Under current North Carolina law, women cannot withdraw their consent after beginning to have sexual intercourse with a partner or partners.

In a 1979 ruling, the North Carolina Supreme Court held that “if the actual penetration is accomplished with the woman’s consent, the accused is not guilty of rape, although he may be guilty of another crime because of his subsequent actions.” In other words, if a woman begins having sex with someone and decides that she wants to stop, any action after that woman stops consenting is not considered rape under North Carolina law.

Per the 1979 ruling, consent can only be withdrawn, but not once an instance of sexual activity is ongoing. This has affected survivors who have tried to have their alleged rapists charged with rape but were unable to do so because of the court’s ruling. Many states adhere to similar legal principles as those reflected in North Carolina law.

North Carolina State Senator Jeff Jackson introduced a bill in March to the North Carolina General Assembly to address that legal loophole. If passed, the bill would “provide that a person who continues to engage in intercourse after consent is withdrawn is deemed to have committed the act of intercourse by force and against the will of the other person,” regardless of whether the parties had had sex previously or the situation in question was their first encounter.

While well-meaning, the bill does have its fair share of shortcomings. Although the bill is meant to correct the current law’s faults in regard to rape and women’s ability to consent, the bill is narrowly tailored to vaginal intercourse. The bill makes no mention of other forms of intercourse or people who do not have vaginas.

The bill also outlines that “the withdrawal of consent must be clearly communicated in a way that a reasonable person would understand to constitute withdrawal of consent.” This idea still puts the responsibility on the person withdrawing consent, whereas consent should be a continuous conversation among all people involved. After all, consent is not the absence of a “no,” but rather a clear, ongoing, mutual, and uncoerced “yes.”

It is unclear yet whether the bill has any hope of passing. Jackson failed to pass a similar bill last legislative session, and the current bill is still stuck in North Carolina’s Senate’s Rules Committee. However, the bill could have the potential to address some very real issues with North Carolina’s rape laws and bring justice to any future survivors of rape.

Marcus Dieterle

Marcus is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a rising senior at Towson University where he is double majoring in mass communication (with a concentration in journalism and new media) and political science. When he isn’t in the newsroom, you can probably find him reading on the train, practicing his Portuguese, or eating too much pasta. Contact Marcus at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Women Unable to Withdraw Consent Under Archaic North Carolina Law appeared first on Law Street.

Six members of the Presidential Advisory Council on HIV/AIDS have resigned in frustration with the Trump’s Administration’s apparent lack of interest in “the on-going HIV/AIDS epidemic.”

Since its creation in 1995, the council has sought to craft national policy on the disease, prevent its spread, and promote effective treatment as a cure is developed, according to U.S. News and World Report.

The members of the council who quit began becoming concerned during the 2016 presidential campaign when the Trump team showed little interest in meeting with advocates for those struggling to survive the disease. At that point, while the council noted the Trump camp’s disinterest, they clung to the hope that he could be engaged on the issue once in office, according to U.S. News and World Report.

Things escalated when the White House site “Office of National AIDS Policy” was removed during Trump’s inauguration, said Scott Schoettes, a member of the council since 2014.

The final misstep was when the new American Healthcare Act was passed by the Republican-majority House of Representatives, despite pleas from marginalized communities that it would have disastrous impacts, especially for those with HIV/AIDS.

New HIV infections in America declined 18 percent between 2008 and 2014, according to estimates from the Center for Disease Control. The council worked with the previous administration to create the new healthcare system that provided easier access to diagnosis and treatment. Those who quit the council felt that the new GOP bill would take that away.

Schoettes, and his peers, wanted to provide input for the council, but said that they could no longer stand idly by as the Trump Administration ignored their recommendations. Schoettes wrote in a guest column for Newsweek announcing the resignations:

The Trump Administration has no strategy to address the on-going HIV/AIDS epidemic, seeks zero input from experts to formulate HIV policy, and — most concerning — pushes legislation that will harm people living with HIV and halt or reverse important gains made in the fight against this disease.

Trump has still not appointed anyone to head the White House Office of National AIDS Policy after 150 days, while former President Barack Obama appointed a leader after only 36 days. Schoettes penned the column, but it was cosigned by his partners in resignation Lucy Bradley-Springer, Gina Brown, Ulysses W. Burley III, Grissel Granados, and Michelle Ogle.

While the council can have up to 25 members, it currently has only 15. The council last met in March, at which point the members wrote a letter to Health and Human Services Secretary Tom Price expressing concern about the repeal of the American Healthcare Act and the impact it would have on access to HIV/AIDS treatment. Price responded with an uninspiring, “perfunctory” response, according to Schoettes, which further frustrated the council.

Still, Schoettes says he and his colleagues have a desire to help the community they have worked with for many years. They don’t foresee Trump mustering any more interest than he has shown, but they hope other politicians find it necessary to work on a serious public health issue. The column finished:

We hope the members of Congress who have the power to affect healthcare reform will engage with us and other advocates in a way that the Trump Administration apparently will not.

Josh Schmidt

Josh Schmidt is an editorial intern and is a native of the Washington D.C Metropolitan area. He is working towards a degree in multi-platform journalism with a minor in history at nearby University of Maryland. Contact Josh at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Six Members of the HIV/AIDS Council Resign in Frustration appeared first on Law Street.

Japan’s lower house of parliament, the House of Representatives, approved a bill on June 8 that would amend the country’s rape laws. Japan has not changed its rape laws since 1907.

The amendment would expand the legal definition of rape, add a provision about the psychological factor of rape and sexual assault, raise the minimum sentence for rape convictions, and remove a provision requiring victims to press charges themselves to prosecute their accused rapist.

Currently, Japan’s legal definition of rape is limited to forced vaginal intercourse, but the new amendment would expand that definition to include all forms of forced sexual intercourse.

Current law also requires the use of threats and/or violence for an offense to be considered rape or sexual assault. However, the amendment would expand that definition to include instances in which an aggressor in a position to control or influence a victim–such as the relationship between a guardian and a child–exhibits psychological control over that victim.

The minimum sentence for those convicted of rape would be raised from the current three years to five years under the new law. The amendment would also remove a provision requiring victims to request the indictment of their accused rapist. As of right now, victims must decide whether to pursue the case, which can lead to aggressors pressuring their victims to drop charges.

Even with the amendment, however, prosecutors can still decide not to pursue rape charges. In fact, 53 percent of rape and sexual assault cases are dropped by prosecutors. In September 2016, prosecutors decided not to pursue rape charges against Japanese actor Yuta Takahata, who was accused of allegedly raping a hotel worker.

Support for an amendment to Japan’s rape laws was sparked by Former Minister of Justice Midori Matsushima in 2014. Matsushima founded the Discussion Group on Sex Crime Penalties which led to further governmental discussion about how the penal code addressed sex offenses, and later led to the submission of the amendment.

If the bill is approved by the House of Councillors, the upper house of parliament, Japan will amend the country’s rape laws accordingly.

Marcus Dieterle

Marcus is an editorial intern at Law Street. He is a rising senior at Towson University where he is double majoring in mass communication (with a concentration in journalism and new media) and political science. When he isn’t in the newsroom, you can probably find him reading on the train, practicing his Portuguese, or eating too much pasta. Contact Marcus at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Japan Moves Toward Amending its Rape Laws appeared first on Law Street.

A federal lawsuit has been filed against Baylor University, accusing football players at the school of engaging in gang rape as a rite of passage, and the school of doing nothing to prevent it.

The alleged rapes happened when Art Briles was head coach of the team and Kenneth Starr was president of the university. Briles was suspended a year ago, and Starr lost his position as president but remained a law professor at the school until last August, when he resigned.

Jane Doe, the anonymous woman who filed the lawsuit, claims that she was drugged and gang raped by four to eight Baylor football players in February of 2012. She alleges that the players then burglarized her apartment and harassed her through text messages until she left school the next year.

Jane Doe confirmed that at least one, 21-second videotape of two female Baylor students being gang raped by several Baylor football players was circulated amongst football players. The suit also alleges that Baylor football parties often involved dogfighting–at least once, a dog was so severely injured it almost died.

The lawsuit contends that Briles was fully aware of the alleged gang rape, and includes text messages between him and an assistant coach, in which Briles calls the woman a “fool” for reporting the burglaries to the police.

Baylor athletes gang-raped women as a ‘bonding’ experience: lawsuit. They allegedly called it ‘playtime.’ https://t.co/qXnSpRkxWl pic.twitter.com/ICcJ0c8gFU

— Kate Briquelet (@kbriquelet) May 18, 2017

Allegations of sexual assault at the Christian university began to surface in 2012. Baylor student Jasmine Hernandez accused football player Tevin Elliott of raping her twice at a party. He was convicted in 2014 of two counts of sexual assault and sentenced to 20 years in prison.

In 2013, a female soccer player reported that she was sexually assaulted by football player Sam Ukwuachu. He was convicted in 2015,  and sentenced to six months in jail and 10 years probation.

Hernandez, who publicly disclosed her name, sued the school last year for failing to investigate her claims–Briles and Starr were fired not long after.

Another woman, who was identified under the pseudonym Elizabeth Doe, also filed a lawsuit against Baylor earlier this year, alleging that football players had gang-raped her in 2013. She stated in the lawsuit that 31 players had committed at least 52 rapes, including gang-rapes, between 2011-2014.

Elizabeth Doe’s lawsuit accused the school of using sex as a way to sell the football program to prospective students. It described how Kendal Briles, a former assistant football coach and son of former head coach Art Briles, asked a recruit, “Do you like white women? Because we have a lot of them at Baylor and they love football players.”

Also in @Baylor lawsuit: Woman got school counseling. Says unnamed counselor talked stats of women who don’t report rape to dissuade her

— Jim Vertuno (@JimVertuno) May 17, 2017

Jane Doe’s lawsuit described many of the same elements–likening rape culture at the school to a hazing ritual. She alleges that organized gang rapes were considered to be a “bonding” experience for the players. Her suit also alleges that the older players brought underage recruits to strip clubs. They also had a “hostess program” that allegedly made sure women had sex with the recruits during their visits to campus.

After the allegations against Baylor became known, the school’s board said it was “horrified” and “outraged” to learn what was happening on campus.

Briles filed a lawsuit himself in December, accusing the school of libel. But he quickly dropped the suit after the university released text messages between the assistant coach, the athletic director, and him, that showed how they all did their best to avoid contact with law enforcement and encouraged victims to not press charges.

Jane Doe’s suit claims that school officials encouraged the plaintiff and her family not to report the assault to law enforcement. But the school says it will do all it can to ensure that things are made right.

“The University’s response in no way changes Baylor’s position that any assault involving members of our campus community is reprehensible and inexcusable,” the school said in a statement.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lawsuit Accuses Baylor Football Players of Gang Raping Women as Bonding Ritual appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

People are Outraged at “Stealthing”

There’s a name for a man removing a condom during sex without his partner’s consent: stealthing. The phenomenon is reportedly on the rise in the U.S., according to a new study by Alexandra Brodsky in the Columbia Journal of Gender and Law. Rape victims’ organizations say this kind of behavior needs to be classified as rape. And a lot of people are outraged that this is a “thing.”

Given that “stealthing” puts a victim at risk of pregnancy or disease, and that many people only consent to sex with a condom, this is “experienced by many as a grave violation of dignity,” the study says. And according to Sandra Paul, who is a specialist in sexual crimes, this could amount to legal rape. “There has to be some agreement that a condom is going to be used or there is going to be withdrawal. If that person then doesn’t stick to those rules then the law says you don’t have consent,” she said.

It’s both affirming and terrible to write about an under-acknowledged form of gender violence and hear a chorus of “me, too” in response

— Alexandra Brodsky (@azbrodsky) April 24, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: April 26, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Protesters took to the streets of Glasgow last week to push back against the “rape clause” in the UK welfare system. After reforms of the welfare system took effect in April, the tax credits a family can receive for having children are now capped at two children–except in the case of mothers who have a third child as a result of rape. However, those mothers have to provide evidence that the child was in fact conceived from rape–a provision decried as inhumane.

Rape survivors have to fill out an eight-page form detailing the attack and a third party (such as a healthcare provider or a social worker) must provide additional testimony. The woman can only receive tax benefits if she is not living with the perpetrator and if she has not received financial compensation following a conviction of the perpetrator. But psychologists across the UK have expressed concern that this rape clause will harm survivors. In a letter to The Guardian, a set of psychologists write that forced reliving of the attack may cause “flashbacks, renewed shame and emotional turmoil, and consequently affect how mothers bond with their children.”

The clause was an amendment to an existing law, so it was not debated or voted on in parliament. First Minister of Scotland Nicola Sturgeon’s SNP has decried the clause and has fought against it. SNP MP Alison Thewliss led the Scrap the Rape Clause campaign, presenting a petition with 10,000 signatures asking for the clause to be struck from the tax reforms. Members of the Scottish Parliament have filed a motion to debate the clause, which could push the UK Parliament to also debate it. The SNP is not alone in its discontent: the rape clause may particularly harm women in Northern Ireland, where reporting serious crimes, including rape, is mandatory. If women apply for a tax credit for a third child conceived through rape, they may be drawn into a criminal investigation against their will.

Scottish Conservative leader Ruth Davidson has argued that the Scottish government could set up new benefits to aid families with more than two children, outside of the UK government’s reforms. Davidson accused Sturgeon of simply writing the rape clause off as part of her list of complaints against the UK government instead of actively considering how Scotland could adapt the tax credit system.

Whether or not the rape clause is upheld, families across the UK will find themselves in a new financial bracket thanks to the tax reforms. Historically there has not been a limit to how many children a parent can claim–so large families that have previously benefited from tax credits may now find themselves slipping out of financial stability. The tax reforms disproportionately affect low-income families and will push them deeper into poverty. The rape clause was established in an odd effort to be “compassionate” but the misguided attempt to soften the blow of the tax reforms has only exacerbated ideological divides both within Scotland and the UK as a whole.

Jillian Sequeira

Jillian Sequeira was a member of the College of William and Mary Class of 2016, with a double major in Government and Italian. When she’s not blogging, she’s photographing graffiti around the world and worshiping at the altar of Elon Musk and all things Tesla. Contact Jillian at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com

The post Scotland’s Battle Against the UK Welfare “Rape Clause” appeared first on Law Street.

The Associated Press has reviewed 12 years of United Nations aid missions and found that peacekeepers have repeatedly sexually abused children, in some cases as young as 12 years old. While allegations to this effect have been known for a while, new reports show the issue is significantly more prevalent than previously believed. AP found almost 2,000 cases of alleged sexual abuse by peacekeepers and other UN personnel around the world. And even though more than 300 cases involve children, it’s difficult to prosecute these crimes.

Legally, the UN can’t do anything, as it doesn’t have jurisdiction over individual peacekeepers. It’s up to each country to punish its own troops, and it seems no one has an interest in doing that. AP reached out to 23 countries whose nationals are accused of sexual abuse, and few answered. The names of the accused were also classified, making it impossible to find out whether there was any punishment. A review of UN reports also showed a number of inconsistencies.

In Haiti, 134 peacekeepers from Sri Lanka sexually abused at least nine children between 2004 and 2007 in exchange for food, juice, or small amounts of money. Some of them were forced to have sex with the men several times a day for years. Eventually, 114 of the peacekeepers were sent home, but not one of them was arrested. UN workers are protected by diplomatic immunity and besides, their home countries often don’t want to make their bad behavior public.

.@AP finds U.N. peacekeepers ran child sex ring in Haiti. https://t.co/vauMSkYKv4 pic.twitter.com/poLAvSTutC

— The Associated Press (@AP) April 12, 2017

Antonio Guterres, who took over as UN Secretary General in January, announced in March the organization’s new guidelines for dealing with sexual abuse. “Certainly no person serving with the United Nations in any capacity should be associated with such vile and vicious crimes,” he said. He noted that gender equality is fundamental to tackling sexual crimes and said that promoting equality for all UN workers can help fight abuse of women. But for many, these promises are just hollow words. Similar efforts have been rolled out before to no avail.

As it’s difficult to punish the men guilty of these crimes, many have wondered whether the UN is doing more harm than good. When Nepalese aid workers brought cholera to Haiti, around 10,000 people died. Haitian lawyer Mario Joseph tried to get compensation for the victims from the UN and is now trying to get child support for the women that were left pregnant by UN workers and are living in poverty. “Imagine if the U.N. was going to the United States and raping children and bringing cholera. Human rights aren’t just for rich white people,” he said.

.@AP Despite this the UN is unable to punish those peacekeepers – it must leave that to “the countries that contribute the troops”. Unbelievable

— Peter Yeung (@ptr_yeung) April 12, 2017

A Haitian woman said she was 16 when she was raped at gunpoint by a Brazilian peacekeeper three years ago. In 2011, four Uruguayan peacekeepers filmed their gang rape of a teenager–the only response Uruguayan officials gave at the time was that it was a prank and not rape. In 2012, three Pakistani peacekeepers raped a mentally disabled 13-year-old boy and later abducted him to prevent him from talking to UN investigators. The list of victims goes on and on.

As long as there is no accountability for the member states of the United Nations and no international consensus on how to deal with these issues, it’s tough to imagine a solution. But Guterres is correct in pointing out that education about gender equality is vital. Many of the alleged abusers came from countries that are notorious for gender inequality. The most recent abusers came from Bangladesh, Brazil, Jordan, Nigeria, Pakistan, Uruguay, and Sri Lanka, according to UN data.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post UN Peacekeepers Allegedly Sexually Abused Children, Never Saw Consequences appeared first on Law Street.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump’s Ultimatum: Approve the New Health Bill or We’ll Stick with Obamacare

Donald Trump yesterday posed an ultimatum for House Republicans–approve the new healthcare bill, or he will leave Obamacare in place as it is. The vote on the new American Health Care Act was supposed to take place yesterday but was delayed, as too many Republicans had said they would vote against the bill. In a closed-door meeting last night, Trump said he wants the House to vote on the bill this afternoon whether it has enough votes to pass or not–he’s apparently tired of negotiating. If the bill doesn’t pass, Trump said he would move on to other issues, despite touting an Obamacare repeal as a priority throughout his campaign.

The president and VP Mike Pence held a meeting with the extremely conservative House Freedom Caucus yesterday afternoon to discuss the bill. A photo from the meeting circulated on social media and was heavily slammed. One of the main topics of conversation was whether to get rid of essential health benefits regulations, which require insurance plans to cover pregnancy and maternity services. But…notice anything missing from this photo?

Here’s the picture of the leaders negotiating away birth control, maternity care & abortion. Notice anything? #ProtectOurCare

(h/t @Emmya2) pic.twitter.com/X1dYUSa7nO

— Planned Parenthood (@PPact) March 23, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: March 24, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

A Texas teenager who ran into a church earlier this month, claiming she had been abducted and sexually assaulted by three black men, has admitted that she made the story up. Breana Harmon Talbott made headlines with her story, and many white nationalists took the opportunity to blame the alleged perpetrators’ race for the crime. Far right groups on Reddit, social media, and neo-Nazi website The Daily Stormer picked the story up. Many complained about the lack of media coverage and claimed that if the races had been reversed, it would be all over the national news. But now, the story has proven to be a hoax.

#satchat
Breana Talbott, 18, Denison TX, appar kidnapped/raped by 3 men.
I guess no media bc doesn’t fit noble blacks/evil whites narrative. pic.twitter.com/qBMiuqYPOz

— Philip Schuyler (@FiveRights) March 11, 2017

When Talbott entered the church on March 8 she was bleeding from cuts and scratches on her body, which she later admitted were self-inflicted. A rape kit from the investigation came back negative, meaning that there was no physical evidence of rape. On Wednesday, police announced that Talbott’s allegations were unfounded. “Talbott’s hoax was also insulting to our community and especially offensive to the African-American community due to her description of the so-called suspects in her hoax,” a statement on Facebook read. It also said the department would file a criminal case against Talbott for “False Report to a Peace Officer, a Class B Misdemeanor.” Talbott also admitted that she had fabricated the story.

Breana Talbott of Denison accused of staging kidnapping, making up story of being raped near church: #Denisonpolicehttps://t.co/Vm3UlUyUDI pic.twitter.com/7qtvJ0mMFX

— domingo ramirez jr. (@mingoramirezjr) March 22, 2017

The news caused shock and outrage in the community. Talbott’s friends had even created a GoFundMe to replace her jewelry that she claimed was stolen. Her then-fiancé was the one who called the police when she “went missing” about three hours before she reappeared. He had no idea she made the whole thing up and they have since separated. Denison Police Chief Jay Burch said that even though everyone was relieved the attack never happened, “there could be permanent damage as a result–a damage of relationships within our community, damage to the reputation of our community.”

Denison PD confirms 3/8/17 kidnapping & sexual assault was a hoax perpetrated by Breana Talbott, victim @FOX4 pic.twitter.com/pbapqXKF7s

— John Gnann (@kdfw07) March 22, 2017

The topic of false allegations when it comes to rape and sexual assault is incredibly sensitive. According to Slate, a commonly cited estimate is that only about 2 percent of rape reports are false. And women had to fight for a long time to gain the respect and the rights we have today. For a long time it wasn’t considered rape if a man forced himself upon his spouse, and that didn’t change until 1979 with the first conviction of spousal rape in the U.S. Still, victims of sexual abuse are often not taken seriously and so many have to fight to get a proper investigation. Cases like Talbott’s make it even more damaging when people make false accusations, because they’re used as justification to not trust other survivors.

Unfortunately, Talbott’s case received even more attention because she claimed that the made-up offenders were black. This played right into the hands of far right extremists who immediately used the story to push their own agenda. According to a recent study, black people are more likely to be wrongfully convicted than white people, and are also more likely to spend a long time imprisoned before being exonerated. False accusations will undermine the credibility of real victims, but they also contribute to a false image of who commits crimes. While the police figured out what had really happened before anyone was arrested or charged, wrongful convictions are always a problematic possibility.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police: Texas Teenager Fabricated Story that She Was Raped by Three Black Men appeared first on Law Street.

Canadian Judge Robin Camp has resigned after his comments during a 2014 rape trial when he asked the woman testifying why she didn’t “keep her knees together.” Camp’s language and comments during the trial implied that he thought the woman could have prevented being assaulted if she had wanted to. He faced backlash for his condescending and wrongheaded behavior pretty much immediately and a 15-month investigation by the Canadian Judicial Council began.

On Thursday, the council released its findings and stated that Camp was “manifestly and profoundly destructive of the concept of impartiality, integrity and independence.” The council urged that he be removed from office, and a few hours later Camp announced that he would resign.

The case involved 29-year-old Calgary man Alexander Wagar and an anonymous 19-year-old woman, who accused Wagar of raping her in the bathroom during a house party. The judge’s behavior was also inappropriate; throughout the trial he acted as if the alleged rape victim was to blame. He repeatedly referred to her as “the accused” even though that was the proper term for Wagar.

Why couldn’t this guy keep his lips together? He was obviously asking for it. https://t.co/gZsU5j9Zgt

— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) March 10, 2017

Camp also claimed that young women “want to have sex, particularly if they’re drunk.” He stated that for women, “some sex and pain sometimes go together,” which is not necessarily a bad thing.” He even went as far as telling the woman that she could have avoided being raped if she had moved her pelvis “slightly.”

As expected, Camp acquitted the man. But the Alberta Court of Appeal overturned the decision and ordered a second trial with another judge. Judge Gerry LeGrandeur said that although neither the accuser nor the accused sounded completely reliable during their testimonies, he couldn’t say without reasonable doubt that a sexual assault had actually occurred. After his second acquittal, Wagar’s attorney claimed that he was “the true victim.”

Repeat, he is one person. We need to look at the systemic issues of victim blaming in the criminal justice system. https://t.co/EBgX07DH4g

— Farrah Khan (@farrah_khan) March 9, 2017

The woman in the case said that her experience throughout trial left her with suicidal thoughts, including Camp’s inappropriate questioning. “What did he get from asking that?” she said at a hearing during the inquiry into Camp. “He made me hate myself and he made me feel like I should have done something… that I was some kind of slut.” Camp, who had been nicknamed the “knees together judge,” showed remorse and admitted that he had been rude and had used “facetious words.” In the middle of an apology he had to correct himself, when he said, “The thing I feel worst about is the questions I asked of the accused.” He then quickly corrected, “the complainant.”

Camp’s daughter also took part in the hearing and said she is a rape survivor herself. She said that although her father’s comments were “disgraceful,” she claimed to have seen him develop an understanding and empathy for those who have experienced trauma. Camp also pointed to how he has spent a lot of time educating himself about sexual assault, met with feminist scholars, and underwent sensitivity training. But in the end, that was too little, too late. The council wrote in its report, “his apologies and efforts at remediation do not adequately repair the damage caused to public confidence.”

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Judge Who Asked Rape Survivor Why She Didn’t “Keep Her Knees Together” Resigns appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Trump’s first week, but the protests haven’t stopped quite yet. For example, actor Shia LaBeouf has launched a four-year-long livestream art project called “He Will Not Divide Us.” It involves a camera outside of New York’s Museum of the Moving Image and its first featured guest was Jaden Smith. Check it out here.

Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Trump’s Team Hired Actors to Attend His First Campaign Speech

Way before President Donald Trump won the election, back when he publicly announced his candidacy in June 2015, his campaign team indirectly hired actors to be in the audience. Members of Trump’s team were accused of doing so at the time, but denied it—and they are right, in a sense. They didn’t hire the actors directly, but they worked with a contracting firm, which then subcontracted a talent agency to make sure that some actors came to cheer for the new candidate. A complaint that the American Democracy Legal Fund filed in March was made public last week and confirms the allegations. That organization supported Hillary Clinton and is alleging that Trump’s campaign team didn’t pay the agencies appropriately.

Trump hired a firm to provide actors to cheer during his 2015 campaign announcement then didn’t pay them for months https://t.co/7Ktaj6Jiec

— Liam Stack (@liamstack) January 22, 2017

A journalist from the Center for Public Integrity found that the Trump campaign also failed to pay the contracting firm until a month after the company had filed a complaint, and four months after it was originally hired. In the end, the Federal Election Commission ruled that the Trump campaign hadn’t done anything wrong. But if nothing else, it’s an embarrassing revelation for a team that only days ago claimed to have had the largest inauguration audience in history, despite photo and video evidence to the contrary.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: January 24, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

It’s Monday and Donald Trump is officially our president! In other words, this past week was pretty hectic to say the least. So ICYMI, check out some of our top trending stories from last week below!

Rinat Dray: NYC Bar Association Supports Woman Who Sued Hospital for Forced C-Section

In 2011, Rinat Dray went to Staten Island Hospital, already in labor. She had already had two babies through C-sections and had her mind set on giving birth naturally. But she said the doctor immediately started persuading her to have a C-section. In 2014 she sued the hospital for malpractice, among other claims, saying that the doctors did not care about her judgment as a mother, but pressured and threatened her.

Girl Scouts Face Backlash for Decision to March in Trump’s Inaugural Parade

The Girl Scouts of the USA have a controversial weekend ahead of them–it has been announced that the organization will be attending and marching in President-elect Donald Trump’s inaugural parade. And given Trump’s pretty abysmal record on women’s rights, a lot of people are really mad at the organization for making that call.

Man Found Guilty of Rape After Removing Condom During Sex

Consent is essential before engaging in any kind of sexual activity. But as one case in Switzerland makes very clear, consent goes well beyond simply saying yes or no before having sex. In a landmark decision Monday, the Criminal Court in Lausanne, Switzerland convicted an unnamed man of rape after he secretly removed a condom during sex with his partner, without her knowledge or consent.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Consent is essential before engaging in any kind of sexual activity. But as one case in Switzerland makes very clear, consent goes well beyond simply saying yes or no before having sex. In a landmark decision Monday, the Criminal Court in Lausanne, Switzerland convicted an unnamed man of rape after he secretly removed a condom during sex with his partner, without her knowledge or consent.

According to the Independent, the 47-year-old French man met the Swiss woman using the popular dating app Tinder. On the pair’s second date in June 2015, they started having sex with a condom. Afterwards, the woman learned that he had removed the condom during sex.

The judge determined that the woman never would have consented to unprotected sex.

According to bedsider.org, “ignoring a partner’s desire to protect against pregnancy or STIs, or even sabotaging a partner’s efforts to protect against pregnancy or STIs (like taking off a condom in the middle of sex without permission)” is considered sexual assault.

As Broadly notes, our understanding of consent has evolved in recent years. Dr. Sinead Ring of the University of Kent pointed to the UK’s Sexual Offenses Act 2003 as good point of reference for understanding “conditional consent.”

“If it’s proved the woman consented to sex with a condom and he changed the circumstances under which she’d consented, it’s quite possible he’d be convicted of rape,” Ring told Broadly. “But a jury would have to determine that he didn’t have a reasonable belief in consent and just went ahead and did it anyway.”

The perpetrator in this case received a one-year suspended sentence. The woman’s lawyer described the conviction as “a first for Switzerland.”

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Man Found Guilty of Rape After Removing Condom During Sex appeared first on Law Street.

Last night, Obama gave his last speech as POTUS, and today, Trump held his first news conference in 167 days. Read on to find out what they said! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Obama’s Moving Farewell Speech

Last night, President Barack Obama gave his last speech before leaving the White House, and it’s safe to say that there was not a dry eye in the place. Though he admitted that his job hasn’t been easy, and that he’s seen a lot of setbacks, he hasn’t lost hope. Obama urged his supporters to not give in to fear, guard their values, and be open-minded. The crowd cheered loudly enough to drown out his words, and when he paid tribute to Michelle, many people stood up. “You took on a role you didn’t ask for and made it your own with grace and grit and style and good humor,” he said, wiping his eyes. And of course he mentioned his BFF, VP Joe Biden, and said, “You were the first decision I made as a nominee, and it was the best, not just because you have been a great Vice President, but because in the bargain I gained a brother.”

But where was his youngest daughter, Sasha, during all of this? It turns out that she missed the speech because it was a school night and she had a test in the morning. Now that’s discipline!

#WhereIsSasha Hopefully blocking the driveway to the White House pic.twitter.com/NodjX8x4tB

— Sabra Berger (@SabraBerger) January 11, 2017

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: January 11, 2017 appeared first on Law Street.

Revenge porn–the non-consensual posting of someone’s explicit photos or videos, usually by an ex–is deeply problematic. And as our technology evolves, we need lawyers willing to help out those, often women, who fall victim to this kind of online harassment. Brooklyn attorney Carrie Goldberg specializes in sexual privacy and focuses on fighting revenge porn, and recently made headlines after being featured in a New Yorker profile. She was once the victim of online sexual harassment, and basically had to start her own law firm in order to become the kind of lawyer that was needed. She mainly represents young women who are trying to get photos off the internet, are being extorted, or have endured sexual abuse.

ACTIVIST SPOTLIGHT (USA): Carrie Goldberg is a Brooklyn attorney with a practice specialising in sexual privacy,… https://t.co/jNGmstSmH2

— The Pixel Project (@PixelProject) December 12, 2016

Many of her clients feel shame, even though they didn’t do anything wrong. One of the youngest is an African-American girl who is only 15 years old. When she was 13, she was raped by a classmate who filmed it and spread the video around the school. Instead of punishing the boy, the school sent the girl home and later transferred her to another school. She was in effect punished for being raped and harassed. Most other clients are women in their twenties who have ex-boyfriends or husbands who have spread or threatened to spread photos or videos online.

Goldberg has, sadly, seen a steady uptick in the number of clients seeking her help since the emergence of Donald Trump as a serious political contender. By this summer she had 35 active clients and had to hire a colleague. She said that many people seem to believe that a Trump presidency might mean a “license to be cruel.” And it’s not all revenge porn–for example she represents a family whose kids’ pictures were used in memes about the Pizzagate conspiracy.

Abuse on the internet flourishes easily, as it is hard to punish. In the case where someone just sends verbal threats it’s basically impossible to find the perpetrator. But we’re making progress. According to the New York Daily News, Goldberg has already done a lot:

She estimates she’s removed more than 900 pieces of revenge porn from the internet, protecting 72 victims. She’s also lobbied for legislation across the country and 34 states now have it — though not New York.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post How One Lawyer is Fighting Revenge Porn and Why that Fight Matters Now appeared first on Law Street.

Good morning everyone, we’ve officially all made it halfway through the week. Celebrate with a new RantCrush entry as a reward! Welcome to RantCrush Top 5, where we take you through today’s top five controversial stories in the world of law and policy. Who’s ranting and raving right now? Check it out below:

Aleppo Ceasefire Broken a Few Hours After it Was Reached

Last night, Russia declared that the battle over Syria’s largest city, Aleppo, was over. Rebel fighters and government forces reportedly reached a deal, which meant that evacuations were set to start this morning at 5 A.M. and the remaining rebels were to be transported to rebel-held territory. But this morning, fighting resumed and the evacuations were delayed.

An end to the fighting in Aleppo would be a huge development in the five-year-long war in Syria. The deal came just as the remaining citizens in Aleppo had lost all hope, and many sent out videos saying their goodbyes on social media. There have also been reports that government forces have entered buildings and executed civilians. It’s unclear what will happen next.

This is Aleppo: https://t.co/iresAnLQ55

— Jeffrey Goldberg (@JeffreyGoldberg) December 14, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post RantCrush Top 5: December 14, 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

It is hard to believe that in 2016 in a European country, a government could propose a new law that would make child marriage legal, and also protect rapists from being punished by the law as long as they marry their victim. But that is exactly what is happening in Turkey. The new bill was approved on Thursday and is scheduled to undergo a final vote on Tuesday. If it passes, it will take away the punishment for sexual assault if there is no force or if the victim and perpetrator are married. This would include girls under the age of 18. So how could sexual assault without force be criminalized, and how could sexual violence in marriages be punished? Put simply: they likely couldn’t be.

WTF Turkey with this project of law to decriminalize rape if it ends in a marriage??? “rape legalization”, that’s the true meaning of it…

— mandubianhotep (@mandubian) November 21, 2016

If a man rapes a girl, he can escape punishment by agreeing to rape her for the rest of her life. #Islam #Turkey https://t.co/CrLGhzXM46

— Anne Marie Waters (@AMDWaters) November 19, 2016

Over the weekend, thousands of people took to the streets to protest the proposed law, carrying signs that read “Punish the rapist, not the child,” and “Rape cannot be pardoned.” According to reports even the daughter of Turkey’s President, whose party introduced the bill, protested it. “Pardoning the crime of sexual assault, or dropping it due to prescription, is out of the question. People who commit sexual assault and rape crimes cannot be cleared,” one protester said to the AP.

The government claims it didn’t create the bill to pardon rapists, but to solve some legal challenges in connection with the widespread custom of child marriage. According to Prime Minister Binali Yildrim, it would release men who were imprisoned after marrying underage girls in religious ceremonies. But critics say the law would pardon rape and basically take away the rights of women and children. Now some United Nations agencies, like UNICEF, are urging Turkey to not go ahead with the law, as it would work against the country’s ability to “combat sexual abuse and child marriages.” A spokesperson said that UNICEF is “deeply concerned,” and that “these abject forms of violence against children are crimes which should be punished as such.”

Motion to ‘protect child marriage’ in #Turkey draws criticism and claims of pardoning rape. #EndChildMarriage https://t.co/FIfDpo2Fkr pic.twitter.com/KFUNI04FY8

— Edward Herbert (@ed_herbert) November 21, 2016

Turkey has one of the highest rates of child marriage in Europe, especially in more rural areas. The changes would apply to cases between 2005 and November 16 of this year.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Public Uproar: Turkey Moves Ahead With Child Marriage Law appeared first on Law Street.

Happy Monday Law Streeters! It’s the day before the presidential election, and we have a roundup of some of the top political stories you may have missed last week. Sitting at the top spot was “The State of Weed,” the Cannabis in America team’s comprehensive analysis of marijuana legalization state by state. It was followed by Melania Trump’s speaking out against cyberbullying, and Donald Trump’s child rape accuser canceling her first public appearance. ICYMI–check out the top stories from Law Street below.

1. The State of Weed: Marijuana Legalization State by State

In recent decades, marijuana legalization has continuously evolved in the United States, as opposition against the drug continues to wane amidst new research on the drug’s effects and criticism of the U.S.’s handling of the “War on Drugs.” The following slide show contains information on each states’ marijuana laws in regards to possessing, selling, and cultivating weed, although please note that this is intended as a basic resource and does not include the entirety of provisions in any given state. This is the “State of Weed.” Read the full article here.

2. Melania Trump Wants to Fight Cyberbullying, but Forgot Who She Married

Melania Trump gave a rare speech in Pennsylvania on Thursday, in which she expressed her concerns about people being mean on the internet, causing many to ask: does she even know her husband? Read the full article here.

3. Donald Trump’s Child Rape Accuser Cancels Public Appearance

A woman who filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump for allegedly raping her as a child, pulled out of a press conference where she was expected to reveal her identity moments before it began. The accuser, known by the pseudonym Jane Doe, was expected to reveal her identity before media outlets in her lawyer’s Los Angeles office on Wednesday. Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, cancelled the event due to fears surrounding her client’s safety–citing death threats. Read the full article here.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

A woman who filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump for allegedly raping her as a child, pulled out of a press conference where she was expected to reveal her identity moments before it began.

The accuser, known by the pseudonym Jane Doe, was expected to reveal her identity before media outlets in her lawyer’s Los Angeles office on Wednesday.

BREAKING: woman who sued Donald Trump for child rape breaks her silence today. https://t.co/ecbzZ6jxSU pic.twitter.com/kdCRsG7wIm

— Lisa Bloom (@LisaBloom) November 2, 2016

Her attorney, Lisa Bloom, cancelled the event due to fears surrounding her client’s safety–citing death threats.

“Jane Doe has received numerous threats today as have all the Trump accusers that I have represented. She has decided she is too afraid to show her face,” said Bloom. “She has been here all day, ready to do it, but unfortunately she is in terrible fear. We’re going to have to reschedule. I apologize to all of you who came. I have nothing further.”

The federal lawsuit alleged Trump raped Doe in 1994 when she was 13 years old, and sexually assaulted her on other occasions while attending sex parties at the New York City mansion of billionaire and convicted pedophile Jeffrey Epstein.

The woman making the claims is referred to as “Jane Doe” in the most recent court complaints filed in New York, but as “Katie Johnson” in a similar suit filed in California earlier this year. Doe filed a lawsuit in April, without legal representation, which was dismissed for technical filing errors. Trump responded to the allegations and claimed the lawsuit was an attempt to bring him down.

“The allegations are not only categorically false, but disgusting at the highest level and clearly framed to solicit media attention or, perhaps, are simply politically motivated,” Trump told RadarOnline. “There is absolutely no merit to these allegations. Period.”

There have, of course, been questions about the validity of the lawsuits from some. According to Jon Swaine of The Guardian, the lawsuits seem to be orchestrated by Norm Lubow, a former producer on the “The Jerry Springer Show” who is “an eccentric anti-Trump campaigner” with a record of making outlandish claims about celebrities.

A civil lawsuit is scheduled for an initial status conference in a New York district court on December 16.

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Donald Trump’s Child Rape Accuser Cancels Public Appearance appeared first on Law Street.

The Brock Turner sexual assault case upset us all, and you can’t have missed the assault survivor’s powerful words as her statement circulated in the media. It started with the words, “You don’t know me, but you’ve been inside me, and that’s why we’re here today.” A few days after the trial, an open letter was released by Vice President Joe Biden, commending her for her courage. She has only been identified as Emily Doe in the media to protect her identity. Now Glamour magazine has named her as woman of the year for her courage and her words, with the praise: “It was Doe’s take-no-prisoners telling of what happened afterward that changed the conversation about sexual assault forever.”

We honor Emily Doe to support the @RecallPersky initiative: https://t.co/ZwZyzGwv6R #GlamourWOTY #shattertheceiling pic.twitter.com/YrJnEYp8IU

— Glamour (@glamourmag) November 1, 2016

The nomination continued:

Doe’s words circled the globe. Within four days her statement had been viewed 11 million times; it was read aloud on CNN and the floor of Congress. Rape hotlines experienced surges in both calls and offers of volunteer help. And importantly, California closed the loophole that had allowed lighter sentences in cases where the victim is unconscious or severely intoxicated.

On Tuesday, Doe wrote another piece for Glamour describing how she was told her case was an “easy” one, thanks to the evidence and witnesses. But she didn’t experience it that way.

I had forensic evidence, sober un­biased witnesses, a slurred voice mail, police at the scene. I had everything, and I was still told it was not a slam dunk. I thought, if this is what having it good looks like, what other hells are survivors living?

Doe went on to describe how she lost all hope when she heard Turner was only sentenced to six months in prison. And how later, he was let out after serving only about half that time. But after Buzzfeed published the powerful statement she read in court, support from women all over the world started pouring in. She got letters from Botswana, Ireland, and India, she received bicycle shaped earrings to symbolize the two Swedish guys who biked by and rescued her, and she got paintings of lighthouses, referring to the part of her speech when she talked about being a beacon of light for others.

Doe wrote how she wants to be a role model for young girls–and to encourage everyone to speak up. She also contemplated how one woman felt it necessary to comment somewhere on the internet: “Sad. I hope my daughter never ends up like her,” as if being raped was Doe’s own fault. Someone else said: “she’s not pretty enough to have been raped.” Doe absorbed those remarks, but drew strength from seeing her message spread online and on the TV news. And she said she did hope other girls would “end up” like her–strong and knowing their rights.

Emily Doe, “the Stanford Survivor” speaks out in a powerful essay—”I hope you don’t end up, I hope you keep going.” https://t.co/0thSTYFw8Y pic.twitter.com/x6LzPuTLKa

— End Rape on Campus (@endrapeoncampus) November 1, 2016

Placing the blame on an assault survivor is a dated and dangerous way mindset. No matter how someone is dressed or how dark it is outside, an attack is never the survivor’s fault.

If you think the answer is that women need to be more sober, more civil, more upright, that girls must be better at exercising fear, must wear more layers with eyes open wider, we will go nowhere. When Judge Aaron Persky mutes the word justice, when Brock Turner serves one month for every felony, we go nowhere.

She ended her essay by saying that the world won’t change until everyone makes it a priority to avoid harming other people–and hold accountable those who do.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Glamour Names Emily Doe from Stanford Rape Case as Woman of the Year appeared first on Law Street.

Attorneys for Rolling Stone magazine and a former administrator at the University of Virginia completed their closing arguments on Tuesday, in a defamation case brought against the magazine for an article it published two years ago about now-debunked rape accusations. Seven jurors will begin deliberating the case on Wednesday in Charlottesville, Virginia.

Nicole Eramo, the former associate dean of students at UVA, also in Charlottesville, is suing the magazine for $7.5 million for its November 2014 story, “A Rape on Campus.” Eramo says the writer, Sabrina Rubin Erdely, unfairly portrayed her as a villain, and as an administrator protecting her institution rather than her students. The story centers around “Jackie,” a student who alleged she was gang raped and beaten at a fraternity party in 2012.

Tom Clare, Eramo’s attorney, argued that Erdely set out to tell a story of “institutional indifference,” and had a preconceived agenda that directed her reporting. He said she ignored key sources and facts that ran counter to her narrative, asserting “once they decided what the article was going to be about, it didn’t matter what the facts were.”

After the Rolling Stone piece thrust the case, and campus sexual assault more broadly, into the national conversation, a police investigation largely debunked the story “Jackie,” told Erdely. Rolling Stone issued an apology in December 2014, and the story was retracted in April 2015. To prove her case, however, Eramo must show the magazine intentionally acted with “actual malice.” 

Rolling Stone defamation trial nears end as lawyers say facts of UVA case ignored https://t.co/3nkzmG6woo

— The Guardian (@guardian) November 2, 2016

On the other side of the aisle, Rolling Stone’s lawyer, Scott Sexton, said there is no evidence that the magazine was aware of the story’s falsehoods before publication. “Everyone who encountered this young woman believed her,” he said. “Yet we are the ones, in a sense, being tried for having believed her.”

The Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism was commissioned by Rolling Stone after the story’s retraction in 2015 to study how the article was reported and where it failed. The commission called Erdely’s piece “a story of journalistic failure that was avoidable,” encompassing “reporting, editing, editorial supervision and fact-checking,” especially concerning the writer’s reliance on a single source (“Jackie”), and her failure to corroborate details with friends or interview the accused attackers.

The trial has lasted over two weeks, as 10 jurors–the seven who will decide the case and three alternates–reviewed 11 hours of video testimony, a score of eye witnesses, and 300 exhibits. “Jackie” will be providing a recorded deposition, and will not show up in court.

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Rolling Stone Defamation Case is in the Jury’s Hands Now appeared first on Law Street.

Another college is in the news, accused of mishandling a rape case. A female student at Old Dominion University who reported that she was raped in her own dorm room says she was denied a medical exam until after campus police had interrogated her for eight hours. The assault took place in October 2014 at the Old Dominion University campus in Virginia. Late Wednesday, the woman’s lawyer, Laura Dunn, filed a complaint against the university, accusing the school of mishandling the case and violating federal law.

The woman, who was not named in the complaint obtained by the Associated Press, wrote that she booked an appointment at a local medical center to get an exam after she was assaulted. But when she told campus police about what happened, officers wouldn’t let her leave. They took her to their department where they denied her food, water, and bathroom breaks. They interrogated her for eight hours, asking questions like “do you like rough sex?” and saying, “I’m just trying to find the crime here,” implying that it was her own fault that she was raped.

My alma mater is out here treating rape victims like criminals. And y’all wonder why people don’t come forward. #ODU https://t.co/SJT4MsCZ33

— Kris (@thatkblife) October 14, 2016

The way the campus police treated the student caused her stress and anxiety disorders. “After the entire day of being victimized by your police department, I was left feeling paranoid and scared as if I was the criminal,” she wrote in a personal statement attached to the complaint. The man, who was not a student at the university, was never charged with a crime.

Said it before and I’ll say it again, college “police departments” should be banned. https://t.co/eWseSI028R

— Bryan Beal (@bryanrbeal) October 14, 2016

The complaint accuses the school of violating federal law by not informing the woman of the importance of preserving evidence by getting a forensic exam right away–which she wanted to do, but wasn’t allowed–and not letting her know that she had the right to not report the incident to police until after being examined. She was also not informed that she could seek a protective order against the man, what her counseling options were, or the possibility to change her living situation. She was not even allowed to move out from the dorm where the assault took place until after getting a diagnosis from a psychologist. The school also failed to add the assault to the school’s “crime log” until after a reporter asked about it.

“This validated to me that Old Dominion University never took my sexual assault seriously and does not care for me as one of their students,” she wrote.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Old Dominion Student Who Reported Rape Was Interrogated for 8 Hours appeared first on Law Street.

One of the detectives investigating the Derrick Rose rape trial in Los Angeles died from an apparent self-inflicted single gunshot wound to the chest, authorities said on Wednesday.

LAPD Det. Nadine Hernandez was a 19-year veteran with the force who worked in the Robbery-Homicide Division Special Assault Section. She was found dead in her home in Whittier at 3:27 p.m. on Tuesday. She was 44 years old.

In a statement, the LAPD said Hernandez was one of several detectives on the case, and that “the Rose investigation will continue unimpeded.”

“At this point there is no indication that her case work had any connection to her death,” the statement said.

Breaking: After the judge denied Derrick Rose’s mistrial motion, the LAPD detective on the case is found, dead pic.twitter.com/qpCUA5Yjpt

— Spark Sports (@Spark_Sports_) October 12, 2016

Rose, a former Chicago Bulls star and current New York Knicks player, and two friends are being sued for $21.5 million for allegedly raping an incapacitated woman three years ago.

The plaintiff, whose name has remained undisclosed throughout the trial, accused Rose and his friends of drugging her at a party in L.A. and later gang raping her in her apartment.

She and Rose met in 2011 and maintained a two-year relationship. Rose claims the sex that night was consensual.

The latest developments in the trial came Wednesday when the defense called for a mistrial after the plaintiff’s lawyers failed to produce three text messages exchanged between their client and Rose on the night the alleged rape took place.

Lawyers of the plaintiff said there was no new information contained in the texts. Rose’s lawyers, however, said the texts show the accuser as having plotted sex in the hours leading up to the incident. They also claim the messages show her the next morning asking for a taxi reimbursement, seemingly undisturbed by the events of the previous evening.

The judge ruled that withholding the texts was not enough the derail the trial.

This Derrick Rose case is turning into an SVU episode

— Iesha ✨ (@ieshaax3) October 12, 2016

“I’m not going to dismiss it now,” U.S. District Court Judge Michael W. Fitzgerald said. “I’m not going to declare a mistrial when we have a jury in the box.”

Rose’s defense attorney Mark Baute mentioned Hernandez’s death when asking for a mistrial Wednesday, apparently shocking the plaintiff.

Police in Whittier, the LA suburb where Hernandez was found dead in her home, echoed the LAPD’s statement saying, “There are no signs of foul play, and the incident is being investigated as a suicide.”

Alec Siegel

Alec Siegel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. When he’s not working at Law Street he’s either cooking a mediocre tofu dish or enjoying a run in the woods. His passions include: gooey chocolate chips, black coffee, mountains, the Animal Kingdom in general, and John Lennon. Baklava is his achilles heel. Contact Alec at ASiegel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Detective in Derrick Rose Case Found Shot Dead appeared first on Law Street.

California Governor Jerry Brown has signed legislation ending the state’s 10-year statute of limitations on rape.

Senate Bill 813, filed by State Senator Connie Leyva (D-Chino) amended the penal code so that some sex crimes, including rape, forcible sodomy, and molestation of a child, can be be prosecuted, regardless of how long ago the crime occurred.

Leyva praised Brown’s decision, saying it told every rape and sexual assault victim in the state “that they matter.” “It shows victims and survivors that California stands behind them, that we see rape as a serious crime, that victims can come forward and that justice now has no time limit,” she said.

The sexual assault allegations against scandal-plagued comedian Bill Cosby inspired the bill. Cosby’s accusers testified before the California Legislature to support the bill, dubbed the Justice for Victims Act, before it made its way to Brown’s desk. Dozens of women have accused the comedian of sexual assault dating from the 1960s to the 1990s.

“The Cosby Show” star has denied the accusations, saying his sexual encounters were consensual.

Attorney Gloria Allred, who represents some of the accusers, stated that this was a positive step. “It puts sexual predators on notice that the passage of time may no longer protect them from serious criminal consequences for their acts of sexual violence,” she said.

The new law will not work retroactively, or help those who accuse Cosby of crimes committed more than 10 years ago. It will go into effect January 1, 2017.

Bryan White

Bryan is an editorial intern at Law Street Media from Stratford, NJ. He is a sophomore at American University, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Broadcast Journalism. When he is not reading up on the news, you can find him curled up with an iced chai and a good book. Contact Bryan at BWhite@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post California Ends Statute of Limitations on Rape with Senate Bill 813 appeared first on Law Street.

A Swedish court decided on Friday that the arrest warrant for Wikileaks founder Julian Assange still stands. He was accused of rape during a visit to Sweden back in 2010 and remains in the Ecuadorian Embassy in London. Assange denies the rape allegation and has refused to leave the embassy out of fear that he will be extradited to the United States where he could face espionage charges for documents leaked by his website.

Originally from Australia, Julian Assange visited Sweden in the summer of 2010 to give a lecture. He spent time with two Swedish women and over the course of a couple days he spent the night with each of them. Opinions diverge over what happened next. According to the women, what started out as consensual sex ended up being non-consensual. But Assange denies any wrongdoing and claimed he was shocked to hear the accusations.

Some people believe the women are part of a bigger political scheme to have Assange arrested. International media has criticized the strict Swedish rape laws, calling the country a “feminist dystopia” for how easy it is to be convicted while mocking the women for being upset that Assange dated more than one person at the same time. But the women’s testimonies, which were obtained by the Guardian, indicate that the case is more complicated than that. Assange allegedly attempted to have sex with both women without a condom, and although he eventually did use one, one of the women alleges that he intentionally ripped it before they had sex. The other woman claims she woke up and realized he was having unprotected sex with her, against her will. According to the Associated Press, allegations of sexual molestation and unlawful coercion were dropped due to the statute of limitations in Sweden, but the rape charge will remain until 2020.

In response to the ruling, Assange’s Swedish defense lawyer Per Samuelson told the Associated Press, “We are naturally disappointed that Swedish courts yet again choose to ignore Julian Assange’s difficult life situation. They ignore the risk that he will be extradited to the United States.”

Swedish prosecutors said they have not been in contact with the United States about Assange’s case, and if a third country asks to have Assange extradited it would need permission from Britain. Prosecutors are trying to move forward on the case by interrogating Assange at the embassy with the help of an Ecuadorean official who will question him on October 17.

Yesterday, the Wikileaks Twitter account said that Assange would turn himself into the United States if authorities release Chelsea Manning.

If Obama grants Manning clemency, Assange will agree to US prison in exchange — despite its clear unlawfulness https://t.co/MZU30S3Eia

— WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) September 15, 2016

Manning is currently serving a 35-year prison sentence for leaking classified materials. She ended her hunger strike earlier this week after the U.S. Army decided to allow her to undergo gender transition surgery.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Swedish Court: Detention Order for Julian Assange Stands appeared first on Law Street.

Comedian and former TV superstar Bill Cosby is due back in court on Tuesday, for proceedings in one of the only sexual assault cases against him that hasn’t passed the statute of limitations. He is accused of drugging and sexually assaulting about 60 women over the past 50 years, but many of the women revealed what happened well after the fact, and prosecutors were unable to purse charges. The Andrea Constand case took place in 2004 in Pennsylvania, where the statute of limitations is 12 years, meaning January 2016 was the deadline for pressing charges. In December of last year, Pennsylvania prosecutor Kevin Steele did so.

Andrea Constand was an operations manager and coach for the women’s basketball team at Temple University, Bill Cosby’s alma mater. As in the other alleged assault cases, he invited her over to his house, gave her some pills to make her relaxed, and then  assaulted her. Cosby has denied any wrongdoing.

Two months ago the judge in the case rejected Cosby’s request to have the criminal charges dismissed. On Tuesday he is due back in court for a pretrial hearing, and his lawyers want the judge to dismiss two pieces of key evidence: Cosby’s deposition from 2005, and a recording of a phone call between Cosby and Andrea Constand’s mother from the same year.

HAPPENING TODAY: Bill Cosby is back in Montgomery Co. court for evidence hearing. Could learn trial date @CBS21NEWS pic.twitter.com/W38d3F05wP

— Sara Small (@SaraSmallTV) September 6, 2016

The Constand case is in part based on Cosby’s 2005 deposition. Cosby talked about having extramarital affairs that he claimed were consensual, despite admitting to drugging the women. According to his defense team, he only talked freely about that because then district attorney Bruce Castor promised to not bring a criminal case against Cosby. But Castor said he made the promise so that Cosby couldn’t use the Fifth Amendment to avoid the questions.

Andrea Constand’s mother Gianna was recording when Cosby phoned her in her home in Canada in 2005, without Cosby’s knowledge. According to Canadian law it is legal to record a call with only one party’s consent, but Cosby’s lawyers want the court to apply the Pennsylvania law to the case, which would require both parties’ consent.

However, prosecutor Kevin Steele claimed that Cosby either knew or suspected what was happening, based on comments Cosby made on the call, and the fact that he claimed to have that information in his 2005 deposition.

Cosby is currently free on a $1 million bail but could face up to ten years in prison if found guilty.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Back in Court For Andrea Constand Sexual Assault Case appeared first on Law Street.

After serving only three months in Santa Clara County jail for sexual assault, former Stanford University swimmer Brock Turner was released on Friday morning. He left after serving half of a six-month sentence that he received in June after he was convicted of sexually assaulting an unconscious woman on Stanford’s campus in of January last year.

The case has been widely covered and the judge was harshly criticized for the lenient punishment. Prosecutors wanted a six-year sentence, but Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky responded saying, “A prison sentence would have a severe impact on him. I think he will not be a danger to others.”

As Turner left the jail, wearing dress pants and a wrinkled white shirt, a small group of demonstrators and members of the press watched. Sandra Pfeiffer, who told NPR member station KQED that she was a rape survivor herself, said, “Other people get locked away for a very long time, why did he get out after 90 days? Why? Why? It doesn’t make sense.”

In the aftermath of Turner’s sentencing, the Department of Education released a list of sexual assault complaints at colleges across the country. The list revealed that Stanford had five federal complaints–not counting Brock Turner’s case, which was conducted in the justice system not by the university–into how the school handled sexual assault cases. According to the list, Stanford had the most of any school under review.

Before Turner was sentenced, his father sent a controversial letter to the judge in his son’s case, which also led to a lot of criticism. In the letter, he argued that his son didn’t deserve to have his life ruined by a prison sentence. He wrote, “His life will never be the one that he dreamed about and worked so hard to achieve. That is a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life.”

In court, Turner’s victim read a powerful statement in court where she questioned the lenient punishment and society’s view on sexual assault. She also wondered what the outcome would have been if the assailant had not been a privileged, white star-athlete:

If I had been sexually assaulted by an un-athletic guy from a community college, what would his sentence be? If a first time offender from an underprivileged background was accused of three felonies and displayed no accountability for his actions other than drinking, what would his sentence be?

Turner’s early release made a lot of people on Twitter mad, as some saw it as an example of white privilege.

I know dudes from my hood who’ve had their lives ruined over a bag of weed and this dude Brock Turner just did 3 months for rape.

— Blédakiss (@ChefRoble) September 2, 2016

If only Brock Turner were a poor undocumented Mexican immigrant & not ‘an All-American boy,’ Trumpists cld use him to vilify a whole people.

— Jeffrey Wright (@jfreewright) September 2, 2016

Some argued that his sentence reflects one of the many reasons why victims of sexual abuse often do not speak up.

If you ever say “Why don’t rape victims just tell the police?” Please refer to the Brock Turner case and realize that it’s not that simple.

— tess (@that1mum) September 2, 2016

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Brock Turner Released From Jail After Serving 3 Months for Sexual Assault appeared first on Law Street.

On Friday, Los Angeles Times published a powerful op-ed by actress Gabrielle Union in which she addressed the recent rape allegations against movie director, writer, and actor Nate Parker. Parker was Union’s director in the movie “Birth of a Nation,” the highly-anticipated Oscar favorite about Nat Turner, an enslaved man who started a slave rebellion. Union plays a rape victim that throughout the film is silent, symbolizing situation many survivors of sexual violence find themselves in.

In her op-ed, Union reveals that she herself was sexually assaulted in her youth. She describes how 24 years ago she was raped at gunpoint in the back room of the shoe store where she used to work. She took the role in “Birth of a Nation” to provide a voice to all the voiceless women out there who have been victims of sexual abuse or rape. When the allegations against her director Nate Parker resurfaced, she says she was shocked. She wrote:

Since Nate Parker’s story was revealed to me, I have found myself in a state of stomach-churning confusion. I took this role because I related to the experience. I also wanted to give a voice to my character, who remains silent throughout the film. In her silence, she represents countless black women who have been and continue to be violated. Women without a voice, without power. Women in general. But black women in particular. I knew I could walk out of our movie and speak to the audience about what it feels like to be a survivor.

She went on to say that she couldn’t take these allegations against Parker lightly, arguing that although no one knows what actually happened that night many years ago, this is an opportunity to educate people about consent. Silence does not mean “yes.”

The rape accusation against Parker is 17 years old but recently resurfaced in the media. At 19, he and his college roommate Jean McGianni Celestin were accused of raping a woman who allegedly was too drunk to stand up straight. Parker has always maintained his innocence, saying it was consensual. He was acquitted of all charges, but Celestin was convicted of sexual assault. Celestin also helped make the movie that is now in the running for Academy Awards. One part that is particularly controversial is that they allegedly harassed the woman afterward. She later committed suicide in 2012.

Parker has tried to explain the difference between his 19-year-old self and the Nate Parker of today. He posted a statement on his Facebook page expressing his shock when he heard of the young woman’s passing. Some have accepted this as an apology, while others have said it’s just empty talk to try and save his movie. In light of the recent controversy, several locations have canceled screenings of “Birth of a Nation” and Q&A’s with Parker, such as the American Film Institute.

Gabrielle Union is married to NBA player Dwyane Wade and is the stepmother of his three sons. She said in raising them, she and Wade have educated them strictly about manners, drugs, and making the right choices. But lately, she realized this is not enough, and that they also have to teach them about boundaries between the sexes. She said:

To that end, we are making an effort to teach our sons about affirmative consent. We explain that the onus is on them to explicitly ask if their partner consents. And we tell them that a shrug or a smile or a sigh won’t suffice. They have to hear ‘yes.’

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Gabrielle Union Speaks Out About Nate Parker’s Rape Allegations appeared first on Law Street.

It’s been over a year since New York Magazine enlisted the help of 35 women to blow the lid off Cosby’s decade-spanning sex scandal. Unfortunately, California’s 10-year statute of limitations for prosecuting rape meant many of these women would never face their alleged abuser in court. And that didn’t sit well with Golden State lawmakers.

On Thursday, the California Assembly passed a bill to eliminate the time limit for prosecuting rape and other felony sex crimes. Now the bill referred to as SB 813 is on its way to the state Senate, which passed an earlier version of legislation 33-0 in June, according to the LA Times. If it is successful there, it could be signed into law by Governor Jerry Brown before the session ends.

Nearly half of the states in this country have a statute of limitations for these crimes. Understanding where each state stands can be confusing at times since the U.S. hasn’t standardized its terminology for what is considered sexual assault (some states define it as: Sexual Offense, Forcible Rape, Criminal Sexual Conduct, Sexual Battery, etc.) Many states do, however, make exceptions when the victims happen to be minors. But even in these cases many victims must report their attacks before they reach a certain age.

Opponents of the bill, which included the California Public Defenders Association and some victims’ rights groups, spelled out a list of reasons for why statute of limitations exist for rape cases. They say the time limits are meant to decrease the chances of wrongful convictions due to inaccurate memories, deaths of witness, and lost or tampered evidence.

According to the Daily Mail, three of Cosby’s alleged victims spoke before the California Senate in June to support the bill. They include Victoria Valentino, a former Playboy Model who claimed Cosby raped her in Hollywood in 1969; “Kacey,” who said the comedian sexually assaulted her 20 years ago in Bel-Air; and the actress Lili Bernard, who claimed she was raped by Cosby in the ’90s in Atlantic City, New Jersey.

“War criminals, no matter how many decades have passed, cannot evade prosecution,” Bernard told the Senate committee. “I am asking you to do the same thing for us, rape survivors, who survived the war upon our body.”

Unfortunately for her, if the bill passes, California won’t be prosecuting Cosby for any former allegations, since charges cannot be brought retroactively. The bill would only apply to crimes committed after January 1, 2017, or to incidents where the statute of limitations hadn’t run out by that date.

Click here to learn more about your state’s laws governing sex crimes using Rape Abuse Incest National Network’s database.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post California Aims to Eliminate Time Limit on Prosecuting Rape Cases appeared first on Law Street.

On Monday, the Associated Press revealed that South Sudanese troops went on a nearly four-hour violent rampage, where they raped foreign aid workers and killed a local journalist near the country’s capital of Juba. The worse part is, the nearby U.N. compound and the U.S. Embassy knew, but did nothing.

For three long years, Juba has been the center of a civil war between President Salva Kiir and the opposition forces led by Riek Machar. During the course of the war, both sides have often targeted civilians. But on July 11, soldiers celebrating a battle win in the capital attacked the Terrain hotel complex, which is a temporary home to many foreign aid workers, expats, and members of the Sudanese elite.

Residents of Terrain heard shouts and gunfire, while  between 80 and 100 men armed, drunk, and wearing the symbol of the President’s army broke into the hotel complex. Security guards at the hotel armed only with handguns didn’t stand a chance.

The soldiers began their rampage inside the complex by stealing phones, computers, and wallets. Then they beat up foreigners with their rifles–seemingly singling out Americans–and fired bullets close to people’s heads.

A man from the Philippines said the soldiers definitely had hatred for America, recalling one soldier saying: “You messed up this country. You’re helping the rebels. The people in the U.N., they’re helping the rebels.”

Three women interviewed by the AP said they were raped–one of them by 15 men. One of the women said security advisers from an aid organization had told them they would never be the target of an attack since they were foreigners. She claimed this exchange happened half an hour before they were assaulted.

Local journalist John Gatluak was killed for having the same tribal markings as Machar. A soldier shot him twice in the head and four more times in other parts of his body.

Many sent texts, emails and Facebook messages to people on the outside, pleading for help.

“All of us were contacting whoever we could contact. The U.N., the U.S. embassy, contacting the specific battalions in the U.N., contacting specific departments,” said the woman raped by 15 men.

But why didn’t the U.N. or the U.S. Embassy do anything to stop the attack? According to an internal timeline compiled by the U.N. that was obtained by the AP, a member of the U.N.’s Joint Operations Center in Juba first received word of the attack at 3:37 p.m, minutes after the breach of the compound.

Then over the course of the next hour, the timeline noted more U.N. staff members began receiving messages from inside Terrain. At 4:33 p.m., a Quick Reaction Force was informed; however it wasn’t until 6:52 p.m.–more than two hours after first the first message–that the U.N. Department of Safety and Security (DSS) declared it would not be sending a team.

Ethiopians from the U.N. mission were asked to send a Quick Reaction Force instead, but the emergency team took too long and the mission was abandoned. The U.N.’s Department of Safety and Security also asked Quick Reaction Forces from China and Nepal to intervene, but no one did.

“Everyone refused to go. Ethiopia, China, and Nepal. All refused to go,” said an American man who alerted U.N. staff of the attack after being released early from the compound.

According to the U.N. timeline, a patrol was supposed to go the following morning instead, but it “was cancelled due to priority.” When asked why no one responded, the U.N. said that it is investigating the matter.

But the U.N. isn’t the only organization facing blame. The U.S. Embassy was also asked for help, and reportedly never answered the American citizens trapped inside the hotel. The Embassy also did not respond to repeated requests for comment from AP.

The foreign aid workers in the field are there to help local civilians, but when they themselves become targets of attacks, the U.N. and their embassies should be the first ones to assist them. Instead, they were ignored when they begged for help.

Human Rights Watch is now calling for increased sanctions and an arms embargo on South Sudan.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post South Sudanese Soldiers Raped Foreigners, While the U.N. Did Nothing appeared first on Law Street.

A Title IX lawsuit against the University of Tennessee-Knoxville has been settled for $2.48 million with a group of eight women who accused the school of fostering a “hostile sexual environment,” listing incidents dating back to 1995, mostly involving allegations against male student athletes.

The announcement of the settlement comes just two days before the university has to formally respond to the case in the U.S. District Court. However, though UT is paying out nearly $2.5 million, it is not admitting guilt or negligence.

The lawsuit was first filed in February, when six women filed a civil suit claiming that athletes who were found guilty of assault went unpunished. They alleged that perpetrators and their teammates discouraged women from reporting rape charges, and that an athlete who tried to help a woman who had been assaulted was attacked by a fellow athlete. The women are dismissing the lawsuit against UT, according to David Randolph Smith, the Nashville attorney who represents the eight women.

“My clients and I are dismissing the lawsuit with prejudice and signed the settlement agreement,” Smith said in a statement. He added:

We are satisfied that, while universities everywhere struggle with these issues, the University of Tennessee has made significant progress in the way they educate and respond to sexual assault cases. My clients and I are also convinced that the University’s leadership is truly committed to continue its exemplary efforts to create a model as it relates to sexual misconduct.

The lawsuit claimed UT’s administrative hearing process was one-sided and denied victims the “rights to a hearing and to the same equal procedural, hearing, and process rights as given to perpetrators of rape and sexual assault.” It also accused the university of interfering with investigations and providing lawyers for students accused of misconduct. The $2.48 million payout from UT to the eight women will be split between UT’s athletic department and central administration. The money will not come from taxpayer dollars, student fees or donor funds, according to the school’s lawyers.

Joe DiPietro, UT System President, announced that in the next few weeks he will appoint an independent commission to review the current programs in place that combat sexual assault, and assess what areas need to be strengthened.

“I continue to say that one incident of sexual misconduct is one too many,” DiPietro said. “But unfortunately, on a college campus, these incidents will happen. When they do, I want the confidence of knowing that we did everything within our power to appropriately deal with the situation, and we provided the necessary support for all involved. There are no excuses for anything less.”

UT Chancellor Jimmy Cheek is also spearheading his own initiatives—he will hire six more people for Title IX compliance positions.

Inez Nicholson

Inez is an editorial intern at Law Street from Raleigh, NC. She will be a junior at North Carolina State University and is studying political science and communication media. When she’s not in the newsroom, you can find her in the weight room. Contact Inez at INicholson@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post University of Tennessee Settles Sexual Assault Lawsuit for $2.5 Million appeared first on Law Street.

A 22-year-old Dutch woman who reported being drugged and raped during a holiday in Qatar ended up being jailed herself for “illicit consensual fornication” and being “drunk in a public place.” The woman, identified only as “Laura,” has been in jail since March 14, and on Monday was handed a one-year suspended sentence, three years of probation, and a fine of about $823.

Protestors feared Laura, 22, would get sentenced to years of prison in Qatar, but Monday’s ruling means she can finally go home as she will be deported back to the Netherlands as soon as possible. A court official told Al Jazeera that the sentence was lenient, adding: “Had she been a Muslim woman, she would have received at least five years in jail. No one can get out of such charges here in Qatar.”

The case has given rise to strong reactions on social media under the hashtag #freelaura:

Dutch woman faces prison after being raped in Qatar for having "extramarital sex" – this needs to be covered by int'l media asap #freelaura

— Manya Koetse (@manyapan) June 11, 2016

Really #Qatar?! And u wonder why I have NO interest in exploring parts abroad. This! When ur jailed 4 reporting ur own rape #FreeLaura Smdh

— Kween Ka$h (@Kweendom) June 13, 2016

The Syrian man accused of raping her, Omar Abdullah al-Hasan, was sentenced a punishment of 100 lashes for extramarital sexual acts, plus 40 lashes for drinking in public, a severe crime in Qatar and other Muslim countries. He admitted to having had sex with the woman but not that it was by force. He was not charged with rape, and the subject didn’t even come up during the court hearing.

Laura was reportedly out at a hotel bar with a friend when she had a drink that made her feel strange. She said she woke up the next morning in a room she didn’t know, realizing she had been raped and probably drugged. When she went to the police, they arrested her.

The Dutch Embassy was involved at an early stage and has been in close contact with Laura and her family. Yvette Burghgraef-van Eechoud, the Dutch ambassador in Doha, said to CNN: “We will do everything we can to get her out of the country as soon as possible to where she says she wants to go.”

Another reason why we shouldn't play football in #Qatar. It's not safe for women! #freelaura

— Devi Boerema (@DeviBoerema) June 11, 2016

Qatar is set to host the World Cup soccer tournament in 2022, something that has led to protests among human rights activists concerning the death of migrant workers, corruption, and more. It has also caused concerns about how the country will deal with beer-loving soccer fans–and how fans will deal with strict sharia laws.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dutch Woman Jailed In Qatar After Being Raped To Be Sent Home appeared first on Law Street.

Ex-Stanford student and swimmer Brock Turner, who most of us are acquainted with by now, has been banned for life by USA Swimming. Turner, who was sentenced to an upsettingly mild sentence of six months in jail for sexually assaulting an unconscious student in 2015, was a promising athlete with his mind set on the Olympics. Now he will never be able to compete professionally in swimming since USA Swimming is the national governing body for the sport, and also hosts the trials for the Olympics.

See Law Street’s five reasons why people are protesting the Brock Turner’s sentence.

A spokesperson for the organization told USA Today that Turner was no longer a member of the organization at the time of the assault since his membership had just expired, but if he wished to apply today, he would not be eligible. The spokesperson said:

USA Swimming strictly prohibits and has zero tolerance for sexual misconduct, with firm Code of Conduct policies in place, and severe penalties, including a permanent ban of membership, for those who violate our Code of Conduct.

Now that Brock Turner has been banned from US Swimming for life and no longer has any of those cool future prospects can he just go to jail

— Kendra W (@kendrawcandraw) June 10, 2016

Although sentenced to six months, it now looks like Turner will be a free man after only three–online inmate records from Santa Clara County Jail show that he is to be released on September 2. This is because inmates at county jails only serve half the time they were sentenced if they behave well. On top of that, he is reportedly held in protective custody to keep him safe from other inmates during his short jail stay.

#BrockTurner will probably serve HALF of the 6 month sentence+is placed in protective custody as to not be targeted. pic.twitter.com/UNowixpccG

— very famous (@adatweetsthings) June 10, 2016

Turner was found guilty of three felonies, which carry a maximum sentence of 14 years in prison–but the judge thought it too harsh for the 20 year-old, saying “a prison sentence would have a severe impact on him,” so the judge sentenced him to six months in a county jail. The assailant’s father also read a letter in court, pleading for a mild punishment, saying, “he has never been violent to anyone including his actions on the night of Jan 17^th 2015.” This seems like a strange statement about someone who was found guilty of attacking an unconscious woman.

The girl who was assaulted read her moving statement in court and it was later published on Buzzfeed, to which Vice President Joe Biden replied with an open letter expressing his anger with what happened and thanking her for her courage to speak up. Both of them praised the two Swedish students that rescued her and held on to Brock Turner until the police showed up.

Brock Turner is blowing up but these men (Carl Fredrik and Peter Jonsson) rescued the girl and called the police. RT pic.twitter.com/vMqZePrYMn

— Tweet Like A Girl (@TweetLikeAGirI) June 10, 2016

The judge, Aaron Persky, has been widely criticized for the lenient sentence and urged to withdraw. In the new and totally unrelated case he’s working on, 10 prospective jurors have refused to work with him because of the Turner case.

For more on this, read Law Street’s piece about Lena Dunham and the cast of “Girls” dedicating a video to the survivor of the Stanford case.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Stanford Sex Offender Brock Turner Banned by USA Swimming – Forever appeared first on Law Street.

Protests erupted throughout the nation last week after a California judge sentenced former Stanford University freshman Brock Turner to a six month jail sentence for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman behind a dumpster.

People are mad, and there are currently six Change.org petitions protesting Turner’s sentence. If you’re new to the case, here are five reasons why people are outraged:

1. The Judge Was Extremely Lenient

On March 30, Turner was found guilty of three felonies: assault with intent to rape an intoxicated woman, sexually penetrating an intoxicated person with a foreign object, and sexually penetrating an unconscious person with a foreign object.

Then on June 2, Santa Clara County Superior Court Judge Aaron Persky sentenced Turner to six months in county jail, which is less than the state’s recommended sentence, followed by three years of formal probation. Turner must also register as a sex offender and participate in a sex offender rehabilitation program. However, with good behavior Turner may only have to serve three months of the prison sentence.

Since the charges carried a maximum penalty of 14 years in prison, Turner’s six months came across as extremely lenient. Apparently the judge worried that a stiffer sentence would have a “severe impact” on the 20-year-old star swimmer.

Many people theorized that the judge offered Turner “special treatment” because he was a Stanford alum as well as a former college athlete. The judge is now facing public demands to resign from office.

2. The Father’s Letter to the Judge

Before sentencing, Turner’s father wrote a letter arguing that his son should receive probation instead of jail time. In the letter Dan A. Turner writes, “He will never be his happy go lucky self with that easy going personality and welcoming smile.”

Turner added, “His life will never be the one that he dreamed about and worked so hard to achieve. That is a steep price to pay for 20 minutes of action out of his 20 plus years of life.”

Brock Turner’s father criticized for statement he read to court in sexual assault case: https://t.co/ELMMkUfQtu pic.twitter.com/A9CcKvBiWu

— CBS This Morning (@CBSThisMorning) June 7, 2016

At no point did the letter acknowledge that Brock committed the assault, instead the letter focused entirely on Brock’s pain and suffering rather than his victim’s. Eventually Dan A. Turner apologized for his “20 minutes of action” comment, which he claims was “misinterpreted by people.”

3. Biased Media Coverage

Mugshot Double Standard

For weeks, whenever the media reported on Turner, this photo was used:

Brock Turner’s friend blames his felony sexual-assault conviction on political correctness: https://t.co/GGXH6VcwjR pic.twitter.com/TO3KQ1k8cP

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) June 6, 2016

After a while this photo of a suited Turner smiling for his yearbook photo began to drum up its own controversy. Many people wondered why Turner’s booking photo wasn’t being used instead. It wasn’t until recently that Turner’s mugshot from the night he was arrested was finally released to the public.

The mugshot taken of Brock Turner the night of his arrest https://t.co/NVU6ZmXTqe pic.twitter.com/3lKGu9W7Sl

— deathandtaxes (@DeathAndTaxes) June 7, 2016

These photos illustrate a double standard in the way the media treats young, white criminals versus young, black victims of violence.  For an excellent explainer on this double standard, read this think piece by Mic.

Washington Post Coverage

The Washington Post was also criticized for its coverage of Turner’s verdict. In an article titled “All-American swimmer found guilty of sexually assaulting unconscious woman on Stanford campus,” the paper dedicated several paragraphs to Turner’s swimming career and squashed Olympic dreams.

Even though Turner had already been convicted, the paper showed him preferential treatment by focusing on his accomplishments and the impact the sentence would have on his once-promising future, rather than the severity of his crimes.

4. The Victim’s Powerful Letter

After the sentencing, the victim, whose identity has been protected, wrote a heart wrenching 12-page letter addressed to Turner that has since gone viral. In the letter, she discusses learning about her assault, reliving that night in court, and struggling to move forward after everything that happened to her.

She writes,

If you think I was spared, came out unscathed, that today I ride off into sunset, while you suffer the greatest blow, you are mistaken. Nobody wins. We have all been devastated, we have all been trying to find some meaning in all of this suffering. Your damage was concrete; stripped of titles, degrees, enrollment. My damage was internal, unseen, I carry it with me. You took away my worth, my privacy, my energy, my time, my safety, my intimacy, my confidence, my own voice, until today.

Unfortunately, the victim’s emotional message had no real effect of the outcome of Turner’s sentencing.

You can read the victim’s powerful letter in full here.

5. We Can’t Even Call Him a Rapist

It’s important to note that the reason I haven’t used the word “rapist” to define Turner throughout this article is not due to personal bias, but California law.

According to New York Magazine,

In California, rape is defined as someone using “physical force, intimidation, duress, or threats to persuade the victim to engage in sexual intercourse.” In the case of Turner’s rape of an unconscious woman, witnesses and testimony determined that Turner penetrated his victim with a foreign object, not a sexual organ.

So in other words California is telling me and the rest of the world that Turner was able to rip the clothes from his victim’s body, insert his fingers inside of her, grope her breasts, and hump her half naked body, but we can’t call him a rapist?

Like almost everything else involving this case, it simply doesn’t seem fair.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post 5 Reasons Why People Are Protesting Brock Turner’s Sentence appeared first on Law Street.

Oklahoma has done it again, ladies.

Oklahoma law does not criminalize someone who forces an intoxicated or unconscious person to engage in oral sex.

A Tulsa County judge dismissed a case in November involving two high school students after a 17-year-old boy reportedly offered a ride home to a 16-year-old girl. She had been heavily drinking and court documents show that her BAC was at 0.34, which would constitute alcohol poisoning. She was taken back to her grandmother’s house where she was completely unconscious and taken to the hospital. She later woke up to sexual assault testing and the boy’s DNA was found on her body.

He was initially charged with forcible sodomy and first-degree rape.

The boy claimed their encounter was consensual, but the girl claimed that she had no memory of it happening.

According to the court, “Forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation.”

The case was appealed, but the appeals court affirmed that the state could not prosecute the boy for his actions.

“The plain meaning of forcible oral sodomy, of using force, includes taking advantage of a victim who was too intoxicated to consent,” Benjamin Fu, the Tulsa County district attorney leading the case, told The Guardian. “I don’t believe that anybody, until that day, believed that the state of the law was that this kind of conduct was ambiguous, much less legal. And I don’t think the law was a loophole until the court decided it was.”

The defense attorney, Shannon McMurray, argued in the Oklahoma Watch that the court was right because intoxication cannot be substituted for force.

“There was absolutely no evidence of force or him doing anything to make this girl give him oral sex other than she was too intoxicated to consent” McMurray said.

This ruling has acted as a catalyst for the public to urge change to the law. Lawmakers as well are pushing to close this gap and make sure that this cannot be used in the future to dismiss a case.

One Oklahoma State Representative, Scott Biggs, R-Chickasha, said that he plans to amend the bill in order to include unconscious victims under the forcible sodomy law.

Oklahoma: it isnt rape if you’re drunk. So I can get drunk and rob people and it’ll be okay then? maybe steal a car?https://t.co/yM2YK4cW8z

— Lynsie Lee (@LynsieLee) April 28, 2016

WTF IS WRONG WITH OKLAHOMA???? OK court: oral sex is not rape if victim is unconscious from drinking https://t.co/AKf2vyKP7q#YesAllWomen

— Jeska Dzwigalski (@JeskaD) May 1, 2016

While the verdict shocked many, it wasn’t surprising to all.

“It’s not surprising, although unfortunate, that this is how it came down,” Rebecca O’Connor, the vice president for public policy of the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network told The New York Times. “It’s also not unique to Oklahoma. This sort of gray area of law can lead to unfortunate consequences.”

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Oklahoma Court: It Isn’t Rape if She is Too Intoxicated appeared first on Law Street.

With movies like “The Hunting Ground” making waves, numerous studies conducted on incidences of sexual assault on college campuses, and dozens of schools under investigation by the federal government for possible Title IX violations, the conversations about rape on college campuses are at an all time high. Now, a new video protesting the way that some of our nation’s institutions of higher learning deal with sexual assault on campuses is making its rounds, and it’s possibly the most powerful statement I’ve seen yet:

The video takes a common life marker–getting accepted into college–and features videos of a bunch of different kids reading their college acceptance letters. But then, after each of the students find out they’ve been accepted, they go on to read promises from their prospective schools that are about more than just education. The teens read the following phrases in short succession: “Prepare for a challenging year ahead,” “which includes losing your virginity to a rapist.” “You’ll be taken to the basement and violently raped.”

The video directs viewers to the website dontacceptrape.com for more information, a joint effort between advertising agency Goodby Silverstein & Partners, LA-based production company PRETTYBIRD, and Ultraviolet, a group fighting against sexual assault and sexism. The group explains its inspirations for the campaign:

The campaign includes stories of sexual-violence survivors in the form of ‘acceptance letters’ detailing the truth of the event as if it were coming from the college itself. These videos tap into the trend of teens posting acceptance videos on social media. The goal of the campaign is to raise awareness of this issue and inspire students, parents and the public to demand their colleges and universities act to protect their students.

In addition to launching the videos, the campaign also published full page ads in a couple of print publications, including the Harvard Crimson and USA Today. That ad took a similar approach:

The Unacceptable Acceptance Letter campaign launched today with this story printed in @thecrimson. #dontacceptrapepic.twitter.com/F5D4iwPSik

— Laura Petruccelli (@LauraPastacheli) April 16, 2016

As college acceptance season continues, and students begin to narrow down where they will be spending the next 4-odd years, this haunting video is particularly timely.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Anti-Rape PSA Features Dark College Acceptance Letters appeared first on Law Street.

In the context of campus sexual assault becoming more of an epidemic sweeping colleges across the country, one first-year student asked presidential candidate John Kasich how he as president will help women “feel safer and more secure regarding sexual violence, harassment and rape.”

Kasich turned away, making jokes to the audience about how he needs to leave, almost trivializing the St. Lawrence University student’s question.

He responded by explaining the efforts that Ohio has taken to provide support to victims on college campuses, like access to confidential reporting, rape kits, and the opportunity for victims to “pursue justice after you have had some time to reflect on it all.”

He then hit her with a kicker: don’t go to parties with alcohol.

Let’s unpack this statement. First of all, no woman should feel afraid just by simply going to a party with alcohol. If women do, and if telling women not to go to parties is even in the realm of something someone thinks, shouldn’t that warrant some sort of drastic preventative change?

However, Kasich did not address the root issue of how universities and colleges can solve the issue of sexual assault, rather he perpetuated the idea that it can only be prevented if women do not put themselves in situations where they could be sexually assaulted (which really is a wide variety of situations…so should women stop going to school, too?).

Rather than direct this conversation toward precautionary measures, Kasich tried to fix the issue by naming reactionary measures. The suggestions he stated at the beginning are great, but do not actually fix the issue of women (and men) being sexually assaulted in the first place.

A woman should be able to attend college parties totally naked, dance on tables & drink lots of alcohol w/o being raped or assaulted #Kasich

— James McHale (@JamesMcHaleUK) April 15, 2016

A 2007 study for the National Institute of Justice showed “… the vast majority of incapacitated sexual assault victims (89 percent) reported drinking alcohol, and being drunk (82 percent), prior to their victimization.”

Obviously alcohol does play a role in a lot of sexual assaults, especially on college campuses, but does that mean that one necessarily causes the other? Not quite, according to a report from the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

Although alcohol consumption and sexual assault frequently co-occur, this phenomenon does not prove that alcohol use causes sexual assault. Thus, in some cases, the desire to commit a sexual assault may actually cause alcohol consumption (e.g., when a man drinks alcohol before committing a sexual assault in order to justify his behavior).

Women should not be afraid to be around people drinking, period. In addition, alcohol doesn’t rape, people rape. And while it may play a factor, it is not an excuse for Kasich’s comments.

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post John Kasich to College Women: “Don’t Go To Parties With Alcohol” appeared first on Law Street.

April is sexual assault awareness month. And on Friday, one of the four former Vanderbilt football players involved in the infamous Vanderbilt rape case from June 2013 was retried alone. After nearly three hours of deliberations, the jury came to their conclusion and justice was timely served this awareness month. The jury found Corey Batey, a 22-year-old former Vanderbilt football player, guilty of aggravated rape and aggravated sexual battery.

According to a Washington Post poll conducted last year, 25 percent of women and 7 percent of men are victims of “unwanted sexual incidents” while in university. The Washington Post conducted the poll last year by telephone, which surveyed 1,053 women and men undergraduate students at a four-year college, between the ages of 17 to 26, living on campus or nearby. Sexual assault was defined as five different types of “unwanted contact: forced touching of a sexual nature, oral sex, vaginal sexual intercourse, anal sex and sexual penetration with a finger or object.” Using that definition specifically, “5 percent of men and 20 percent of women said they had been sexually assaulted in college.”

With sexual assaults on college campuses increasing and becoming an issue that needs to be addressed more urgently than ever, more colleges are joining the effort to put an end to sexual assault each year and are implementing “mandatory sexual assault awareness programs.” In addition to these mandatory awareness programs, “many universities have joined President Obama’s “It’s On Us” campaign, which is a nation-wide promotion aimed at putting an end to sexual assault on college campuses.” Though universities are showing a commitment to effectively address the issue of sexual assault on campuses, there are been results that indicate that these programs are not yet working. This last fall, Indiana University invited more than 7,000 undergraduate and graduate students to take a survey about their perceptions and experiences with sexual assault. It found:

Twenty-nine percent of the undergraduate women reported experiencing some form of nonconsensual sexual touching while at IU […] 35 percent of the undergraduate women and 34 percent of the graduate women reported being the victims of some form of sexual harassment while at IU […] and, 86 percent of the undergraduate women and 85 percent of the graduate women participants who reported experiencing some form of nonconsensual sexual contact did not report the incident to anyone at IU.

As these findings are similar findings with studies conducted at other universities, an answer on how to solve the epidemic of sexual assault on campuses remains to be solved. Hopefully, this recent court ruling against Batey will influence sexual assault victims to speak up and encourage universities to continue to make efforts with protecting and creating a safe space for sexual assault survivors, and putting an end to this horrendous crime for good.

Ashlyn Marquez

Ashlyn Marquez received her law degree from the American University, Washington College of Law and her Bachelor’s degree from The New School. She works in immigration law and has a passion for worker’s rights, tacos, and avocados. Contact Ashlyn at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deja Vu: Former Vanderbilt Football Player Found Guilty of Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Perhaps no public figure has received as much criticism and vitriol over such a long period of time as Hillary Clinton. Clinton has been nationally famous since the 1980s, and internationally famous since her first day as First Lady of the United States. In her stump speeches and TV appearances, Clinton chalks the near-constant mudslinging up to oppositional Republican forces who are threatened by her ability to enact real change. And though it may sound trite at this point in the campaign due to repetition, sexism is still a real and damaging force, and may contribute to some of these efforts. Of course, that can’t be true for every line of attack–not every criticism is a right-wing conspiracy designed to slander the former secretary of state. So which is the truth–or could it be a mixed bag of libelous fiction and legitimate fact? Let’s evaluate Clinton’s history of responding to sexual assault and rape by trying to determine the truth, and what they might mean about Clinton’s candidacy and presidency.

Before I dive in, I’ll try to pre-empt some bias–as it stands, I like Hillary Clinton. I know that for some reason, saying you support the efforts of the frontrunner of The Democratic Party (and the most likely person to be our future president) is a divisive statement, but it’s something I should acknowledge. I wasn’t always set on Mrs. Clinton, and my support isn’t unmovable, but her levelheaded approach to policy reform and breadth of executive experience appeal to me. I like Bernie Sanders, and I respect him as a politician. He’s represented the state of Vermont loyally for decades, but I find myself doubting whether he’d make progress on his lofty plans with Congress, and wonder if he has enough foreign policy clout to serve as our Commander in Chief.

Still, the internet can be a toxic place for a Hillary Clinton supporter. The seemingly cult-like online presence of Sanders fans is suffocating to anyone voicing support for his opponent. In the real world, Clinton leads Sanders nationally, and has fantastic momentum in the delegate count, but the subset of voters who are active online paint a very different picture. Know that I’m not a blind supporter of Mrs. Clinton, and that I believe her to be a flawed person.

Most famously, Clinton’s husband’s sex scandal has also become her cross to bear. It’s no shock to the American people at this point that President Bill Clinton had an extramarital affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky. At the time that the affair was first breaking to the public, Hillary Clinton argued that the claim was yet another attempt by a “vast right-wing conspiracy” to tarnish her husband’s reputation. Then, as evidence to support Ms. Lewinsky’s claims grew, Clinton told the press that she had been misled by her husband, and she publicly committed to her marriage in spite of her husband’s indiscretions, taking the role of “the good wife.” Whether Clinton was truly unaware of the goings-on between her husband and Ms. Lewinsky, and whether Hillary and Bill are in love and devoted to each other is anyone’s guess. It’s equally reasonable to think that the former President and his wife have successfully moved on from the scandal as it is to think that their relationship is rocky and held together by political promise. Either way, I don’t think that the personal marital strife of the couple reflects poorly on Hillary Clinton’s intelligence or leadership.

The larger concern borne out of the Lewinsky scandal is Hillary Clinton’s attitude toward women leveling accusations against her husband. On the campaign trail these days, she tells crowds that rape victims should be believed and supported.

Every survivor of sexual assault deserves to be heard, believed, and supported. https://t.co/mkD69RHeBL

— Hillary Clinton (@HillaryClinton) November 23, 2015

That proves troubling when faced with Juanita Broaddrick’s 1978 rape accusations against Clinton’s husband, which came to light two decades later. This created a conundrum for her: if these claims are false, standing by your husband is the right thing to do. If the claims are true, disbelieving a rape victim is heartless, wrongheaded, and reprehensible. The only response from Bill or Hillary to these claims came through President Clinton’s lawyer, who said “Any allegation that the president assaulted Juanita Broaddrick more than 20 years ago is absolutely false.”

A person in a position as powerful as president is a lightning rod for false accusations, but it’s also true that a president’s influence could be used to cover up sexual indiscretions as well as acts of sexual violence. Knowing that both of those things are true, it would be extremely difficult to navigate charges made against your extremely powerful husband. There is no evidence to show that Hillary Clinton threatened or intimidated Broaddrick into silence. At the time, Clinton was supporting Anita Hill during her testimony against then-Supreme Court nominee Clarence Thomas, so it’s tough to argue that Hillary was completely unsupportive of women or even specifically victims of sexual harassment and assault. Many online rags will argue that Hillary personally sicced private investigators on Bill’s accusers, but the only concrete statement on that comes from a 1998 Matt Lauer interview:

I think we’re going to find some other things. And I think that when all of this is put into context, and we really look at the people involved here, look at their motivations and look at their backgrounds, look at their past behavior, some folks are going to have a lot to answer for.

That’s certainly not the “love and kindness” angle that Clinton is espousing now, but it’s not inherently criminal or evil. While false rape accusations are exceedingly rare, they do happen, so though it’s very disappointing to hear Clinton say these things, it would only be truly unforgivable if Clinton knew that these accusations were true, and actively tried to bury them. Criticizing Hillary Clinton for her comments about rape accusers in the nineties is absolutely fair game, and shows pretty clearly that in many areas of women’s issues, Hillary Clinton was certainly part of the problem.

For a candidate whose campaign often puts women’s issues at center stage, Clinton’s comments from twenty years ago show that she has been on the offensive against specific women accusing her husband. Whether she’s learned from the backlash, or simply learned to hold her tongue, her policy decisions and voting record show that she’s been a defender of women for decades, turning the feminist corner and leading the charge among the 2016 candidates. While her record on equal pay legislation, maternity leave, and global women’s rights is something she can proudly tout, some of Mrs. Clinton’s attitudes and comments from the 90s are absolutely disheartening, but not disqualifying.

Sean Simon

Sean Simon is an Editorial News Senior Fellow at Law Street, and a senior at The George Washington University, studying Communications and Psychology. In his spare time, he loves exploring D.C. restaurants, solving crossword puzzles, and watching sad foreign films. Contact Sean at SSimon@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What Should we Make of Hillary Clinton’s Record on Rape Victims? appeared first on Law Street.

According to one Idaho sheriff, the Idaho legislature shouldn’t have anything to do with making a statewide rape kit collection and tracking system because most rape accusations are just plain false.

A new bill, which is heading to the desk of the governor now, would standardize how medical clinics collect evidence from suspected sexual assaults, and would create and enforce a timeline for law enforcement agencies to send evidence for testing at a state forensic lab.

DNA collected from rape kits goes into a nationwide database in order to check for matches. Rape kits contain semen, saliva, or blood found on the victim during an examination. Agencies would need the approval of their county prosecutor if they do not believe a kit should be tested.

Idaho Governor C.L. “Butch” Otter has not yet indicated whether or not he will sign the bill. But Bingham County Sheriff Craig Rowland told Idaho Falls television station KIDK, according to OregonLive, that this new measure prohibits members of law enforcement from doing their jobs. Rowland said:

They need to let us decide if we’re going to send the kit and when we send the kits in. Because the majority of our rapes — not to say that we don’t have rapes, we do — but the majority of our rapes that are called in, are actually consensual sex.

These comments add to the systematic issue of law enforcement not always taking rape victims seriously.

“This bill sends a clear message that victims are to be taken seriously,” said Democratic Senator Maryanne Jordan to the AP. “The DNA evidence in these kits can be a powerful tool in solving these crimes.”

This new measure aims to streamline the process by bypassing skeptical police by requiring that clinics send their kits for testing, unless the victim or county prosecutor say otherwise.

“It’s hard to know if a claim is false if the kits don’t get tested,” Ilse Knecht, policy and advocacy director for the Joyful Heart Foundation told the AP. “Each one of these kits represents a survivor. … We need to take their claim seriously, treat them with respect and use the evidence.”

According to a Vox report, 2 to 8 percent of rape allegations are actually false. The six point discrepancy comes from different understandings of what rape is. Therefore, depending on where and who is doing the reporting and investigating, many cases are not considered rape, leading to discrepancies amongst state and national agencies.

“The heated public discourse about the frequency of false rape allegations often makes no reference to actual research,”–this is according to a ten-year study done by Violence Against Women. “When the discourse does make reference to research, it often founders on the stunning variability in research findings on the frequency of false rape reports. ” The study found that the range for false rape allegations was between 2 and 10 percent.

Only 32-33 percent of rapes are even reported, according to the Department of Justice, cited in a report by RAINN (Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network), and only two out of every 100 rapists will spend any time in jail. With numbers like that, legislation that aims to give a voice and legitimacy to each victim is vital.

Julia Bryant

Julia Bryant is an Editorial Senior Fellow at Law Street from Howard County, Maryland. She is a junior at the University of Maryland, College Park, pursuing a Bachelor’s degree in Journalism and Economics. You can contact Julia at JBryant@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Idaho Sheriff: Rape Kit System ‘Unnecessary’ Because Most Accusations are False appeared first on Law Street.

Recently, several former members of the University of Tennessee Volunteers female training staff sued the University for violating their Title IX rights. While many people may have been caught up with Peyton Manning’s name in the filing, others were probably confused about why Title IX was invoked at all. After all, Title IX is concerned with female athletes having the opportunity to receive scholarships for playing collegiate sports, right? Partly, but it can also be invoked in cases where a woman feels her rights have been infringed upon, notably in the context of a number of high-profile sexual assault cases at major universities. Read on to find out the whole scope of the landmark statute and what role it is playing in potentially punishing universities for their actions.

What is Title IX?

Title IX is actually a section of the Educational Amendments that were passed in 1972. The purpose of these amendments was to prevent discrimination on the basis of sex in all federally-funded education programs and activities. Title IX states:

No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance.

Since its inception, the law has been the basis for numerous amendments, reviews, political actions, and even Supreme Court cases. While Title IX is primarily discussed in the context of athletics, there are several other areas that the law regulates.

In regard to athletics, Title IX regulations require schools to give women the same amount of access as they do for men. Once it became law, Title IX had a measurable effect on female participation in sports. The law ensures that all schools provide equitable opportunities for both male and female sports including availability, resources, and scholarships. In 1972, when the law went into effect, only about 295,000 girls played sports at the high school level in the United States. Fast-forward to 2011 and that number has risen to 3.2 million. Additionally, the number of women receiving athletic scholarships went from zero to 200,000 over the same period.

The opportunity to participate in athletic programs has significant consequences beyond access for women who want to participate. In fact, increased participation has also been associated with increased graduation rates, healthier lives, and diminished trouble with the law.

The video below gives an overview of the effects of Title IX in sports:

Criticism of Title IX

While Title IX has clearly had a significant impact on female participation in athletics and equality in education more generally, the law still has its critics. On one side are those who complain that Title IX is still not doing enough to prevent discrimination. This group’s argument began almost immediately after the law’s inception when it was weakly enforced and nearly eliminated thanks to the 1984 Supreme Court decision in Grove City vs. Bell. Even as the law started to be more rigorously enforced after Congress passed the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987, women at all levels of athletics still have much lower rates of participation and receive less funding than men. Others also argue that enforcement remains weak and investigations can drag on for a long time without being fully resolved.

On the other hand, the law is also criticized by those who bemoan its effects on men’s sports. This starts with the prevailing belief that funding a women’s sport means cutting funding to men’s teams. But between 1988 and 2011, for example, over 1,000 new men’s sports teams were added by NCAA members. Additionally, many of the men’s sports that have seen spending cuts during this time were the victims of universities’ increasing focus and spending on two high-profile sports–football and men’s basketball–and not necessarily because of funding for women’s sports. The interaction between these two sports and Title IX is also frequently misunderstood. Title IX does not require schools to spend the same amount of money on men’s and women’s sports. Instead, all Title IX requires is that the “benefits and services” provided to both men and women are equal.

Preventing Assault

While most discussion of Title IX focuses on athletics, much of the public’s attention has started to shift toward the law’s role in preventing sexual assault. Indeed, protecting students against sexual assault has become one of the most important aspects of Title IX. The Supreme Court even ruled that schools may be liable if they fail to address reported incidents. According to the Department of Education, sexual violence “refers to physical sexual acts perpetrated against a person’s will or where a person is incapable of giving consent… A number of different acts fall into the category of sexual violence, including rape, sexual assault, sexual battery, sexual abuse, and sexual coercion.”

As more students speak out about the issue of sexual assault on college campuses and evidence about its prevalence mounts, the government has taken a more active role in dealing with the issue using Title IX. There’s a large number of surveys that measure sexual assault and sexual violence on college campuses, but many often come to different conclusions about the extent to which it affects undergraduates. Most cite the statistic that 1-in-5 female students are victims of sexual assault, and even that figure has its critics. Tyler Kinkade at the Huffington Post points out that while these statistics may be good talking points, the reason that the issue has become so important is because of the large number of students calling for more attention and better procedures to deal with these incidents.

Enforcement and High-Profile Incidents

While concern and outrage over alleged sexual assaults have increased, enforcement has faced some resistance. This seeming indifference reached such a zenith that in 2014 the Department of Education released a list of over a 100 colleges and universities under investigation for violating Title IX. The Department expounded upon this last year, releasing a “Dear Colleague” letter in which it reminded its constituent schools what sorts of actions violate Title IX laws. That letter was a follow-up to a similar one sent out in 2011–which itself was a reminder of sexual harassment guidelines released in 2001–that gave schools instructions on how to deal with sexual assault complaints. As these steps show, these schools under investigation have been repeatedly reminded of their responsibilities, yet many high profiles cases have come up recently.

The incident involving Peyton Manning and the University of Tennessee is a perfect example of the difficulties surrounding these types of cases. The case began all the way back in 1997 with a lawsuit against Manning and the University of Tennessee. It continued with another lawsuit against Manning in 2003, after the release of his autobiography in which he depicted one of the women involved unfavorably. The newest lawsuit that was filed earlier this year shows how long the process surrounding these cases can last. In the meantime, the woman who accused Manning had to agree to leave the school, while the university won a national championship and he was able to enjoy a long and storied career. According to the suit, instead of protecting victims, the school actually created an environment that was hostile to them.

This is certainly not the only controversial incident. Another high-profile incident involved former Florida State University quarterback and current Tampa Bay Buccaneers player Jameis Winston. In 2012, a female student sued Florida State for its investigation of her rape complaint against Winston and its “deliberate indifference” throughout the process. FSU’s poor handling of the case also led her to file a lawsuit. The civil suit against the school was resolved this year when FSU paid a $950,000 settlement. The alleged victim has also filed a civil suit against Winston; he has countersued.

The following video looks at the alleged Title IX infraction at FSU:

Results and Remaining Issues

Since the Office of Civil Rights began stepping up its expectations and enforcement of Title IX violations, the number of investigations has increased dramatically. Accusations like these and the actions of the Department of Education are not isolated incidents. As of April 2015, the Department of Education had over 100 active investigations for sexual violence-related Title IX issues. In its Dear Colleague letters, OCR instructs institutions to develop new standards for investigating complaints and instructed institutions to hire a Title IX coordinator to ensure that cases are handled properly.

It is important to note that in many of these investigations, including the ones surrounding Manning and Winston, no one has been found guilty in a criminal court–though criminal guilt is not necessarily the point. Regardless, the original claims were not adequately investigated, and in some cases ignored. Proper investigations may also disprove the claims and absolve the accused. Too often, though, school are accused of not pursuing complaints thoroughly or do not have the necessary processes in place to properly investigate them. Due to these shortcomings, victims are often depicted negatively and a culture of hostility can result.

Unfortunately, OCR’s investigations and related civil suits often take a very long time to complete. The Department of Education has a large backlog of investigations into schools that have been accused of violating Title IX. While President Obama made a push for more funding, little more was granted, and likely not enough to offset the rise in the number of cases and the loss of approximately a third of the Department’s workforce. Title IX also covers K-12 school districts, along with colleges and universities–adding another lay of emphasis in resolving these cases and achieving resolutions.

Conclusion

While Title IX is often seen as a law that guarantees equality in sports, it is much more than that. Athletics is only one of many areas in which the statute seeks to ensure fairness and equality. What is clearer than Title IX’s exact breadth is its impact, as it has drastically improved the opportunities for women and girls in the United States. Unfortunately, what is also clear is the limitations of the legislation and the trouble that many institutions have complying with the new guidance.

One example of these limitations, and probably the most troubling, is in regard to sexual harassment. There have been repeated, high-profile incidents of workers and students complaining of sexual harassment or assault. As the growing number of OCR investigations indicate, schools have had a hard time instituting processes to adequately deal with these cases. This is exactly the type of thing Title IX was meant to prevent, yet has struggled to accomplish. The law is certainly not a panacea, but it applies to more than just sports and with greater implementation, it can have a very wide-reaching effect.

Resources

Feminist Majority Foundation: Empowering Women in Sports

Title IX: History of Title IX

NCAA: How is Title IX Applied to Athletics?

The Washington Post: Title IX has Helped Encourage Many Girls to Play Sports

USA Today: Florida State Agrees to pay Winston Accuser $950,000 to Settle Suit

ESPN: Baylor Faces Accusations of Ignoring Sex Assault Victims

CNN: 23% of Women Report Sexual Assault in College, Study Finds

Huffington Post: Federal Campus Rape Investigations Near 200, And Finally Get More Funding

Department of Education: Dear Colleague Letter on Title IX Coordinators

U.S. Department of Education: U.S. Department of Education Releases List of Higher Education Institutions with Open Title IX Sexual Violence Investigations

U.S. Department of Education: Dear Colleague Sexual Violence

Michael Sliwinski

Michael Sliwinski (@MoneyMike4289) is a 2011 graduate of Ohio University in Athens with a Bachelor’s in History, as well as a 2014 graduate of the University of Georgia with a Master’s in International Policy. In his free time he enjoys writing, reading, and outdoor activites, particularly basketball. Contact Michael at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Title IX: More Than Just Sports appeared first on Law Street.

There were several applause-worthy moments at last week’s Academy Awards, including, of course, Leonardo DiCaprio’s long overdue win for Best Actor and his subsequent speech about saving the environment.

I have immense respect for celebrities who use their public platforms to champion various causes, a phenomenon which has become significantly more common as things like feminism and race equality come to the forefront of political discussions in America.

One such celebrity is Lady Gaga, who has taken on the role of advocate for sexual assault victims, including fellow pop star Kesha, who is undergoing a legal battle with her alleged assailant and producer Dr. Luke.

Lady Gaga, along with Diane Warren, were nominated in the Best Original Song category for “Till It Happens To You,” a dramatic ballad about sexual assault for the documentary film “The Hunting Ground.”

“The Hunting Ground” focuses on sexual assault on college campuses. What the filmmakers found was horrifying, if not surprising: victims of sexual assault are hushed up and discouraged from reporting their assaults, especially when their abusers are high-profile. The documentary received backlash from schools and perpetrators who were featured,  including Jameis Winston, the quarterback of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers, whose alleged assault of another Florida State student is covered in the film.

But the producers refused to back down. One of them, Amy Ziering, said in an interview with Salon that campus rape is:

A pernicious, pervasive problem that’s been misunderstood for decades, and we really need to step up our game, rethink it, and figure out how to do something better about it. And just help people. That’s where our interests should be: Let’s help all the victims of this. Let’s acknowledge they exist. Let’s do right by them. Right now, we’re just really damaging everybody.

Watch a trailer for the documentary below:

While the documentary itself may have its faults from a storytelling stand point, the message is clear: nothing is being done about the staggering number of sexual assaults that take place on college campuses.

Which brings us back to Lady Gaga and her Oscar-nominated song.

“Till It Happens To You” has a title that is pretty much self-explanatory. It speaks from the point of view of a rape victim, questioning “What the hell do you know?” to those who dismiss the issue of rape without fully understanding its magnitude.

At the Academy Awards, Lady Gaga accompanied herself on piano, and towards the end of the ballad, welcomed dozens of sexual assault survivors–male and female–onto the stage with her.

The song did not end up winning the Oscar, but the global stage it received last weekend is very important. We need to keep this song and “The Hunting Ground” in the spotlight, and we need to keep the conversation about sexual assault in the news. We need to stop the culture of victim-blaming, and we need to stop glorifying the perpetrators. Only then can a true solution be reached.

Watch the entire performance here:

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post We Should All Be Talking About Lady Gaga’s “Till It Happens To You” appeared first on Law Street.

We’ve been over this, but apparently it requires repeating: being raped doesn’t make you immune to getting pregnant. That is fundamentally not how the female reproductive system works. Yet, in a nice case of deja vu, Idaho State Representative Pete Nielsen opined about how women usually don’t get pregnant from rape–a nice reminder of similar comments made by failed 2012 U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin.

Nielsen’s comments about the likelihood of pregnancy resulting from rape were made during an Idaho State House committee hearing on a bill that would require abortion providers to tell women where they can get a free ultrasound. One of the issues with that provision is that it may mean that many women get referred to more “crisis pregnancy centers,” which are well known for trying to scare women away from getting abortions, and rely on false scientific claims. Additionally, the bill provides no exceptions for rape and incest, and to that point, Nielsen stated:

Now, I’m of the understanding that in many cases of rape, it does not involve any pregnancy because of the trauma of the situation. That may be true with incest a little bit.

When he was asked if it was impossible for a victim of rape to get pregnant, he said:

No, no, I just think that it’s much more difficult, because of the trauma, that the body itself is not going to accept, like it would in consensual sex.

When asked to elaborate, he admitted that he wasn’t very confident about his information, stating:

That’s information that I’ve had through the years. Whether it’s totally accurate or not, I don’t know. I read a lot of information. I have read it several times. … Being a father of five girls, I’ve explored this a lot.

There are a lot of issues here–first of all, there is literally no scientific evidence that women are less likely to become pregnant if they’re victims of rape or incest as opposed to consensual sex. While this idea has long been a popular myth, it’s been proven utterly untrue. In fact, some studies indicate that it’s actually more likely that a woman who has been raped will get pregnant (although it’s also unclear why that is.)

Back in 2012, Todd Akin’s similar comments about “legitimate rape” at least in part contributed to his failed Senate campaign. Nielsen is now receiving plenty of criticism for his comments, but the bill that his committee was debating did pass. The issue is that it passed based on a vote from at least one person (Nielsen) who has absolutely no understanding of how biology or conception works. But I guess that’s just the state of politics now–doubting scientific evidence and passing dubious bills.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Deja Vu: Another Republican Lawmaker Doubts you Can Get Pregnant from Rape appeared first on Law Street.

The pop star who brought us such hits as “Tik Tok” and “Your Love Is My Drug” has been going through an intense legal battle over her contract with her producer and alleged rapist, Dr. Luke. Her lawsuit hit a snag last week when a New York judge denied Kesha an injunction that would have allowed her to record with other studios, instead forcing her to remain in her contract until the details of the lawsuit are settled.

Kesha’s fight against Dr. Luke has been in the public eye since 2013, when fans began the campaign to “Free Kesha” from Dr. Luke’s control. The singer soon revealed that her producer had not only restricted her music and lyrics, but verbally, physically and sexually abused her, culminating in a stay at a rehab facility. She filed the lawsuit in 2014 in an attempt to break her contract and record music elsewhere.

After the injunction was denied, Dr. Luke broke his silence on the matter, claiming he has never assaulted Kesha. Despite his statements, the singer has received an outpouring of support from fans and celebrities, including a $250,000 donation from Taylor Swift.

But regardless of whether or not you believe Dr. Luke or you believe Kesha, the denied injunction means the same thing: Dr. Luke and his record label’s money is more important than the well-being and mental state of the singer whom they claim to represent. Given the gravity of the allegations against Dr. Luke, it should not be the case that Kesha must stay in a career-throttling contract with her alleged abuser until he is proven guilty.

Contracts in the music industry are notoriously bad about allowing musicians any sort of artistic freedom, often signing them on for long periods of time with constricting regulations.  Of the injunction, the judge said, “You’re asking the court to decimate a contract that was heavily negotiated and typical for the industry.”

What makes her case atypical, however, are the rape and abuse allegations. Denying her an out is an attempt to diminish her claims, and the action shows a lack of support for rape victims in general. It says to them that, until their claims are proven, it didn’t happen. This is a result of the victim-blaming society in which we live, where rape victims are questioned and their abusers are allowed to go free.

In Kesha’s case, what more proof is needed? She has gone through rehabilitation and treatment for the trauma she experienced, and is pursuing a lengthy and expensive legal solution to her misery. If an artist simply wanted to break a contract, there are simpler ways to do so.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kesha’s Denied Injunction Spits In The Faces Of Rape Victims appeared first on Law Street.

Researchers have determined that there’s a relationship between college football games and incidences of reported rape. The study was released by the National Bureau of Economic Research late last year, but has broken into the news recently, as the conversations around college sexual assault and the violence of football have continued into the new year.

The researchers, led by Professor Jason Lindo at Texas A&M University, discovered that:

Home football games increase reports of rape by 41 percent on the day of the game while away games increase reports by 15 percent. They estimate that Division 1A football games cause between 253 and 770 additional rapes of college-aged victims per year across 128 universities.

The researchers don’t claim this is a direct link–rather they were attempting to look at the connection between events that sparked heavy drinking and partying, and reports of sexual assault. Understandably, then, they found higher reports of rape when something worth “celebrating” happened during a football game–for example, underdog teams upsetting better-ranked rivals. Additionally, game days saw a spike in other crimes–such as disorderly conduct, DUIs, and public intoxication. Given that big college football games usually happen on Saturdays and Sundays–busy party days for college students–the researchers attempted to control for that. According to NPR’s Social Science Correspondent Shankar Vedantam:

Lindo and his colleagues actually tried a control for this by comparing reports of rape on a days the college team was playing to reports of rape on other Saturdays of the year when the team was not playing. So this analysis is focused on the additional rapes being reported to college police and local law enforcement on days the college team is playing compared to what’s reported on a typical Saturday.

In order to conduct the study, the researchers looked at 22 years of FBI data on rape. Given that those statistics have received criticism for being undercounts of sexual assaults, the numbers could be even higher. Additionally, the statistics can’t provide a full picture of all big college football schools, as only 96 of the 128 schools with Division I teams voluntarily reported enough data to be included in the study. However, as they stand, the statistics are certainly worrisome, and worth a look as the fight to prevent sexual assault on college campuses continues.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Is There a Connection Between College Football and Rape? appeared first on Law Street.

You’ve probably seen some coverage of it in the last few days: a man named Daryush Valizadeh, more commonly known as Roosh V., has been advocating for international meet ups of his readers this weekend. Roosh V. founded the site called “Return of Kings” and purports to be the leader of a movement called “neomasculinity,” as well as an accomplished “pick-up artist.” But his arguably most controversial position–the legalization of rape on private property–drew international attention. In light of the widespread criticism, leaders and advocates rallied against the meet ups, and they have since been cancelled.

The meet ups were supposed to be on February 6, all over the world. According to the Return of Kings site, there were to be 165 meetings in 43 countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, and Australia. While Return of Kings originally publicly gave instructions for how to find the meet ups, after protests began, the organizers began to privatize the meet ups and required that prospective attendees prove that they were legitimately fans of the site (or one of Roosh V.’s other exploits) by one of three means:

• If you’ve left a non-hater comment on ROK or RooshV.com using your Disqus account before January 15.
• If you have an active account on RVF that is at least three months old.
• If you can provide a screenshot receipt of one of my books (Amazon, iTunes, Kobo, Paypal, etc) that was purchased before January 15.

Eventually, the meetings were cancelled altogether; according to a message posted by Roosh V. yesterday:

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post MRA Group Making Waves: What’s Up with all These Return of Kings Meet Ups? appeared first on Law Street.

Racial discrimination by law enforcement has been a long standing issue in the United States. However, in the last couple of years, beginning with the dire situation in Ferguson, Missouri and the mirror images in Maryland, Illinois, New York, and a number of other locations across the country, the public at large has become increasingly aware of the systemic abuse against minorities.

A small piece of victory was served for individuals experiencing systemic abuses by law enforcement as Daniel Holtzclaw, an Oklahoma City police officer, was sentenced to 263 years in prison on January 22, 2015. His trial commenced on November 2, 2015 and was highly criticized for having an all white jury. However, approximately one month before being sentenced, Holtzclaw was convicted by that jury for 18 out of the 36 counts for which he was charged. The sentence, which is to be served consecutively as opposed to concurrently, seeks to rectify the wrongs done to Holtzclaw’s 13 victims (ranging from a 17-year-old teenager to a 57-year-old grandmother), including four counts of first-degree rape and four counts of forced oral sodomy.

The frightening part–Holtzclaw had a strategy to his clearly calculated rapes and sexual assaults. He targeted black women in one of Oklahoma City’s poorest neighborhoods who he knew had criminal histories, predominantly drug and prostitution records, which he could leverage against them should they threaten to approach authorities for his abusive behavior. Which worked…until it didn’t.

Jannie Ligons, a 57-year-old grandmother of 12, was stopped at approximately 2 AM on June 18, 2015 driving through the poor neighborhood in which many of his other victims had been confronted. Holtzclaw made a huge mistake in assuming that Ligons was a resident of the neighborhood, had a low social status, and had reasons to fear the authorities. Quite the costly “mistake” if you ask me. Her testimony recounted the graphic and horrifying details following Holtzclaw’s stop. I do have to issue a warning, as it is graphic.

Returning home from a game of dominoes with a friend, Ligons was stopped by Holtzclaw who was ending his shift. Due to a broken driver-side window, Ligons was directed to the rear passenger side seat of the vehicle and was asked if she had been drinking or if there was anything in her vehicle that she was hiding. She denied possessing anything illegal or to have been drinking. Holtzclaw did not believe her. He demanded that she get out of her vehicle so that he could check her. Holtzclaw demanded that she lift her shirt, which she did, to reveal her stomach. After telling her that was not good enough as something could be hiding in her bra, he forced her to lift her shirt and bra and shone a light on her exposed breasts.

As she noticed Holtzclaw playing with his penis at this time, she heard him instruct her to stand up and pull her pants down. Leaving her underwear on, Holtzclaw shone the light in her private area and demanded she sit back down. She obliged, distressed, only to look up and see his penis in her face. “Please don’t do this…you’re not supposed to do this,” she begged as he forced himself into her mouth. Ligons thought he was going to kill her. He threatened to follow her home, but as she pulled into a driveway to do a U-turn, Holtzclaw took off unexpectedly.

Ligons called the police when she got home. When no one at the police station answered, she and her daughter drove to the station to file the assault. Ligons was taken to the hospital with Kim Davis, an officer of the Oklahoma City Police Sex Crimes Unit, and underwent a sexual assault medical forensic exam. The report filed by Ligons led the Sex Crimes Unit to an unsolved report, and ultimately, to the discovery of a number of victims subjected to Holtzclaw’s sexual abuses, assaults, and rapes.

