Anonymous Helps Find Evidence In Gang Rape Case 436
jfruh writes "Evidence of a gang rape committed by members of an Ohio high school football team, including video, was, in the way of digital native teenagers today, put online on various social media sites — and was quickly taken down as students began realizing the magnitude of the situation. The hactivist group Anonymous has been able to find archived and cached versions of the damning content, which may help prosecutors make their case." (The original story from December at the New York Times adds more detail.)
Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:4, Interesting)
No boundaries, no jurisdictions... just results.
All of the power of the harnessed internet with the face of the silent auction bidder.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:4, Funny)
So, who are the Legion of Doom?
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So, who are the Legion of Doom?
The MPAA/RIAA, obviously.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Funny)
High school football teams.
They're more like the Legion of Dumb.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Informative)
IANAL, but I don't think that's true. I believe the prosecution can use illegally obtained evidence if it was obtained by non-government individuals. See:
Supreme Court Decision BURDEAU v. MCDOWELL, 256 U.S. 465 (1921)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Informative)
IANAL: Not sure if that's true. If the police obtained the evidence illegally, it could not be used in court. However if someone else obtains it illegally (who has no connection with the police) and provides it to them, then it can be used.
"Evidence unlawfully obtained from the defendant by a private person is admissible. The exclusionary rule is designed to protect privacy rights, with the Fourth Amendment applying specifically to government officials."
- Burdeau v. McDowell, 256 U.S. 465
Re: (Score:3)
ONLY COPS ARE RESTRICTED IN THAT WAY.
If I participate in a crime, I see someone else do it, and then the cops catch me, DUH the cops can get me to rat on my friends and testify against them. You think because I saw them committing a crime while I was committing a crime, that my testimony doesn't count as evidence in court?
Ugh, public education, ladies and gentlemen.
The fruit of the poisoned tree rule only applies to cops, to prevent cops from abusing their auth
Re: (Score:3)
It likely could be thrown out of court by the defense...I forget the term but something like "Chain of authority" in the handling of evidence.
Not to mention the source being Anonymous...defense would posit that the evidence could have been tampered with by a rogue hac
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Chain of custody [Re:Anonymous has become Batman.] (Score:3)
The word you want is "chain of custody [thefreedictionary.com]". But that isn't the case here, since it's not physical evidence.
In any case it's irrelevant, since the prosecutor already had the videos that Anonymous released. What Anonymous did was to make them public. Whether it's a good thing to put videos of a purported rape out onto the internet is another discussion.
Re:What does "gang" mean? (Score:4, Informative)
The "confession" video has a boy saying "They raped her harder than that cop raped Marcellus Wallace in Pulp Fiction."
Re:What does "gang" mean? (Score:4, Informative)
It's an 8-page article in my browser at least - make sure you look at the other 6 pages, wherein they detail: that she was passed out and at least two of the players "slipped a finger" inside, in addition to taking her clothes off, inviting other people to urinate on her, and flashing her breasts while she was passed out. And they recovered two photos from one of the suspects' phones, one of which shows the girl "face down on the floor, naked, with her arms tucked beneath her," and the other which they don't describe.
Here's the single-page version [nytimes.com] of the NYTimes story, and it's got plenty of details to support *allegations* of a gang rape. Whether or not these allegations are true is what will be determined at trial.
Re: (Score:3)
You can't get pregnant from oral or anal sex, either, but it can still constitute rape. So does entry with a physical object. It's also possible for a woman to rape a man by causing him to penetrate her, even though she's the willing part of it.
For example, under Texas law, penetration "by any means" of another person without the consent of both of those involved is sexual assault. Even non-consensual contact (without penetration) of one person's sexual organ with another's sexual organ, anus, or mouth i
Re:What does "gang" mean? (Score:5, Informative)
You heard wrong and obviously have never spoken to a rape victim. Rape is not a sex act, it is an act of hatred and violence. Its only purpose its to hurt, demean, and humiliate the victim. Many rapes are done with broom handles, pool sticks, toilet plungers, etc.
Rapists don't rape because they're horny, they rape because they hate women.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and they would never frame anybody or tamper with evidence or anything, because their motives are always pure and above reproach. And unlike public officers, they're completely accountable!
Wait, who are these people again?
