffield said that although the evidence against Rountree and Bolton was strong and exceeded the requisite requirement for probable cause, the Grand Jury was racially divided and that the black grand jurors would not vote to return an indictment against Rountree and Bolton because of the race factor.”


No idea if that is true or not; but I do find the following interesting:


Quote:
 
The grand jury heard about three hours of testimony Monday before voting to no-bill Christian Rountree, 18, Rakheem Bolton, 17, and a 16 year old juvenile.

They were accused of sexually assaulting a Silsbee High School cheerleader last October during a party at a home in Silsbee.

The girl testified before the grand jury.


How long did the Durham grand jury hear about the lax case? Five minutes? Did Crystal testify?
Did Roberts testify? Did Dr. Manly testify?

Is a grand jury supposed to devote three hours to deciding whether to indict someone for rape?
How retrograde!
:SarC:

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

And another case in the news:

Quote:
 
http://www.news.com.au/breaking-news/australian-matthew-moorhouse-sues-luxury-new-york-hotel-over-false-rape-claims/story-e6frfku0-1225936892396?from=public_rss

Australian Matthew Moorhouse sues luxury New York hotel over false rape claims

October 11, 2010 12:32AM



AN AUSTRALIAN businessman falsely accused of raping a maid at a luxury boutique hotel in New York is now suing the hotel for $US10 million.

Matthew Moorhouse, 43, from Sydney, claims that the Standard Hotel's racy atmosphere contributed to the false charges against him.

(snip)

Mr Moorhouse said that the maid had lied after he caught her rifling through his bag and he was acquitted of the charges in July.

He filed suit last week in Manhattan Supreme Court.



To what extent did the anti-male anti-athlete bias of some of Duke's faculty contribute to an atmosphere
which contributed to the credence given the false rape charges in Durham?

To what extent did the anti-athlete anti "privilege" bias of some of Duke's Admin (including President
Brodhead) contribute to the credence given the false rape charges in Durham?

To what extend did the coverage by the HS and N&O do the same; and, if they were shown to have
acted in collusion with conspirators (i.e, if Gottlieb contributed to "Dancer gives details of ordeal",
or if that piece was knowingly slanted/censored to produce a pro-prosecution effect), to what
extend did that contribute to the credence given the false rape charges in Durham?


(Note that these would be different allegations than that the papers defamed the falsely-accused.)
Edited by Quasimodo, Nov 10 2010, 12:54 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply