Crying rape

[Katy W.]

What is the name of your state? AZ

Wow all you guys are still here, amazing.

This is a question about libel.

My son's friend, a boy who is like part of our family, got himself in a situation where he had sex with a very drunk girl at a party, he was also very drunk. He later sent the girl home in a taxi because none of them have driver's licenses yet.

The girl got home and told her parents that she couldn't remember anything after leaving her school. The police got involved and decided that she had been the victim of a rapist who used a "date rape drug." This incident happened on November 28. She was taken to a hospital and checked that nite. Obviously the police had her blood taken at the hospital.

The town newspaper reported the incident as a sexual assault in which "date rape drugs" were used. The article was front page on Dec. 6, 8 days after the "rape." In this article the police discuss date rape drugs at length.

The boy was arrested on Dec. 19. Another front page article on 12/21. In each article the incident is reported as a sexual assault. The 12/21 article still talks about a date rape drug, then in the last paragraph, states "in this case, there was no drug, only alcohol, but the effects were similar."

No names were used since minors are involved, but every kid at Mayberry RFD High here knows who the articles are about. The boy was never chanrged with sexual assault, he was charged with sexual conduct with a minor. The girl never claimed anyone had ever assaulted her.

The kid doesn't even know that the articles say he assaulted this girl. The judge "yelled at him" for having sex with this girl when she was drunk. He was in kiddie jail for 14 days, over Christmas. The girl is charged with nothing , not a minor in possession of alcohol, nothing.

1 problem - the police knew that there were no drugs involved on Dec. 1, 2005, yet the paper ran the articles stating that date rape drugs were involved on Dec. 6.

2 problem obviously is that the paper names "the youth" as committing sexual assault. This has spread thru the entire community including the kids at the high school.

PLEASE I UNDERSTAND that the family needs to see a lawyer. This family is not real sophosticated when it comes to legalities, and there are a few of us who are thinking about just sitting down with them and telling them that the boy was called a rapist in the papers and that they need to look into legal issues. I don't know if they have even read the articles but i know the boy hasn't.

my questions are, if the newspaper discussed this incident in a small town where most of the people knew who was involved but without naming names, could it still be considered libel?

can the police be charged with libel for going to the paper and stating that they felt date rape drugs were used, when they already had the information that the only drug ingested was alcohol which the girl ingested herself?

This is a very dicey situation, this family is poor, and the boy really has been done harm, half of my son's friends believe he raped someone. But I don't want us to say anything to the family if I don't have a reasonable belief that a personal injury lawyer would not kick them out of his office because the boy's name was not actually in the paper.

thanx KatyWhat is the name of your state?

 

[seniorjudge]

What is the name of your state? AZ

Wow all you guys are still here, amazing.

This is a question about libel.

My son's friend, a boy who is like part of our family, got himself in a situation where he had sex with a very drunk girl at a party, he was also very drunk. He later sent the girl home in a taxi because none of them have driver's licenses yet.

The girl got home and told her parents that she couldn't remember anything after leaving her school. The police got involved and decided that she had been the victim of a rapist who used a "date rape drug." This incident happened on November 28. She was taken to a hospital and checked that nite. Obviously the police had her blood taken at the hospital.

The town newspaper reported the incident as a sexual assault in which "date rape drugs" were used. The article was front page on Dec. 6, 8 days after the "rape." In this article the police discuss date rape drugs at length.

The boy was arrested on Dec. 19. Another front page article on 12/21. In each article the incident is reported as a sexual assault. The 12/21 article still talks about a date rape drug, then in the last paragraph, states "in this case, there was no drug, only alcohol, but the effects were similar."

No names were used since minors are involved, but every kid at Mayberry RFD High here knows who the articles are about. The boy was never chanrged with sexual assault, he was charged with sexual conduct with a minor. The girl never claimed anyone had ever assaulted her.

The kid doesn't even know that the articles say he assaulted this girl. The judge "yelled at him" for having sex with this girl when she was drunk. He was in kiddie jail for 14 days, over Christmas. The girl is charged with nothing , not a minor in possession of alcohol, nothing.

1 problem - the police knew that there were no drugs involved on Dec. 1, 2005, yet the paper ran the articles stating that date rape drugs were involved on Dec. 6.

2 problem obviously is that the paper names "the youth" as committing sexual assault. This has spread thru the entire community including the kids at the high school.