Other women have recollected their experiences with Holtzclaw, depicting the clear fear for their lives while in his custody. A woman identified as “T.M.,” a known drug user and prostitute, was forced to perform oral sex in order to avoid jail and ended up screaming for her life when Holtzclaw drove her to an open park area, fearing rape and potentially, death. The GPS recorder on Holtzclaw’s police car matched T.M’s testimony.

Further, Holtzclaw violated police protocol for searches of females and even went so far as to touch the bare breasts of victims while conducting searches, stating that they needed to “just play by my rules,” in order to avoid further charges or jail time. Holtzclaw even proceeded to go to the home of one of the victims and harass her at home, while with her family, which ultimately led to the stalking charges against him. Several other victims reported that Holtzclaw entered their homes and raped them while inside. He even raped 24-year-old Sade Hill in her hospital bed as she was detoxing from a spout of intoxication.

As if the killing of innocent and unarmed young black men has not been a frightening and infuriating display of racial discrimination by police, the case against Holtzclaw uncovers an even more troubling layer of abuse–vulnerable black women of low socioeconomic status unable to defend themselves, particularly due to their criminal histories and fear of authorities. Minorities of low socioeconomic status appear to be dispensable scapegoats to law enforcement at this day in age and frankly, it is an unacceptable and outrageous display of power by those trained to protect and serve. While the citizens of the United States continue to protest, demand change, and incite much needed action, a little solace can be taken in the fact that individuals like Holtzclaw and those who abuse their authority and prey on people incapable of fighting sometimes get the cosmic dose of karma their actions deserve.

Ajla Glavasevic

Ajla Glavasevic is a first-generation Bosnian full of spunk, sass, and humor. She graduated from SUNY Buffalo with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and received her J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Ajla is currently a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania and when she isn’t lawyering and writing, the former Team USA Women’s Bobsled athlete (2014-2015 National Team) likes to stay active and travel. Contact Ajla at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Daniel Holtzclaw Sentenced to 263 Years in Prison appeared first on Law Street.

Schools have become a frightening place for parents to send their children. From the horrors of lives lost at Sandy Hook Elementary, to those mourned at Columbine, to the controversies faced with “No Child Left Behind” and the Common Core curriculum, there’s now the terror that the people who take care of and teach our children could sexually abuse such innocent and unsuspecting lives.

On December 23, 2015, St. George’s School, an elite Newport, Rhode Island prep school unveiled an investigative report recognizing that 26 credible witnesses/individuals have come forward “strongly suggesting” that there were six perpetrators, who were employees of St. George’s School, that “engaged in sexual misconduct” with a number of students. Firsthand accounts and corroborating evidence depict that there were a total of 23 victims. The scope of the scandal has greatly increased since the release of the report, as a rising total of at least 40 St. George’s alumni have since come forth with credible accounts of sexual misconduct, even allegations of rape, by a total of seven St. George employees.

While St. George’s sincerely apologized to the victims in the report it released and offered immediate counseling to the individuals that underwent traumatic events as a result of unreported sexual misconduct spanning several decades, victims demanded more. Some of the victims viewed the investigation conducted by St. George to be “a sanitized version of events and said it was not truly independent because it was conducted by a lawyer, Will Hannum, whose partner is the school’s counsel.” As such, a new, comprehensive, and independent investigation will be conducted into the allegations of sexual misconduct–it was just announced that Scott Harshburger, a former Attorney General of Massachusetts, will be the investigator.

The discrepancies in the total number of victims, as well as the number of perpetrators, suggest that there could be unchecked allegations pertaining to the longstanding reporting of the alleged incidents. Leslie Heaney, a 1992 graduate of St. George and current chairwoman of the school’s board of trustees stated, “the board is committed to a truly impartial investigation. There is nothing more important to us than that the review be thorough and exhaustive, and that its findings are found to be reliable and credible by all parties, particularly the victims.”

Reports suggest that the sexual misconduct took place from 1974-2004. Of the seven former St. George’s employees reported to have been involved in sexual misconduct, only four are still alive. Furthermore, the misconduct resulting in the termination of each former employee was allegedly never reported to any authorities nor were potential future employers, other schools and educational settings, warned about the sexual misconduct against minors done at the hands of the perpetrators that they potentially hired. The victims’ attorneys have noted that the Massachusetts legislature is currently considering what is known as the “pass the trash” bill–which refers to the practice of passing on teachers that have been terminated or dismissed for inappropriate conduct and behavior unbecoming of a professional in an education setting without reporting such problems and potentially putting others in jeopardy. The bill would work to criminalize a failure to report a complaint of sexual misconduct in private and public schools–maybe it would be worth considering a similar act in other states.

Victims are calling for the head of the school, Eric Peterson, to resign. They believe that he has played a part in covering up the incidents and being quite unresponsive to the complaints made against St. George’s former employees. However, the school has indicated that Peterson will not resign or be required to resign, that he has greatly supported the “vigorous investigation of alleged sexual abuse,” and has been very compassionate and empathetic toward all of the victims that have come forward about with allegations of sexual misconduct.

Sexual abuse of children in the education system, particularly in private schools that have the discretion to report such misconduct, is becoming the boogeyman of primary education concerns as media coverage of such incidents continues to increase. Even more frightening is the fact that the perpetrators of sexual misconduct of students and children tend to be individuals either employed or associated with schools–i.e. teachers, coaches, student aides and workers, as well as administrative staff. Additionally, state legislatures’ decisions can create very unsettling gaps in protection from sexual misconduct against students. For example, in New York State, where there are approximately 2,161 private schools attended by over 492,000 children, private school students are excluded from the State’s Education Law 23-B, entitled “Child Abuse in an Educational Setting” which only applies to public and charter schools, leaving private school students subject to sexual misconduct abuses without protection. Various organizations have taken on lobbying efforts to raise awareness of such gaps and mend the system to include private school students in the states that exclude such students from their laws.

The issue of sexual misconduct in a school setting has taken center stage in the media as the new, comprehensive investigation gets underway for St. George School. As the investigation continues and potential victims continue to come forward, St. George School will be under a microscope to see how the situation is handled and how schools in general react to their findings in providing greater protections for students. All we can do is wait to see how the tragedy in Rhode Island plays out, hope that justice is served for all victims who suffered great trauma due to the horrendous acts of school employees, and rally for a change in school policies relating to sexual misconduct and the protections offered to students.

Ajla Glavasevic

Ajla Glavasevic is a first-generation Bosnian full of spunk, sass, and humor. She graduated from SUNY Buffalo with a Bachelor of Science in Finance and received her J.D. from the University of Cincinnati College of Law. Ajla is currently a licensed attorney in Pennsylvania and when she isn’t lawyering and writing, the former Team USA Women’s Bobsled athlete (2014-2015 National Team) likes to stay active and travel. Contact Ajla at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post St. George’s: Sex Abuse Scandal Rocks a Rhode Island Town appeared first on Law Street.

This weekend the New York Times published the article “Get Home Safe,” My Rapist Said, in its opinion pages. In it, Alisson Wood tells the story of her boss raping her one night after work. She sought justice and solace from her company and the law, but only received dismissals. It was her word against her boss’s, and he claimed the situation was consensual, slut-shaming her. This situation is not uncommon for many other survivors of rape in America, victimized by a culture that often finds more fault in its victims than its perpetrators. Rape culture undermines the power imbalances at the core of rape by diverting attention away from why and how a rapist takes advantage of a person, and instead focuses on the character of the rape victim. For example, a boss takes advantage of an employee, a man takes advantage of a woman, or a cop takes advantage of a citizen. But last week, justice beat the power of rape culture. The prosecutor in the Daniel Holtzclaw case convinced a jury of the power imbalances of a white police officer raping African American women, and for Holtzclaw’s 29th birthday he received a recommended 263-year prison sentence.

Holtzclaw has been standing trial since November 2 after sexually assaulting 13 women in Oklahoma City. Jannie Ligons, a 57-year-old grandmother, went to the police after Holtzclaw attacked her on June 2,2014. Holtzclaw’s record revealed more allegations of rape, catching national attention and leading to his arrest. He faced 36 charges ranging from multiple counts of first degree rape to stalking and sexual battery. Officer Holtzclaw clearly underestimated the courage Ligons possessed as a survivor of sexual assault, and as a woman who could put trust in a police department whose own officer violated Ligons’s most basic right to her body.

Holtzclaw targeted 12 other African American women in a low income neighborhood ostensibly because of their vulnerability and unlikelihood to press charges. A couple of the victims were guilty of criminal activity of their own. The defense tried to use to this to its advantage by discrediting the victims and questioning why they did not contact the police after their assaults. But, who could those victims trust? The fact that they would likely not be perceived as “innocent victims” halted many from contacting authorities. “What kind of police do you call on the police?“–that was a question of one of the victims, who was only 17-years-old.

Race has factored into this case from the onset. Holtzclaw intended to protect himself by preying on these women with full knowledge of the future juxtaposed images of an All American Football player-turned-cop against black women. While the verdict supplies some justice to these victims, the all-white jury hardly seemed fair with about a 15 percent African American population in Oklahoma City.

Some activists see Holtzclaw’s verdict as a good milestone in a long history of black women as victims of sexual assault and domestic abuse. I agree with and welcome the justice served to this rapist. However, the lack of mainstream media attention garnered by this case validates all the fear these women had in reporting their rapes. It’s an indication of the intersectional obstacles women of color face in our lives, our problems often invisible, and rape culture even more prominent. So, it is an insult to see Holtzclaw’s tear stained face. Are those tears because he did not beat the odds? Or because white privilege did not win out and he did not get away with his exploitative assaults? As for me, I’d rather read through the brave testimonies of these 13 women in their own words than see his tears.

Dorsey Hill

Dorsey is a member of Barnard College’s class of 2016 with a major in Urban Studies and concentration in Political Science. As a native of Chicago and resident of New York City, Dorsey loves to explore the multiple cultural facets of cities. She has a deep interest in social justice issue especially those relevant to urban environments. Contact Dorsey at Staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Power of Justice: A Guilty Verdict for Daniel Holtzclaw appeared first on Law Street.

Bill Cosby.

You used to be able to say that name and conjure up happy memories of family-friendly sitcom episodes, flamboyant knitted sweaters, or pudding pops. But not anymore.

Now America’s former “favorite dad” has become synonymous with drugging women with quaaludes and raping them, after more than 50 women came forward to accuse the comedian of sexual assault. As a result, Cosby is lashing out by filing a defamation lawsuit against seven of his accusers, claiming they ruined his reputation for “financial gain.”

The lawsuit filed Monday is a counterclaim to a civil lawsuit filed by Tamara Green, Therese Serignese, Linda Traitz, Louisa Moritz, Barbara Bowman, Joan Tarshis, and Angela Leslie. The seven women had joined together in a defamation suit initially filed last year by three accusers against Cosby in a federal court in his home state of Massachusetts. According to USA Today, it is currently the largest of the half dozen civil lawsuits filed against Cosby in recent months.

In a statement tweeted Monday, Cosby’s lawyer Monique Pressley wrote,

Mr. Cosby states plainly that he neither drugged no sexually assaulted the defendants and that each defendant has maliciously and knowingly published multiple false statements and accusations from Fall 2014 through the current day in an effort to cause damage to Mr. Cosby’s reputation and to extract financial gains.

My statement re today’s lawsuit filed by @BillCosby against all 7 accusers in Massachusetts lawsuit. pic.twitter.com/XRYoV4gXpC

— Monique Pressley (@MoniquePressley) December 14, 2015

Cosby’s lawsuit comes across as a last-ditch effort to save himself from shelling out a fortune to the dozens of women who claim he assaulted them in the 60’s, 70’s, 80’s, and 90’s. Statutes of limitations for rape prevented the 78-year-old from facing any legal charges for the assaults. Therefore many of his accusers have now opted to file civil lawsuits instead. Cosby, however, has repeatedly denied claims of any wrongdoing.

According to unsealed court documents, Cosby testified in 2005 that he had obtained the sedative drug Quaaludes, with the intention of giving them to young women in order to have sex with him. This revelation came as shock to many who had came to the defense of the former star amidst the allegations.

While we’ll never see Cosby criminally charged with assaulting these women, there is some hope for justice in the civil cases currently pending. However, his defamation suit makes it clear that he doesn’t plan to go down without a fight.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Countersues Seven Rape Accusers For Defamation appeared first on Law Street.

The “Safe Campus” Act has been met with significant criticism since it was introduced into Congress this summer. There are a few troubling aspects to the proposed legislation, but one in particularly really stands out: unless rape victims report their assaults to the police, the school isn’t allowed to investigate them, or levy any sort of action against the accused. This bill was supported by much of national Greek Life–both the North-American Interfraternity Conference and the National Panhellenic Conference were on board. But one sorority–Alpha Phi–just broke from the NPC to say it doesn’t endorse the deeply problematic bill.

Alpha Phi released a statement obtained by the Huffington Post today that outlined the organization’s views on the bill. It explained:

We are writing at the request of many of our members and chapters to clarify Alpha Phi’s position on the 2015 Safe Campus and Fair Campus Acts which have been endorsed by the National Panhellenic Conference. Alpha Phi has not endorsed this legislation and has not committed to any financial support.

Additionally, Alpha Phi explained its position further, saying:

We believe our sisters who are survivors should have choices in how, when and to whom they go to for support or to report the crime. They should have their own voice and the support and encouragement they need to move forward including reporting as they choose to.

The issue critics have with the Safe Campus Act isn’t necessarily that police shouldn’t be the ones looking into a crime. Rather, the act would hamstring universities’ abilities to take any actions. Given that police investigations and convictions can take years, groups that oppose the act are arguing that a school should be able to work in the meantime to provide a safe environment for its students.

Additionally, requiring victims of rape to report their assaults to the police opens up a whole new set of issues–including the fact that rape victims often aren’t treated with respect or dignity. Dana Bolger, co-founder of Know Your IX, an advocacy group, explains:

Many survivors of color, who experience police surveillance and brutality every day, don’t want to go to the very people who have been agents of violence against them. And for male survivors and survivors assaulted by someone of the same sex, reporting to the police won’t do anything: Many states still don’t recognize rape against people of the same gender, or against men, as rape at all.

There are other arguments against the Safe Campus Act as well–for example, many other crimes (drug possession, alcohol violations, etc) are able to be handled with schools without involving the police.

It’s unclear exactly which reasons motivated Alpha Phi to clarify its position on the bill, but the organization’s executive director, Linda Kahangi explained:

Many of our members — both collegians and alumnae — had expressed concern that NPC’s endorsement of these two bills implied that Alpha Phi had endorsed them. We wanted to clarify to them that we had not.

It’s an important clarification, and will hopefully cause some of the other Greek Life fraternities and sororities under these umbrella organizations to question their involvement as well. While making campuses safe for all is a great goal, the Safe Campus Act falls too far short to fit the bill.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Alpha Phi Breaks From National Greek Life Organizations on “Safe Campus” Bill appeared first on Law Street.

Let me preface this by saying I have nothing against people of the Christian faith. In fact, I know many truly decent, open-minded human beings who practice Christianity. What I do have a problem with is that subset of Christianity that uses religion as an excuse to encourage acts that violate basic human rights.

Take, for example, a writer for the website Biblical Gender Roles who goes by the name Larry Solomon (not his real name). In previous posts, he has said there is “no such thing” as marital rape because if a wife refuses sex with her husband it is “a disrespectful and unloving response… and there is no sin in you trying to initiate sex with your wife.”

He goes on to encourage husbands to have sex with their wives anyway, even if she flat-out refuses or does so “begrudgingly.”

Of course, he acknowledges that marital rape is not as pleasurable as consensual sex, and since the author wants the husbands to enjoy themselves anyway, he advises them to “focus your eyes on her body, not her face. Focus on the visual pleasure you receive from looking at her body and physical pleasure you receive from being inside your wife.”

Solomon explains that women just don’t want sex as much as men do, that sex is the primary way husbands feel close to their wives, and that if a wife denies her husband sex she is opening them both up to “temptation.” I assume what he means by “temptation” is extramarital sexual relations. So, he tells his readers, if your wife agrees to “fake it,” has sex begrudgingly, or just refuses, have sex with her anyway and ignore her face, because she’s probably giving you a look of betrayal.

What’s scary is that Larry Solomon, or whatever his real name is, isn’t the only person who thinks this way. He isn’t the only person who thinks that men have a God-given right of control over their wives or significant others. Somehow, it becomes the woman’s fault for not being “in the mood”; somehow it is her fault if her husband seeks companionship outside of their marriage. For example, the Duggar family came under fire recently because the oldest son had more than one sexual scandal in one year (if you need a refresher: it was revealed that he has previously molested two of his sisters AND had an Ashley Madison account while married). In response, the mother, Michelle, took to her blog to implore women to meet their husbands’ sexual needs even if they’re tired after a long day or “exhausted and pregnant.” She says that if you’re there for his physical needs, he’ll be there for your needs. So, essentially, fake it when you’re not in the mood for the health of your relationship.

Ladies, that’s bullshit. Marriage takes work, that is no secret. If one night you don’t feel like having sex, or your husband doesn’t feel like having sex, you don’t do it. Unless both parties agree to it, it’s not consensual, even in a marriage. If you’re refusing sex because of a deeper issue, such as a lack of communication or unresolved argument, clearly things need to be worked out emotionally before you and your significant other can get physical again and have it be pleasurable for BOTH of you. There is such a thing as marital rape, and there is no shame in saying “no.”

Marital rape is illegal in the U.S., but in several states, there is still language being used that allows spousal rape to go unpunished. According to the research in this Daily Beast article, a person can be legally drugged and sexually assaulted in some states if the perpetrator is the victim’s spouse. The existence of these caveats only adds to the rape culture already running rampant in the United States. To stop it, we have to keep sending out the message that “No Means No,” even in a marriage.

Learn More: Marital Rape in the U.S.: What are the Laws?

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post #INeedFeminism Because Sites Like “Biblical Gender Roles” Exist appeared first on Law Street.

Sharing the details of a sexual assault can be a frightening and invasive experience for a victim, which is just one explanation for why a staggering amount of rapes go unreported each year in this country. The reasons for why these women and men choose not to share their stories are vast, making it a challenge for police to catch their abusers. But what happens when police goad a unwilling victim into sharing her story, only to later arrest her for lying? A rape survivor in Prince William County, Virginia found out.

In a recent in-depth profile by Buzzfeed, Lara McLeod, 23, shared that when she was 19 she was raped by her sister’s fiancé Joaquin Rams–just two weeks after her sister, Hera, had given birth to Rams’ son Prince. When Lara confided in her family about the rape, it confirmed Hera’s unsettling suspicions about her fiancé. Lara’s family supported her decision not to report the rape, but Hera wanted to immediately cut ties with Rams.

Hera called Prince William County police to request an escort to pick up her belongings from the house she shared with Rams, but upon seeing the police, a “confused” Rams starting yelling that he hadn’t touched Lara. That’s when Buzzfeed reports that the routine escort request turned into an investigation for an alleged rape.

Despite her reluctance to report the assault, Lara was persuaded by police to go on record accusing Rams for the rape. However, the tables quickly turned after police began questioning her about specifics in the case like “why she didn’t try harder to escape.” Investigators’ biases on how rape victims “should act” lead them to conclude that Lara was lying, so they arrested her and charged her with making a false report.

Lara McLeod was arrested for reporting her own rape. Later her rapist murdered her n… https://t.co/fNItkxBB1a #news pic.twitter.com/b55oFSsqXn

— [ Police News ] (@InsidePolice) September 28, 2015

Her sister Hera was also charged with obstruction of justice, after allegedly deleting  video footage of her sister’s rape, that Rams had apparently filmed without either sisters’ knowledge. These charges were devastating for the two sisters, especially for Lara who watched as her reputation was ruined as more and more people learned of her supposed “fake rape.” It took years before the charges were finally expunged, but the experience left Lara with deep mistrust for law enforcement. But as reporter Katie J.M. Baker put it, the “worst was yet to come.”

According to Buzzfeed,

In the ensuing battle for custody over Prince, Hera and Joaquin’s infant son, it emerged that not only had Joaquin lied about his name, employment history, and age — he was a decade older than he had claimed — but he had also once been a suspect in his ex-girlfriend’s shooting death and a person of interest in his mother’s death, too, although he was never successfully charged in either case. He had been accused of child abuse by his other son, although never convicted, and ran an amateur porn site.

But thanks to the charges against Hera and Lara, Joaquin was able to portray himself as a comparatively fit parent — and the victim of a smear job. The judge granted Joaquin unsupervised visits. Three months later, EMTs found Prince unconscious on the floor of Joaquin’s house. The 15-month-old died the next day. Months later, Joaquin was charged with capital murder.

This story manages to combine almost everything that’s bad in this world into one perfect storm. A woman was raped, her life was ruined, and incompetence from the legal system led to her baby nephew’s death. The actual intricacies of the case are mind boggling. There was mishandling of evidence, miranda rights weren’t read, and the police involved operated under the bias that many women lie about being raped.

Until this kind of prejudice against rape victims is erased, sexual assault will continue to plague this country, rapes will continue to go unreported, and confidence in our police forces with only continue to dwindle. I hope Lara’s story sparks some change for the better.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Convinced This Women to Report her Rape, Then Arrested her for Lying appeared first on Law Street.

Law Street Media’s comprehensive Crime in America 2016 coverage provides a look at the safety of our cities and towns around the United States. Based on data provided in the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reports, Law Street analyzes the data to provide lists of the safest and most dangerous cities around the U.S. Take a look at the rankings and features below to discover how safe your city actually is. Check back regularly for continued reporting and additional features.

Rankings

Metro Area Rankings

Interactive Dashboard

Crime Trends in America’s Largest Cities

CHARTS AND DATA

NOTES

• What the FBI Says About Its Uniform Crime Reports
• Methodology

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Crime in America 2016 appeared first on Law Street.

The state of New York and the U.S. Department of Justice are now investing millions in testing backlogged rape kits. The grants will be allotted to local jurisdictions across America in hopes of bringing justice for rape victims. New York was the first state to start this process and is at the forefront of the effort. The grants will not only serve to convict rapists, but will also prevent future crimes by putting criminals behind bars.

Overview

Prevalence of Sexual Assault in the United States

It is commonly known that the number of sexual assault crimes are grossly underestimated. Due to the nature of the crime, victims are often reluctant to report what happened to them. But according to a 2010 report by the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, one in five women in the U.S. will be raped in their lifetimes. Statistics show a sexual assault crime occurs every two minutes, but only 39 percent of those crimes are reported.

What is Rape Kit?

When a victim of sexual assault does report the crime, a sexual assault kit (SAK), also known as a rape kit, is used by a doctor or nurse (usually in a hospital) to preserve possible DNA evidence. Then the SAK is turned over to the police. The process is extremely invasive and can last between four and six hours. First, the victim stands on a large paper sheet, while undressing, in order to contain any stray fibers or hairs that could be used as evidence. According to ENDTHEBACKLOG, the examiner collects biological evidence from the victim’s “saliva, blood, semen, urine, skin cells and hair by taking swabs of the victim’s skin, genitalia, anus and mouth, scraping under the victim’s fingernails and combing through the victim’s hair.” The victim is also photographed from head to toe to document any and all injuries. In order to preserve evidence, victims are asked to not eat, drink, or urinate until the exam in over.

Generally, a state SAK will include: Detailed instructions for the examiner, forms for documenting the procedure and evidence collected, tubes and containers for blood and urine samples, paper bags for collecting clothing and other physical evidence, swabs for biological evidence collection, a large sheet of paper, dental floss and wooden sticks for fingernail scrapings, glass slides, sterile water and saline, and envelopes, boxes and labels for each part of the exam.

Some states have highly trained staff to conduct these procedures called Sexual Assault Forensic Examiners (SAFEs) or Sexual Assault Nurse Examiners (SANEs). Not only are they trained on how to be more specifically sensitive to sexual assault victims, studies show that SAKs conducted by SAFEs or SANEs are more consistent and of higher quality. If examiners aren’t extremely careful, the experience could feel like a re-victimization to the patient or the SAK could be inadmissible in court due to mishandling.

After the SAK is completed and given to local law enforcement, DNA from the kit and alleged rapist is entered into the FBI’s national database CODIS (Combined DNA Index System). CODIS allows authorities to track serial rapists across the United States.

Untested SAKs

There are several different reasons for the large backlog of untested rape kits. They may not have been sent to a public or private crime lab in a timely fashion and remain in storage–including police department evidence rooms, crime labs, hospitals, clinics, rape crisis centers–or the SAKS remain at the lab without being processed. Although the exact number of backlogged SAKs across the country is unknown, the numbers found in specific cities are quite staggering. In 2009, 11,000 forgotten SAKs were found in a Detroit police warehouse. In addition, Los Angeles has almost 12,500 backlogged kits, Houston has approximately 6,500, and Memphis has over 12,000.

SAK backlogs have become a significant issue for local police departments, a National Institute of Justice (NIJ) survey of more than 2,000 law enforcement agencies found:

18 percent of unsolved alleged sexual assaults that occurred from 2002 to 2007 contained forensic evidence that was still in police custody (not submitted to a crime lab for analysis).

The NIJ study noted that some SAKs remain in law enforcement custody when the case is a matter of “consent.” In that case, the suspect admits to sexual intercourse, but maintains that is was consensual. A SAK will not shed light on that matter. Cases could have also been dropped, or a guilty verdict was already rendered.

Other reasons are far more alarming. Forty-three percent of the agencies claimed they did not have a computerized system for tracking forensic evidence, either in their inventory or for after it was sent to the crime lab. Nearly 45 percent of the law enforcement agencies admitted that one of the reasons they kept SAKS was that they didn’t have a suspect. And fifteen percent reasoned that the analysis had not been requested by a prosecutor. Three in 10 officers claimed they did not turn in the SAK because they were unsure of its usefulness. Another 11 percent of the agencies claimed one reason they didn’t submit evidence was due to consistent untimely results of the lab, while another six percent claimed the lab wasn’t accepting more evidence because of a backlog. The NIJ study also argues that biases contribute to the problem. For example, SAKs may have gone untested if the victim was a prostitute, a drug user, or was mentally ill.

There are several explanations for the backlog of SAKS, but one thing is clear–law enforcement agencies across the country are not on the same page whether from a lack of training, funding, or personal prejudices.

New Funding

Earlier this month, Vice President Joe Biden, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and Manhattan District Attorney Cyrus Vance announced that $80 million worth of grants would be invested into radically reducing the number of backlogged SAKs across the United States. In the announcement, Vance said that the state of New York is donating $38 million to 32 jurisdictions in 20 states, while Lynch pledged $41 million to investigate the reasons behind the backlog. “I’m saying today to all the women awaiting justice,” Vance stated, “you are not forgotten.” Together, the funds from Department of Justice (DOJ) and state of New York are expected to help test 70,000 untested SAKs in 43 jurisdictions in 27 states.

Vice President Biden praised the effort saying,

When we solve these cases, we get rapists off the streets… For most survivors, seeing their rapists brought to justice, and knowing that they will not return, brings peace of mind and a sense of closure. The grants we’re announcing today to reduce the national rape kit backlog will bring that sense of closure and safety to victims while improving community safety.

The issue hits close to Biden’s heart; he and Senator Barbara Boxer co-authored the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) back in 1994. Biden and Boxer condemned the lethargic response from police and prosecutors as well as the skewed attitudes toward violence against women in general.

History has shown a correlation between testing backlogged SAKs and convictions. New York was the first state to eliminate its backlog, testing 17,000 SAKs between 2000 and 2003. It resulted in 49 indictments. The grants will not only prevent future rapes but will give thousands of women across the country the justice they deserve.

Related Legislation

Over the last five years, Congress has passed several laws to address SAK backlogs across the country. The DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 authorizes the Attorney General to make grants to eligible states in regards to SAK backlogs. The grants are specifically aimed toward the collection, analysis, and indexing of DNA samples in CODIS as well as for increasing state and local lab capacitates. To receive such grants, states must adhere to certain provisions, including the timely delivery of tested SAKs.

In 2013, President Obama signed the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act. It was the third time the act has been reauthorized. Among other things, the reauthorization addressed new provisions to tackle the rape kit backlog across the country. First, it amended the aforementioned Backlog Elimination Act of 2000 by increasing audit requirements for SAK backlogs, increasing grants, and increasing state and local lab capacities. It expanded the focus of VAWA grants to include fortifying law enforcement and forensic response. The act also required states to minimally allocate “20 percent of funds within the STOP (Services, Training, Officers, Prosecutors) program and 25 percent of funds within the Grants to Encourage Arrest Policies and Enforce Protection Orders program be directed to programs that meaningfully address sexual assault.”

More than ever, states are dedicated to ending their respective SAK backlogs. Colorado, Illinois, and Ohio have all passed legislation to reduce backlogs. Arkansas, Kentucky, Virginia, and Louisiana passed legislation that requires an inventory of untested SAKs. California and Michigan enacted guidelines for processing evidence derived from SAKs. Texas allocated $10.8 million to untested SAKs in its 2014-15 state budget. It is also within a state’s jurisdiction to define statutes of limitation. Some advocates fight for the clock on statutes of limitations to start only once a SAK has been tested, as addressed in this video.

Proponents of this change argue that rapists should never benefit from a SAK that remained untested for so long that the respective crime exceeded a statute of limitation law.

Conclusion

It seems like a number of things need to come together to eradicate the backlog nationwide. For the most effective standards, the United States needs a uniform system of analyzing and indexing evidence in addition to regularly trained teams of trained nurses, doctors, law enforcement, and prosecutors. Funding is also necessary to allow all the different parts of the process to come together effectively. The recent $80 million investment in SAK testing can bring justice and closure to thousands of women.

Resources

Primary

Congressional Research Service: Violence Against Women Act

DOJ: Unanalyzed Evidence in Sexual Assault Cases

Additional

EndtheBacklog: Defining the Rape Kit Backlog

EndtheBacklog: State Respones

EndtheBacklog: What is a Rape Kit and Rape Kit Exam?

EndtheBacklog: Where the Backlog Exists

Govtrack: Summaries for the DNA Analysis Backlog Elimination Act of 2000

Huffington Post: Joe Biden, Loretta Lynch Pledge Millions To Resolve Rape Kit Backlog

National Center for Injury Prevention and Control: Statistics about Sexual Violence

NRC on Domestic Violence: The Effectiveness of Sexual Assault Nurse Examiner (SANE) Programs

Time: Authorities Invest $80 Million in Ending the Rape Kit Backlog

Time: Here’s What Happens When You Get a Rape Kit Exam

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rape Kits: New Funding to Bring Victims Justice appeared first on Law Street.

Does society perpetuate rape culture? Sadly, this idea has been proven over and over again. We keep asking the question and receiving the same answer: Yes. We saw it in the case of Bill Cosby. It took evidence of Bill Cosby blatantly admitting his crimes before a majority of the public believed he was guilty of raping and drugging women. For some people, it was just easier to believe the victims wanted their 15 minutes of fame than admit that the previously beloved actor committed such crimes. We saw it again in the protection of reality TV personality Josh Duggar it was revealed that he had a history of molesting girls including his sisters, and in the December retraction of Rolling Stone’s UVA campus gang rape story. The latest news brings us another story involving an alleged rape accusation: the Daily Beast reported on July 27 that Ivana Trump, ex-wife of  Donald Trump, accused him of rape during their marriage over 30 years ago. The controversy brings light to a highly controversial issue: marital rape. Even today there are still those who deny you can rape a spouse. So exactly what is the history and legality of marital rape in the United States?

Marital Rape in the News

According to the Daily Beast,  during the Trumps’ divorce proceedings Ivana claimed Donald raped her. She later clarified that she felt “violated” by the incident, rather than raped “in the criminal sense.” She further elaborated, “[O]n one occasion during 1989, Mr. Trump and I had marital relations in which he behaved very differently toward me than he had during our marriage. As a woman, I felt violated, as the love and tenderness, which he normally exhibited towards me, was absent. I referred to this as a ‘rape…’” Terms of the couple’s divorce agreement prohibit her from speaking on the marriage unless authorized by Donald himself. The Daily Beast cites a 1990 deposition from the Trumps’ divorce as well as the book “Lost Tycoon: The Many Lives of Donald J. Trump.”

After becoming aware of the report, Ivana labeled the story “totally without merit” in a statement to CNN. She also called her ex-husband and her “best friends” and remarked that Trump would make “an incredible president.” The authenticity of the story is in question. Ivana is denying it. The Daily Beast calls her recent statements ironic as the story is written “based on her own words.”

Regardless if Ivana’s words were misinterpreted or she is dishonestly recanting a story, the means by which Donald’s lawyer Michael Cohen responded to the allegations is appalling and shocking. Cohen threatened Daily Beast reporter Tim Mask and denied the existence of marital rape itself.

You write a story that has Mr. Trump’s name in it with the word ‘rape,’ and I’m going to mess your life up … for as long as you’re on this frickin’ planet … you’re going to have judgments against you, so much money, you’ll never know how to get out from underneath it…You’re talking about the front-runner for the GOP, presidential candidate, as well as a private individual who never raped anybody. And, of course, understand that by the very definition, you can’t rape your spouse.

Contrary to Trump’s lawyer’s statement, one can rape a spouse. All 50 states and the District of Columbia have laws barring nonconsensual sex with a spouse.

What is Marital Rape?

While rape is all non-consensual sexual intercourse, marital rape is specifically between spouses. It has been illegal in all 50 states and Washington D.C. since 1993. Before then, “marital exemption” allowed a person to a rape a spouse without fear of legal repercussions. Every state had a “marital exemption” law until 1975 when South Dakota became the first state to drop it. North Carolina was the last.  Its elimination is chiefly thanks to the women’s rights and equality movement. However, it is still significantly harder to prove marital rape than rape by any other.

Statistics

According to HealthResearchFunding.org, 30 percent of adult rape cases were committed by a husband, common-law partner, or boyfriend, while 29 percent of all sexual assaults were perpetrated by a husband or lover. When there is a precedent of domestic violence in a marriage, the chance for marital rape increases by 70 percent. Only around 3.2 percent of victimized women report the crime when it is committed by someone they know. An alarming 69 percent of women who’ve endured spousal rape will be raped more than once. Lastly, 18 percent of spousal victims claim their children saw the incident.

Cases of Opposition to Marital Rape

You would think, at least since 1993, that the door is closed on the validity of the existence of marital rape, but somehow, it still seems to be a gray area where it should be black and white: non-consensual sex is always wrong. Trump’s lawyer’s remarks are just the latest in a history of disturbing events.

Michigan 1987

Michigan resident Rosanna Hawkins was attacked and raped by her estranged husband, armed with a six-inch knife. She filed for divorce a month before the incident and had been staying with her sister. The attacker, Eugene, was sentenced by Oceana County Circuit Court to 27 to 92 years in prison. However, in a 3 to 0 vote, the Michigan Court of Appeals overturned the verdict in 1987.

Why? At the time, Michigan only recognized marital rape as a crime if the husband and wife were living apart and one member had filed for divorce. The court also required that a person live in the state for at least six months before filing for divorce. In Hawking’s case, she had only returned to Michigan a week before she filed, deeming it invalid.

Virginia 2002

In a 2002 legislative debate, Virginia delegate Dick Black stated,

I don’t know how on earth you could validly get a conviction in a husband-wife rape when they’re living together, sleeping in the same bed, she’s in a nightie and so forth. There’s no injury, there’s no separation, or anything.

If she says no, it doesn’t matter where she is sleeping or what she is wearing. This is the same man who called birth control “baby pesticides” in 2004.

Indiana 2014

Fast forward to the current day. David Wise repeatedly drugged and raped his wife, Mandy Boardman, for years during their marriage. Boardman’s suspicions were confirmed when she found video on Wise’s cellphone. She went to the police in May 2011. After the ensuing trial, a jury convicted Wise of six felony sexual assault charges. He had told the jury that, “She was snippy and it made her nicer when he drugged her.” The prosecutor asked for a 40-year prison sentence.

Wise will not spend one day in jail. Marion Superior County Judge Kurt Eisgruber sentenced Wise to 20 years, with eight years suspended and 12 years spent in home confinement. It only gets worse. Boardman told The Times “[The judge] told me I needed to forgive my attacker and I needed to let my attacker walk. It was a punch to the gut from the justice system …”

What are the Laws Regarding Marital Rape?

As previously stated, marital rape is illegal in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Generally speaking, marital rape is penalized like a rape committed by any other person. Fines can range between several thousand dollars to over $50,000. Prison terms also range from several years to life in prison without parole. Often, sentences are based on the violence of the crime. Surprisingly enough, there are still certain states that have variances in the law regarding spousal rape compared to other types of rape. In some states, marital rape is charged under a different section of criminal code, given shorter reporting periods, held to stricter degrees of force/threat, and penalized differently.

Ohio and Oklahoma

Ohio state law has two distinct subsections for rape. Outside the confines of marriage, sex is non-consensual if the offender uses a “drug, intoxicant, or controlled substance” to alter the “mental or physical condition” of the victim; however, this circumstance does not apply to spouses living together. There must be “force or threat of force.” Essentially, it is legal for a husband to drug and take advantage of his wife. Oklahoma has similar legislation, requiring “force or violence” to be considered marital rape. Oklahoma also defines sexual intercourse as rape when the victim is unconscious, so long as it is not the spouse.

South Carolina and Idaho

South Carolina has even stricter laws. Sexual intercourse between spouses is non-consensual when “the threat of use of a weapon” and/or “physical violence of a high and aggravated nature” exists. In contrast, a weapon isn’t required in prosecuting “criminal sexual misconduct” outside the confines of marriage in South Carolina. Furthermore, the crime must be reported to law enforcement within 30 days of the event in order to investigate. In Idaho, “[n]o person shall be convicted of rape for any act or acts with that person’s spouse” except if the spouse struggled and was “overcome by force or violence,” threatened with violence, or drugged.

Virginia

In Virginia, court-approved marital and/or personal counseling can be substituted for fines and prison time in marital rape cases. The victim must agree and the option is available only once. This leaves the door open, however, for the offender to pressure the victim into approving the alternative. This option is not open to other cases of rape.

 Conclusion

Just last month, state legislators in Ohio embarked on a mission to remove the archaic word usage of their marital rape laws. Hopefully this is a sign of good things to come for the rest of the states that still believe spousal rape is different from any other rape. No is no. Regardless, there are still hurdles to be overcome and it’s wrong to be complacent with mediocre law writing.

Resources

Daily Beast: Marital Rape is Semi-Legal in Eight States

WomenLaw.org: Marital/Partner Rape

Daily Beast: Ex Wife: Donald Trump Made Me Feel ‘Violated’ During Sex

HealthResearchFunding.org: 21 Amazing Spousal Rape Statistics

Jezebel: A Brief Overview of Dudes Who Are Pretty Sure You Can’t Rape Your Wife

Jezebel: Wife Can’t Be Raped if She Wears a Nightie, Says Politician Named Dick

LA Times: No Prison Time For Indiana Man Convicted of Drugging, Raping Wife

The New York Times: Marital Rape

NOLO: Marital Rape Laws

Politico: Ivana Trump Denies Accusing Donald Trump of Rape

Jessica McLaughlin

Jessica McLaughlin is a graduate of the University of Maryland with a degree in English Literature and Spanish. She works in the publishing industry and recently moved back to the DC area after living in NYC. Contact Jessica at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Marital Rape in the U.S.: What Are the Laws? appeared first on Law Street.

Bill Cosby’s fall from grace has taken a new incriminating turn. Recently released court documents reveal the comedic icon formally admitting to drugging women in the past. Unsealed testimony from a 2005 civil suit may finally end the plausible deniability routine that the now-disgraced comedian has used since accusations from over 30 women surfaced. As the evidence and claims against Bill Cosby mount, statute of limitation laws protect him from facing criminal charges in most cases. In light of this, it is important to ask why these statutes exist in the first place and whether they should apply to sexual assault cases.