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and they would never frame anybody or tamper with evidence or anything, because their motives are always pure and above reproach. And unlike public officers, they're completely accountable!
Wait, who are these people again?
I can't tell if you're a smart guy trying to slam Anonymous or an idiot idolizing public officers. Either could be corrupt and/or unaccountable. Anonymous, however, has no vested interest either way in the lives, well-being and reputations of those in Steubenville Ohio - or their football team (which, if you read the NYT article, seems to be the main concern of many in the town)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Anonymous has no accountability at all. If taken with a grain of salt and backed by good police work, what they provide could very well be useful, but they're essentially no different than the anonymous tip line. Tips do provide leads, but they also provide a significant ratio of noise as well.
We need police forces that at least have checks on them, even if they are sometimes broken. We definitely cannot rely on, or uncritically applaud the motives of those who choose to take certain actions under the Anonymous umbrella. It's like saying that being a little biased or corrupt is the same thing as being completely uncontrolled to begin with. The "intentions" of an anonymous tipster can be anything from helpful to just trolling or even character assassination, at the worst.
So, let me say "Good job" to the individuals who ran down this data, but given the fact that there are no entry requirements for the group, Anonymous remains, as always, completely unpredictable in both quality of work, and even intent.
Re: (Score:3)
From the sounds of the article, it would be hard to find a unbiased jury in the area anyways. The stadium holds half the population of the town. Everyone is related within a few degrees of the situation.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
I was trying to say that the only difference between Anonymous and public officers is accountability. Public officers are also prone to frame someone or tamper with evidence -- this happens frequently. But the fact that they're accountable is important, and makes me more inclined to trust lawful authorities than a faceless mob.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yup, because when the authorities frame people and then later get caught, they almost always get punished, and the victims exonerated. Oh wait, no, that's not what happens...
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
They're accountable? By what evidence do you speak of? Show me cases where police screwed up and were held accountable. I'll show you countless more where they were given paid vacations and a raise.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Insightful)
Yeah, and they would never frame anybody or tamper with evidence or anything, because their motives are always pure and above reproach. And unlike public officers, they're completely accountable!
Wait, who are these people again?
I can't tell if you're a smart guy trying to slam Anonymous or an idiot idolizing public officers. Either could be corrupt and/or unaccountable. Anonymous, however, has no vested interest either way in the lives, well-being and reputations of those in Steubenville Ohio - or their football team (which, if you read the NYT article, seems to be the main concern of many in the town)
How would you know Anonymous has no vested interest? You don't even know who they are. It worries me that people refer to Anonymous as an entity, rather than a mask of anonymity that could be worn by anyone or everyone, and that people ascribe lofty motivations to what is just another bunch of ACs.
Also, lack of vested interest, proven or not, is no guarantee of benign intent. I was falsely accused of several acts of vandalism once, back in school. Once the accusation was made, the entire class believed it and turned against me, and several came forward in following days making additional accusations. I didn't do any of those things but that made no difference to the court of public opinion. Now, you could argue that a bunch of stupid naive kids can't be expected to make sound judgements as to what is true and what is false, but unfortunately most adults are just as credulous, and for anyone to throw accusations about in public can create a dangerous situation. Not something I'd applaud the way I see people doing here. The place to find truth is in a proper court of law, not the court of public opinion.
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Anonymous has become Batman. (Score:5, Funny)
Its parent groups were killed off while it was watching, what else did you expect?
Re: (Score:3)
Ha, I thought precisely the same thing as I parsed the headline.
It's interesting to see how they've gone from hated, wanted outlaws to (at least in my mind) maybe-they're-not-so-bad...
Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)
Anonymous does something truly useful and good!
Way to go guys!
Re:Finally... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Finally... (Score:5, Interesting)
Well, if the video can be forensically shown to be un-tampered with then it will be admissible. The nature of the evidence is taken into account as well as the methods of collection. In the case of video, anyone can find it under just about any circumstance because the actions depicted in the video is the evidence itself, which tends to avoid the issues associated with other types of evidence that can be planted which is why they have to follow a strict chain of custody and procedures.
Its a lot more difficult to plant video evidence of you raping someone as opposed to me walking in and claiming I found this illegal gun with the serial filled off in your home.
Re:Finally... (Score:4, Insightful)
Maybe, maybe not.
More important, cops will know who to question directly, same as if they'd had an anonymous tip. They can do that.
Apply pressure to the people involved, one will flip. Everyone goes down, one with a lesser charge.
Re: (Score:3)
Maybe, maybe not.
More important, cops will know who to question directly, same as if they'd had an anonymous tip. They can do that.
Apply pressure to the people involved, one will flip. Everyone goes down, one with a lesser charge.
And cops know how to cover up for their friend's kids. Which is exactly what is happening in this case. If Anonymous had not stepped in, these fuckers would be getting off with little more than a slap on the wrist. Read up on this Sheriff Fred Abdalla.
Re:Finally... (Score:5, Informative)
According to some posts made by the suspects: they lured the girl to a party under false pretenses, drugged her, and then had her way with her. At one point, on video, they're caught commenting that they couldn't tell if she was passed out or dead and didn't care either way since they got their rocks off. Then commented/question on whether it's really rape if she never even got the chance to consent or say no.
Really creepy stuff.
Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)
Your conclusions are wrong, you are an idiot, and the world would be a much better place if you killed yourself.
Re:Finally... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally... (Score:4, Insightful)
Exactly. And if she was lured under false pretenses, she could have easily been slipped something in an otherwise innocuous drink. Remember the recent news story about the kid who drugged her parents with sleep medicine in milkshakes so she could get more Facebook time? How easy would it have been to hand the girl a soda with some sleeping medicine (or something worse) mixed in. By the time she realizes what's up, she's waking up from having passed out the night before and the guys have violated her.
As for the guys "debating" whether it's rape, consent isn't an opt-out system. It's not "you're allowed to do whatever you want to someone as long as they don't get the chance to say 'No'." It's opt-in. If the person doesn't say "yes" then you don't have consent. (Even if they say yes, there might be mitigating factors such as being drunk, underage, etc. But in general "yes = consent" and absence of yes = no consent.)
Re: (Score:3)
And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Interesting)
I've been half-heartedly following this story once I heard the initial reports and what took place was almost, but not quite, as bad as the Indian student who was attacked, raped and beaten on a bus in India and later died.
This girl was, apparently, passed out drunk (she was 16) and while passed out, was raped by at least 2 members of the football. Her limp, violated, body was carried by her arms and legs, all while being recorded and while others stood by and did nothing.
Some people present tweeted what was taking place, some took pictures and one shining example of the human race was recorded for a length of time bragging about how much she was fucked (worse than in the movie Pulp Fiction according to him). No one called the police.
Further, when asked about how he would feel if his daughter was raped (he apparently at the ripe of a late teenager had a daughter) in 10 years, he pontificated that in ten years his daughter would be raped and dead. What a wonderful guy.
While the death penalty cannot undo what was done to someone, we as a society can no longer continue to coddle people who refuse to live with the basic bounds of society. There isn't something new in not raping, murdering, shooting, tealing from, beating or otherwise doing something to someone, and people such as this who have no regard for others do not deserve any sympathy or regard from the rest of society.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:4, Insightful)
What's next, cutting off a thief's hands? Death penalty is not proportional to the crime. Yes, rape is bad, but it's not murder.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Interesting)
What's next, cutting off a thief's hands? Death penalty is not proportional to the crime. Yes, rape is bad, but it's not murder.
Obviously, castration would be proportional to this. :-)
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:4, Funny)
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
BTW...there's a big difference between what happened in India which was violent and evil with the intent to harm/kill which went far beyond rape vs the kind of rape that involves having sex with a passed out girl.
What we have here is a kinder, gentler rape.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
I'd have thought it's the other way around.
If you are murdered, that's it. After rape, you have to live with not only the physical AND mental trauma, but also the society's finger pointing that says "yeah she is victim but she probably deserved it."
No one deserves it.
And what would she do if she got pregnant by the rapists? She will need to go through another nightmare deciding what to do.
I honestly think death sentence is too lenient in this case. Burning isn't good either; it will end too soon.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You obviously have no conception of what rape is or does to people. Be thankful. But stop talking about shit you know nothing about.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I would rather be raped 100 times before murdered.
Says the man that has never been raped.
If you equate the two, then you don't have any respect for life.