PLEASE I UNDERSTAND that the family needs to see a lawyer. This family is not real sophosticated when it comes to legalities, and there are a few of us who are thinking about just sitting down with them and telling them that the boy was called a rapist in the papers and that they need to look into legal issues. I don't know if they have even read the articles but i know the boy hasn't.

my questions are, if the newspaper discussed this incident in a small town where most of the people knew who was involved but without naming names, could it still be considered libel?

can the police be charged with libel for going to the paper and stating that they felt date rape drugs were used, when they already had the information that the only drug ingested was alcohol which the girl ingested herself?

This is a very dicey situation, this family is poor, and the boy really has been done harm, half of my son's friends believe he raped someone. But I don't want us to say anything to the family if I don't have a reasonable belief that a personal injury lawyer would not kick them out of his office because the boy's name was not actually in the paper.

thanx KatyWhat is the name of your state?

Q: can the police be charged with libel for going to the paper and stating that they felt date rape drugs were used, when they already had the information that the only drug ingested was alcohol which the girl ingested herself?

A: No.

 

[racer72]

Put yourself in place of the girl's parents. You probably would have a totally different viewpoint.

 

[JETX]

there are a few of us who are thinking about just sitting down with them and telling them that the boy was called a rapist in the papers and that they need to look into legal issues.

'Legal issues' about what?? There is NOTHING in your post to even suggest liability by the newspaper or anyone else.

my questions are, if the newspaper discussed this incident in a small town where most of the people knew who was involved but without naming names, could it still be considered libel?

Nope.

can the police be charged with libel for going to the paper and stating that they felt date rape drugs were used, when they already had the information that the only drug ingested was alcohol which the girl ingested herself?

Nope.

This is a very dicey situation, this family is poor, and the boy really has been done harm, half of my son's friends believe he raped someone.

What your friends believe is NOT relevant.

 

[bononos]

My advice:
Tell Mom to teach her kid better behavior.
Don't get blitzed when you are under age.
Don't have sex while intoxicated, or AT ALL!
Don't have sex with a person who is intoxicated, or AT ALL!

You are promoting what this kid did!
He got hammered and had (probably unprotected) sex with a girl who was hammered and underage.
AWH, poor baby.

 

[stephenk]

Technically he is a rapist because he committed statutory rape.

 

[Katy W.]

Technically he is a rapist because he committed statutory rape.

Wtf? uh, which Arizona statute are you quoting? In Arizona a sexual assault is sex without the consent of the other party. Minors having sex with each other is termed "sexual conduct with a minor" for either child. Why the hell are you answering posts you do not have a clue about?

You are promoting what this kid did!

Oh please! Obviously, both kids behaved like swamp trash.

The girl, 16, and the boy, 14, (incidentily a virgin) drink the same amount, get sh*tfaced, have sex. The girl gets home, she's in big trouble, and she tells mom and dad that she can't remember a thing. Parents take the girl to the hospital where she has tests done to see if she has drugs in her system. 24 hours later the police have the lab results showing she tested negative for everything but alcohol, which she had plenty of. A week later the newspaper prints a story on the front page quoting the police saying that they think the girl was given a "date rape drug". The reporter asks the police why they didn't charge the girl with a minor possesion of alcohol. The Sgt. replies, "Because she was a victim of a sexual assault."

K was never charged with sexual assault. He pled guilty to sexual conduct/minor. The girl had zero legal consequences.

i understand that this does not satisfy defamation criteria, but for God's sake, I would hope that a newspaper would be more careful about printing a story saying that a child sexually assaulted another child in two newspaper articles, both front page, when in this small town, every high school kid knows who it was who was arrested. when all the info was false. Aren't they supposed to check that out before they print it?

Explain why you argue that about how the boy was obviously guilty, etc?

 

[justalayman]

13-1405. Sexual conduct with a minor; classifications

A. A person commits sexual conduct with a minor by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with any person who is under eighteen years of age.

B. Sexual conduct with a minor who is under fifteen years of age is a class 2 felony and is punishable pursuant to section 13-604.01. Sexual conduct with a minor who is at least fifteen years of age is a class 6 felony. Sexual conduct with a minor who is at least fifteen years of age is a class 2 felony if the person is the minor's parent, stepparent, adoptive parent, legal guardian or foster parent and the convicted person is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis except as specifically authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed has been served or commuted.