Recently unsealed testimony from a previous civil lawsuit against Cosby, obtained by the Associated Press, shows the comedic icon admitting under oath to obtaining Quaaludes. He admits to giving the drugs to at least one woman and “other people” with the intent to have sex with them. The 2005 civil case was filed by Temple University employee Andrea Constand, who accused Cosby of sexually assaulting her in 2004. Cosby was not charged with a crime due to a lack of physical evidence, so Constad had to resort to suing him as a means of seeking justice.

According to the unsealed documents, Cosby was asked, “When you got the Quaaludes, was it in your mind that you were going to use these Quaaludes for young women that you wanted to have sex with?” to which Cosby answered “Yes.” He was then asked if he gave women the sedatives without their knowledge, but his lawyers objected before he could respond. Cosby’s lawyers later said that the women knew that he had given them Quaaludes.

Despite the growing number of accusations against him, Cosby has never actually been charged with a crime. This is primarily because most of the alleged crimes took place decades ago, leaving him legally free of charges due to state statute of limitation laws. A statute of limitation is a law that prohibits a prosecutor from charging someone with a crime after a specified period of time has passed. Proponents believe that these laws are to ensure that convictions are based only on valid evidence. Because evidence weakens over time, successfully convicting a defendant years after the fact is typically more difficult. These laws are meant to increase the validity of assault accusations in order to prevent fraudulent claims, and thus prevent an error that might convict an innocent person. Sexual assault cases typically begin with the victim describing what happened to authorities and creating material evidence vital to back up the victim’s accusations.

As of last November, 34 states and Washington, DC have statute of limitation laws for rape or sexual assault charges, ranging anywhere from three to 30 years. For example, charges must be filed within fifteen years of the crime in Georgia, five years in Connecticut, and just three years in Minnesota.

While making a case with deteriorated evidence is challenging, completely disallowing a victim’s ability to seek justice simply because evidence may have deteriorated does not seem fair. Improvements in technology are also slowing down that process, making evidence that was once unreliable much more useful. With more efficient DNA testing, authorities can now test decades old rape kits for DNA samples that previously could not be tested. A rape kit involves a medical inspection of a sexual assault victim and is a very useful means of preserving physical DNA evidence. Improved DNA science has started to give law enforcement agencies the ability to identify rapists dating back several decades.

One case that points to the unfairness of statute of limitation laws is the case of Charles Steele, a man who raped at least four Cleveland women in the mid-90s. The cases went unsolved for 20 years because police never tested the victims’ rape kits for DNA. Evidence collected from the bodies of each victim in 1993 and 1994 remained in storage until Cleveland police tested the kits 2011, leading them to Charles Steele who was already serving a lengthy prison sentence for a different rape. In 2014, Steele received an extended sentence for a minimum of 65 years in prison nearly two decades after the rape occurred. However, one of the indictments against Steele was thrown out due to Ohio’s 20-year statute of limitation law. The crime occurred on March 5th, 1993, but the indictment was issued March 6th, 2013–passing the 20-year limit by just one day. Cases like these are perfect examples of how a victim could be blatantly denied justice because the clock ran out.

As the Cosby controversy and other high profile cases gain public attention, many people are starting to question the validity of these laws. Wendy Davis, a state senator and former Democratic nominee for governor in Texas, proposed the elimination of the statute of limitations for rape and sexual battery cases last year. Davis’ efforts in Texas are one example of the growing opposition to these laws. Lise Lotte Lublin, one of Cosby’s accusers, recently testified at a Nevada Assembly hearing in support of a bill that would eliminate the statute of limitations for rape in the state. Nevada currently has a four-year statute of limitation for rape cases, which precludes Cosby from being charged for Lublin’s rape.

Because of statute of limitation laws, many of Cosby’s alleged victims may never get a chance at justice. Potentially allowing criminals to walk free simply because a certain time period passed, does not make the crime any less vile. Statute of limitation laws were initially created for justice, but now ironically serve as a barricade to it.

Kwame Apea

Kwame Apea is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Kwame at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Rape Allegations Continue: Should We Have Statutes of Limitations for Sexual Assault? appeared first on Law Street.

Student safety is a high priority for all colleges and universities. While colleges and universities are typically safer than the areas that surround them, many schools face important and unique challenges. Law Street’s Campus Crime Rankings were created to serve as a comprehensive look at the safety of our college campuses, and to act as a resource for students, families, and college communities.

Federal law requires all postsecondary institutions that receive federal financial aid to report and monitor criminal offenses on their campuses. Each year this self-reported data is published by the Department of Education to help colleges and their communities understand the safety challenges that they face. Law Street Campus Crime Rankings utilize the most recent three years of this data to determine the average violent crime rate per 1,000 students for each school with available statistics.

Our rankings break up schools into different categories to ensure that the comparisons are as helpful and fair as possible. This list ranks large schools, which include four-year institutions with enrollments greater than 20,000 students.

Click here to see the data used to create these rankings.

Check out the Top 10 Highest Crime Rates on Large Campuses below.

#1 Highest Crime Rate: University of Illinois at Chicago

Image courtesy of Storm9 via Wikimedia Commons

The University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) is a public research-intensive university located in the Near West Side area of Chicago, Illinois. The majority of the university’s reported violent crimes were aggravated assault offenses with 96 between 2011 and 2013, making up more than 71 percent of its total. UIC reported more aggravated assaults than any other school according to Clery Act data.

Craig Moran, an officer at UIC, attributes the high crime rate to a growth in bars near the school. He told the DePaulia, “With the increase of bars and students, there is an increase of crime.” In an article on DNAInfo Chicago, students and professors criticized the university for not fixing broken lights on campus, which they believe contribute to the overall perception of safety on campus. UIC spokesman Bill Burton believes that the number of crimes is not increasing, rather the number of alerts sent to students is. Burton told NBC Chicago, “We’re trying — we’re more active than ever in trying to make people aware of crime as it occurs and what they can do to prevent it.”

UIC has a Campus Violence Response and Prevention Plan, which includes strategies to raise awareness, as well as to identify and prevent incidents of campus violence. The University of Illinois at Chicago Police Department has full arrest authority on campus.

Sherri McGinnis Gonzalez, a spokesperson for the university, told Law Street in an email:

UIC is the only public research university located in Chicago, a global city with a population of more than 2.7 million. As an Urban Serving University in a large metropolitan area, the institution’s crime rate is affected by socio-economic issues and other factors that also impact the city of Chicago. The UIC Police Department, which has a long history of community-based policing, works closely with Chicago Police and other municipal departments, as well as federal, state, county and other public safety agencies.  The UICPD is mandated to report all crimes on or off campus. When reporting crime data, the campus includes Chicago Police Department crime statistics when a crime occurs within the campus Clery geography.

Fall 2013 Enrollment: 28,038 (16,671 Undergraduate)
Average Violent Crime Rate: 1.59 per 1,000
Murder: 1
Forcible Sex Offense: 21
Robbery: 16
Aggravated Assault: 96
Campus Setting: City (Large)

-Campus crime statistics are three-year totals from 2011, 2012, and 2013
-The average violent crime rate is an average of the three-year data shown as a rate per 1,000 students

Click here to see the methodology used for the rankings.

Research and analysis done by Law Street’s Crime in America team:
Kevin Rizzo, Kwame Apea, Jennie Burger, Alissa Gutierrez, and Maurin Mwombela.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Campus Crime 2015: Top 10 Highest Reported Crime Rates for Large Colleges appeared first on Law Street.

One of the most important problems facing college students today is sexual assault, and a recent poll by the Washington Post-Kaiser Family Foundation further solidifies this fact. The poll found that one in five women are victims of sexual assault in college. The poll also indicates that very few cases of sexual assault are actually reported to police or campus authorities.

Conducted between January and March, the Post/Kaiser poll surveyed 1,053 college students who live on or near their school’s campus.

According to the Rape Assault Incest National Network (RAINN), 68 percent of sexual assault victims nationwide do not report the crime to the police, and the rate on college campuses is even strikingly lower. According to the Post/Kaiser poll, 72 percent of the respondents who experienced unwanted sexual contact or sexual assault said that they told someone about it. Of that, only 11 percent told the police or campus authorities.

How can a crime as traumatic and prevalent as sexual assault be reported at such a low rate?

A wide range of factors may prevent sexual assault survivors from reporting or even openly discussing the crime that has been perpetrated against them. Victims often remain silent because they fear that the police, school administrators, or their peers won’t believe them. A 2007 study by The U.S. Department of Justice found that 42 percent  of forcible sexual assault victims who did not report the attack said it was because they “did not want anyone to know.”

The fact that most victims know their assailant as well as the fear of being unfairly blamed and victim shamed, particularly when alcohol is involved, can make reporting very difficult. When a victim knows the person who assaulted them it can become very difficult to talk about what happened to friends or authority figures. According to the Post/Kaiser poll, 70 percent of victims said that they knew the person in some way, and nearly 50 percent said they knew the person well or very well. While those who are sexually assaulted are never to blame for what happened to them, victim blaming remains a reality for many on college campuses. This is particularly prevalent when alcohol is involved, which according to the Post/Kaiser poll happens in more than 60 percent of cases.

Finally, victims of sexual assault may not report the crime because it is simply unlikely that the perpetrator will actually receive punishment. According to RAINN, of the 32 percent of sexual assaults reported to the police nationally, only seven percent lead to an arrest, and an even lower two percent were convicted or spend a day in prison. Theories have posited that the reporting rate is so low because many victims believe that a two percent conviction rate is not sufficient enough to go through filing a police report, an invasive rape kit, and possibly testifying in a trial. Federal data also shows that punishment remains an issue on college campuses, as administrators often warn, suspend, or order counseling for offenders rather than expel them.

While the Post/Kaiser poll provides important insight into the issue of sexual assault on college campuses, and the one in five statistic is certainly striking, a lot remains unknown. The factors behind underreporting to the police may also affect the results of anonymous surveys. While these surveys provide a much better understanding of sexual assault compared to the number of cases reported to the police, polls still face their own challenges. Because the issue of sexual assault likely varies between campuses, national surveys cannot help us understand all of the problems that individual institutions face.

As sexual assault becomes an important national issue, colleges around the country are starting to take important steps to prevent assaults on campus. New programs and policies are starting to encourage victims to come forward, raise awareness,  and provide new resources to students. Programs like the Campus Grant Program and the Bystander Intervention Programs are just a few examples that can help reduce sexual assault cases. Last year, a dozen House members called on U.S. News and World Report to include efforts to prevent sexual assaults in its annual college rankings.

The White House launched the “It’s On Us” campaign to increase awareness and empower men and women to actively prevent sexual assault. The Obama Administration is also encouraging the Department of Education (DOE) to proactively deal with the issue using its Title IX authority. These efforts have led the DOE’s Office for Civil Rights to investigate more than 100 colleges and universities for potentially mishandling sexual violence cases.

It’s clear that sexual assault cases on college campuses are a huge problem that must continue to be addressed nationally. As a society, we must take action to deter these crimes instead of blaming victims. Colleges must create an environment where victims are encouraged to come forward and we can all work together to make sure these alarmingly high rates become a thing of the past.

Kwame Apea

Kwame Apea is a member of the University of Maryland Class of 2016 and a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Kwame at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sexual Assault: Still a Problem for Colleges appeared first on Law Street.

During this past year the media has paid close attention to Bill Cosby due to the many sexual assault allegations against him. There have been women stepping forward, some named and some anonymous, with similar stories that Cosby drugged and raped them. New York Magazine just recognized these women with its powerful new cover.

35 women of the 46 who have publicly come forward against Bill Cosby on New York Magazine Cover! Powerful Journalism! pic.twitter.com/yQaUEswsix

— John Robbie (@702JohnRobbie) July 27, 2015

Nearly 60 years after Cosby’s first alleged assault, 35 women have come together on the cover of New York Magazine to have their voices heard. The magazine photographed and interviewed the women who have accused the 78-year-old comedian of sexually assaulting them. The story features a combination of videos, photos, and individual testimonies. The list includes supermodels, actresses, playboy bunnies, waitresses, and journalists alongside many other women.

Beverly Johnson, one of 35 women interviewed, on allegedly being assaulted by Bill Cosby: http://t.co/T3DGgjNWI4 pic.twitter.com/ABg3ilTShS

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) July 27, 2015

“I felt ashamed. I was embarrassed to be me.” Listen on Instagram: http://t.co/y8zR8jXEuL pic.twitter.com/VNQySdNUoV

— New York Magazine (@NYMag) July 27, 2015

People have constantly questioned if these allegations were true due to some of the women waiting decades to speak out about it, but many claimed they did not speak out because of the fear that no one would believe them. Barbara Bowman, who accused Cosby of assaulting her from 1985 to 1987, said in an interview:

I could have walked down any street of Manhattan at any time and said, ‘I’m being raped and drugged by Bill Cosby,’ but who the hell would have believed me? Nobody, nobody.

Cosby has denied all the sexual allegations despite revealing in a 2005 court deposition that he gave quaaludes to young women with whom he wanted to have sexual relations. The case was filed by Andrea Constand, a former basketball player and administrator at his alma mater, Temple University, who claimed Cosby drugged and raped her in his Pennsylvania home. Constand was the first person to file a lawsuit against Cosby. After the deposition from that case became public three weeks ago, Spelman College ended its long term relationship with Cosby, along with Temple University, and the University of Massachusetts. “The William and Camille Olivia Hanks Cosby Endowed Professorship at Spelman College has been discontinued,” Spelman’s communications office said in a statement Saturday.

Due to statutes of limitation, civil suits and criminal charges must be filed within a specific time period. If they are not filed within this period, then they can’t move forward, no matter how much evidence is presented. Because most of these allegations describe an assault that took place in 2004 or earlier the statutes of limitation for these cases have seemingly passed and Cosby cannot be charged or sued. However, several of the women have filed a defamation suit against Cosby, claiming that he damaged their reputations by accusing them of lying in their accusations against him. Although there a few cases within the statutes of limitation, the amount of time that has passed and lack of physical evidence would make it extremely difficult for him to be prosecuted.

Despite the legal complications, this magazine cover is still incredibly important. So far, there have been a total of 46 women who claimed that Cosby sexually assaulted them, and 35 have stepped up to be on the magazine. On the cover there is a 36th chair left open for the women who have not yet come forward. The cover has been described as brave, powerful, and brilliant. New York Magazine is giving powerful and recognition to the voices of the women who have stepped forward, and all those who were victimized by Cosby.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby’s Accusers Come Together On The Cover of New York Magazine appeared first on Law Street.

As mass incarceration and state violence vis a vis police brutality are coming increasingly under fire, even in mainstream media, many communities are turning toward alternative methods of addressing violence. Transformative justice–as opposed to criminal justice–seeks to create alternatives to incarceration in a similar manner to its less-radical cousin, restorative justice. But transformative justice does something else, as well: transformative practices encourage communities to avoid involving police in crimes, even in instances of violence.

How can community practices of transformative justice transform the larger criminal justice system? Can community-based methods of addressing violence be the key to transforming this society?

What is Transformative Justice?

According to Generation Five, an organization dedicated to transformative justice in cases of gender-based violence, especially child abuse, transformative justice is described as the following:

Transformative justice [is] a liberatory approach to violence…[which] seeks safety and accountability without relying on alienation, punishment, or State or systemic violence, including incarceration or policing.

Three core beliefs:

Individual justice and collective liberation are equally important, mutually supportive, and fundamentally intertwined—the achievement of one is impossible without the achievement of the other.

The conditions that allow violence to occur must be transformed in order to achieve justice in individual instances of violence. Therefore, Transformative Justice is both a liberating politic and an approach for securing justice.

State and systemic responses to violence, including the criminal legal system and child welfare agencies, not only fail to advance individual and collective justice but also condone and perpetuate cycles of violence.”

Because of these core beliefs, rather than seeking to integrate transformative practices into the current criminal justice system, transformative justice practitioners actively advocate for remaining outside of state intervention.

Transformative Justice is a response to the State’s inability to provide justice on either individual or collective levels. Therefore, in this paper, we propose a model that responds to experiences of violence without relying on current State systems. We believe this to be a liberating politic that creates opportunities for healing and transformation rather than retribution and punishment. Transformative Justice moves us toward equity and liberation rather than maintaining the inequality that the current State and systems maintain.

Transformative justice practitioners argue that there is a choice, however: by equipping communities to engage in transformative practices instead of resorting to the only option often presented to people–involving the police in cases of violence–harm can actually be repaired and further harm can actually be prevented.

Can Transformative Practices Achieve Justice?

While many people across the country increasingly accept alternatives to incarceration for youth who are convicted of minor, nonviolent offenses–indeed, restorative practices dealing with those kinds of cases are becoming more common–many are skeptical about transformative justice advocates’ claims that alternatives to incarceration should also be used in cases as grave as rape and child abuse.

But does anyone actually practice transformative justice?

In one example of transformative justice principles being used in an effort to keep targeted communities safe without resorting to state intervention, the Bed-Stuy, Brooklyn queer of color youth collective Safe OUTside the System launched a campaign in 2007 in line with transformative justice principles and practices:

In 2007, the collective launched the Safe Neighborhood Campaign. Similar to the Dorchester Green Light Program of the 1970s, the campaign provides safe havens from sexist, homophobic, transphobic, and racist language, behaviour, and violence of all sorts. The campaign has three phases. In the first, neighbourhood public spaces such as restaurants, schools, churches, and businesses agree to visibly identify themselves as safe havens for those threatened with or fleeing from violence. In the second phase, the campaign incorporates an educational component to address some of the causes of anti-gay and anti-trans violence. Members of the campaign train the owners and employees… [on] ways to prevent violent without relying on law enforcement. In the third phase, Safe Space advocates recruit other community members and public figures into the campaign.

In ways that are formal–like these Safe OUTside the System’s effort–and informal, strategies of transformative justice are providing alternatives to the criminal justice system across the country.

Transforming criminal justice?

While transformative justice can be criticized for not offering a structured, consistent approach to providing alternatives to policing, transformative justice advocates continue to emphasize the importance of promoting truly individual and community-based alternatives–which vary with each circumstance–rather than attempting to dictate what is best for different communities. This is because ultimately, the priority of transformative justice advocates is not to transform the criminal justice system, but rather to work outside of it until it can be dismantled and rebuilt in a transformative way that does not continue to target already marginalized peoples.

Resources

Generation Five: Transformative Justice

Generation Five: Toward Transformative Justice

Huffington Post: Seeking Transformative Justice in Ferguson, Dearborn, and Beyond

Huffington Post: Criminalizing Victims: How the Punishment Economy Failed Marissa Alexander

Philly Stands Up!: Transformative Justice Anti-Sexual Assault Action Camp!

US Prison Culture: Thoughts About Community Support Around Intimate Violence

Safe OUTSide the System: The SOS Collective

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Transformative Justice Transforming Mass Incarceration? appeared first on Law Street.

Date rape, also known as “acquaintance rape” or “hidden rape,” has been increasingly recognized as a problem in our society. A shocking study shows that 82 percent of sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone who is not a stranger, and 47 percent of rapes are by a friend or acquaintance. The tragic story of a woman in Montgomery County, Maryland who was recently raped and killed serves as a horrifying reminder of these statistics.

At 11:40 PM on Thursday, June 18th, a security guard at the Montgomery County Circuit Courthouse  in Rockville, Maryland witnessed a struggle between 16-year-old Marquiz Turner and a 19-year-old girl outside. The guard notified the sheriff’s deputies who went outside the building and allegedly saw Turner forcing sexual intercourse on the young woman. He was immediately taken into custody. According to court documents, the victim had gone to see a movie in downtown Rockville with her ex-boyfriend, Turner, on Friday night. When the film ended Turner expressed that he wanted to have sex with her and she told him she was not interested. As the two of them walked to the car, Turner allegedly ripped off her clothing, pushed her against the courthouse’s concrete wall, and proceeded to rape her. The charging documents stated, “when the Deputies rounded the corner and identified themselves, Turner jumped back and pulled his pants up.”

Detectives interviewed Turner, who did admit to forcing the victim to have sex with him. He stated that “he was unwilling to accept ‘no’ for an answer,” and that he was going to have intercourse regardless of her objections. According to the charging documents, he felt that she “owed him” sex. At the scene, the victim told police she had broken up with Turner previously because he kept pressuring her to have sex with him.

Paramedics transported the victim to Shady Grove Medical Center for a forensic rape exam. While en route, she stopped breathing and lost a pulse. Doctors pronounced her dead at 1 AM, less than 90 minutes after the alleged rape occurred. The official autopsy and toxicology results have not yet been released, leaving questions about the reason for her mysterious death. According to reports, Turner showed little to no emotion after hearing of the victim’s death.

Court documents show that Turner is a sophomore at Winston Churchill High School in Potomac, Maryland where he had a 3.7 GPA. He lived with his mother in a Silver Spring high-rise apartment building. Neighbor Felicia Charles expressed, “I’m very shocked. I think that’s disturbing. I would have never thought he would do something like that. He never gave off that vibe.” Jean Arthur, a counselor for victims of sexual abuse, said,

Unfortunately that thinking is pervasive. It’s just really sad that a person thinks they can do that to another person. The fact that a person at 16-years-old even thinks to do that, I mean it just boggles my mind. I completely don’t understand it.

Turner is currently being charged with second-degree rape, a felony that carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison. Prosecutors say there may be additional charges depending on the deceased victim’s autopsy and toxicology reports.

Unfortunately sexual assault is one of the most underreported crimes, with an average of 39 percent being reported to the police each year. While this was a more high profile case, more attention does need to be brought to the pervasive issue of date rape.

Taelor Bentley

Taelor is a member of the Hampton University Class of 2017 and was a Law Street Media Fellow for the Summer of 2015. Contact Taelor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Maryland Woman’s Death Sheds Light on the Problem of Date Rape appeared first on Law Street.

In 2006, the criminal justice system helped Josh Duggar’s family expunge his record of abuse and protected him from being exposed in media reports as someone who had “forcibly fondled” younger girls (a.k.a. molested children).

Every day–then, now–the criminal justice system targets people of color–especially women and trans people of color–for abuse and shootings (a.k.a. public executions for walking while Black or Latina).

And yet.

And yet we continue to use pictures of him in suits instead of finding pictures that try to reflect him negatively (see featured photo), like the mainstream media insists on doing with young people of color slaughtered by cops.

When Black young men are murdered by cops, they are cast as “thugs.” When a young white man is accused of child abuse, he retains his status as ‘poor cult victim.’

This serves both racist and misogynist ends: white perpetrators remain victims, and his misogyny is cast as an exception (caused by his cultish family).

The mainstream media likes to speculate on the “scandalous” aspects of how the family helped cover up the abuse; how the family, in fact, abused him through their extremism and his isolation from “mainstream culture”; but we don’t like to speculate on how Josh Duggar is not, in fact, an exception. Josh Duggar is the rule.

Duggar is an embodiment of rich white cis male non-dis/abled privilege, and while the control his family exerts over him is indeed frightening, their misogyny is not an exception.

The Duggars may be particularly explicit in the ways they preach and practice misogyny, but what pieces focusing on the cultish aspects of the Duggars that facilitated the abuse miss is that every person in this country–every. single. person.–is raised to hate women. The Duggars may be more explicit than most, but they are not alone: Josh Duggar’s apparent belief that women and girls exist for male pleasure is the same belief that we are all raised with.

It’s called rape culture, and it’s everywhere.

The fact that the Duggars isolated their children so much that they didn’t have a TV misses the point: all of us with TV, too, receive the same message–in a heteropatriarchal society like this one, women are disposable.

Because rape culture is not isolated to “cults.” It is everywhere.

Because women–especially women of color–are disproportionately targeted by the same criminal justice system that protected Duggar when the first police report was issued against him.

Because living in a heteropatriarchal society makes us much more vulnerable to debilitating mental health issues.

Because “strong women” in the mainstream media is still the only trope we’re allowed to hope for.

Because the kind of misogyny that the media ascribes to the cult of the Duggars is the same kind of misogyny that we are exposed to every single time we turn on the television, interact with men in the street, or are educated in a public school system that still focuses on “great” [read: genocidal] white men and does not teach consent as the golden rule in health classes (a.k.a. teach rape culture to all students).

Because we can condemn–or pity–Josh Duggar as much as we’d like.

But ultimately, we must recognize that his privileged positions and entitled, abusive actions are the rule, not the exception.

Jennifer Polish

Jennifer Polish is an English PhD student at the CUNY Graduate Center in NYC, where she studies non/human animals and the racialization of dis/ability in young adult literature. When she’s not yelling at the computer because Netflix is loading too slowly, she is editing her novel, doing activist-y things, running, or giving the computer a break and yelling at books instead. Contact Jennifer at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Josh Duggar is Not an Exception: On Rape Culture in the U.S. appeared first on Law Street.

Spring break is a college rite of passage synonymous with beaches, bikini-clad babes, and binge drinking. However, it’s no secret that excessive alcohol consumption can lend itself to a dangerous environment for these vacationers, including reckless behavior, violence, and sexual assault. No one knows these kinds of dangers better than the residents of the spring break capital of the world, Panama City Beach, which is why their city council members have voted to make a change next year by banning beach drinking during spring break.

Panama City Beach bans #springbreak drinking. Should others follow? http://t.co/DLZCjfJ6BR pic.twitter.com/D9lHTh9ONn

— The News-Press (@TheNewsPress) May 14, 2015

According to the News Herald, the Panama City Beach City Council voted last week to ban drinking all together on the beach next March despite its expected negative effect on business owners. The measure has been deemed a much-needed crackdown on out of control spring break partying that has negatively impacted the city.

Case in point, this year seven people were shot and wounded at house party. Then in April, police released a censored video of girl passed out on the Florida beach getting gang raped in broad daylight while crowds of bystanders watched. Even though most of the girl’s body had been blurred, a young woman watching the video recognized her tattoos and contacted authorities. The girl in the video was believed to have been drugged before the assault occurred. What’s even more disturbing is this isn’t the first time something like that incident has happened there. Bay County Sheriff Frank McKeithen said they’ve recovered a number of videos similar in nature. Ruth Corley, spokeswoman for the sheriff’s office, commented on the incident via social media saying,

We have been able to find video of girls, incoherent and passed out, and almost like they are drugged, being assaulted on the beaches of Panama City in front of a bunch of people standing around.

This move is in addition to 17 other measures approved last year to tone down the city’s Spring Break celebrations. These changes are expected to cause a dramatic drop in revenue for the $200 million-plus economy that the tourism provides, but owners see it as worth the risk while hoping for an increase in more family-friendly tourists.

As someone who’s personally made the 800-something mile pilgrimage there from my college town of Athens, Ohio, with a group of my best friends, I can tell you that I’m not at all surprised by how out of control it has gotten there. Much of what I thought were spring break myths were proved realities during my short stay there. Even though this initiative will likely anger prospective spring breakers, working to prevent occurrences of violence and sexual assault is much more important.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Beach Drinking Banned at This Popular Spring Break Destination appeared first on Law Street.

Two female students from Valencia College studying medical diagnostics have recently filed a lawsuit claiming that their classwork at the school crossed a very serious line. The suit alleges that they were forced to endure invasive vaginal exams in front of all of their classmates.

The lawsuit, which was filed Thursday in Orlando, Florida, targets both the college and three of its instructors, Maureen Bugnacki, Linda Shaheen, and Barbara Ball. Both students, who were identified only as Jane Doe I and Jane Doe II, claim they were forced to submit to the examination of their sexual organs via a transvaginal ultrasound “under threat of having their grades reduced or of being blacklisted by future employers” reports CNN.

A transvaginal ultrasound is a procedure used to check for pregnancy, fertility, or other reproductive problems that involves inserting a probe directly into a woman’s vagina. The lawsuit describes the plaintiffs’ experience with the procedure as,

A student would place a condom over the probe and then apply generous amounts of lubrication to the probe. In some cases, the student would have to sexually ‘stimulate’ plaintiffs in order to facilitate inserting the probe into plaintiffs’ vaginas.

The plaintiffs claimed that they were forced to endure these exams weekly and without any privacy in full view of instructors and other students. The lawsuit also alleges that in one instance one of the defendants, Barbara Ball, made inappropriate comments to one of the students undergoing a probe telling her she was “‘sexy’ and should be an ‘escort girl’ (prostitute).”

Peer examinations are actually quite common when studying in the the medical field as they are a way for students to better understand the procedures they will eventually perform on real patients. The lawsuit states that Valencia College had used a second year student nicknamed the “TransVag Queen” to describe the procedure to new students during an orientation for the program. The lawsuit states,

[She] explained the Medical Diagnostic Sonography Program’s faculty believed that students should undergo invasive transvaginal ultrasound procedures in order to become better sonography technicians. Valencia positioned these transvaginal probes as voluntary, but its actual policy and practice was that they were not.

It’s important to remember that this is a pending lawsuit and the defendants haven’t been found guilty. But if these women’s allegations are in fact true then what happened to them is absolutely disgusting and almost definitely qualifies as sexual assault. Sexual assault has unfortunately become a permanent fixture on college campuses that has been increasingly highlighted by the media in several high profile rape cases. However, it’s almost inconceivable to think of it happening in full display of an entire classroom at the hands of an instructor. This may very well turn into a case where the actual details are are difficult to come by, but nevertheless these allegations should be taken very seriously.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Lawsuit Claims Valencia College Exams Included Vaginal Probes appeared first on Law Street.

The number one article at Law Street this week came from Marisa Mostek, our resident authority on the dumbest laws of the United States. And guess what? Alaska and Hawaii are no exception. The second most popular post of the week, from Alexis Evans, is decidedly more serious as the UVA rape allegations that ran last Fall in Rolling Stone were found baseless by the police. And the number three article of the week, from Ashley Shaw, details the case of a criminal who outed his own hiding spot by Snapchatting it to his friends. ICYMI, check out this week’s best of the week from Law Street.

#1 The Dumbest Laws of the United States: Alaska and Hawaii

The last two additions to the family of United States could not be any more different in some ways, for example their opposing climates. However, Hawaii and Alaska are similar in that both possess a unique set of strange and dumb laws. In Anchorage, Alaska, there is a law specifically banning tying a dog to the roof of a car. Perhaps this brings to mind a certain politician doing so a few years back cough Mitt Romney cough. Read full article here.

#2 Police Find No Evidence to Support UVA Gang Rape Story

Last November, Rolling Stone shocked the nation with its 9,000-word article entitled “A Rape on Campus.” The piece told the horrific story of a University of Virginia freshman known only as “Jackie.” She claimed to have been gang raped by seven Phi Kappa Psi frat members during a frat date party. The article accused UVA of a “cycle of sexual violence” and “institutional indifference” that preferred to silence girls like Jackie who reported rape instead of helping them. The piece started an impressive national dialogue about rape culture, particularly rape culture on college campuses. Now after four months of investigating and roughly 70 interviews, police have concluded that the gang rape that reignited a movement most likely never even happened. Read full article here.

#3 Peek-a-Boo! Cops Find Crook Who Snapchatted His Location

There are a lot of stories about idiots who are wanted for one crime or another who get caught through social media. This might be because the police post their searches on Facebook and people see them and report the fugitives’ whereabouts. It could be the girl who posted a video on YouTube talking about everything she had just stolen. Or the guy who posted a pic of himself siphoning gas from a police car. Basically what this shows us is that many crooks are stupid and arrogant, and the man in this week’s story is no exception. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Another day, another Uber controversy. It seems like the popular ride-sharing app will never see the end of its legal struggles. Some of the buzz is positive–Uber recently announced that it’s expanding and beefing up safety features. However, other recent headlines about the company cannot be considered anything but incredibly negative. For example, yet another rape accusation has come to light. Overall, as Uber continues to grow, so do safety concerns, and seemingly, safety features.

Read More: Uber Will Have a Rough Ride in 2015

A Philadelphia woman has come forward with allegations that she was raped by her Uber driver on February 6, and then essentially held captive in the car while he drove around for two hours following the assault. While she evidently brought the claims to the police, Uber claims that it didn’t learn about it until much later. A rep for the company told Philadelphia Magazine, who broke the story:

Our thoughts and prayers are with our rider. Upon learning of the incident, we immediately reached out to the Philadelphia Police Department to assist in their investigation and support their efforts in any way we can. As the investigation continues, the driver’s access to the Uber platform has been suspended.

New controversies for Uber aren’t just popping up here in the states. Two Uber drivers in Ottawa, Canada, recently pleaded guilty to operating unlicensed taxis. There have also been very high profile sexual assault allegations in France and India.

It’s in response to all of these developments, as well as others like them in the past and potential for more in the future, that Uber is launching new programs and initiatives focusing on safety. The additions to Uber’s safety measures will include things like incident response teams to investigate anything that may happen over the course of an Uber ride, and further review of things like quality assurance. The company will also expand its work with law enforcement, including in India where there will be a button programmed into the Uber app allowing riders to directly call law enforcement.

While some of these features seem promising, Uber still sometimes struggles to follow through, as evidenced by the United Nations Women’s partnership debacle from a few weeks back.

Read More: Uber’s New hiring Initiative: Trying to Win Back Women

Uber and UN Women announced a plan to work together to create jobs for female drivers and released a jointly signed letter on Uber’s website. However, after some backlash and safety concerns, UN Women pulled out of the agreement. Some of that backlash included a statement from the International Transport Workers Federation, which stated:

The creation of one million precarious, informal jobs will not contribute to women’s economic empowerment and represents exactly the type of structural inequality within the labor market that the women’s movement has been fighting for decades. Uber’s practices are defined by an aggressive informalization of an industry that was already deregulated three decades ago

It’s clear that Uber wants to make changes, but it’s certainly struggled to do so in the past. Perhaps it’s a side effect of being a young company that experienced a lot of growth very quickly, or just inherent to the nature of a business as informal as ridesharing. Either way, Uber needs to reform–and let’s hope that it sticks this time.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Uber Adds More Safety Features, But Will They Be Enough? appeared first on Law Street.

Last November, Rolling Stone shocked the nation with its 9,000-word article entitled “A Rape on Campus.” The piece told the horrific story of a University of Virginia freshman known only as “Jackie.” She claimed to have been gang raped by seven Phi Kappa Psi frat members during a frat date party. The article accused UVA of a “cycle of sexual violence” and “institutional indifference” that preferred to silence girls like Jackie who reported rape instead of helping them. The piece started an impressive national dialogue about rape culture, particularly rape culture on college campuses. Now after four months of investigating and roughly 70 interviews, police have concluded that the gang rape that reignited a movement most likely never even happened.

Charlottesville police announced Monday that they have found “no substantive basis” to support the gang rape detailed in Rolling Stone’s article. Investigators also found “no evidence” that a Phi Kappa Psi frat party even took place on the night of Sept. 28, 2012, which was when the rape was reported to have occurred.

In the above video Chief Longo says,

We’re not able to conclude to any substantive degree that an incident occurred at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity house, or any other fraternity house, for that matter. That doesn’t mean something terrible didn’t happen to Jackie on the evening of Sept. 28, 2012. We’re just not able to gather sufficient facts to determine what that is.

There were a number of unsubstantiated claims made by Jackie in the Rolling Stone article that investigators detailed debunking. For starters, police found no proof that a party even occurred at the frat house the night of the alleged rape, but instead proved the Phi Kappa Psi brothers were attending a formal at their sister sorority, Delta Gamma, that evening. Jackie also claimed to have been hit over the head with a glass bottle during the rape, and that her roommate at the time, a nursing student, later removed glass shards from her face. But when police interviewed the roommate, she denied removing any such glass and claimed the wound was more consistent with an abrasion from having fallen. The list of inconsistencies didn’t stop there. For the full text from the Charlottesville police statement detailing their findings in the UVA rape case click here.

According to Chief Longo, the case is not closed but rather suspended until police are able to gather more information or someone comes forward providing more information.

So, what does this mean for Rolling Stone and its journalistic integrity? The magazine, which operated under the assumption that everything Jackie told it was true, already released a statement taking responsibility for its mistakes in handling the article. It admitted to its failure to contact the accused in the story, known as “Drew,” and get his side of the story. Now it’s opening itself up for further review by allowing the Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism to complete its own investigation into the magazine’s reporting, which will later be published in Rolling Stone in early April.

As for Phi Kappa Psi, the accused fraternity might be seeking legal action against Rolling Stone for “defamation”. UVA’s Phi Psi chapter said in a statement provided to Business Insider:

Phi Kappa Psi is now exploring its legal options to address the extensive damage caused by Rolling Stone — damage both to the chapter and its members and to the very cause upon which the magazine was focused.

From a legal perspective the frat has a pretty good case, due to the magazine’s gross lack of fact checking and failure to even contact the frat for its side of the story. However if the fraternity members plan to follow through with a suit, they must be willing to expose themselves yet again to scrutiny that could result in even more unwanted publicity.

Alexis Evans

Alexis Evans is an Assistant Editor at Law Street and a Buckeye State native. She has a Bachelor’s Degree in Journalism and a minor in Business from Ohio University. Contact Alexis at aevans@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Police Find No Evidence to Support UVA Gang Rape Story appeared first on Law Street.

Attitudes toward prostitution in the United States have long been based on the Judeo-Christian tradition arguing that selling sex is immoral; however, global trends arguing for sexual self-determination and changing attitudes toward the sex industry have become more popular. The United Nations Secretary General has even called for the decriminalization of sex work. These changes pose the question: how should the United States address the issue of prostitution?

The U.S. still criminalizes sex work, but the urgency of making changes in this sphere is evident in the growing sex worker rights movement that strives to define the legal status and rights of prostitutes. Read on to learn more about different models of regulating prostitution, and the arguments for and against them.

What are the real numbers behind prostitution?

Prostitution is “the act of offering one’s self for hire to engage in sexual relations.” In other words, it’s an exchange of a sexual act for money.

It’s hard to determine the real numbers behind prostitution due to the fact that sex work is criminalized in the United States. As most of the actors involved in this business operate underground, statistics are rather scarce. Some estimates of the current number of prostitutes range from 230,000 to 350,000, but others put the number closer to one million.

Prostitutes come from a variety of backgrounds. Indisputably, there are those who come from marginalized and impoverished environments, were sexually abused, homeless, poorly educated, or drug addicted. In addition, some women and men are coerced or trafficked into prostitution. Every year thousands of people are trafficked for the purposes of exploitation, including sexual exploitation. However, this doesn’t mean that all prostitutes are forced or trafficked. There are also those who chose to become involved in sex work of their own volition. These people can have different motivations to enter the sex industry, citing high earnings, flexible work hours, or genuine passion for this line of work.

Should prostitution be decriminalized, legalized, or none of the above?

Generally, you hear about three distinct approaches to prostitution: criminalization, decriminalization, and legalization. All of them are rooted in different ideological perspectives and include diverse goals and contrasting methods of achieving their desired objectives. Watch the video below to learn more about the ongoing debate over prostitution.

Criminalization

Prostitution is criminalized in most parts of the United States. Proponents of this view often believe that prostitution is immoral, and therefore label it as a criminal behavior. In their view, prostitution endangers marriages and is simply wrong. Prostitutes are viewed as criminals who behave illegally. The rhetoric of those who support criminalization is often centered on the notion that such alternatives as legalization will have devastating consequences on the American morale.

The supporters of criminalization also connect legal prostitution with increased sex trafficking, the spread of STDs, and a greater number of children being coerced into the sex industry. Watch the video below to learn more about Catharine MacKinnon’s arguments against the legalization of prostitution and its connection with human trafficking.