I don't have respect for the life of a rapist. Rape is murder of the soul.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
You're obviously a raging asshole and a demagogue. First, victims of crimes do not set the level of punishment for their victimizers for obvious reasons. Secondly, you're also a raging moron if you think rape is as bad as death - go talk to any parent who's child has been raped AND murdered and see if they'd rather have a rape survivor if you want to play that card.
Third, talk to the Duke Lacrosse men and the Central Park five about how they should have all been executed. Before they were found to be innocent.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Interesting)
No it isn't. Even if the death penalty is a good idea (I'm not offering an opinion on that here), summary execution is not. You're ending someone's life here, and you can never undo that if it turns out to have been a mistake, so you'd damn well better take the time and effort to make sure you didn't fuck things up when you convicted the guy. That means appeals, it means possible retrials, it means delay after delay over technicalities, it means lots of expense for the taxpayers, and that is how it fucking well ought to be. It should NEVER be easy or cheap for the state to kill a citizen, no matter how big a scumbag he's alleged to be. That's a road that never leads anywhere good.
There is not, and never can be, a "quick, simple, cheap solution to this problem".
Re: (Score:3)
This girl was, apparently, passed out drunk (she was 16) and while passed out, was raped by at least 2 members of the football. Her limp, violated, body was carried by her arms and legs, all while being recorded and while others stood by and did nothing.
Do you know how much porn is online from what counts as respectable pornographic film companies doing exactly that? I don't mean staged content; I mean a couple 40 year old guys slip into a college party and fuck a completely drunk, barely awake (if even) college girl.
Alcohol is considered fair play. I know too many girls who, when I bring up that I don't mess with girls once they've had more than a minor buzz, proceed to carefully explain to me that what they do when they're drunk as fuck is their bus
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you know how much porn is online from what counts as respectable pornographic film companies doing exactly that? I don't mean staged content; I mean a couple 40 year old guys slip into a college party and fuck a completely drunk, barely awake (if even) college girl.
You probably believe those Dancing Bear videos where a male stripper shows up to a bachelorette party and ends up fucking the bride-to-be and all the bridesmaids aren't staged either.
No, those bangbus guys don't just pick up random girls on the street and fuck them in the back of a van for cash, either.
Repeat after me: all porn is fake. Yes, ALL of it.
Do you have any idea how much pressure is on porn producers to verify and document the legal age of every single performer in their productions? They will get shut down if records are missing or tampered with. All performers are required to submit to regular health and STD checks. Stringent records and contracts are kept.
Why take a gigantic risk and have your male talent (which is in severely limited supply) rape some random girl on camera, provided they would even agree to do so and not just hand you over to the cops immediately? They would basically be filming their own confession.
It's fake. All of it. Yes, even that video you just found that looks really authentic. Fake.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
They do, however, have girls sign consent forms, then genuinely coerce them into doing stuff they didn't want to.
That is, the girl makes it clear when she takes the job that there's no anal, nothing rough, no bondage - then one by one, her agent, the director, the male co-star, etc. - browbeat her (verbally) into submission. It wouldn't surprise me at all if girls were given alcohol to expedite the process.
For example, recently a documentary aired on British TV (sorry, can't remember the name) in which exactly this was happening, until the documentary film crew felt they had to intervene, rather than be accessories to rape.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:4, Insightful)
I know too many girls who, when I bring up that I don't mess with girls once they've had more than a minor buzz, proceed to carefully explain to me that what they do when they're drunk as fuck is their business and their responsibility--up to and including fucking the hell out of everyone when they're too far gone to remember their own name (or stay conscious).
People just don't see this as wrong. I don't know why.
Well, (assuming you're male, heterosexual, available, and not opposed to casual sex in general), let's turn it around. If someone tells you, hey, if you're 8-pint drunk, you're not allowed to consent to sex, what would you say? I'd say, to hell with that! Why should it be any different for girls?
If you're not conscious, you can't consent; you can't even imply consent. So that's rape, no question. I doubt the girls you're talking about were defending their right to be shagged while unconscious.
You can be very drunk indeed, still know what you want and what you don't, and still say no.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Informative)
Sorry, but there are mounds of evidence as to why the death penalty is not a deterrent (ie.: crimes of passion, psychological studies that show humans are *really* bad at thinking ahead and considering consequences ) and as long as there a still a chance of wrongful conviction, I won't stand for mandated state murder. Not to mention killing is morally wrong no matter what the context or circumstances.
