*women

after a few days i just kept checking in to see if he was still coming back for more

Real women don't put themselves in that situation LDO

I'm guessing he realized how easy it is to find his real life identity and also how much damage it could cause him to be exposed (I would bet most prosecutors would not appreciate one of their employees weighing in on such a highly sensitive case in a nearby community). He probably hopes that by bowing out, no one will expose him.

I disagree with you and I think your logic and opinion are sufficiently dumb enough to where it's not practical for me to argue with you any further.

Was the victim charged with a crime?

I wonder how that works - clearly there was sworn testimony in court (and her own admission) that she violated Pennsylvania underage drinking laws. I haven't seen any reported charges, but perhaps because she is a minor those aren't public or something?

They cut deals with people who are involved with homicides for no charges in exchange for their testimony, they certainly aren't going to charge a 16 year old rape victim with underage drinking.

Be serious.

I like productive discussions and arguments. Things really veered off course a few pages back. Is it helpful or welcome when I point this out? Probably not to the people who are veering off course, but I still think it's worth mentioning in an off-chance that it helps.

I'm not trying to get all parent-y on you or RJ or even Gizmo to save you from some bad feelings, but if you look at culs and the way he's chosen to engage you guys, he's been overall pretty dispassionate and even-keeled. He slipped and made a silly reference to some old pictures that Gizmo posted, and that was a ****ty and dumb thing to do. However, despite the overwhelming unpopularity of the things he's saying, and despite all of the vitriolic response he's received, he's managed to remain mostly civil when expressing his opinion.

Is it so much to ask that he get the same courtesy in response? Or do animals like him with contrary stances to yours not deserve that?

Look, all I'm saying is that we have to take into account their post history. There are things I can tell you about them because I'm friends with some insiders.

I was being serious. I don't see how this would be a "deal for testimony" situation since she was the one pressing charges I assume. I guess I just assumed that she'd be cited for this as a matter of course.

Guess it isn't super common for someone to be the victim of a crime while engaged in illegal behavior, but when it does, the more serious charge trumps?

In many states (Ohio included), it is not illegal for teens to drink "On private non-alcohol-selling premises with parental consent."

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/You...Age-of-21.html

If someone is the victim of a serious crime, especially a violent or sexually related crime, they aren't going to risk alienating that person by charging them with some minor piddling crap. It's hard enough to get victims of sexual assault to testify as it is, charging them with a minor offense is a sure way to drop reporting of sex offenses even lower.

"Oh, you were smoking weed that night? Well, ma'am, we'll certainly do our best to find the guy who raped you, but in the meantime we're going to have to charge you with this minor offense you told us about while detailing your attack. Sorry, but smoking pot IS against the law, I'm sure you understand."

So, as I said....get serious.

Now Sgt RJ - you're starting to sound pretty emotionally driven. Please refrain from the histrionics. I'm sorry if you got collared for some petty offense once when you were reporting a serious crime, but that's no reason to let it color the discourse here and now.

I understand that you're a woman, and therefor it may be difficult to be free from emotions. But give it a try, for the good of the conversation.

You don't want to discourage someone from reporting a major crime like rape because they can't afford the penalty of a much smaller crime, like underage drinking

I guess that makes sense.

Wonder if anyone has ever tried to exploit that to get out of hot water.

Note: I am not suggesting that is the case here. I know the sharks smell blood but I'm just genuinely curious.

Yes, I did once.

Of course people do. That is why many people rob prostitutes and john's (just look at all the Craiglist's robberies). They assume that they won't go to the cops and admit they were robbed while doing something illegal.

However, in most instances, the prosecutors exercise their discretion (they have no obligation to charge everyone that has commintted a crime) and let the minor crime go in order to encourage people to report major crimes.

If you mean do people agree to give evidence of larger/more serious crimes when they themselves are caught breaking the law, then of course. How do you think police come by most of their drug informants?

Have you never watched any police related TV show or movie in your entire life? I find it difficult to believe that someone would be unaware that people with critical testimony of serious crimes are given a pass on offenses of their own. Especially something ridiculously insignificant like underage drinking when compared to the crime of rape.

whoa whoa

allegation of rape. allegation.

Yes, I'm surprised that she wouldn't get in trouble for doing something wrong, even if someone else did something wronger.

Two wrongs not making a right and all. But I get that it's small potatoes. My question on whether this ever gets exploited has more to do with someone fabricating an accusation that makes themselves a victim in order to get away with a relatively minor indiscretion themselves. Will stop derailing as that obv. didn't happen here.

I don't know what to say in response to "two wrongs don't make a right" when the two "wrongs" you are comparing are underage drinking and rape.

Next you'll be saying that the guy who was sitting at a stop light checking his smart phone (OMG! cell phone in the car! that's illegal!) should get a ticket when he's plowed into from behind by a drink driver.

When the offense in question would normally result in nothing more than a citation, yes, not charging that person who is the victim of a much larger crime is the absolute norm. And that's fine because cops/prosecutors don't always ticket/charge every single person who violates every single law. It's called discretion.

Yes, but when I stop at the light to check my phone that doesn't make a drunk driver more likely to plow me from behind.

It does if the light turns green and you don't notice.

In that scenario I am at fault and will most likely be found contributorily negligent.