Even Duke lacrosse players are saying, "That shit ain't right"

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2006/07/09/state/n192544D70.DTL

 

Even Jerry Tarkanian is saying "That shit ain't right."

And I can't believe there wasn't a better way to write this sentence:

Uhh, yeah. Mental trauma? Another story entirely.

 

OMFG. Poor girl. She's gonna be a healthy member of society now

Assholes. As if that's any sort of excuse for doing this to a person. I demand Starman justice for these men.

 

As do I. And, we're certainly not dealing with any Rhodes Scholarship contenders here, either:

It's morally the right thing to do, but in terms of saving your own ass, "fully cooperating" with the police is the last thing they want to do.

Which, of course, a good lawyer will seize upon -- if the players admitted any wrongdoing under the (presumably) incompetent legal advice of the coach, probably any such admissions will all be thrown out.

 

As long as the players made a knowing and intelligent waiver of their Miranda rights prior to the questioning, that lawyer is going to be running up against a brick wall. It doesn't matter if you listen to your lawyer, your coach, your minister, your neighborhood "Jesus is coming repent" streetcorner bum when they tell you to come clean. Why you waived those rights is irrelevant. If you go in that room and the cop asks you, "Would you like to have a lawyer with you" and "You understand you don't have to say anything to us and that anything you do say can be used against you" and you make a voluntary waiver of those rights (and if you invoke them later, the police respect that and end questioning)....well, those statements are going to be used against you. Period.

P.S.: It was the lawyer (Idiart) who told them to cooperate, not the coach. And if the prosecution has them dead-to-rights, it is the appropriate legal strategy as well. If you admit wrongdoing early and often, it almost always will be used as a mitigator at sentencing. Too many people have the idea that going to trial is a 50/50 propisition. It isn't. Too many jurors will assume that if you are on trial, you did something wrong. And in this case, the crime is so heinous (a ganbang of an 11-year old ) that the jury is going to want to convict someone, regardless of how strong the evidence is. And the difference between admitting wrongdoing early and often and getting a generous plea deal and maintaining innocence and being found guilty at trial shave many years off your sentence.

 

What "plea deal?"

If these guys gang-raped an 11-year-old, send them to fucking jail for the rest of their fucking lives. To enjoy all the pleasures usually presented to child rapists in prison, every joyful day.

I don't care how cooperative or repentant they may be. Throw away the fucking key.

 

I don't disagree with you. People who gangbang children shouldn't see the light of day. But I guarantee you the lawyer is angling for a plea deal and will likely get one. If you are the prosecutor, you can either go after the max and make an 11-year girl recount a horrific gangbang in open court and risk strange things happening where they are found not guilty or you can avoid all of that and still get a somewhat lengthy sentence....I think you have to consider offering the plea.

 

Castrate them. Not joking either.

 

it's stautory rape, child molestation on many counts and the DA could probably throw some more shit in there. if they plea, it would probably be for like 20 years in jail and probation after that. if they went to trial, they could have a lot more years at risk. if they decide to throw a plea at them. a ballsy DA would say no and make these guys go away for a long time.

 

Seriously! That's sick. I've seen many 11-year-olds and younger girls who I thought, "man, she's going to be a hot one someday." But I've never seen even a 13-year-old since my, say, 21st birthday that I could even get a hard on over.