I will happily see my tax dollars spent (and even increased) to incarcerate truly haneous offenders as long as is necessary.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
people such as this who have no regard for others do not deserve any sympathy or regard from the rest of society.
I agree, but then why are you regarding them so much? Why are you spending so much of yourself on hating them? Why not just remove them from society and get on with your life? Why would you let them turn you into a killer? Why let them poison who you are?
It's like torturing terrorists when you don't get actionable intel; even if they genuinely deserve it, that's not the point. It's about what we subject ourselves to. We choose not to torture because torturing harms us, not because the sonofabitch doesn't deserve it.
We choose not to kill because killing is a nasty business, and is not necessary to achieve the goal of minimizing the rapist's ability to effect our world. Rather, it increases his effect on who we are. He does not deserve that power.
Re: (Score:3)
I would honestly rather not pay to keep these scumbags alive.
These people chose their own fate. They chose to rape that girl. I have no sympathy because this isn't something that can happen by accident.
"Yeah my dick just came out and dragged me over to her."
No. Just end them. They are a serious threat to others and have shown it, willingly and without remorse.
Re: (Score:3)
I would honestly rather not pay to keep these scumbags alive.
If your complaint is about the money, then it is definitely cheaper to keep them alive then to pay for the appeal process of a death penalty. Actual incarceration isn't terribly expensive. Besides, in prison, they are much more likely to get a taste of what they did to the poor girl. Prison populations are notoriously hard on rapists and child abusers.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not about punishing people. These are people who hold absolutely no value to society, and allowing them to keep living is just a waste of perfectly good oxygen.
Re:And still no death penalty for rape (Score:5, Insightful)
The really disturbing part (Score:5, Insightful)
The really disturbing part is not just the fact that a 17-year-old was gang-raped, and no charges have been filed. No, the really really disturbing part was that a significant portion of the population of the town have actively opposed doing anything about it.
I mean, why bother even having laws against rape if you're not going to enforce them?
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
I mean, why bother even having laws against rape if you're not going to enforce them?
I forget; Which box is listed after "jury" in that famous quote about defending liberty?
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Insightful)
but these were jocks, football players
they are more equal than others
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is being able to run fast and throw/catch a ball accurately considered something that elevates these people above everyone else?
Why can't people be elevated for doing things that actually contribute to society?
Our priorities as a culture are SERIOUSLY fucked up.
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Informative)
The NYT article clearly states that two football players were arrested 11 days later, and are being held under house arrest until their trial.
Re: (Score:3)
It's not really disturbing. This is common in small-town America. The parents might be successful members of the community, they might know local government figures who can quietly plead with the small police force to investigate selectively. The mayor's son and the police chief's son might be on the same team. They might be all banding together to protect their kids from a lifelong fate that resulted from a terrible thing they did when they were a bunch of stupid kids.
Note that I'm not condoning this AT AL
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Interesting)
Because sex with drunk chicks is a major past time in America. Parties are arranged with alcohol specifically because people want to get drunk and fuck. It is well known that women do not go to bars to get laid; they go to bars to have fun, which is why we have wingmen--distract the girl's friends so she is isolated, because she's not there to get picked up. That's why guys take home so many drunk chicks: they did not come there to get taken home, they're just too drunk to think straight!
Guys go out to the bar to find drunk bitches to fuck. Guys arrange parties and tell their friends to find chicks to bring so they can get them drunk and fuck them. This is not what college kids do. This is not what teenagers do. Thirties, forties guys do this. It is common, consistent, continuous behavior.
Most laymen don't register this as 'wrong' until somebody calls it rape. Hell even women don't really take much notice that they've been taken for a romp; they just wake up, ask where the hell they are, and try to find their way home without giving it much thought.
There is a sickness in the world, though perhaps I am pessimistic. Maybe the only reason we freak out when someone calls it 'rape' is because we've accepted this behavior to such a level that everyone pre-accepts the consequences--women don't go out to get fucked while they're passed out drunk, but when it happens most of them are like, "Oh yeah, that happens lol... man I was druuuuunk..." and don't flinch. Is this really what we are?
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:3)
The only "fun" they're going to have is by dangling sex in front of the males, therefore they are in fact going out to get laid.