Decriminalization

Decriminalization means the removal of certain criminal laws related to the operation of the sex industry. When prostitution is decriminalized, consensual adult sexual activity in a commercial setting is no longer viewed as a crime. Decriminalization can be considered a half step toward legalization as individuals engaged in the business can be required to obtain a special permit or be subjected to penalties. Essentially, if a person is caught in the act, his punishment will be no more than a fine, something along the lines of speeding or a parking ticket.

At the same time, decriminalization doesn’t legalize sex work, but does instruct law enforcement to give low priority to prostitution cases. This approach intends to use the already existing legal mechanisms to support the health and safety of prostitutes. Many advocates of decriminalization cite labor and anti-discrimination laws as arguments to grant prostitutes certain rights, including freedom of choice and self-regulation.

Decriminalized systems often still impose criminal penalties for all other actors involved in the business, including clients and pimps. This perspective is rooted in the abolitionist movement that historically rescued women from prostitution and trained them for alternative careers. In this view, prostitutes are victims of male exploitation and supporters of this approach often consider prostitution demeaning to women.

The ultimate goal of decriminalization is to uproot the profession by targeting those who purchase sex in the first place. It’s believed that by eradicating the demand, the supply will subside on its own. The advocates of this form of decriminalization usually strongly oppose legalization that will make the sex business flourish instead of extinguishing the industry.

The Swedish Model

The Swedish model is the most influential decriminalization example. Since 1999, buying sex in Sweden is a criminal offense punishable by fines or up to six months imprisonment. Contrarily, selling of sexual services is not a criminal offense, meaning that prostitutes are not subjected to criminal law proceedings. The law is popular in Sweden–80 percent of the Swedish population supports the initiative, but many are still skeptical of its effectiveness.

The Swedish model was also adopted in Norway and Iceland. In 2014, Canada moved to this model of controlling public solicitation of prostitution and restricting demand on sexual services. In addition, similar decriminalization models were adopted in Nepal, India, American Samoa, Bhutan, Cambodia, China, Fiji, Guam, Republic of Korea, Palau, and Taiwan.

What are the arguments in favor of decriminalization?

Decriminalization of prostitution can arguably decrease violence against prostitutes. A study in San Francisco found that 82 percent of prostitutes have been assaulted and 68 percent were raped during their time working in the sex industry. Another study in Colorado Springs found that prostitutes were 18 times more likely to be murdered than non-prostitute women of their demographic. If sex work is criminalized, prostitutes are reluctant to ask for help or go to the police if victimized. If decriminalized, prostitutes and law enforcement will have an avenue for communication, and if a prostitute is victimized she can report the crime to the police without the fear of being charged and detained for prostitution.

Decriminalization can also benefit the investigation of sex trafficking cases as prostitutes can aid law enforcement with information from the inside. In addition, law enforcement can save valuable resources as police departments won’t need to deal with as many prostitution cases. In 2011, Texas alone spent $8 million on prison expenses related to prostitution. Decriminalization won’t eliminate the financial burden completely as pimps and johns are often criminalized in those countries who adhere to decriminalization model, but it can decrease expenses overall and re-direct resources towards other crimes.

What are the arguments against decriminalization?

Criminalization of sexual services for clients, and not for prostitutes, can be challenging as both those who purchase and provide sexual services are unlikely to admit to the transaction. Clients will be reluctant to do so due to the existing criminal laws, while prostitutes can lose their income and clientele if they aid law enforcement. In fact, several independent studies have shown that current laws have pushed some Swedish prostitutes underground, resulting in an increased danger of victimization.

Those who oppose the Swedish approach to prostitution are also concerned with its unintended consequences of stigmatization and marginalization of those who enter the sex industry of their own volition. The Swedish model doesn’t acknowledge that prostitutes can choose this occupation out of their free will, but view all prostitutes as passive victims of violence and abuse.

Overall, there isn’t much evidence that this approach improves the quality of work and life of sex workers, or decreases HIV or STD transmissions. Even through the Swedish model is popular around the world, both the Swedish and the international experiences don’t provide enough indications of decline in prostitution.

Legalization

Legalization usually involves a system of laws and government regulations that define the operation of the sex industry. Such a system can be highly regulated or merely define the legal conditions under which prostitutes can operate. Legalization is often accompanied by strict criminal penalties for those who operate outside the established framework. Prostitutes are often required to pay special taxes, can work only in specified zones, and to register with the government. In addition, prostitutes are often obligated to regularly undergo health checks, and to obtain special licenses to legally operate as a sex workers. Thus, the legalization of prostitution seeks to control, regulate, and define the rules of the sex industry.

The legalization model emphasizes freedom of personal choice and regards prostitution as a form of work. The supporters of this approach maintain the belief that sexual relations between two consenting adults should’t be criminalized as those who engage in this type of relations do so voluntarily. This rhetoric is centered on the notion that people are free to choose what to do with their bodies and, therefore, entering into contracts to provide sexual services is their right that shouldn’t be undermined by the views of those who don’t agree with their decision. At the same time, advocates for legalization acknowledge that people can be forced or coerced into prostitution. They also acknowledge the existence of trafficking and exploitation, but don’t believe that all women are victims, and that prostitution automatically leads to violence.

European Experiences

The Netherlands and Germany are, probably, the most prominent examples of legalization. The Netherlands legalized prostitution in 2000, and it’s now regulated by the country’s labor laws. Germany followed in 2002 by providing prostitutes with legal protections and social insurance. In both countries the sex industry boomed, resulting in increased numbers of legal brothels and prostitutes, but also prompted concerns over increased cases of human trafficking.

Nevada’s Legal Brothels

The state of Nevada has a long history of regulating prostitution in some counties, starting in  1937 when a law was enacted to require weekly health checks for all prostitutes. In 1971, Nevada began taxing brothels, thus legalizing the sex industry in rural counties of the state. As of now, there are around 500 prostitutes who are working in 30 brothels. A recent study found that 84 percent of the surveyed prostitutes in Nevada felt safe working in the legal brothels, and were not trafficked or coerced into prostitution. Contrary to the European countries that have legalized prostitution, Nevada’s sex workers are considered independent contractors. Consequently, they don’t receive unemployment, retirement, or healthcare benefits.

What are the arguments for legalization?

All arguments cited earlier in support of the decriminalization model, such as decreased violence, better cooperation with police, and re-direction of valuable law enforcement resources, can be relevant when taking about legalization, as well.

The advocates for legalization argue that such a model of regulating prostitution can provide even more safety for prostitutes. Legal brothels are often closely observed and monitored by the law enforcement agencies to ensure compliance with safety regulations and to prevent sex trafficking cases. Legalization can also completely eliminate  the financial burden from police departments as there will be no prostitution cases to pursue. It’s estimated that in 2010, California alone arrested 11,334 people for prostitution. In Texas, an average of 350 prostitutes are sentenced to serve time in state prisons yearly. Proponents argue that legalization can decrease the prison population and save state resources that otherwise would be used to investigate, prosecute, sentence, and house those who are charged with this “victimless” crime.

In addition, legalization advocates argue that condom requirements and mandatory HIV and STD testing can reduce health risks for prostitutes and clients alike. If sex work is criminalized, fewer prostitutes will have access to testing services and fewer of them will practice safe sex. It was found that in the United States only three to five percent of STDs can be attributed to prostitution, supporting the argument that prostitutes are not vehicles of HIV and STD transmissions. The number of prostitutes infected with STDs in New Zealand and New South Wales, where prostitution is legalized, is very low or non-existent. In Nevada, there were no registered cases of HIV among legal sex workers. Watch the video below to learn more about Nevada’s health regulations and condom requirements for legal prostitutes.

Another argument is the revenue that legalized prostitution can bring in the form of income taxes. According to some estimates based on the current income of Nevada’s legal prostitutes, legalization can generate $20,000 in federal income taxes per person per year. Not only could this money be used to provide more social and health services for prostitutes, but could be spent on other governmental needs as well.

Perhaps the biggest and the most controversial argument in support of legalization of prostitution is the extension of labor rights and other occupational benefits to prostitutes. If prostitution is treated as any other profession, legal sex workers can be entitled to minimum wage, freedom from discrimination, and safe work environments. They can claim benefits, form or join unions, and get access to medical insurance and pension plans.

Lastly, supporters of legalization believe that prostitution is no different than pornography, lap-dancing, tobacco, alcohol, and gambling, which are all legal in the United States.

What are the arguments against legalization?

The most common argument against legalization of prostitution is its close connection with human trafficking and organized crime. The Netherlands’ legalization of sex work is cited as an example of a failing experiment as Amsterdam became a hub for traffickers and organized crime groups. The Dutch Justice Ministry closed over 320 prostitution windows as a part of the initiative to curb violence against migrant women, who are often forced by traffickers and pimps to work as window prostitutes in the city’s Red Light District.

The increase in child sexual exploitation is another point of concern for those who advocate against the legalization of prostitution. The adult sex industry is viewed as perpetuating the recruitment of children as sex workers, who also could be trafficked and coerced into sexual exploitation.

Prostitution is also thought to increase crime rates as it is a magnet for ancillary crimes, including drug, sex, and violent crimes. In this view, with any form of legalization those crimes can only increase as pimps and traffickers would have more legal avenues to conduct their illicit businesses.

Together with increased crime rates and  human trafficking, legalization can give more power to pimps as they are transformed into businessmen. According to this assumption, working in legal brothels can increase the likelihood of victimization as women spend their time in closed spaces and have fewer resources to ask for help or seek protection against abuse. Prostitutes in one of Nevada’s brothels compared their working conditions to a prison environment as most of the time they were locked inside their rooms waiting for clients and could leave the premises only with their male pimps.

Those who oppose legalization of prostitution also state that prostitutes will continue to spread diseases, even if their services are legalized. As it can take up to two weeks to process STD tests, sex workers can continue to infect their clients, prompting the spread of infections and STDs, regardless of their legal status.

Conclusion

How to deal with prostitution is an endless topic of debate. As decriminalization has its benefits and pitfalls, so does legalization. Even though each model has a different set of goals, both converge on the opinion that prostitutes shouldn’t be criminalized. The United States needs to start participating in the international discussions and may soon consider an alternative to the outdated criminalization model.

 Resources

Primary

UNODC: Human Trafficking

Additional

RNW: FAQ – Prostitution in the Netherlands

Alternet: Should Prostitution be Legalized?

Business Insider: Everything You Ever Wanted to Know About Prostitution in Nevada

Business Insider: Seven Reasons Why America Should Legalize Prostitution

California State University Northridge: Should Contractual Sex Be Legalized?

CBS News: Prostitution Laws: Europeans Debate Whether Criminalization or Legalization Works Better

Difference Between Net: Difference Between Legalization and Decriminalization

Digital Journal: Amsterdam Courts Ready to Clean Up Red Light District

The New York Times: Labour Laws, Not Criminal Laws, Are the Solution to Prostitution

The New York Times: Legalizing Prostitution Leads to More Trafficking

The New York Times: Nevada’s Legal Brothels Make Workers Feel Safer

The New York Times: Nevada’s Legal Brothels are Coercive, too

Prostitution Education Network: Prostitution Law Reform: Defining Terms

The NAYked Truth: Prostitution: The Economic and Criminal Justice Benefits of Legalization

Valeriya Metla

Valeriya Metla is a young professional, passionate about international relations, immigration issues, and social and criminal justice. She holds two Bachelor Degrees in regional studies and international criminal justice. Contact Valeriya at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Prostitution: Should it be Legalized or Criminalized? appeared first on Law Street.

The FBI released its Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report last week indicating that violent crime in the United States is down 4.6 percent overall. The report, which marks the first FBI statistics for the 2014 calendar year, compares crime levels from January to June to the same period in 2013. The charts below highlight five important takeaways from the FBI’s report. Click here to read Law how the Top 10 Safest and Most Dangerous Cities fared with the latest data.

1. Crime is Down… Again

Despite a slight uptick in 2012, violent crime levels have been decreasing for years, and the preliminary numbers for 2014 are no exception. Overall violent crime was down 4.6 percent in the first six months of last year relative to the first six months of 2013. This downward trend in violent crime is not limited to the first six months of the year; annual statistics have shown a decrease in violent crime in six of the last seven years. The full year statistics for 2013 indicate that violent crime was down 18 percent when compared to the level in 2000.

The chart below details the change in violent crime from January to June for the past seven years. Note: each bar represents a percent change relative to the first six months of the previous year.

2. Better Data on Rape in America

Starting January 1, 2013, the FBI began using a new definition of rape to make the measure more inclusive and as a result more representative of the crimes that occur. Due to the nature of the UCR program, where cities and states voluntarily report their crime statistics to the FBI, it is up to individual law enforcement agencies set a time frame for adopting new procedures. It typically takes several years before a change in the reporting system is universally adapted by reporting agencies.

The preliminary semiannual report only includes agencies with three to six months of comparable data in two consecutive years. This means that the report does not cover the details of every agency in the United States, particularly agencies that recently transitioned to the new rape definition in 2014, as comparable data is not available. A better understanding of how many agencies use the new definition we be available once all full-year data for 2014 is submitted to the FBI.

The chart below indicates the total number of agencies that report using the revised and legacy definitions of rape as well as the the share of the population that they cover. Note: because this graphic is only based on agencies included in the recent report, the total number of agencies and total population is lower than it would be for the entire United States.

3. Violent Crime Fell Across Nearly All Categories

With the exception of the legacy definition of rape as discussed above, crime numbers decreased for every category of violent crime. The number of robberies experienced the steepest decline, falling more than ten percent relative to the first six months of 2013. Agencies using the revised definition of rape also had a significant decrease, though those numbers only cover about 55 percent of the population in this report. The total number of murders also had a notable decrease, going down six percent or more for the second year in a row.

4. Midwestern Crime is Dropping Faster Than the Rest of the Nation

According to the recent FBI report, violent crime decreased in every region during the first six months of 2014. The Midwest saw the largest decline at -7.6 percent, followed by the Northeast at -6.6 percent, then the South at -3 percent, ending with the West at -2.7 percent. The chart below indicates the regions defined by the FBI and the change in their violent crime levels.

Source: FBI Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report 2014, Table 2

5. Crime Dropped Across Every Population Group

The recent FBI report indicates that violent crime went down in every single population grouping. Led by cities with populations of 10,000 people or fewer, which saw a 6.7 percent decrease in overall violent crime and a 17.8 percent drop in murders. The chart below shows the change in violent crime for each of the eight population groupings used by the FBI as well as the number of law enforcement agencies in each grouping and their population coverage.

Kevin Rizzo

Kevin Rizzo is the Crime in America Editor at Law Street Media. An Ohio Native, the George Washington University graduate is a founding member of the company. Contact Kevin at krizzo@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post What You Need to Know About the FBI’s Latest Crime Statistics appeared first on Law Street.

Victims of rape often experience multiple hardships in the aftermath of their attack. Not only can they sustain serious physical injuries during an assault, but many also experience emotional trauma. Some may lose a job or home, or will need to relocate due to safety concerns. Each case is different, but there are many common issues experienced by rape victims, especially when it comes to medical problems.

It’s estimated that 19-22 percent of rape victims experience genital injuries. Sexually transmitted infections (STIs) are contracted by 40 percent of rape victims, while one to five percent become pregnant by their rapists. Thus, for rape victims, medical expenses can be quite costly.

Read on to learn more about federal regulations, state practices, and current issues in medical assistance for rape victims.

How does the federal government regulate medical assistance for rape victims?

Medical assistance for rape victims is addressed by the federal government through two distinct laws: VAWA and VOCA.

What is VAWA and how does it help rape victims?

VAWA is the Violence Against Women Act, first passed by the federal government in 1994. It’s a comprehensive law aimed at protecting women who were victims of violence, including rape. Among other things, VAWA mandates that rape victims cannot be forced to pay for their own rape examination or for services of protective order. Essentially, it outlines the minimum requirements and necessities victims of rape should be entitled to, but still gives states substantial freedom to create their own guidelines, especially when it comes to financial assistance.

Since the law was passed, it has gone through several revisions. First, VAWA was reauthorized in 2000, enhancing penalties for abusers, adding immigration protections, and creating programs for elderly and disabled women. In 2005, Congress reauthorized VAWA again, focusing on amending rules regarding states’ accountability and public health responses to domestic violence. This revision also advanced rape victims’ rights, by requiring states to cover the costs of the rape kit. In the case of noncompliance, states would lose certain federal crime fighting grants.

The 2013 reauthorization of VAWA clarified the issue of forensic examination even further, providing that in no circumstances can rape victims be charged upfront for their medical examination, and reiterating that such medical services should always be provided free of charge. At the same time, this last revision still allowed states to require victims to submit claims to their medical insurance company, but emphasizes that victims are not responsible for paying deductibles or co-payments for the services provided. The newly revised version of VAWA also pays more attention to public outreach, stating that every victim should be promptly informed about free-of-charge forensic examinations.

What are VOCA and the Crime Victim Compensation Program?

VOCA is the Victim of Crimes Act that was first passed by Congress in 1984. It created the Crime Victims Fund, which provides federal monetary assistance to states through the Victim Assistance Grant and Crime Victim Compensation Program (CVCP). The fund’s balance was estimated at more than $4 billion as of August 2010. As states receive federal funding they are supposed to use it to compensate crime victims. As of now, state compensation programs pay $500 million annually to more than 200,000 victims across the country.

Each state has its own Crime Victim Compensation Program (CVCP) that provides financial assistance for victims of crimes, including rape victims. Some state CVCPs were created even before VOCA came into affect. The first program was established in California in 1965. Federal grants cover 25-60 percent of the program’s costs. The rest of the money comes from local and state funds that are generated from criminal fines and penalties obtained through the court system. According to recent statistics, rape victims receive eight percent of all CVCP funds.

Typical programs provide help with medical bills, mental health treatments, funerals, and lost wages. As states decide what will be covered by their CVCP, the degree of financial assistance varies greatly. Some states may pay for travel costs to medical facilities, moving expenses, housekeeping, and even child care, while others will hardly cover medical bills. In addition, states may offer a variety of services, but provide different benefit amounts as well as have specific eligibility requirements.

What are the main issues in securing medical assistance for rape victims?

Variations in State Practices

Federal laws provide minimal guidelines to states about how to manage federal grants and what services to cover. This rift creates disparities, as each state has its own set of rules and regulations about medical assistance for rape victims. VAWA only mandates that states provide forensic medical examinations free of charge, but doesn’t mention non-forensic medical expenses. Thus, rape victims may end up paying for their medical treatment, including injuries sustained from rape, emergency contraception, and medications to prevent or treat HIV infections and other STIs. Some states cover these expenses, but are less likely to do so as there is no federal requirement to pay for these specific services.

For example, in Missouri, the victim compensation program won’t pay for treatment of injuries, medications, emergency contraception, STI testing, pregnancy testing, emergency room fees, or counseling. Essentially, it won’t cover any of the “collateral” costs of rape. It will only pay for the forensic examination as mandated by the federal law.  At the same time, in Montana, rape victims are provided with free pregnancy testing, STI testing, medication, hospital or emergency room stays, and even drug testing. Only 15 states cover the costs of STI testing, 13 cover pregnancy testing, six pay for emergency contraception, and only two provide free-of-charge counseling in relation to sexual assault.

State Caps on Medical Services

Not only does each state have a distinct set of laws that regulate what medical services can be covered by its victim compensation program, but many states have caps on how much they will pay for those medical services. The range is quite broad, from $450 in Oklahoma to $25,000 in Rhode Island. Five states–Utah, Vermont, Louisiana, New Mexico, and Arkansas–will cover a set percentage of the medical bills ranging from 70-100 percent. Some states will compensate victims only for the forensic medical exam, the bare minimum required by the federal law. Even in this case, victims will have to pay for their rape kit first, and apply for compensation of their expenses later. Interestingly, in Montana, rape victims can be compensated only if the fund still has money. If the fund runs out of money, victims will be charged for all medical services received.

Lax Enforcement of Federal Laws

In some states victims of rape are still billed for their forensic examinations. Such exams are essential for collecting evidence such as semen, blood, and tissue samples. Without a proper medical exam after a rape, the ability to solve the crime and to convict the rapist greatly diminishes. In California, in order to be eligible for the free forensic examination, rape victims have to cooperate with the police in the ongoing investigation. In Texas, victims of rape are mandated to report the crime to authorities within a four-day period. If they fail to do so, their medical exam won’t be covered. Illinois covers such exams only for low-income or uninsured victims, while Maryland doesn’t explicitly prohibit billing the costs of a forensic exam to the victim. Thus, some states may find loopholes in federal regulations to bill victims for their forensic examinations.

The cost of a rape kit can be up to $1,200. Watch the video below to learn more about how victims of sexual crime are billed in Louisiana.

Hospital and Law Enforcement Mistakes  

Hospitals and police stations are often the first points of contact for crime victims, including those who are the victim of rape. Hospitals administer forensic exams and provide other necessary medical treatments, and they are in charge of medical billing. As financial assistance for victims of rape is regulated by federal, state, and local rules, billing departments have to know how to navigate the system in order to bill correctly. They often mistakenly charge victims of sexual crime for forensic exams and other services due to improper paperwork or their lack of knowledge about the process. The medical file of a rape victim may not contain information on whether he or she was a victim of rape. At the same time, billing employees can be confused about the current laws, or not aware of the latest revisions. In most instances, after hospitals become aware of their billing mistake, they will make it right by billing CVCP or other organizations that should bear the costs of the rape kit.

The same confusion is taking place in police departments across the country. Some employees are still not aware about the latest VAWA revisions and still use outdated information, charging rape victims for their forensic exams.

How do these issues affect rape victims?

As medical assistance for rape victims varies greatly from state to state, some victims will have to foot some or most of the bill themselves. As a consequence, victims of rape can end up refusing medical treatment or skipping essential HIV or STI testing, harming their health.

At the same time, some victims may still be charged for their forensic examination, which is an essential part of the evidence collection process. If the victim is unsure about the costs of the exam, he or she can be reluctant to report the crime or undergo the procedure in the first place. As rape cases are already hard to prove, it can become almost impossible to obtain justice without the rape kit.

Billing rape victims for medical services, either by mistake or according to variations in state laws, can also harm a victim’s personal life. In many cases, victims of rape don’t want their family members to know about the victimization. If the parents of the victim hold the insurance policy, it can lead to shaming or family issues, or in some cases re-victimization, if the attacker is a family member.

Conclusion

Victims of rape receive financial assistance from a variety of sources including federal, state, and local funds. In addition, their insurance policies, if they have one, can cover some of the expenses. The federal government acknowledged in its latest revision of VAWA that victims should never pay for their forensic examination, as it’s a part of the evidence-collection process. At the same time, it’s not clear who should be paying for the “collateral costs” such as HIV, STI, and pregnancy testing as well as the treatment of physical injuries.

Resources

Primary

Congress: Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013

White House: Factsheet: The Violence Against Women Act

Congressional Research Service: The Violence Against Women Act: Overview, Legislation, and Federal Funding

Additional

National Center For Victims of Crime: Crime Victims Compensation

National Association of Crime Victim Compensation Boards: Crime Victim Compensation: An Overview

ProPublica: Despite Promises, Some Rape Victims Stuck Paying Exam Bills

NPR: Despite Law, Rape Victims Sometimes Pay For Medical Services

New York City Alliance Against Sexual Assault: The Cost of Rape

CBS Evening News: For Some Sex Assault Victims, Ordeal Carries Price Tag

Huffington Post: Worst States For Pregnant Rape Victims

Frisky: Some Rape Victims Are Forced to Pay For Their Medical Treatment

Huffington Post: Rape Victim’s Choice: Risk AIDS or Health Insurance?

NOLA: Billing for Rape: Louisiana Sex Assault Victims Often Face Hefty Bills for Medical Care

AEquitas: Summary of Laws & Guidelines. Payment of Sexual Assault Forensic Examinations

Human Rights Watch: Making Rape Victims Pay

ProPublica: As Rape Victims Wait, Money For DNA Testing Goes Unused

Office of Crime Victims Advocacy Quarterly Newsletter: Victims of Crime Act and the Creation of Victim Compensation Program

Valeriya Metla

Valeriya Metla is a young professional, passionate about international relations, immigration issues, and social and criminal justice. She holds two Bachelor Degrees in regional studies and international criminal justice. Contact Valeriya at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Medical Treatment For Rape Victims: Who is Responsible? appeared first on Law Street.

Just a few short months ago there were some very serious rape allegations being thrown around based on a Rolling Stone article about a student at the University of Virginia. It was a very traumatic account of a young woman being raped by several young men at a frat party, and that she didn’t report it until telling the story to a Rolling Stone writer several years later. When the administrators at UVA found out about these allegations they shut down the greek community and launched a full investigation only to discover that the story was falsified. Aside from the false accusation, UVA’s response seemed to be a little too late–only after this story got massive amounts of media attention did the school attempt to do anything.

That is not the case in regard to a student at Stanford University. Every news report I have seen calls this accused rapist a “former student,” but that status came about after the school found out about what he had done. Brock Allen Turner was charged with five felony counts of suspicion of attempted rape and penetration with a foreign object.

According to prosecutors, the attack occurred on January 18 when two young men riding their bikes on campus came across the scene of the crime. Turner was seen on top of an unconscious young woman; when confronted by the bikers he tried to run away, but luckily these guys were able to catch him and hold him until the police arrived.

A spokeswoman for Stanford University, Lisa Lapin, stated that Turner voluntarily withdrew from the university and is never allowed to re-enroll. I have a feeling that the school gave him an option and he took it, maybe to save face especially since he pleaded not guilty to the charges just yesterday morning.

Stanford did the right thing by shutting down what could have been a massively negative mark against the school. The best part in my opinion? The school had a resolution before the news even broke and was able to release a statement to news outlets immediately, letting people know that it knew what was going on and already had a resolution from an academic standpoint. Universities everywhere, take note!

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Stanford Sets the Standard for How Colleges Should Handle Campus Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Did you watch President Obama make the Republicans cry Tuesday night?

Yeah you did! Because you’re smart and well informed and give a crap about where this nation is headed, am I right?

Obviously.

So today, instead of reacting to the SOTU—because let’s be real, you’ve read a thousand of those pieces by now already—we’re going to talk about something a little less official. A little more ridiculous. A little more—Meninist.

Yep, that’s right. Meninist is a word now. Thanks, Men.

But who is a Meninist, you ask, and what in fuck’s name is Meninism? Sadly, it’s not an adjective used to describe a person who is both a zealous believer in Leninism and also suffering from meningitis.

I love the word #meninist. It cleverly combines the painful brain inflammation of “meningitis” with the doomed zeal of “Leninist”.

— Tom Freeman (@SnoozeInBrief) January 17, 2015

We’re sorry, Tom Freeman. We like your definition a whole lot better.

Nope. In fact, Meninism is a sad little play on Feminism, because those goddamn men’s rights activists are so fucking convinced that their lives are super hard and women are out to get them.

All together now.

UGGHHH.

So basically, the Meninist movement has gone something like this, so far.

Men started tweeting at each other with a cute little Meninist hashtag. It started out as a joke (rolling my eyes so hard right now), and then morphed into an outlet where people with penises could bitch about how hard it is to be a man in the twenty-first century.

The first challenge, it seems, is spelling. #MeninistTwitter and #MenimistTwitter are used interchangeably across this little trend, which I think is probably the funniest detail about this whole thing.

Anyway! After these dick-swingers had built up something of a Twitter community, some entrepreneurial folks decided to capitalize on this jackassery and make some merch.

Courtesy of Teespring.com.

And so was born the Meninist T-shirt and hoodie combo. Douche canoes galore are modeling their swag proudly on Twitter.

Look what came in the mail #Meninism #meninist pic.twitter.com/cCJGMgDMzZ

— Evan Conway (@evandotconway) January 15, 2015

And some of them are even totally not-ironic women! Because men need equal rights too, guys. It’s just so unfair that they get to make more money than women do, spend less on their cost of living (having a vagina is expensive, yo), participate less in childrearing and other household tasks, and control the vast majority of corporate and governing bodies across the globe.

Supporting equal rights @MeninistTweet #meninist pic.twitter.com/ZBqssfyFXG

— Paige (@tubapay) January 16, 2015

So much power, so little justice.

Folks, I can’t. And apparently, neither can a lot of you! Because some wonderful feminists also took to Twitter to mock and ridicule these Meninist fuckers, because COME ON. This shit is ridiculous.

Fixed the meninist tshirt guys pic.twitter.com/JgM3LT1dUP

— Emily ReyNOlds (@rey_z) January 19, 2015

the "I'm never getting laid" starter pack: pic.twitter.com/dfQXxhfbDw

— Kuh-Reem (@WTFKAREEM) January 17, 2015

noticed a little typo in the new #meninist hoodies, so i thought i'd help out! pic.twitter.com/7E4NuEdC1b

— Inglourious Beanpole (@ladyepicenter) January 17, 2015

You folks are heroes.

But, all jokes aside, this Meninist crap is genuinely not okay, and here’s why.

A feminist is, by definition, “a person who believes in the social, political and economic equality of the sexes.” Thanks for defining this baggage-laden, complicated term in such a straightforward way, Chimamanda Ngozi Adichie! We love you.

So, here’s the thing. If you’re not a feminist—or, if you’re like these Meninist jerks who are actively taking a stand against feminism—that means that you don’t believe in the social, political, and economic equality of the sexes.

Got that?

You’re cheering for inequality and oppression. That’s what you’re fighting for. That’s really fucking shitty, guys.

Now, to be fair, a lot of these Meninists don’t seem to be holding up signs telling women to get back in the kitchen. (Although a fair amount of them are pissed off that we don’t want to see their dicks.) They aren’t actively calling for the vag-havers to be oppressed. Instead, they’re just looking for some sympathy.

These seemingly reasonable Meninists are simply saying that equality between the sexes has already been achieved, and so feminism has become obsolete. Anyone who STILL identifies as a feminist is actually a man-hater, looking to reach beyond simple gender equality and over toward flipping the power dynamic, leaving men in the oppressed position that women used to be in before we got equal rights and all.

To those Meninists, I say, UNTRUE.

Gender equality has not been achieved. This is not a real thing.

Women are still paid less on average than their male counterparts. Women are still disproportionately at the mercy of domestic and sexual violence, which (not coincidentally) are crimes that are disproportionately committed by men. Women are still responsible for a greater share of the household and childrearing responsibilities. Women are still more likely to live in poverty, more likely to have difficulty accessing quality health care, and more likely to be single parents.

Why are all of these things happening?

In part, it’s because of shitty legislation. The Equal Rights Amendment never passed, meaning that it’s still legal to deny or abridge the legal rights of women simply because they have vaginas. There are also a shit ton of laws out there that specifically bar us from maintaining control over our own bodies or accessing the health care we need.

These are the problems that are officially on the books.

But off the books? We’re in trouble there too.

As a culture, women are almost exclusively valued as objects, not people. We’re treated like ornaments to be admired, fetus incubators to be legislated, pieces of ass to be fucked. When compared to men, women are literally paid less and raped more—and that’s because we aren’t valued as highly as men are.

So, to all the Meninists complaining about how fucking hard it is to be a man in the twenty-first century:

You’re missing the point.

Feminism isn’t about making life hard for you, and if you think it is, then you’re acting like a self-involved brat. Please wake the fuck up.

Women want to be valued and respected. We want to live in a world where social, political, and economic equality is a real thing.

And we want you to stop whining about it and get the fuck out of our way.

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Misogynists Are At it Again, Now With T-Shirts! appeared first on Law Street.

Sexual assault on college campuses has been one of the hottest topics for a couple years now. Many universities are being investigated by the Department of Education for Title IX violations. The recent Rolling Stone article about rape on the campus of the University of Virginia that was partially retracted and has landed the publication in hot water over concerns about its journalistic ethics has seriously reignited the discussion. There are a lot of moving parts to the debate about sexual assault on college campuses, and I think that one of the many, many reasons that the conversation gets so easily muddied is that we don’t all agree on definitions, or statistics.

While this is obviously an extreme example, watch this video of “Princeton Mom” Susan Patton who I’m still a little bit sure must be running the world’s longest satirical performance. She begins the video by talking about how rape is no longer just defined as a woman being held at gunpoint and assaulted, and then spends the next ten minutes pretty much going on about what a shame that is. She also thinks that rape is often women falsely accusing men after “regrettable sex.” Then she talks about how it’s women’s responsibility to protect themselves from rape by not drinking, making good decisions, and choosing better friends. It’s a charming exercise in a game I like to subject myself to called “Holy Shit, People Actually Think This Way.”

Now the Department of Justice (DOJ) has weighed in with statistics from a study it conducted, and it’s probably going to all get even more confusing.

The new DOJ report dealt with not just college students, but college-aged females more generally. The DOJ report included the statistic that six of every 1,000 college females are sexually assaulted, and now everyone who thinks like Patton is using it to prove that sexual assault on college campuses isn’t a thing we should be worried about, and that this talk of “rape-culture” is overblown.

First, what we need to do is remember that anytime this sort of study is undertaken–one that relies on people’s word, memories, and stories, rather than say, hard facts in a laboratory–is that it needs to be taken with a grain of salt.

There have been other studies that indicate that the rate of college sexual assault is much higher than what the DOJ reports. A survey at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) concluded that 17 percent of female students and 5 percent of young men were sexually assaulted as students. Then there’s the Campus Sexual Assault Study from 2007 that gave us the now-infamous and oft-cited “one in five” statistic.

There are a few reasons why two studies can have such radically different numbers, and they’re excellently detailed here, by the Marshall Project. The main takeaway is this though: neither is necessarily right and neither is necessarily wrong. They asked different questions, they talked to different people, and at the end of the day, it’s really very much an inexact science. We’re not sure how many students are sexually assaulted; more studies to come might help us pinpoint that number, but probably not.

But we do know that at least some are. Furthermore, the same DOJ report stated that eighty percent of students sexually assaulted don’t report it. And 80 percent were assaulted by someone they know. Both of those statistics are deeply troubling.

No matter how many people are being assaulted on our college campuses–whether it’s one percent, twenty percent, or somewhere in between–it’s too many.

But that “less than one” percent is probably going to get thrown around for a while. Because, unfortunately, there are a lot of people out there who, for whatever reason, don’t want to see change. They just got some ammunition, for now.

That’s why we need to keep having conversations about rape culture. Why we need to keep educating our young people, and for that matter, all our people, on consent. Why we need to stand up for rape victims when they’re accused of making up their stories. It doesn’t matter how many–any at all are too damn many.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post DOJ Stats Show College Sexual Assault Remains Too Prevalent appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

A couple of weeks I wrote about Rolling Stone’s report of a young woman being brutally raped on the University of Virginia campus. Last week Rolling Stone retracted the story, even apologizing to its readers. After the original report hit the news cycle people hung on to every word–even the administrators at UVA took action by banning all fraternities–but now it seems that the story may not have been true.

In my first article I was conflicted about the story of Jackie–the victim–and wondered why she would value her reputation at the school by keeping quiet for so long over her own well-being and justice. I get that being raped by five to seven guys is a traumatic event, one that no one would ever want to relive, but why would you allow your “friends” to talk you into keeping something like that quiet, as the report indicated? Why allow seven rapists to troll the campus for another possible victim?

I believe in the theory that there are three sides to every story, and in this case those sides belong to the victim, the unnamed rapists, and the truth somewhere between the two. One person’s perspective on an event can be totally different from someone else’s, so combining both stories usually brings out a more accurate truth, in my opinion. What Rolling Stone  did was allow Jackie to tell her side of a story without sufficient due diligence on the part of the publication by contacting the men she accused and fact checking the story. Granted, I don’t know how much fact checking you can do when a young woman states she was raped two years ago. Yes, you can check to see if such a party took place at the frat house, but there isn’t much more access someone can get without starting to raise flags. Rolling Stone‘s journalism in this case was abysmal.

My biggest question is would UVA administrators have taken the time to do a thorough investigation if this were privately handled? I would like to think so, but the cynic in me knows that sometimes administrators put the reputation of a school above the well-being of its students.

I’m ashamed of Rolling Stone, not just because of this article but because of several missteps over the last couple of years. The cover where it got the facts wrong on who signed the Constitution–a staple of being an American. The RIDICULOUS decision to put a terrorist on the cover of its magazine where he looked more like a rockstar than an enemy of the state! Fact checking and respecting Americans is clearly not on the agenda over at Rolling Stone. Maybe you guys should stick with what you know–entertainment. But really, you shouldn’t even do that because those reviews are usually wrong, too.

Fellow Law Streeter Anneliese Mahoney wrote about how Rolling Stone’s retraction affects rape victims in America. I agree with her, the original Rolling Stone article and later retraction are going to make real victims of rape shy away even more from reporting their experiences. UVA administrators and investigators disproved certain facts that Jackie reported to Rolling Stone. Why couldn’t this publication have taken a little more time and done the right thing? Why did it not take a step back and try to get a full story? Look at the big picture? Yes, it was probably trying to do a good thing in telling this story. So many women feel like they were not alone and were encouraged to tell their story because somehow Jackie found the strength to do it. But now that “strength and courage” have been squashed by reality.

It’s Go Ask Alice all over again. The diary of a young girl that was in fact fictional but presented as truth. There is a certain level of betrayal from the publishers of Go Ask Alice and the people over at Rolling Stone. You want to help rape victims? Try doing your job and not ruining what victims have worked so hard for. That 5.9 percent of false accusations that Anneliese mentions are the ones that are heard the loudest and hung on to the longest. Those who cry wolf are the ones doing the most damage to real victims and Rolling Stone may have just let someone cry wolf on the main stage with a loud speaker.

I’ve shamed Rolling Stone. I’ve shamed UVA. I’ve even shamed Jackie. But now it’s time to reiterate that even though her story as published in Rolling Stone may not be true, anyone who is a victim of rape–or any crime–should find the strength in themselves to speak up. Be what Jackie was supposed to be–a role model who is taking charge of what happened to her and standing up for herself and victims alike.

Don’t let Rolling Stone take away your power.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rolling Stone, Bad Journalism, and the Future of Rape Victims appeared first on Law Street.

Early this afternoon, Rolling Stone released a post entitled “A Note to Our Readers.” It was a follow-up to a story published last month that took an extensive look at rape culture on the campus of the University of Virginia. Although the story was far-reaching, it focused particularly on a young woman named Jackie who allegedly was gang-raped at a fraternity party. I use the word allegedly because even though I believed Jackie’s story wholeheartedly, Rolling Stone has now retracted the article.

“A Note to Our Readers” was spectacularly vague, and in my opinion, put more blame on Jackie than a nationally known and respected news publication, but that’s almost beside the point. You can read the full retraction here, but here’s the part that stuck out to me. For context, it’s important to understand that Rolling Stone never interviewed or spoke with the men Jackie accused, out of an attempt to respect the fact that she was fearful of them. This is the what Rolling Stone included in its note today:

In the face of new information, there now appear to be discrepancies in Jackie’s account, and we have come to the conclusion that our trust in her was misplaced. We were trying to be sensitive to the unfair shame and humiliation many women feel after a sexual assault and now regret the decision to not contact the alleged assaulters to get their account. We are taking this seriously and apologize to anyone who was affected by the story.

There were discrepancies to Jackie’s account–for example, the fact that she may have gotten the date of the party wrong, and so on. I don’t have the information that Rolling Stone does, and they were clearly being purposefully vague–but “discrepancies” does not render the entire story null and void.

Discrepancies are part of reporting, part of crime, and part of life. Jackie was telling this story after the fact and was relaying a traumatized experience. If she didn’t have discrepancies, I’d be more surprised.

And what people want is tidy little narratives from victims. They want perfect and total recall from shocking situations.