13-1406. Sexual assault; classification; increased punishment

A. A person commits sexual assault by intentionally or knowingly engaging in sexual intercourse or oral sexual contact with any person without consent of such person.

B. Sexual assault is a class 2 felony, and the person convicted shall be sentenced pursuant to this section and the person is not eligible for suspension of sentence, probation, pardon or release from confinement on any basis except as specifically authorized by section 31-233, subsection A or B until the sentence imposed by the court has been served or commuted. If the victim is under fifteen years of age, sexual assault is punishable pursuant to section 13-604.01. The presumptive term may be aggravated or mitigated within the range under this section pursuant to section 13-702, subsections B, C and D. If the sexual assault involved the intentional or knowing administration of flunitrazepam, gamma hydroxy butyrate or ketamine hydrochloride without the victim's knowledge, the presumptive, minimum and maximum sentence for the offense shall be increased by three years. The additional sentence imposed pursuant to this subsection is in addition to any enhanced sentence that may be applicable. The term for a first offense is as follows:

Minimum Presumptive Maximum
5.25 years 7 years 14 years

Being drunk can can be considered an incompacitating condition in which the drunk person cannot give permission.
So I would suppose the boy could have been charged with sexual assault as well as sex with a minor.

The girl should have herself been charged with sex with a minor especially because the boy was younger and in a lower age classification within the statute.

This is the problem with sex and the young'ns. It is a case of TWO dumb kids doing things they shouldn't be doing. While I do not believe there should be no punishment, they seemed to both be similarly equal in guilt. (as posted anyway)

Now it of itself does not change the story but in the original post you state the boy sent the girl home in a cab. Later you claim they are so poor. How does a 14 y.o. kid poor kid have enough money for a cab. Also, what was the cab driver's testimony, (if it got that far)?

Concerning libel.,,,,,no, they did not publish the kids' names. As well , the paper printed the alleged story. If they have reason to believe it may be true, they are pretty safe. Although you state the cops knew Dec. 1 that there were no date rape drugs used, how do you know this and how do you know it was a definitive knowledge. Some drugs leave no detectable traces and as long as the girl and/or parents were alleging use, the courts would eventually make that call, not the cops.

The part I believe is sad is the convict now has to register as a sex offender in most of the states he would live in. It should be seperated from (please don't jump on me for this comment) the real sex crimes. 2 stupid kids having sex does not compare to what I consider a sex crime.

 

[HomeGuru]

Wtf? uh, which Arizona statute are you quoting? In Arizona a sexual assault is sex without the consent of the other party. Minors having sex with each other is termed "sexual conduct with a minor" for either child. Why the hell are you answering posts you do not have a clue about?

Oh please! Obviously, both kids behaved like swamp trash.

The girl, 16, and the boy, 14, (incidentily a virgin) drink the same amount, get sh*tfaced, have sex. The girl gets home, she's in big trouble, and she tells mom and dad that she can't remember a thing. Parents take the girl to the hospital where she has tests done to see if she has drugs in her system. 24 hours later the police have the lab results showing she tested negative for everything but alcohol, which she had plenty of. A week later the newspaper prints a story on the front page quoting the police saying that they think the girl was given a "date rape drug". The reporter asks the police why they didn't charge the girl with a minor possesion of alcohol. The Sgt. replies, "Because she was a victim of a sexual assault."

K was never charged with sexual assault. He pled guilty to sexual conduct/minor. The girl had zero legal consequences.

i understand that this does not satisfy defamation criteria, but for God's sake, I would hope that a newspaper would be more careful about printing a story saying that a child sexually assaulted another child in two newspaper articles, both front page, when in this small town, every high school kid knows who it was who was arrested. when all the info was false. Aren't they supposed to check that out before they print it?

Explain why you argue that about how the boy was obviously guilty, etc?

**A: take a chill pill and mind your own business.

 

[Katy W.]

Being drunk can can be considered an incompacitating condition in which the drunk person cannot give permission.
So I would suppose the boy could have been charged with sexual assault as well as sex with a minor.

They both drank half a bottle of Jack. K handled it better because of his size, oh who cares.

**A: take a chill pill and mind your own business.

HG...bite me.

 

[abaga]

They both drank half a bottle of Jack. K handled it better because of his size, oh who cares.



HG...bite me.

Now, I don't think HG would do that....after all, couldn't that then be considered assault??