Women do not exist to satisfy your sexual desires. They can (and many do) enjoy a girls' night out, and they have the right to do so without assbags like you calling it "dangling sex in front of the males."
So kindly go fuck a fire ant nest while the rest of us men get on with the business of being more than walking penises.
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:4)
No, the disturbing issue is that the cops won't do their jobs and round up the suspects and let the prosecutors and grand jury decide base on evidence that was gathered in good faith. In the texas case, unlike the ohio case, the law followed the law and over 20 people have been convicted of a crime, and given various crimes from probation to life sentences. It is not up to the police to decide who is guilt and not. It is up to them to make arrests and collect evidence.
And this problem is not limited to ohio. Minnesota has areas of with incredible high rape rates. Their excuse. It sometimes gets hot. Corpus Christi in Texas also is hot, and teens go there to party very hard, yet the rape rates are no where as high as parts of Minnesota. Maybe because the cops are going to arrest those who rape others, and not just blame the weather or the fact that victim was drunk.
Re:The really disturbing part (Score:5, Insightful)
In the Duke case, the DA was pandering to constituents who wanted action(it was a serious town/gown thing, and students don't do much voting in local politics). In this case, the relevant authorities are pandering to constituents who want inaction to protect their precious football heroes.
Different incentives; but both good examples of the fact that criminal investigations can be...modified...by the desires of local stakeholders.
It would appear... (Score:5, Insightful)
The better title might be 'Anonymous actually gives a damn about gang rape case, unlike clannish and football crazed natives of some backwater hellhole'.
The perps in this case were almost unbelievably sloppy in concealing their activities; but the people supposed to be enforcing the law were, by turns, overtly apathetic and far more interested in protecting their hometown heroes and their precious football season than actually seeing justice done.
Re:It would appear... (Score:5, Interesting)
The authorities aren't overtly apathetic, they're seem to be in full-on coverup mode. According to the narrative that Anonymous/Localleaks/Knight Sec are telling, they have a vested interest that goes well beyond preserving hometown pride. One of the players implicated is the son of the county prosecutor attached to the case, and allegedly the girl transported to the prosecutor's residence during that night and raped before being transported to another location.
Video link (Score:5, Informative)
Deadspin has been great about following this story (see the other links(, and this page from a few days ago is more in depth and has the video itself (and some choice quotes if you can't listen to this sort of thing):
http://deadspin.com/5972527/she-is-so-raped-right-now-former-student-jokes-about-the-steubenville-accuser-the-night-of-the-alleged-rape [deadspin.com]
Truly despicable.
This just in (Score:5, Insightful)
False dichotomies ... (Score:3)
Update (Score:3)
This needs an update to include the town sheriff's amazing press conference ("Anonymous, I am coming after you!") and Anonymous's response [wordpress.com].
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:5, Informative)
When this story came out, the prosecutor told the press that they already had collected the video in question. And still hadn't charged anybody.
In other words, there's an untainted trail of the evidence, and the reason that Anonymous got involved at all is that they're trying to shame the prosecutor's office into doing something.
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:5, Informative)
The prosecutor, you mean the mother of one of the kids on the football team?
Hurray small town america.
Wrong (Score:5, Informative)
"Under Ohio law, the Ohio Attorney General is elected by the voters of the state and does not have the independent jurisdiction or ability to undertake investigations or prosecutions of juvenile crime. In this case, the Jefferson County Prosecuting Attorney who has such authority delegated her authority to the Attorney General's office to act as special prosecutor in the matter. The special prosecutors are not from the Steubenville area and graduated high school elsewhere."
Source [steubenvillefacts.com]
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:5, Insightful)
Huh? Not charged? (Score:5, Informative)
-August 11-12, 2012. The incident that began this case occurred.
-August 14, 2012. The incident was reported to Steubenville Police.
-August 16, 2012. Electronic devices of people who potentially had knowledge of the incident were taken, pursuant to search warrants.
-August 17, 2012. Steubenville Police request technical and investigative support from the Ohio Bureau of Criminal Identification and Investigation "BCI" (a state agency supervised by the Ohio Attorney General). At the request of Steubenville Police, BCI expedited the evidence analysis. The analysis involved uncovering and reviewing tens of thousands of emails, texts, and photos from approximately a dozen electronic devices. The vast majority of such data was unrelated to the case. Investigators and forensic examiners never found any video of the alleged crime.