— roxane gay (@rgay) December 5, 2014

Our legal system doesn’t demand that every little question be answered and correct–I’m going to make an entirely unfair comparison here, but a grand jury in Ferguson, Missouri proved just a few weeks ago that discrepancies in stories apparently mean jack squat. So why would the existence of discrepancies make Rolling Stone pull their story?

There are a couple of explanations. One is that they’re protecting their asses. They don’t want to get sued. They are businesspeople and they are choosing to protect their business, regardless if it means invalidating a quite possibly real and shocking story.

Another explanation is that Jackie lied, and Rolling Stone didn’t catch it. I don’t want to believe this is true. False accusations are rare–exceedingly rare–but they do exist. A study out of Northeastern University estimates them at about 5.9 percent. That’s of course only out of rapes that are reported–there are far more that aren’t, which means that the people who report false rape vs. people who are actually sexually assaulted are really rare. I highly doubt that this was fabricated, but it’s not impossible. There could be half truths too–Jackie could be telling someone else’s story who was too afraid to come out with it. Either way, I can’t say with certainty but I don’t think this was a lie. And honestly if it was, that’s on Rolling Stone too for screwing up their fact checking.

Because at the end of the day, it should be Rolling Stone we’re mad at. This whole thing is going to encourage rape victims to hide, not come forward and tell their story, unless they can remember every damn detail and prove it. It’s going to shift the conversation from the legitimate problem we have with sexual assault in this country to conversations about journalism. This incident is going to be cited by rape apologists and those who claim false rape accusations until those idiots are blue in the face. It’s going to set us back, there’s no way it’s not going to.

Rolling Stone: you didn’t do your job, and now rape victims are going to pay the price.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rolling Stone Just Set Back Rape Victims’ Progress in America appeared first on Law Street.

Law Street’s top three articles last week covered a whole range of hot topics. Don’t worry if you ate too much turkey and couldn’t keep your eyes open to read them though, we’ve got you covered here. The Crime in America Team’s coverage of the Safest and Most Dangerous States in the nation took the top spot; Noel Diem delved into the complicated world of school dress codes and their effects on students for article number two; and Allison Dawson wrote the third most popular post of the week with a look into the University of Virginia’s move to shut down fraternities while it investigates rape allegations published in Rolling Stone. ICYMI, here are the top three stores of the week from Law Street.

#1 Slideshow: America’s Safest & Most Dangerous States 2015

Alaska is the most dangerous state in the nation according to the latest violent crime data from the FBI. With an increase in violent crime rate from 603 per 100,000 people in 2012 to 640 in 2013–the most recent year for which the FBI provides data–Alaska moved into the number one spot, followed by New Mexico (613) and Nevada (603). Read full article here.

#2 School Dress Codes: Are Yoga Pants Really the Problem?

Anyone who has been inside of a high school in the last five years has seen some interesting fashion choices by today’s teenagers. Teachers are expected to teach to the tests, teach students how to survive in the real world, personalize the curriculum for IEP students of all levels, and still have their work graded within twenty-four hours. And now? Some districts are adding another dimension: dress code enforcement. Dress codes are an important part of school culture, as they sometimes dictate whether or not a student can even attend class. Read full article here.

#3 University of Virginia Suspends All Fraternities After Rape Allegations

You might have missed it with all the huge news events within the last week, but there was aRolling Stone article published last week about a young woman who was the victim of a heinous crime. Seven (yes, SEVEN) young men at a fraternity party raped the woman over a three-hour period. The rape took place two years ago, but now that the story is out UVA President Teresa A. Sullivan has decided to shut down all fraternities until at least January 9, 2015. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

You might have missed it with all the huge news events within the last week, but there was a Rolling Stone article published last week about a young woman who was the victim of a heinous crime. Seven (yes, SEVEN) young men at a fraternity party raped the woman over a three-hour period. The rape took place two years ago, but now that the story is out UVA President Teresa A. Sullivan has decided to shut down all fraternities until at least January 9, 2015. There will be an investigation conducted during the suspension.

I read the Rolling Stone article and the details are mind boggling. Not just of the before and after but of the rape itself. It was horrifying. After the victim, Jackie, was raped she was able to locate her “closest” friends and tell them about the incident, which resulted in a decision I do not understand. One friend wanted to take her to the hospital immediately while the other two were more concerned about her reputation at the school. I’m sorry but those two kids were NOT your friend, Jackie. When your friends are more concerned about your reputation than your wellbeing, you need to take a good hard look at those relationship. I realize Jackie was in a horrible state but the friend who said she needed to go to the hospital should have put her foot down and taken her. According to the report her dress was drenched in blood and she needed to see a doctor.

I understand that life on a college campus can sometimes be difficult but what is more difficult–having people talk about you for a few weeks because you were raped and reported it or walking around on campus knowing that at some point you will run into your rapists, knowing what they did to you and that they are just living their lives like nothing happened?

I respect the school’s decision to shut down the fraternities and investigate but all of the evidence that was needed to prosecute these scumbags is gone. All that is left is eye witness accounts that aren’t really that reliable, especially after so much time has gone by. I worry about students on any college campus who are more focused on their reputations than justice when a crime is committed.

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post University of Virginia Suspends All Fraternities After Rape Allegations appeared first on Law Street.

Law Street’s top three stories of the week ranged from the truly outrageous, to the infuriating, to the utterly baffling. Anneliese Mahoney  brought us the number one most read article of the week about a Canadian couple who dotted all their insurance i’s and crossed all their doctor’s permission t’s and still were hit with a million-dollar hospital bill when they unexpectedly had their baby while on vacation in the U.S.; Mahoney also wrote about the startling  sexual assault allegations surrounding Bill Cosby and the rape culture in which we’re immersed; and writer Ashley Shaw told the tale of the very worst neighbor you can imagine–one whose dogs dogs killed the neighbor’s beagle so she decided to sue them. I told you it was utterly baffling. ICYMI, here is the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 Meet the World’s Most Expensive Baby

A Canadian couple decided to go on a nice, warm visit to Hawaii. Jennifer Huculak and her husband Darren Kimmel were three months away from the birth of their daughter when they came to the U.S. on vacation. Unfortunately, a few days after their arrival, Huculak went into labor and gave birth to a baby girl. Because their daughter was born premature, they racked up some expensive hospital bills. Well, actually, expensive is kind of an understatement. To be more precise, they are being charged $950,000 for the medical care they received. Read full article here.

#2 Bill Cosby Allegations: A Striking Example of Rape Culture

Bill Cosby has, to many, gained the sort of “elder statesman” distinction in the acting world. For all intents and purposes, things were going well for him this year. He signed up to do a new show on NBC and announced a Netflix standup special. Then a comedian named Hannibal Buress did a bit in which he accused Cosby of being a rapist. Read full article here.

#3 Woman Sues Neighbors After Her Own Pit Bulls Kill Their Beagle

I have a quiz for you (don’t worry, it’s only one question, it isn’t math, and it’s multiple choice): If your four pit bulls break through a fence and enter the neighbor’s yard, then kill Bailey the ten-year-old beagle that resides there, what do you do? a. Apologize. b. Offer to buy the neighbors a new dog. c. Both a and b. d. Sue the neighbors for $1 million. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

Bill Cosby has, to many, gained the sort of “elder statesman” distinction in the acting world. For all intents and purposes, things were going well for him this year. He signed up to do a new show on NBC and announced a Netflix standup special. Then a comedian named Hannibal Buress did a bit in which he accused Cosby of being a rapist.

Buress was of course not the first person to accuse Cosby of rape. In fact, many of his alleged victims had come forward over the years, starting roughly a decade ago. But because of Cosby’s celebrity status, the allegations had never really stuck. Buress’ point in the video is dead right–many people continue to defend Cosby because of his role in American consciousness as “America’s dad,” or just think that the many, many young women who have come forward with rape allegations are looking for their 15 minutes of fame. In fact, it took another man–Buress–repeating those allegations to even make it into national news.

That’s really just the tip of the iceberg. More and more women are coming forward with their stories–and they all sound pretty similar. Similar enough to make it clear that Cosby used the same M.O. with these women.

These women are finally widely getting support…mostly. Of course, this is America, so we still have a nicely cultivated culture of treating rape victims like shit. I found all of the tweets below by searching “Cosby” on Twitter. It only took me about five minutes. This is why women don’t go forward, and why it’s so essential to stand by the women who have. Because when you come forward you become a walking target for all of this.

Victim Blaming

Maybe women who don't want Bill Cosby's pudding pop in their vajayjays shouldn't be doing drugs naked in his hotel room. Just a thought.

— Todd Kincannon (@Todd__Kincannon) November 20, 2014

Mr. Kincannon, doing drugs does not mean you consent to sexual activity. Furthermore, there is significant evidence that Cosby roofied or drugged at least some of these women. A man who doesn’t want to type out the word “vagina” shouldn’t be commenting on matters that require maturity and thoughtfulness, anyway.

Accusations of fame-seeking

I don't believe Bill Cosby'd rape anyone. My hunch is these women are trying to link their names w/ a consistently successful entertainer.

— R. Deniston (@Obolerfan) November 20, 2014

Most of Bill Cosby's victims refuse to even go to the press, please tell me how all these women are just lying for fame?

— Kill Darren Wilson (@kim_tastiic) November 19, 2014

That’s why so many people have gotten famous through rape allegations. Really, it’s pretty much the way to get discovered now, along with America’s Got Talent and posting videos on YouTube. Never mind that some of these women–such as Janice Dickinson–are pretty well-known and wealthy in their own rights.

There have been a whole bunch of speculative pieces written about how we’ve all been able to ignore these rape allegations for so long. The most convincing argument I’ve heard is that Cosby isn’t the first powerful man, the first powerful cultural figure to face a case like this. Woody Allen and Jerry Sandusky are both good examples. People ignore the allegations out of a mixture of distrust of the victims and respect for the accused.

For those of you who still don’t believe that rape culture exists, well that’s it right there. Rape culture is a well-respected man being given a pass because it’s inconvenient and upsetting to take his 15-plus victims seriously.

Now, Netflix has postponed the standup special, NBC has cancelled the possible sitcom project, and TV Land has stopped showing reruns of the Cosby show. They probably shouldn’t be applauded too much–I highly doubt that any of the networks are doing this because they are convinced that Cosby is a rapist, but rather because they don’t want the bad publicity. And that’s one more good example of rape culture right there–when a woman comes forward with her story of being sexually assaulted, she’s accused of doing it for publicity’s sake; when networks pull the projects of rapists, they get applause.

Things are getting better in the United States. Our attitudes toward rape and sexual assault are changing, bit by incremental bit. But rape culture is still alive and well–just ask Bill Cosby.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Bill Cosby Allegations: A Striking Example of Rape Culture appeared first on Law Street.

There are few topics as loaded in the American consciousness right now as the crime of rape. The Department of Education launched a massive investigation into the way that universities and colleges handle rape allegations, and hashtags like #YesAllWomen and #BeenRapedNeverReported have led to raw, powerful discussions on social media. However, one of the most immediate issues when it comes to dealing with rape in this nation is the complicated way in which we prosecute it. The Washington State Supreme Court just made a ruling that sheds light into the difficulty that comes with trying a rape case.

There are obviously a lot of moving parts when it comes to rape prosecution — social pressures, lack of reporting, and institutionalized victim-blaming to name just a few. All of these are essential factors that affect every step of a rape prosecution, and that needs to be kept in mind. But on the most basic level, prosecuting rape is complicated because of one simple question that we still haven’t figured out: who needs to prove what?

Think of a murder case. The prosecution has to prove that the defendant murdered the victim. Because of the nature of that crime, there’s no paranoia about false accusations the way there is with a rape case. Very few people argue about what the victim was wearing, or whether they invited someone over, or whether they were drinking matter at all. There’s no claim that the victim didn’t make it clear enough that they didn’t want to be murdered. There’s no real consent argument to make, except for possibly in a doctor-assisted suicide case, but those are rare outliers, not a normal consideration. We as a people know that being murdered is horrible, and the person who commits the murder is in the wrong. In order to make sure that the right person receives justice,however, affirmative defenses do exist — the most well-known probably being self-defense or insanity. This is not to say that murder cases are straightforward, but rather that the idea of “murder” and how to deal with it in a court is significantly more understood and accepted.

Compare that to a rape case. Like I said, there are all the other issues to contend with first — lack of investigation, lack of reporting, intense cultural shame. For all of those reasons, and many others, the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network (RAINN) estimates that for every 100 rapes, only 46 are reported to the police, and only nine of those even get a day in court. Those abysmal statistics aside, when the case makes it to court there are even more compounded issues.

One of the big problems that we can’t seem to move past is the mere concept that rape can involve an act that in another context is not a crime. It’s different than other violent crimes in that way; no one can make that argument about murder or robbery. The inability to grasp that concept is what has led to national paranoia over false accusations and a perverted fascination about the actions of the victim.

And that brings us to the prosecution of rape — consent is so hard to define and prove that it makes even the ability to prosecute rape messy. A recent case in Washington highlights the issue. The State Supreme Court overturned a ruling that placed the burden on the defendant to prove consent in a rape case. This was a 1975 decision that made it so that the prosecution didn’t have to focus so much on proving there was a lack of consent, but rather the defendant had to show that there was consent. This protected the victim from unfair and inappropriate scrutiny. As Justice Susan Owens put it in her dissent:

In 1975, the legislature took an important step toward justice for rape victims when it modified the laws to focus on the conduct of the perpetrator and not the victim…. Not only does the majority’s decision invalidate years of work undertaken to properly refocus our rape law, but it also has serious implications for victims of an already underreported type of crime.

A move toward providing the most just outcomes whenever possible should be applauded. But within the context of how difficult it already is to prove a rape case and the horrible way our society usually deals with rape, it’s tough to imagine that this decision truly did that. There’s a lot that needs to happen to ensure that our justice system fairly deals with rape and sexual assault, and to be fair a lot of it, such as working to remove the stigma and societal judgment about rape, isn’t even really possible for the judiciary to do. That being said, this step backward in Washington has a lot of potential to be dangerous. There’s no perfect answer yet for how to best prosecute rape, but Washington’s step backward can’t be it.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Washington Courts Turn Back the Clock on Rape Prosecution appeared first on Law Street.

In the final week leading up to a big election there’s never any shortage of political news. Know what else there isn’t a shortage of? Exhaustion over political news. Last week at Law Street, though, our top three stories came from the world of crime. The Crime in America team produced the number one article of the week with the first-ever definitive coverage of the Killers of Craigslist; writer Anneliese Mahoney covered the disturbing case of California highway cops who routinely steal nude photos from detained women’s cell phones; and the third most popular article detailed Americans’ biggests fears — both warranted (identity theft) and not (mass shootings, which you are highly unlikely to ever experience firsthand). ICYMI, here is the best of the week from Law Street.

#1 Killers of Craigslist

Since the arrest in 2009 of Philip Markoff, aka the “Craigslist Killer,” the website has faced increased scrutiny by the media. Law Street decided to take a closer look at the site and its media coverage to see how dangerous Craigslist really is. We wanted to know: Was Markoff’s an isolated act, or an incident on a continuum? Our findings are noteworthy. This marks the first tabulation of all Craigslist murders since 2009. Law Street identified 58 murderers and 45 murder victims connected to Craigslist postings through last June. Read full article here.

#2 California Police Officers Found Stealing Suspects’ Nude Photos

Today’s “wow, people really suck” story comes straight to you from the California highways. Or, to be more specific, California’s Highway Police. Apparently, a few officers from Contra Costa County, California, have created a new, sick game to pass the time. They began accessing the cell phones of female suspects brought into custody, and then sending nude or semi-nude photos of these women to themselves. Allegedly, the pictures were then passed to the other officers playing the “game.” Read full article here.

#3 Just in Time for Halloween: What Are Americans’ Top Fears?

What scares you the most? That’s the question that Chapman University decided to ask America in a recently released study called the “Chapman Survey on American Fears.” In the study, researchers surveyed 1,500 Americans from different walks of life in order to create a strong representative sample. They split the types of fears into four categories: personal fears, crime, natural disasters, and fear factors. They were able to determine the most pressing concerns in each of the categories, as well as overall. Read full article here.

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post ICYMI: Best of the Week appeared first on Law Street.

The Iranian government executed a woman on Saturday for murdering a man who she said attempted to sexually assault her. After several delays of her execution and despite condemnation from human rights organizations, the Iranian government went forward with hanging Reyhaneh Jabbari.

Jabbari, 26, admitted in 2009 to killing 47-year-old Dr. Morteza Abdolali Sarbandi in self-defense, claiming that he tried to rape her. Sarbandi was killed in 2007, when Jabbari met with him on the pretense that she, an interior designer, would evaluate his office for a renovation, the New York Times reported.

Under Iranian law, Jabbari technically should have been in the clear for killing Sarbandi. As a Slate article explains, the Iranian death penalty doesn’t have to apply in a murder case if the murder was in retaliation to another crime punishable by death, such as rape. Jabbari maintained that she killed Sarbandi after he attempted to rape her. However, the judges are given very broad discretion in interpreting the facts of the case – so broad, in this case, that Jabbari was found guilty.

Beyond the fact that Jabbari’s is technically innocent even if she killed Sarbandi, that shouldn’t even matter considering the circumstances of her admission. Jabbari admitted to the murder “under duress possibly amounting to torture,” U.N. human rights investigator Ahmed Shaheed said in a press release, adding that acts of sexual violence should always be fought, no matter what. Shaheed said that if Jabbari was telling the truth, she was attacked by the Iranian justice system in addition to her assault:

If her allegations are true, Ms. Jabbari may have been doubly victimized; first by her attacker, and then by the judicial system, which is supposed to protect victims of intended and actual sexual and physical assault.

An online petition in March bore more than 240,000 signatures urging Iran not to execute Jabbari. The government then delayed the execution from April until this month. As the new date approached, supporters of Jabbari took to Facebook and Twitter to get attention to stop the execution. The day before the execution,  Amnesty International wrote that Jabbari’s side story wasn’t fairly judged. “Her claims do not appear to have ever been properly investigated,” Amnesty wrote in a blog post.

Iran has one of the highest execution rates in the world. According to an August United Nations report, the country executed at least 852 people, including at least eight who were under the age of 18 at the time of their crimes, during the period from June 2013 to June 2014. The report says Iranians can face the death penalty for “adultery, recidivist alcohol use, drug possession and trafficking” plus “enmity against God,” which is viewed by the Iranian government as when “a person brandishes or points a weapon at members of the public to kill, frighten and coerce them.”

All this might leave some wondering how hard it is not to get executed in Iran. In the larger scheme of things – for the Iranian justice system, that is – Jabbari is just another number.

—

Zaid Shoorbajee (@ZBajee)

Featured Image courtesy of [The Pondering Moose via Flickr]

Zaid Shoorbajee

Zaid Shoorbajee is a an undergraduate student at The George Washington University majoring in journalism and economics. He is from the Washington, D.C. area and likes reading and writing about international affairs, politics, business and technology (especially when they intersect). Contact Zaid at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Reyhaneh Jabbari: Another Victim of Iran’s Harsh Death Penalty appeared first on Law Street.

Since the arrest in 2009 of Philip Markoff, aka the “Craigslist Killer,” the website has faced increased scrutiny by the media. Law Street decided to take a closer look at the site and its media coverage to see how dangerous Craigslist really is. We wanted to know: Was Markoff’s an isolated act, or an incident on a continuum? Our findings are noteworthy. This marks the first tabulation of all Craigslist murder trials and convictions from 2009 through June 2014. Law Street identified 58 murderers and 45 murder victims connected to Craigslist postings through last June. Twenty-two murder cases are still pending. The oldest pending case dates to 2012, and eight are from 2014, indications that the killings continue. Craigslist did not reply to multiple inquiries.

Click here to read the Killers of Craigslist in single-page format.

[SlideDeck2 id=26861 ress=1 proportional=false]

—

Research and Analysis by Law Street’s Crime in America team: Lexine DeLuca, Jake Ephros, Chelsey Goff, Anneliese Mahoney, Marisa Mostek, Kevin Rizzo, Nicole Roberts, and Trevor Smith.

Featured image courtesy of [Janine via Flickr]

Chelsey D. Goff

Chelsey D. Goff was formerly Chief People Officer at Law Street. She is a Granite State Native who holds a Master of Public Policy in Urban Policy from the George Washington University. She’s passionate about social justice issues, politics — especially those in First in the Nation New Hampshire — and all things Bravo. Contact Chelsey at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Killers of Craigslist appeared first on Law Street.

On September 13 2014, 18-year-old University of Virginia student Hannah Graham went missing, and recently authorities arrested and charged 32-year-old Jesse L. Matthew Jr. in relation to the incident. His current charge is described as abduction with intent to defile in the case of Graham. (Intent to defile meaning he intended to sexually assault the victim.) Matthew is currently being held without bond and is scheduled for a hearing in early December. Unfortunately, after two weeks of searching, Graham has still not been found, but authorities are doing all they can to locate her.

This case is a tragedy and my heart goes out to Graham’s family and friends. One of the hardest things to understand in this case is recently surfaced reports alleging that Matthew has a history of sexual assault accusations, none of which ended in conviction. According to The Washington Post,

The alleged assaults occurred within an 11-month span from 2002 to 2003 as Jesse L. “LJ” Matthew Jr. moved from Liberty University in Lynchburg to Christopher Newport University in Newport News. Police investigated each report, but neither resulted in a criminal case, according to the Lynchburg prosecutor and a review of online court records in Newport News.

If the allegations of these cases from over a decade ago are true, and with minimal knowledge of the reasoning surrounding the dropped charges, it is hard not to wonder why Matthew got away with such crimes not once, but twice before harming another innocent young girl? These alleged incidents occurred while Matthew was a student attending university, and although legislation and public discourse surrounding campus sexual assault has been under the miscroscope in recent months, I cannot help but wonder how we can act to prevent this loophole?

This case is reminiscent of another sexual assault case with similar characteristics.  In 1996 Amie Zyla, an 8-year-old girl, was sexually molested and victimized by family friend Joshua Wade who was 14 years old at the time. Wade was adjudicated for a misdemeanor in juvenile court. Nine years later, Wade was convicted and sentenced to 25 years in prison for a series of sexual molestation cases involving the abuse of young children. This case caused huge controversy, and was the driving force behind expansions in the definition of sexual assault.

These two cases indicate the importance of people’s histories and backgrounds. We all make mistakes, and sometimes it is wrong for our privacy to be intruded upon, but with something like sexual assault cases — regardless of whether there has been a conviction — something about this needs to be mentioned. It doesn’t take a lot of common sense to understand how hard it can be to convict a perpetrator of sexual assault. There is often a lack of witnesses on top of fear and upset from the victim; with a case dependent on DNA testing, the odds are very slim. Just because cases may not be tried in court — like Matthew’s two alleged college incidents — it does not mean that they didn’t happen and are not warning signs for things to come.

The media has spent its energy publicizing Matthew’s past. This runs a risk of setting off stricter registration laws for sexual offenders, which have proven to do more harm than good. By broadcasting the background of a perpetrator who was in society seemingly living normally until his arrest for the disappearance of a young girl, I question whether the media is supporting the need to find Graham and bring her home safely, or whether it is striking the ‘stranger danger’ rape myth back into society?

Hannah Kaye

Hannah Kaye is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Case of Hannah Graham and the Myth of Stranger Danger appeared first on Law Street.

Hey folks! How many of you are big video game players?

Probably a decent number of you. I, personally, don’t really get the whole video game thing, mainly because I didn’t grow up with them. My parents had really strong opinions about what kinds of activities made children’s “brains melt out of their ears.” Melodramatic, Mom.

But! I’m in the minority here. You guys totally like to relax with a cold beer and a few hours of Madden, am I right?

Yeah I am.

So! If you know anything about video games, you probably — hopefully — know about how insanely sexist the industry is. Really, it’s depressing.

Only about 21 percent of video game developers are women. Giant Bomb, the largest online video game database, exclusively employs white, straight men. And the characters in video games? They’re rarely, if ever, women — and when they are, they tend to be hypersexualized sidekicks with insane amounts of T&A.

On every level, from who designs the video games, to who distributes them, to who’s featured in them, the video game world sends one message loud and clear.

This is a place for men.

But the thing is, it’s not. Forty-eight percent of video game players are women. That’s nearly half. The world of video games is absolutely a place where women are hanging out, passing time, and spending money. Yet they’re almost unilaterally shut out of every aspect of the gaming world that reaches beyond their personal playing console.

Enter women like Anita Sarkeesian and Brianna Wu. A feminist cultural critic and a video game developer, respectively, these women are two among a community of feminist gaming critics. They speak out against the sexism and misogyny that runs rampant in the video game industry, and on Wu’s part, she develops games that feature corporeally realistic and empowered female characters.

As a result, they both receive violent, sexualized death threats almost constantly. Because obviously, advocating for the video game industry not to be a weird club of circle-jerking white dudes is something that merits murder, right?

Apparently so. This week, those depressingly routine threats of violence reached such a fever pitch that Sarkeesian was forced to cancel a speaking engagement at Utah State University, and Wu was driven from her personal home.

What happened, exactly? We’ll start with Sarkeesian. She was scheduled to give a speech at Utah State University on Tuesday, but the day before, university administrators received an email threatening that a gun massacre would happen if they allowed the event to go on.

Now, keep in mind that bomb threats are par for the course when it comes to Sarkeesian’s speaking engagements. So she’s used to fearing for her life every time she steps out in public, as are the folks who choose to book her to speak at their establishments.

But this time was different. The dude who made this threat sent it out under a pseudonym referencing Marc Lépine, the Montréal shooter who killed 14 women and himself back in 1989. His email reads like something straight out of Elliot Rodger’s diary. And, most importantly, because of the concealed-carry laws in Utah, the folks at USU refused to prevent anyone from bringing a firearm into the event.

So, faced with the prospect of giving a speech to a crowded room full of concealed guns — one of which might be attached to the deranged misogynist who threatened to make sure that all the life-ruining feminists on campus were killed (he literally said that) — Sarkeesian made the obvious decision.

She canceled the event. The lack of security USU was offering left her with no other real choices.

She did.

And this Marc Lépine character isn’t alone. He’s part of a vast community called #GamerGate, which is essentially an online club of gamer boys who haven’t learned yet that girls don’t have cooties. But they aren’t little boys; they’re grown-ass men. And that means that they aren’t just taunting the girls on the playground; they’re threatening to rape and murder all the women in the gaming community who dare open their mouths.

This week, #GamerGate didn’t stop with Sarkeesian. They also attacked feminist game developer Brianna Wu. Frustrated by the boys’ club’s temper tantrums, Wu tweeted a meme poking fun at them.

This was just sent to me, a new meme called Oppressed Gamergater. Love it. http://t.co/Sp9sQPgLxQ pic.twitter.com/6UEWRgPGcn

— Imperator Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) October 9, 2014

The response?

The police just came by. Husband and I are going somewhere safe. Remember, #gamergate isn't about attacking women. pic.twitter.com/ZU6oEVxMGL

— Imperator Brianna Wu (@Spacekatgal) October 11, 2014

#GamerGate started battering Wu with crazy-train subtweets, threatening to anally rape her until she bled, castrate her husband and choke her to death with his severed penis, and murder all of her future children. Because they were going to grow up to be feminists anyway, so clearly that means they should die, right?

After the threatening Twitter creeps revealed her personal address, Wu was forced to leave her home.

Folks, this shit is batshit insane. The gaming world isn’t the only place where women — and feminist women, specifically — are targeted with a violence and vitriol that’s truly disturbing. Sexism is rampant in the tech industry in general. Just take a look at the wildly sexist (albeit nonviolent) comment Microsoft’s CEO made last week about closing the income gap.

But this week’s events have put the gaming community’s particular brand of misogyny in the spotlight. It’s seriously time this crap stopped.

The men of #GamerGate are threatening to kill women like Sarkeesian and Wu simply because they dare to speak and to work within their universe. They play video games. They make video games. They ask that video game companies hire more female developers and design games with more realistic and empowered female characters.

These are reasonable, nonviolent, nonthreatening requests. They’re only asking for women to be more positively represented in the gaming world.

And yet, somehow, that’s a goal that merits a sexually violent, vengeful death.

This shit’s unacceptable. People of the world — especially you, men of #GamerGate — stop treating the women in your worlds with violence and aggression. We have every right to be here and to demand respect. And if you can’t handle that, we’re kindly asking you to GTFO.

Hannah R. Winsten

Hannah R. Winsten is a freelance copywriter, marketing consultant, and blogger living in New York’s sixth borough. She hates tweeting but does it anyway. She aspires to be the next Rachel Maddow. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post #GamerGate Takes Misogyny to a Whole New Level appeared first on Law Street.

The grunge-pop diva we all know and love (or love to hate), Kesha, filed a lawsuit this week against her long-time producer claiming that he sexually and emotionally abused her for years. The producer, Lukasz Gottwald — “Dr. Luke” — was the one who discovered her at age 17 and convinced her to drop out of high school to pursue a career in music.

According to Kesha, the abuse started early and for the last ten years has kept her from moving to a different label, having control over her own music, and caused her to develop an eating disorder and subsequently enter rehab. She cites at least one count of rape following the consumption of a date rape drug, and alleges that Gottwald sexually assaulted her multiple times while forcing her to drink alcohol and take drugs. Gottwald has since filed an opposing suit, claiming defamation and breach of contract.

This is not the first time Kesha and Gottwald have been the subject of controversy. In 2013, around the time Kesha’s documentary “My Crazy Beautiful Life”  came out, fans started a petition to release Kesha from Gottwald’s control. The petition claims that  “Dr. Luke is controlling Ke$ha like a puppet, feeding her what she doesn’t want, and her creativity is dwindling and affected negativity (sic)” and that Kesha had little to no creative control over her most recent album.

In the short time since the lawsuits became public, skeptics have asked why Kesha waited so long to complain, or if she is just doing this to get out of her contract, and even saying she is lying because how can a sex symbol accuse someone of sexual assault?

These negative allegations aside, the majority of Kesha fans have shouted their support for the singer’s case, using the Twitter hashtag #StayStrongKesha.

An argument could be made for the idea that Kesha is making it all up to get out of her contract, but I just don’t think this is the case here. Her complaint has pages and pages filled with detailed and disturbing accounts of assault that span years. Accusing someone of sexual assault and rape are serious allegations that are not taken lightly, and if the victim is found to be lying the consequences are severe. Kesha is a smart woman, and by many accounts a near genius who was bound for lofty academic achievement before joining the music industry. Her intelligence does not protect her from being taken advantage of, since even the smartest men and women can be overwhelmed when in unfamiliar territory. It seems Kesha’s “mentor” knew this.

Saying that Kesha is lying because of her style, her sex symbol status, or her music is an argument that has no basis in logic. It stems from the idea that because someone dresses a certain way, or shares their sexuality more than others, they can’t cry “rape” when sexual predators target them.

It will be interesting to see how this case plays out, but Kesha and Gottwald obviously have some sort of toxic relationship that needs to end. Regardless of whether her claims are true or not, they need to be taken seriously. It doesn’t matter how famous a person is, or how long they waited to speak up; sexual assault is never okay and victims of it should be supported. Reacting negatively to cases like this discourages people in similar situations from coming forward, and encourages a society in which rape is covered up. Unfortunately, due to her fame and Gottwald’s counter case, Kesha’s fight has just begun.

Both Kesha’s lawsuit and Gottwald’s counter suit can be found here.

—

Morgan McMurray (@mcflurrybatman) is a freelance copywriter and blogger based in Savannah, Georgia. She spends her time writing, reading, and attempting to dance gracefully. She has also been known to binge-watch Netflix while knitting scarves.

Featured image courtesy of [rocor via Flickr]

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Kesha Lawsuit: Victim Of Assault Or A Bad Contract? appeared first on Law Street.

A few weeks ago the White House began what it calls the It’s On Us campaign to end campus sexual assault. This campaign is a direct result of last April’s Title IX developments to try and change the way we look at consent and rape. As Vice President Joe Biden so sagely put it: “Violence against women is not a women’s issue alone, it’s a men’s issue.”

Last week the It’s On Us campaign continued its onslaught on campus sexual violence by releasing guidance to draft sexual assault guidelines, handle reports of assault, promote prevention, and outline exactly what “consent” means.

It is a little early to tell whether or not these guidelines and the new focus on changing college rape culture will have a noticeable effect, but since every education institution in the U.S. is legally obligated to follow Title IX policies, I’d say change is in the air.

This is only the beginning, though. While sexual assault on college campuses is more common and also more ignored than elsewhere in society, it is by no means the only place rape culture runs rampant.

But what exactly is rape culture? It’s where rape is widely recognized and accepted as a normal part of society. Where, instead of trying to prevent rape, victims are blamed. Rape, unfortunately, has become normalized in American society. The word “rape” can be heard to describe anything but the act itself, and there has been more than one occurrence of assault recorded and uploaded to the internet. As if showing themselves raping someone will give the uploader fame.

No, college is definitely not the only place rape culture needs to disappear. It is also not the only place that things like the Title IX developments may not be taken seriously.

By the time kids get to college, they have had at least seventeen years of rape culture exposure. They grew up in gender roles that encouraged male dominance and female submissiveness. They grew up being told that a girl who dresses in a short dress is “slutty” or “asking for it.” They watched movies like The Hangover where being roofied was turned into a comedy. When they finally set foot on a college campus for the first time, they had years of societal expectations ingrained into their heads.

Now, while many college students are eager to have their minds opened and changed by their chosen institution, not all are willing to let go of the beliefs they got from their parents and relatives. “It’s On Us” will no doubt have some positive effects on the number of sexual assault cases on campuses, and it is a sure sign that rape culture can be changed, but it is just one of the steps that needs to be taken.

It should also be noted that, along with rape culture existing outside the college campus, women are by no means the only ones who suffer sexual assaults. It is a truth that is not widely acknowledged that men get raped too. But, as I said before, men are brought up to be dominant and therefore are too afraid to admit a woman assaulted them. When we, in the words of Emma Watson, “see gender as a spectrum, rather than two sets of opposing ideals,” assault initiated by both genders, and the rape culture in which those assaults are normalized, will end.

If you would like more information on Title IX and its guidelines, go here.

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Rape Culture Can (And Must) Be Changed appeared first on Law Street.

So this week in controversial t-shirt news, a market in the Philippines received a bit of backlash via Twitter over a top encouraging rape culture. Supermall, the major department store chain with several locations throughout the Philippines and China, promoted the offending item featuring the message “It’s not rape, it’s a snuggle with a struggle.”

In this case, I can’t really give Supermalls the benefit of the doubt. What’s even more bizarre about the product is that it was apparently featured in the little boys section of the store because you might as well get them to start disrespecting women as early as possible. There’s no way this could have been an oversight. Although I don’t know how aware Asian culture is regarding the topic of rape, the only excuse that I could begin to provide for Supermalls is that perhaps something got lost in translation. The word “rape” may not translate the same from Tagalog or Mandarin but I can’t see how “struggle” could mean anything other than something that implies difficulty, which is not a word that anyone would want to use to describe sexual encounters.

‘It’s not rape – it’s a snuggle with a struggle’: Store withdraws T-shirt after complaints http://t.co/jCnIn3jZt3 pic.twitter.com/gLMiAepsmI

— Daily Mirror (@DailyMirror) September 24, 2014

In response to all the Twitter backlash, Supermalls released the following statement:

Update on t-shirt statement. pic.twitter.com/cDTPamPC1e

— SM Supermalls (@smsupermalls) September 23, 2014

Why thank you, Supermalls as long as you’re sorry it makes it okay right?

What’s even more interesting is that Supermalls’ Twitter banner features a picture of a happy Filipino family with the statement “Everything’s Here for the Love of Lolo (Grandpa) and Lola (Grandma).” Because I’m sure wearing a shirt that promotes rape culture would make Lolo and Lola extremely proud.

Supermalls also apparently has its own foundation in which they “contribute to the welfare and well being of various communities,” according to its website.

While I’m not sure exactly how such a disturbing t-shirt came to be, the issue behind it only goes to further prove that many countries, including the United States, have a long way to go to erase the mindset of rape culture. The U.S. could learn from this incident in the Philippines and work toward spreading awareness about rape prevention while enacting laws that prevent such vile messages from being featured on advertisements and products.

Katherine Fabian

Katherine Fabian is a recent graduate of Fordham University’s College at Lincoln Center. She is a freelance writer and yoga teacher who hopes to one day practice fashion law and defend the intellectual property rights of designers. Contact Katherine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Controversial T-Shirt News: Store Sells Shirt Downplaying Rape appeared first on Law Street.

Model Mayhem is an online modeling site used by aspiring models to network, find jobs, and share photographs. It was just ruled that a lawsuit against it and its parent company, Internet Brands, Inc, will be allowed to move forward, after a young woman, Jane Doe, sued the site for negligence.

Jane Doe had been using Model Mayhem for its intended purpose — networking — when she was contacted to travel to Florida for an “audition.” There she met Lavont Flanders Jr. and Emerson Callum who drugged her, raped her, filmed the attack, and put it online, marketing it as “pornography.” Their plan was intrinsically tied to the ability to be able to use Model Mayhem to contact the aspiring models.

Flanders and Callum have since been convicted for their horrendous crimes in Florida court. Both of Miami, they stood trial in 2012. They were each found guilty of a hefty 12 consecutive life sentences for sex trafficking. Five of the victims were involved in Flanders and Callums’ trials, but it’s not clear whether the Jane Doe from the current suit was one of them.

According to Jane Doe’s suit, the site knew about Flander and Callums’ actions since 2010, but failed to disclose or provide any kind of warning to its users. The parent company, Internet Brands Inc, had sued the developers of Model Mayhem for failing to disclose that Flanders and Callums’ actions may lead to civil suits, something Internet Brands, Inc. claims should have been told to them when they purchased Model Mayhem in 2008.

What’s disturbing about that first suit is that Jane Doe was apprehended, sexually assaulted, and filmed in 2011. Which means that the website where her assailants found her knew that there was potential for something like this to happen for months before she was ever contacted. That’s not just terrifying — it’s certainly grounds for Jane Doe to argue negligence. And in the civil suit she filed against Internet Brands, Inc., that’s exactly what she argued.

She filed the suit originally in California, and the suit was dismissed under the Communications Decency Act, which was passed in the late 90s in an attempt to regulate the spread of internet-based pornography. On the most basic level, it attempts to make sure that children don’t see explicit content on the internet by regulating the ways in which sites are allowed to disseminate that kind of content. More relevantly to this case though, is Section 230, which states,

No provider or user of an interactive computer service shall be treated as the publisher or speaker of any information provided by another information content provider.

In lay terms, what that essentially means is that you can’t be sued if someone uses your website to, for example, distribute pornography.

This was the law that the original court used to overturn Jane Doe’s case. However, in an appeals ruling released this week, the decision was overturned. Judge Richard Clifton, of the Ninth Circuit, decided that Section 230 did not apply. He was part of a three-judge appellate court that decided the case can proceed. Clifton wrote that Jane Doe’s case isn’t barred under the act because,

Jane Doe’s claim is different, however. She does not seek to hold Internet Brands liable as a ‘publisher or speaker’ of content posted on the Model Mayhem website, or for Internet Brands’ failure to remove content posted on the website. Flanders and Callum are not alleged to have posted anything themselves.

The case will move forward, and with good reason. What Internet Brands Inc, did was reprehensible, and Jane Doe paid the price for its mistake. The company deserves to be held accountable, and this case is certain to make waves as it is indeed allowed to move forward.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Chris Jagers via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Case Against Online Modeling Site Involved in Rape to Move Forward appeared first on Law Street.

Hey y’all!

This is going to be a fun one!