-August 22, 2012. Based on the investigation of the Steubenville Police, two juvenile males were arrested and charged. Their names are Trent Mays and Ma'lik Richmond. Suspects remained in juvenile detention until November 1, 2012 when the Visiting Judge (from outside the county) assigned to the case placed the suspects on home arrest.
-August 28, 2012. County Prosecuting Attorney delegates her authority to special prosecutors from the Ohio Attorney General's Office.
-August 30, 2012. Steubenville Police meet with the special prosecutors.
-The Juvenile Court trial in this case is scheduled for February 13, 2013. Circumstances surrounding media and public access to that trial are controlled by the Visiting Judge.
Source [squarespace.com]
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:4, Insightful)
>In the process, Anonymous successfully managed to get the accused released by tainting the evidence. Congratulations, assholes.
Um no. First of all, Police get evidence ALL THE TIME from secondhand sources. And they don't need a warrant for that either.
Second, I doubt anonymous was able to touch the item that filmed this video. It's still in the camera, even if "deleted". Police got a big heads up to its existence.
Courts most of the time don't go "OMG, IT AINT PURE!!!". They consider many factors and some even *gasp* come to reasonable conclusions.
Re: (Score:3)
In the process, Anonymous successfully managed to get the accused released by tainting the evidence. Congratulations, assholes.
Yes, because police and prosecutors have never relied on anonymous tips to generate leads in cases before.
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:5, Informative)
Actually, it is admissible. IAaL, I am assuming you are not an attorney. Any objection the defense has will go the weight and not the admissibility. All you need is someone to testify to the video, and that the contents are a fair and accurate representation of the events that occurred. It is a matter of course to identify the videographer, people in the video, etc. If the defense wants to attack the authenticity of the video, or if it was edited, that is fine, but it will, as stated above, only serve to limit the weight the jury gives it and not the admissibility for consideration. Additionally, you don't need video evidence of a rape to prove rape. They arrested, convicted and punished people for 1000s of years without video evidence, and in most cases today there is none.
Sheriff says he'll arrest the hackers. (Score:5, Interesting)
From this article:
"Why put their names out there? Why put their addresses out there? With all the crackpots we have running around this country? With all of the sex offenders were have out there, plenty of them in Jefferson County, why put children’s names out there?” said Abdalla. "Mothers have taken their children out of school in fear of what may happen. This has gone too far. Enough is enough." Abdalla also claimed to know the identity of the person leading the online effort. "I'll deal with that at another time," said Abdalla. "I know where he lives. I know his name, his mother's name, his father's name, his brother's name."
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
So can anonymous tips be used in investigation? How can it be known whether the information in a tip was collected legally if the police didn't collect it? And therefore how can any information discovered from following such a tip be allowed?
Re:Tainted evidence (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3)
I work in physical security, and work with a number of police departments. I'm not pessimistic, just realistic. They work a ridiculous number of hours, they don't have time for both families and outside study to learn something as in-depth as computer forensics. By an large they don't have the interest, either. They didn't become cops to sit in front of a computer all day, they want to "get the bad guy." It's an interesting culture to observe from out
Re: (Score:3)
So can anonymous tips be used in investigation? How can it be known whether the information in a tip was collected legally if the police didn't collect it? And therefore how can any information discovered from following such a tip be allowed?
Legally it doesn't matter. If I break into someone's house because I think they have a big ol' stash of kiddie porn and confirm my suspicious and take evidence to the police they can use that evidence in court and/or to get an actual search warrant. As long as the police aren't involved with my illegal evidence gathering in any way it is admissible. I might get charged with breaking and entering and trespassing, but the evidence is still allowed.
Re: (Score:3)
You still need a chain of evidence. An officer needs to collect it at the scene and then log it and all the rest of that. There is probably supervisors involved as well as technicians.
The chain is needed because, as we are aware, evidence can be easy to fake, so it needs to be strictly accounted for. There are also privacy requirements and constitutional requirements about where you can go getting that evidence. No prosecutor who has a good case will want to add evidence that distracts from the central
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Robots.txt is your friend (Score:4, Funny)
... It looks like a simple look up of cached info.
I always use robots.txt to forbid caching my incriminating evidence.
You can't be too careful these days...
Re: (Score:3)