Some of y’all know a while ago I was writing a personal blog, stumbled across Law Street, and was fired up by one of the contributors, Hannah Winsten. I wrote a rebuttal and the rest is history. I’ve been writing for Law Street for a few months now and have had the greatest pleasure in doing so, the team rocks! But in the back of my mind I always wondered when I would be able to have another encounter with Hannah. I like to think of her as the antithesis of me, she stands for everything that I don’t believe in, but in a good way!

The day has finally come. Ladies and gentlemen, Hannah is back and she has fired me up!

Hannah wrote a piece this week entitled, “LADIES: Vote Republican and You’ll Get the D” and I thought this will be a fun one. Boy was I right! I love how she starts right off with a sarcastic tone, throwing in those traditional pop culture references before pulling out the big words like ‘racist,’ ‘sexist,’ ‘homophobic’ and ‘Republican.’

First, she certainly did get it right that President Obama is getting close to being a lame duck, actually at this point he’s checked out and moved on to retirement on the golf course while still in the White House. Things haven’t gone the way he planned and homeboy has chunked deuce on the country, as pointed out by fellow Law Street writer Katherine Fabian here.

Who isn’t ready for the 2016 elections? I know I am!

Here we go again with Hannah only selecting bits and pieces of a report, only outlining what is beneficial and relevant to how she thinks and not the whole story. Yes, Politico reported a survey that states 49 percent of single women hold a negative view of the Republican Party, but it also says that 39 percent view Democrats unfavorably. If you go deeper into the article you also see that 48 percent of married women prefer a Republican to a Democrat. It isn’t a very positive article for Republicans but at least it is the truth and they are trying to do something about it.

Yes, the Republican Party has been perceived as the “good ole boys” party and women were neglected in some respects. But there are still plenty of Republican women in the country and I’m sorry but the idea that Republicans support rape and domestic violence is just vile. Does Hannah see all Republicans as toothless, alcoholic, wife-beating-if-they-step-out-of-the-kitchen inbreds? Referring to conservatives as ‘conserva-turds’ is almost as ridiculous as your girl, DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz, making the comment that “What Republican tea party extremists like Scott Walker are doing is they are grabbing us by the hair and pulling us back.” Maybe you and Debbie get together in the last few days and brainstormed creative ways of calling the Republican Party abusive? Even people in the Democratic Party are distancing themselves from that foolish woman and her hideous remarks.

Nowhere in any Republican initiative or in that specific poll does it say that Republicans are planning to tell anyone that they are wrong. Nowhere. The report says that it is a “lack of understanding” between women and Republicans that “closes many minds to Republican policy solutions.” But let’s be honest, we don’t need a poll to tell us that there is a lack of understanding between the American people and politics. Not many in my generation or in younger generations take the time to understand politics, they just go with what they hear on television and we both know that is not an accurate depiction of politics at its core.

Hannah claims that Republicans will basically shake their fingers at all women, tell them they are wrong, and expect them to go out and vote for the GOP. What exactly are you reading that says any of that? Oh right, it is all based on opinion, not fact. Let’s go back to the Politico article where it states that the group that took the poll suggests “Republicans deal honestly with any disagreement on abortion, and then move to other issues.” Again, the report suggests this for Republicans. On the upside, there have been several Republicans who have come out in support of over-the-counter birth control, and many conservatives in general are Pro-Choice. Yes, Republicans should deal with the abortion topic with real facts, solutions, ideas, and then move on. Unlike Democrats who are still ignoring the facts of the IRS scandal, the Benghazi issue, ISIS, and most importantly Obamacare.

R.R. Reno made valid points in his opinion piece on the dilemma facing social conservatives, but my dear Hannah took what she wanted and neglected the rest. She assumes that this piece is to attack single women, assuming that they live with 12 cats and are terrified that they will end up alone so they recognize the strengths of getting a hand out when they are older and thus support the Democratic Party. What Reno was doing was quoting a statistic about marriage and vulnerability and then putting his two cents in on why McKinsey, a fictional character, may feel judged when someone “opposes gay marriage, because she intuitively senses that being pro-traditional marriage involves asserting male-female marriage as the norm — and therefore that her life isn’t on the right path.”

That is a valid argument and a valid way of thinking. I know that I was raised to believe that the order of life is to graduate high school, go to college, get a job, get married and have kids all under the age of 30. Guess what? I’m 29, I have two degrees (working on a third), and two jobs, but I am not married or have kids and it is a scary idea sometimes. Our parents’ traditional ways were engraved in our minds as young children, but the path our parents and older generations took is not what our generation wants to take. It will take time, but not everyone feels supported in their ventures because we aren’t doing what we were “supposed” to do. I’m glad I messed up and took a different path. I’m a better person for it. Reno was simply putting those ideals in a simple statement and showing that McKinsey chose to reject the norm so that she could feel accepted in her choices, and nothing is wrong with that.

I hate to break it to you, Hannah, but if you think women are voting Democrat because they “want to have control over their own bodies, their own reproductive systems, and their own lives. They want to be able to support ourselves. They want to lead lives that aren’t wracked with violence,” then you should probably vote for the unrepresented party. Democrats are taking away more of your rights than Republicans. Remember that tiny thing called Obamacare? Yeah, do some research and you will find there are more restrictions than advantages. You want to live your own life without someone dictating what you can and can’t do? Should probably take another look at the Democratic Party and its belief in big government, controlling every aspect of our lives and making people believe that they are entitled to handouts instead of working hard for what they have in life. Democrats would rather rich people do the work and hand the benefits to the less fortunate and lazy. Democrats believe in helping everyone but also in accruing more debt — that doesn’t help the economy, it hurts it.

At least Republicans are trying to fix their issues, listen to the people, and change (slowly) with the times more so than Democrats. Not to mention they are taking responsibility for their errors.

If you think Hillary is going to be in the White House in 2016 you’ve got another thing coming. The same “what difference does it make?” Hillary who was so flustered and frustrated about being questioned on the topic of Benghazi that she lost her cool? The same Hillary Clinton who admitted to leaving the White House with her husband President Bill Clinton, personally $10 million in debt? I’m not sure that is someone I would want in the oval office. Let’s be truly honest. We all know that while President Clinton was busy getting blow jobs in the Oval Office Hillary was really running the country. So she’s been president, just behind the scenes, and we don’t need her again.

I’ve said this before, everyone is entitled to their own opinion but the moment that opinion turns into something disrespectful I have an issue with it. The holier than thou, self-righteous, talking down to anyone who doesn’t agree with you tone is not cool. I enjoy Hannah’s quick wit and sarcasm but sometimes she crosses the line. Republicans are people too and in most cases highly educated people who just don’t share your views. Ease up on the conservative detest because you are simply putting yourself in the category of abuse that you talk so much about hating.

—

Allison Dawson (@AllyD528) Born in Germany, raised in Mississippi and Texas. Graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University. Currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative.

Featured image courtesy of [Joe Wolf via Flickr]

Allison Dawson

Allison Dawson was born in Germany and raised in Mississippi and Texas. A graduate of Texas Tech University and Arizona State University, she’s currently dedicating her life to studying for the LSAT. Twitter junkie. Conservative. Get in touch with Allison at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Response: Let’s Stop with the Republican Bashing appeared first on Law Street.

I was recently married, and my husband is in the armed services. While military life isn’t quite what Army Wives would have you believe, there are definitely some aspects I have had to get used to. One of these is the dress code. Recently I went to the PX (think a T.J. Maxx with Wal-Mart prices) on our new base, and encountered a woman being turned away from the door because her midriff was showing. When I say “showing” I mean her tank top had ridden up about two inches. She did not look inappropriately dressed at all — clearly she had just thrown on her tank and jean shorts to do some shopping — yet she was being told she was in violation of the rules.

This was not the first time I had come into contact with strict military clothing restrictions. While my then-fiance was still stationed in Hawaii, I flew there so we could get married and honeymoon on the islands. While there, I ended up — apparently — being in violation of the dress code not once, but twice.

The first time happened shortly after the wedding, when my husband, some friends, and I went to a bar on the Naval base. It was country-themed, with a huge floor for line dancing, so I dressed accordingly: high-waisted skater skirt, polka-dotted crop top, Keds, and bandana headband. When showing our IDs to the bouncer, he stopped me and said, “Ma’am, you’re going to have to pull your shirt down or your skirt up.”

Now, this was the first time I had had any exposure to the dress code. My husband, not being known to wear crop tops himself, had not yet told me about it. I was understandably confused; barely an inch of my lower rib cage was showing, and my skirt was not short by any standard. Not wanting to cause a scene, I pulled down my shirt and was let in.

My second violation was pointed out when we went to the on-base golf course. I had on pastel shorts from the Gap and a white tank top. Not a spaghetti-strap tank, mind you (which would not have been a violation anyway), but a thick-strapped, loose fitting, high-neckline shirt. The man checking people in took my husband’s ID, wrote us down to tee off, then looked at me and said: “Ma’am, that type of shirt is not allowed here.”

I believe my jaw might have involuntarily dropped open. I looked down at my shirt and back up at him, saying “Tank tops? Or white shirts?”

Not amused by my sarcasm, he informed me that tank tops were not allowed and that to be let on the course I would have to buy a shirt in their shop or go home and change. Excuse me, sir, if I don’t want to buy a $50 Puma polo just to play golf. Needless to say, we did not play golf that day.

My point with sharing these examples is not to say that the military needs to take away its dress code. I understand that there is a necessity for uniformity: it makes things easier to regulate, tampers jealousy, and creates a global standard for all active military and their families. Women are not the only ones who have regulations. Men most certainly cannot be found in cropped off short-shorts. My point is that uniformity is not, truly, the only reason women have their clothing choices regulated.

Personally, I have no problem with the way other people dress. They’re expressing their individual style, wearing what they find comfortable, or dressing up for a special occasion (like going to a country bar). I would never call a woman “trashy” for wearing a tight-fitting dress or 6-inch heels, and I certainly wouldn’t say that lewd behavior toward a woman dressed that way is justified. Believe it or not, women DO NOT dress the way they do for the benefit of men or other women. 

When an organization’s dress code seeks to put a stop to those “trashy” fashion trends, they are encouraging uniformity, yes, but they are also saying that a woman showing her midriff, or her shoulders, is inviting inappropriate attention. That somehow the way she dresses makes it her fault men sexually harass her.

Let me explain. The US military continues to have a terrifyingly high number of sexual assault cases each year, yet thousands more go unreported. They are not, by any means, the only organization that has the same problem. This is a huge issue, and one that will not be solved easily because victims are encouraged to keep their assaults quiet. Dress codes like the one the military has in place are there not just for uniformity, but to discourage sexual assault.

If this doesn’t seem ridiculous to you, let me put it another way. In an episode of How I Met Your Mother, Marshall seduces Lily by showing her his calves. Take a look at this quick clip from the episode:

The scene is hilarious because a woman put into a sexual frenzy by the sight of a man’s legs seems ludicrous. Yet, when a woman goes to report a rape, one of the questions she is asked is “What were you wearing?” As if the sight of her bare shoulders caused a man to force himself on her. Telling women what they can and cannot wear to discourage sexual assault is telling them that, somehow, it is their fault when it happens.

Let’s be clear: WHAT SOMEONE IS WEARING DOES NOT JUSTIFY NOR CAUSE SEXUAL ASSAULT.

So, do I think the military and other organizations with similar dress regulations need to take those regulations away? No. Like I said before, I get why they’re there. What I am saying is the reasons behind those dress codes need to change. Instead of encouraging women to cover up to prevent rape, let’s encourage men to be respectful. Instead of saying “cover your midriff” let’s say “don’t catcall someone on the street.” Only when we acknowledge the problem can we change the perspective.

—

Morgan McMurray (@mcflurrybatman) is a freelance copywriter and blogger based in Savannah, Georgia. She spends her time writing, reading, and attempting to dance gracefully. She has also been known to binge-watch Netflix while knitting scarves.

 Featured image courtesy of [Florian Ramel via Flickr]

Morgan McMurray

Morgan McMurray is an editor and gender equality blogger based in Seattle, Washington. A 2013 graduate of Iowa State University, she has a Bachelor of Arts in English, Journalism, and International Studies. She spends her free time writing, reading, teaching dance classes, and binge-watching Netflix. Contact Morgan at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Uniformity Isn’t the Only Reason Organizations Enforce Dress Codes appeared first on Law Street.

The concept behind sex offender lists is good–we want the public to have access to the names and locations of predators. But as recent reports detail, the concept doesn’t always match up with reality. And while the idea of sex offender lists is to protect the people, sometimes they create more harm than good. Furthermore the idea of sex offender lists in some ways violates one of the moral tenants of our justice system–the idea that rehabilitation is possible.

One of the biggest issues with sex offender registries is that they are not consistent from state-to-state. All of them contain the obvious crimes–rape, pedophilia, and the like, but laws differ when it comes to other crimes that fall into more gray areas. For example, over half the states have laws that allow teenagers to be put on sex offender registries if they have consensual sex with another teenager.

Statutory rape laws, when applied to teenagers, operate on sliding scales. Each state has slightly different laws, but they all operate under the same principle: there is leeway for teenagers of the same age who have sex, but as they get further apart in age, the legality vanishes. Here’s an example: in my home state of Connecticut, it would be legal for two sixteen-year-olds to engage in sexual intercourse. It would be illegal for a 14-year-old and a 17-year-old to do the same.

Of course, the argument can be made that those three years do mark important differences in maturity. That’s fair, and I’m not attempting to say that there aren’t many cases in which abuse does occur. These laws do protect that from happening, and even if just one victim is saved, the laws are doing their jobs. But, violating these laws could land that 17-year-old on the sex offender registry, and that’s where I see a problem. A 17-year-old who has sex with a 14-year-old made a bad choice, and broke the law, but he or she does not necessarily deserve to pay that price for the rest of their life.

That exact scenario has happened before– this week Slate published the story of a man named Virgil McCranie who slept with his 14-year-old girlfriend Misty shortly after turning 18. He has since married Misty and started a family with her, but he had had to register as a sex offender to avoid jail time. Because of the laws in his state, he can’t attend his kids’ sports games or dance recitals. He’s lost jobs, money, and opportunities. That doesn’t really seem like justice–it seems like unnecessary punishment.

Consensual sex between teenagers isn’t the only crime that can land you on that list–urinating in public can in certain states. Again, that’s a crime, but the question I want to pose here is, does the punishment match the crime? I’m not so sure.

Inconsistency isn’t the only problem with sex offender lists. They also have the potential to be outdated and inaccurate. Recently it was discovered in Vermont that over 10% of the entries on their sex offender registries were inaccurate in some way. That’s hugely problematic–especially when the presence of a name on a sex offender registry can so seriously affect someone’s life when it comes to job opportunities, purchasing houses, and being a part of the community.

There’s also the issue of how sex offender registries fit into the idea of our justice system. In some ways, our justice system is centered on rehabilitation. Putting people on “lists” to warn the public around them directly contradicts the goal of rehabilitation. Criminal records are of course always affect an individual’s job prospects. But the voyeuristic nature of the sex offender lists make them even more difficult to overcome. As one mother of a young man on a list pointed out:

Several years ago, my son made some really bad choices. He was 22. The girl was 16. He would be placed on the sex offender registry for the rest of his life. He would never be able to serve his time and move on with his life, like any other offender.

She’s right–this can really ruin an offenders life, and not always deservedly so. The blanket treatment that occurs with sex offender registries is problematic–cases deserve to be reviewed on an ad hoc basis. Recognizing rehabilitation is important, and its time that we see that in some of these cases, the punishment simply does not fit the time.

—

Anneliese Mahoney (@AMahoney8672) is Lead Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Kevin Spencer via Flickr]

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Sex Offender Lists: Harmful or Helpful? appeared first on Law Street.

A 19-year-old Oklahoma teen named Matthew Durham has admitted to raping and molesting young girls and boys on a missionary trip to Kenya. Durham was volunteering with a group called Upendo and living with the children at the time of the assaults.

Why does this kind of story not surprise me? Maybe because White people have been going to the African continent for decades claiming to help, while actually causing serious harm. Whether they’re enslaving us, stealing our natural resources, or claiming our land; White people have a knack for hurting the people of Africa.

Durham was arrested last Thursday at his parents’ home in Edmond, Oklahoma after he fled Kenya due to the allegations, according to the Daily Mail. The founder of Upendo, Eunice Menja, told the FBI that Durham admitted to raping between four and ten children, including one who is HIV-positive, between April and June of this year.

According to KTLA 5, this was the fourth time Durham had visited Nairobi with Upendo, which was designed to help neglected Kenyan children. The organization’s vision statement reads, “One child at a time — while we envision a community with no more child poverty, no more child abuse but every child with each basic need met.” Oh the irony, oh the hypocrisy, it’s too much I can’t handle it.

Now it’s hard to completely blame Upendo. How were they to know that Durham was secretly into little children? But the one question that arose when I read this story was why was he allowed to sleep in the same place as these kids in the first place? He was there to help the kids, not to have a slumber party. So for that Upendo, I believe you failed.

But Durham’s lawyer doesn’t seem to think so. Stephen Jones, the lawyer who defended Oklahoma City bomber Timothy McVeigh, says that Menja forced a false confession from the teenage boy with “psychological voodoo.”

Yeah, we’ll see how that holds up in court.

Jones went on to say, “I don’t think Hollywood could make up what happened at this so-called orphanage. We’re on the ground in Kenya now. We’re finding out a lot about these people. This place is right on the outskirts of Nairobi. It’s like some cult over there.”

Whether or not this “so-called orphanage” is a legitimate foundation is not the issue here. Multiple children have come forward and said that Durham touched them in inappropriate places or made them watch as he touched other kids in inappropriate places. Now whether or not you believe in voodoo is up to you, but the fact that multiple children have come forward and spoken on Durham’s behavior has to mean something, and while I get that it is your job to defend your client Mr. Jones, it seems to me like you are grasping at air.

Obviously, most of the blame falls on Durham. Even if you are exploring your sexuality you have absolutely no right to explore it with children. Mr. Durham, don’t you think that these kids have already been through enough in their short lives? Don’t you think the daily hardship that these kids have to endure is already taxing enough without you forcing yourself on them? Don’t you think that these four to ten year olds deserved to grow up just a tad bit more before they were introduced to the complicated world of sex? No. You didn’t think Mr. Durham, and for that you deserve to spend a considerable amount of time in prison to do just that.

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Geraint Rowland via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Africa Gets Screwed Over Once Again by the White Man appeared first on Law Street.

A men’s rights movement has gained momentum within the last several years with the goals of reclaiming rights for men in society. One offshoot of the movement, the Red Pill, is accused of being inspired by a largely misogynistic attitude. This accusation is based on the attacks on women for using and abusing men, and essentially being the “evil” of the sexes. In addition to its major presence on social media, Men’s Rights activists have attempted to gain awareness through conferences and rallies. The Men’s Rights Movement, still controversial in nature, has legitimate goals in that it is working to gain equal rights by advocating for the equal treatment of boys and men in professional, educational, and legal situations. Some feel that this is a hidden effort to disguise prejudice against women, yet men continue to protest their desire to be “equal” citizens in a society where they believe that women currently have all the power. Read on for more information about the Men’s Rights movement and its Social Media counterpart, the Red Pill Movement.

What is the Red Pill Movement?

The Red Pill Movement is comprised of a group of men who hold a certain animosity toward women, believing them to be manipulative, unfaithful, and narcissistic. They band together primarily through social media and rant about their hatred of the opposite sex. Men who “take” the red pill are choosing to live a life free of emotional attachment to any a woman for fear that she will use him for his status, money, or emotional stability. The term red pill has its roots in the 1999 movie “The Matrix.” The red pill symbolizes the consumption of the truth, whereas taking the blue pill results in pure ignorance. Advocates for the Red Pill Movement believe that by taking the red pill, or consuming this eye-opening knowledge, they are becoming aware of women and their antics.

Social Media

Reddit, a social media site where individuals can share information such as texts, photographs, and personal opinions, is the main platform of the Red Pill Movement. Here men rant about their misunderstanding of and hatred for the opposite sex. The theme of most threads is how women are cheating, lying, manipulative, and narcissistic. Members often communicate in a verbally violent and insulting manner toward females and share their negative experiences of being taken advantage of, used, and insulted by women.

The Men’s Rights Movement

While the Red Pill Movement is based on the belief that women are wicked in nature, the Men’s Rights Movement actually does have some concrete goals that members would like to accomplish. According to the Huffington Post, goals of  the pro-men’s rights group Canadian Association for Equality, are mainly to bring awareness about “shared custody of children, unhealthy perceptions of masculinity, declining rates of university enrollment, spousal abuse, and suicide.” Since the Men’s Rights Movement is fairly new, there hasn’t been any policy or legislation enacted yet. The main goal of the group is to draw attention to the issues that men face in a society that tend to focus more on gaining women’s rights and recognition.

Rape

The Men’s Rights Movement emphasizes how often they believe men to be wrongfully accused of rape. Members argue that society has created a stigma that victimizes women and paints a picture of men as violently sexual predators. Many posters and arguments of the movement highlight the idea that women are partially responsible for any sexual acts that occur, in that they consume alcohol and choose to have sex with a man who they then turn around and accuse of rape.

Child Custody

The movement argues that women often receive custody in divorce, and men are unfairly assigned the monetary responsibilities.

#Feminist single motherhood in a nutshell #feminismisawful #NoMRA #MRA @Typhonblue @JudgyBitch1 @AlyssMajere @icmi14 pic.twitter.com/uFyOcaWrIL — Chloé J.F. Berg (@ChloeShell18) July 17, 2014

Domestic Violence

The Men’s Rights Movement accuses society of labeling domestic violence as one sided, in that men commit of all of the abuse. Advocates for men’s rights argue that women are just as responsible for violence in the home, yet it goes unrecognized because of the negative stigma attached to men.

Suicide 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Suicide among males is four times higher than among females and represents 79 percent of all U.S. suicides.” The Men’s Rights Movement aims to prevent this alarming epidemic in men. By providing support and encouragement to young men, members believe that this could eliminate some of the suicides that occur in response to emotional and mental disturbances and abuse.

A Voice for Men

A Voice for Men is a website that compiles information on the Men’s Rights Movement. The organization’s argument revolves around the theory of gynocentrism, the belief that males have bent to the demands of women for centuries. In addition to the organization’s website, the group has a social media presence on Facebook and Twitter dedicated to the Men’s Rights Movement. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dxcXldIFsbQ

The International Men’s Rights Conference 

The Men’s rights movement is increasingly gaining popularity on the grounds that women are the more powerful sex. According to activists, men face the adverse effects of a certain stigma that society has ingrained into them throughout history. At the first International Men’s Rights Conference held in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, both men and women gathered to discuss the issue. Men’s rights activists believe that men face difficulty in society, which has forced them to live out life as “second-class-citizens,” and that men are continuously blamed for rape. According to conference attendee Barbara Kay,

“The vast majority of women crying rape on campus are actually expressing buyer’s remorse from alcohol-fueled promiscuous behavior involving murky consent on both sides…It’s their get-out-of-guilt-free card.”

Men also blamed their feelings toward women on their early childhood experiences. According to Stefan Molyneux, “If we could just get [women] to be nice to their babies for five years straight, that would be it for war, drug abuse, addiction, promiscuity, sexually transmitted diseases.” Molyneux continued to say that women are responsible for choosing the abuser-types, or in his word “a-holes.” “Women worship at the feet of the devil and wonder why the world is evil,” he adds later. “And then know what they say? ‘We’re victims!”

Watch a spoof video below satirizing how women react to men at bars. All jokes aside, this comedic video is indicative of many of the views expressed by members of the Red Pill Movement.

This movement is not just in the United States but many other countries, as well, particularly in the East. Where feminism empowers women, the Red Pill or Men’s Rights  movement cripples them. In a disturbing piece written by Kim Tong-hyung, a professor of medicine at Seoul National University in Korea, Lee Yoon-seong blames women for the rape epidemic. Yoon-seong says:

“If there is money on the street, somebody will pick it up. If there is a woman walking around with sexy clothing, there will be somebody who rapes her …”

The Men’s Human Rights Rally

A men’s rights rally was organized in Toronto, Canada on September 28, 2013. Participants claimed that men are just as likely to face domestic abuse, have a higher rate of suicide, die earlier, and drop out of school as women. They argued that men make up “90 percent” of the prison population and are less likely to get a job after graduation. Thirty people fought for the movement to gain acceptance and recognition. This was a controversial rally, in that some people felt that it was simply a blow to women and masking an underlying current of misogyny.

Case Study: Elliot Rodger and the Santa Barbara shootings

In May 2014 a 22-year-old Elliot Rodger went on a killing spree in Isla Vist, California that was fueled by his resentment of the women who rejected him and the men who received their affections instead. Rodger left behind a video in which he stated, “You girls have never been attracted to me. I don’t know why you girls aren’t attracted to me, but I will punish you all for it.”

Watch the chilling video of Elliot Rodger before his killing spree.

Rodger was reportedly driven to murder because of the rejection he felt from most women. He complains of being a “22-year-old virgin,” and blames his lack of sexual success on the opposite sex. Clearly, there are other mental health issues that contribute to his feelings of rage, yet his outlet is to target what he believed was the source of his depression and anger for a good portion of his life. Rodger was not the only one who had these hostile feelings toward women; Men’s Rights advocates band together to speak of their negative experiences with women and rant about how they have caused them to live a life of misery and deceit. Some of the arguments are extreme, unreasonably blaming an entire sex for the source of a man’s unhappiness in life.

Rape as a Tool

Case Study: Rape Internationally

According to CNN, “rape has too often become the weapon of choice for frustrated young men who blame women, increasingly visible in the workplace, for their unemployment, and who hope to regain jobs by frightening women back home through sexual violence.” Men are being fueled by their anger toward women; they may feel threatened or humiliated by them and are using the most powerful tool that they have to attack in the most sexually aggressive and destructive way possible. Between 2006 and 2011, rape cases in India rose by twenty-five percent. Even more disturbing, only one quarter of the rapists were convicted. Rape is an increasing normality in India and indicative of the lack of support that women receive in the predominantly patriarchal society. Similarly, according to the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network, in the United States, 97 percent of violent rapists will not be convicted and 54 percent of cases are not even reported.

The International Campaign to Stop Rape and Gender Violence

The International Campaign to Stop Rape and Gender Violence works to alleviate some of the gender violence conducted against women internationally, specifically in times of war and conflict. Its main goals are to increase services offered to individuals who have been victims of violence and rape, gain justice for victims, and ultimately stop the aggression toward women.

Battling the Red Pill

Social Media to Combat the Red Pill Movement

In response to a society that seems to breed rape culture, the Twitter movement #YesAllWomen has emerged on Twitter. According to Time, the #YesAllWomen hashtag was created “to criticize the way society teaches men to feel entitled to women at the expense of their health, safety and, in [the Santa Barbara shooter] Rodger’s case, lives.” The online campaign was created to empower women, and expand on the belief that women are worth more than their physical appearance. It also brings awareness to how women are constantly placed in sexually offensive and uncomfortable situations. A recent post links to a list of (in)appropriate responses to cat-callers on the street. Tweets such as this one:

Because tweets like this should not exist #YesAllWomen pic.twitter.com/Ng84ItSXjD — Izabella (@izabellaanna_) July 14, 2014

Organizations Against Rape Culture

Organizations such as People Against Rape Culture, are fighting back by attempting to educate, collaborate, and advocate so that people will become more aware of rape culture. There are also organizations that include man’s involvement. Men Can Stop Rape has compiled a list of Men’s Anti-Violence Organizations. The group has also used collaborative methods, such as the Strength Campaign, to educate boys in middle schools, high schools, and universities and assist them in working on relationships with peers, teachers, family members, and members of their community.

Conclusion

Everyone is entitled to a personal opinion, therefore whether or not the Men’s Rights Movement results in any legislation is irrelevant to its existence as a legitimate movement. This holds true for the Red Pill Movement, as well; however, that it is breeding an extreme sense of animosity toward an entire gender. Governments must continue to educate and prosecute those people who violently and sexually violate women, no matter where the source of that anger comes from.

Resources

Business Insider: Inside Red Pill, the Weird New Cult For Men Who Don’t Understand Women

WorldNews Network: Deadly California rampage: Chilling video, but no match for reality

Washington Post: Men’s Rights Activists, Gathering to Discuss All the Ways Society Has Done Them Wrong

Times of India: Low Conviction Rate Spurring Sexual Assault Cases in India

TIME: The Most Powerful #YesAllWomen Tweets

RAINN: 97 of Every 100 Rapists Receive no Punishment, RAINN Analysis Shows

TIME: What I Learned as a Woman at a Men’s-Rights Conference

Southern Poverty Law Center: Men’s Rights Movement Spreads False Claims about Women

Ms. Foundation: Stopping the Violence Against Women 

Madeleine Stern

Madeleine Stern attended George Mason University majoring in Journalism and minoring in Theater. Her writing on solitary confinement inspired her to pursue a graduate degree in clinical counseling after graduation. Madeleine is an avid runner, dedicated animal lover, and a children’s ballet instructor. Contact Madeleine at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post The Red Pill and the Men’s Rights Movement appeared first on Law Street.

“Rape culture” is a term coined by feminists in the late 1970s to describe the way that society blamed rape victims and normalized male sexual violence. It described how our culture condoned physical and emotional harm toward women. It showed that we allowed women to get raped and men to get away with it. And sadly, the phrase is still apt throughout the globe today, 50 years later.

Yesterday, hundreds of people in Bangalore, India demonstrated outside a public school where a six-year-old girl was raped.

The incident happened at Bangalore’s Vibgyor School in early July, but it was only brought to light last week. No arrests have been made, but it has been reported that police have detained eight suspects in the case.

The pressure from the people of Bangalore is commendable, without their effort the Indian police force would not have taken this issue as seriously, and the girl’s rapist may have never been caught or even investigated.

We’ve come along way since the 1970s. It was in ’77 that Roman Polanski drugged and raped a 13-year-old girl before fleeing to France without serious public uproar.

Since then, there have been major advances in the feminist movement, and people are finally starting to change the way they think about rape. Here are some examples of how people are have started to change the way women can protect themselves:

• A trio of Indian students created “anti-rape underwear” that delivers shocks and alerts the police to potential assaults. The device is cleverly named Society Harnessing Equipment (SHE), and is equipped with a GPS system and pressure sensors that make it capable to send a 3,800 kV shock.

• A group of Swedish girls designed an “anti-rape belt,” also referred to as a “reverse chastity belt.” It has a complex labyrinth of a latch that the wearer has to unlock, which is impossible to do without two hands. “The rapist can’t hold you down and open it at the same time. It takes a while to figure it out if you don’t know what you’re doing,” one of the creators said.

• A South African doctor designed a condom called the “rape-axe” that is designed to dig into a rapist’s penis upon penetration. The jagged hooks cling on to the offender’s penis and create enough pressure to prevent the man from being able to urinate.

• Inventors added a little twist to the rape whistle: now there’s a keychain-like security device that sounds a loud alarm when pulled. The device is meant to scare the attacker while also alerting bystanders that you are in need of help.

• Two students at India’s National Institute of Fashion Technology created a jacket that is supposed to prevent sexual assault. The jacket discharges 110 volts of electricity when it detects unwanted pressure. A button is pressed by the person who is being assaulted, which then signals the jacket to stun the aggressor and temporarily disable him.

• A group of inventors created a test called Pd.id that determines whether or not your drink has been drugged. “The lighter sized sensor is dipped into your drink and performs electrical conductivity tests, temperature measurements, and spectroscopic analysis to determine the molecular makeup of your beverage.” If it does detect something, the sensor alerts the user with a red LED light.

So as you can see there is a lot being done to prevent girls from being raped, and while all these inventions are spectacular and innovative, there’s still one thing wrong; we’re placing the responsibility on women and girls. These inventions send out the message that prohibiting rape is up to the female, and that it is their own duty to make sure that they do not become a victim. Instead, we should be holding our men accountable and teaching our boys that it is their responsibility to respect women.

Many of our conversations these days focus on preventive behavior, telling women not to get drunk, what not to wear, when and where to go out. This is rape culture.

Rape culture is telling women to “be careful” when they leave the house, or to put on something “less revealing.” Rape culture is shaming women for who they sleep with, how they walk, how they talk, what they drink, where they go. Rape culture is protecting our men, and condemning our girls; and I think it’s about time we change that. Not all men sexually assault women, but at one point or another in their lives, most women will be sexually assaulted by a man. We’ve been to the moon, cured numerous diseases, taken flight, and beaten our preconceived prejudices. I think we’re advanced enough to stop shifting the blame off men, and start respecting our women. I think it’s time we stop accepting rape culture, and start refuting it. Don’t you?

Mic Drop

—

Trevor Smith

Featured image courtesy of [Chase Carter via Flickr]

Trevor Smith

Trevor Smith is a homegrown DMVer studying Journalism and Graphic Design at American University. Upon graduating he has hopes to work for the US State Department so that he can travel, learn, and make money at the same time. Contact Trevor at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Yes. All. Women. appeared first on Law Street.

Most of us remember Todd Akin, former Missouri Senate candidate, for his comments about how women cannot get pregnant if they are “legitimately raped.” Unfortunately for him, and for everyone who has to deal with his moronic comments, the fiasco hasn’t ended there. In a recent attempt to explain his 2012 comments, all he did was dig himself into a deeper hole. It’s probably time to just stop talking, Mr. Akin. I mean, I’ve heard from doctors that if you legitimately have stupid thoughts, you won’t say them because your mouth has the ability to shut the whole thing down. Or, in this case, your hand will lose its ability to write a book if you plan to write legitimately ridiculous words.

In his new book (how did he get a publishing deal?), Firing Back, Akin defends his infamous 2012 “legitimate rape” comments and blames the evil media for spinning the whole thing. Someone needs to explain to Akin what spinning means, because he obviously doesn’t know. The media saying exactly what a politician says during an interview is not spin, Mr. Akin. That’s what we call “reporting the facts.”

In what I am sure is a positively invigorating piece of literature, Akin tries to educate his readers about what “legitimate rapes” are. You see, some rapes are not “legitimate” because some women falsely accuse, and when he spoke about a woman’s body shutting “that whole thing down,” he didn’t mean the reproductive system battening down the hatches. Rather, he was referring to rape-related “stress” inhibiting her ability to get pregnant. He does concede that perhaps his wording was a little off.  I feel like I need a Todd Akin Dictionary of Rape Terms to understand this guy’s insane reasoning.

Well, almost…

His comment brings up so many questions: what exactly is “illegitimate rape?” When a woman rejects sex sarcastically? When her attacker rapes her in a certain location? As far as I, and hopefully most other people with common sense know, uteri and fallopian tubes don’t have the capability of self-realization. I’ve never heard a case of ovaries yelling, “We’re under attack! Shut the whole thing down!” to their reproductive-system comrades.

Reviews say that the take away from his new book is that despite his apology immediately following the comments in 2012, Akin is legitimately not sorry. Apology redacted.

But not actually…

—

Marisa Mostek (@MarisaJ44) loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured Image Courtesy of [Jennifer Moo via Flickr]

Marisa Mostek

Marisa Mostek loves globetrotting and writing, so she is living the dream by writing while living abroad in Japan and working as an English teacher. Marisa received her undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado in Boulder and a certificate in journalism from UCLA. Contact Marisa at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Todd Akin Needs to Legitimately Stop Talking appeared first on Law Street.

I’m not a violent person. Some may even say I’m compassionate. But if I were to witness the defenestration of George Will, I cannot deny that I would crack a smile.

What has caused such a drastic shift in my nature? Well, the columnist recently published an article in the Washington Post spewing his opinion that colleges and universities “make victimhood a coveted status that confers privileges.”

Let’s let that sink in. A Pulitzer Prize winner, Princeton educated, syndicated columnist has stated that being a victim of sexual assault is a privilege. When my eyes were first subjected to that sentence my body went into shock, as I was not sure if I should shriek, gag, or faint from the ignorance. Perhaps the Fox News Kool-Aid is stronger than previously suspected, but this is new realm of revolting that I didn’t think possible.

One of Will’s arguments against the “supposed campus epidemic of rape” is the statistic of women who will be sexually assaulted while in college: 1 in 5. Although the government, nonprofits, and research institutions support the statistics he attempts to discredit, the evidence is still not enough for good ol’ George. Dr. Jen Gunter broke down (accurately this time) the “pesky arithmetic” Will complained about. I recommend that Will and all those who agree with his assessment give it a thorough read.

Schools are more frequently including trigger warnings at the beginning of lectures and assigned readings in an effort to alert people who may self-harm or have their post-traumatic disorder triggered by exposure to controversial readings and assignments. Will scoffed at this concept, belittling individuals who would benefit from the notices. The mocking of trigger warnings was the garnish atop a cocktail already soiled with hebenon.

Four Senators sent a letter to Will challenging his position on the issue of sexual assault. He issued a rebuttal, including this nonsensical gem:

“I think I take sexual assault much more seriously than you do.”

Really? Is he truly going to claim that he takes assault more seriously than four Senators who have dedicated their careers to helping victims; not downplaying the trauma they have endured like he has done?

As an Ivy-educated, affluent white male in America it may be fair to deduce that George Will hasn’t faced too many incidents of sexism or racism throughout his experiences — but that is neither my place nor anyone else’s to presume. Just as I do not know his personal history, he is not aware of the thousands of victim’s experiences he was so quick to demean.

Although offensive and infuriating to read, his column serves as an example of the beliefs surrounding sexual assault that continue to plague our society even when there is evidence to refute them. If any good has come from his piece, it is that the backward way of how victims are viewed is being thrust into public conversation.

I am not the first to voice my disdain for Will’s column, and likely not the last. Just last night the St. Louis Post-Dispatch dropped him due to his comments. Everywhere he turns he should be saturated with vehement rebuttals exposing the callousness of his article.

—

Alex Hill is a student at Virginia Tech majoring in English and Political Science. A native of the Washington, D.C. area, she blames her incessant need to debate and write about politics on her proximity to the nation’s capital. Contact Alex at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

Featured image courtesy of [Scott Ableman via Flickr]

Alex Hill

Alex Hill studied at Virginia Tech majoring in English and Political Science. A native of the Washington, D.C. area, she blames her incessant need to debate and write about politics on her proximity to the nation’s capital.

The post Dear George Will: Sexual Assault Isn’t a Privilege appeared first on Law Street.

In the past six months, if you were to Google the keywords college rape scandal, a disturbing amount of articles would pop up. Whatever side people stand on for the debate on college rape, every can agree that system is virtually broken. Previous notions of college campuses being an oasis for intellectual development and personal growth have begun to crumble as concerns over the sexual victimization of students are heightened. So the next question is, what do we do about it? Should we address rape culture, universities’ policies on sexual assault, or place all the burden on the individual? So far, it has been a combination of the three–here are all the facts on the college rape epidemic.

UPDATE: July 17, 2014

Statistics

Multiple organizations and government agencies have conducted surveys to gather data on the staggering amount of rapes that occur on college campuses:

Rape

• According to a survey conducted by the National Institute of Justice, one in four college women have survived rape or attempted rape in their lifetime.
• Estimated a college with a population of 10,000 students could experience more than 350 rapes a year.
• Fewer than 5 percent of attempted and completed rape incidents were reported to law enforcement officials. Victims commonly do not want their family and friends to know about the assault. Additionally, victims who do not report their attack, commonly fear of being treated with hostility by the police, that officials will not believe their account of the incident, and retaliation from their assailant.
• 7 percent of college men admitted to attempting rape, and 63 percent of those men admitted to multiple offenses, averaging six rapes each.
• 58 percent of incapacitated rapes and 28 percent of forced rapes took place at a party.
• On average only 12 percent of student victims report the assault to law enforcement.

College Involvement