• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Scumbags at school tries to cover up rape of disabled girl.

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,870
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Scumbag mayor seems to care too much about his own political career to give two shits about a mentally disabled girl getting raped due a highschool's incompetence.

http://abcnews.go.com/US/LegalCenter/wireStory?id=2073586

Kalie McArthur, now 20 and with an IQ of about 50, was assaulted in September 2004 at Rampart High School by a 15-year-old boy assigned as a peer trainer, said Jeff Weeks, an attorney for the girl and her parents.

The boy, who had been suspended 20 times in the previous year and had a 0.0 grade point average, wasn't screened or trained and spent an unknown amount of time with McArthur, her parents, Cindy Starr and James McArthur said.

Starr and McArthur, who have joint custody of McArthur, agreed to allow the woman's name be used.

Nanette Anderson, spokeswoman for the district, and Francine Guesnier, an attorney for the district, both declined comment, citing a pending court case.

A school coach found the boy and McArthur in a closet, partially unclothed on Sept. 14, 2004, Weeks said. The boy pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact with a helpless victim in 2005, Weeks said.

On June 2, the family filed a federal suit against the school district.


http://www.wrightslaw.com/news/06/mcarthur.academy20.htm

District Expert Says "Assault Was Pleasurable"

According to newspaper articles, Kalie's parents wanted to resolve this case through mediation, but the school district refused.

Although Kalie was fearful of males, Academy School District 20 hired a male psychologist to evaluate her. According to her mother, the psychologist "said the assault was pleasurable, not traumatic ... He said it ignited her female desires."

But in late May 2006, Kalie's transition coordinator wrote, "Due to regression in Kalie's functional level during the 05-06 school year, [she] requires an increased amount of direct care in order to keep her safe."
 
This article made me sick in my stomach. The fact that the first boy only got 2 weeks in jail is truly disgusting. What kind of judges are we appointing to the bench?!? Something like this happened to my friend's little sister who has cerebral palsy. She was raped by a classmate and the judge threw the case out because one of the cops mishandled one piece of evidence. AAWW!! This kind of stuff just makes me so mad the way our system works. These special people who can't help themselves need protection against others that wish to harm them and take advantage of their disabilities. If I was that girl's mother I would make sure they never, ever would be able to do anything like that again. If I couldn't get justice through the system I would execute my own kind of justice.
 
What the HELL??? Who in their right mind pairs a deliquent boy with a special needs girl?? I'd have that principals gonads cut and mounted on my wall.
"oh, it'll give him some much needed self-esteem' was probably the lame reasoning behind that one...Ugh.
And that judge needs to line up and have his mounted as well. Two weeks? Yea, that'll show him.
We had quite a few 'no-goods' that we constantly had to coddle because there was no place to put them. Couldn't expel them unless there was an adult to supervise them!! So, guess where they'd come back to...the school.
The official policy was never followed: so many detentions=in-school suspensions, so many in-school suspensions=out of school suspension, so many of those would equal expulsion. Immediate expulsion was for serious offenses of violence, drugs, etc. Only two girls and two boys were permanently out. That was from a student body of over 1300.
I do question the parents of this girl who continued to keep her in the district after this. They're both special ed teachers, surely they'd have known of alternatives, including specialized home schooling or group schooling. I'd place their share of this fiasco at about 20% at least.
 
americanwoman said:
This article made me sick in my stomach. The fact that the first boy only got 2 weeks in jail is truly disgusting. What kind of judges are we appointing to the bench?!?
Click to expand...

Thats a easy question to answer.Liberal judges is what kind of judges are getting appointed to the bench.
Something like this happened to my friend's little sister who has cerebral palsy. She was raped by a classmate and the judge threw the case out because one of the cops mishandled one piece of evidence.
Click to expand...

I wonder what scumbag lawyer worked out that technicality.

AAWW!! This kind of stuff just makes me so mad the way our system works. These special people who can't help themselves need protection against others that wish to harm them and take advantage of their disabilities.
Click to expand...

Alot of these liberal judges do not give two shits about the victims they care more for the guilty than they do the innocent.The way I look is someone is innocent until proven guilty.But once they have been found guilty, the law should come down on them like a ton of bricks.
 
Jamesrage: I consider myself mostly liberal, and I think that this is totally horrific and disgusting. Classic case of blame the victim. Not all liberals perceive things the way you think they do. :2wave:

District Expert Says "Assault Was Pleasurable"
Click to expand...

Don't these morons know that arousal during a sexual assault is an involuntary physiological reaction and DOES NOT denote consent. Also there are many laws on the books supporting the illegality of what happened to this girl. I know, jamesrage, that at the bottom of your second link, ther are a number of them. Here's another: http://www.cqc.state.ny.us/counsels_corner/cc64a.htm
 

While I admire the beliefs behind your statement, they're misdirected. The decision to throw out a case that one WANTS to convict someone on because of a technical flaw is a decision that would be characteristic of a constructionist judge.

A more liberal, "breathing constitution" judge may have felt that the flaw was unimportant enough that he shouldn't let it get in the way of throwing the guy in jail for 20 years.

We have to remember that if we want justice, we have to want the same justice for everyone. While the guy may have been a shithole, if the evidence was flawed sufficiently that he would be let go, that's the way it is.
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Jamesrage: I consider myself mostly liberal, and I think that this is totally horrific and disgusting. Classic case of blame the victim. Not all liberals perceive things the way you think they do. :2wave:
Click to expand...
I know no conservative would ever sentence a rapist to only two weeks in jail like in the case of that poor mentaly disabled girl or the sentence a child rapist ot only 60 days like that scumbag judge in vermont.


If it just blame the victim and feel sorry scum rhetoric these rat lawyers and liberals judges have.Amazing how the mayor of that town has not said a thing about this.Sure me may not have any direct control over the schools but he sure could use his influence to help that poor girl, and he could condem what the school has done in thier attempts to cover it up.
 

Although I still don't agree with your pidgeon-holing all liberals as the problem, I agree with pretty much everything else you said here. And I'm pretty liberal on most things. :mrgreen:
 
jamesrage said:
I know no conservative would ever sentence a rapist to only two weeks in jail like in the case of that poor mentaly disabled girl or the sentence a child rapist ot only 60 days like that scumbag judge in vermont.
Click to expand...

Wow. You must be psychic to be able to speak on behalf of so many conservatives, even though it's unlikely you have all the facts.

I just don't get it why people have to make these issues partisan. What is the point? So you can feel better about your own party? *Yawn*



When people rant like this and decide to blame it on a liberal, I stop taking them seriously. Oh brother. :roll:


Nevertheless, this is an appalling story.
 
aps said:
Wow. You must be psychic to be able to speak on behalf of so many conservatives, even though it's unlikely you have all the facts..
Click to expand...

How do you think I would sentence a child molestor?

I just don't get it why people have to make these issues partisan. What is the point? So you can feel better about your own party? *Yawn*
Click to expand...


Liberalism and conservatism is not confined to just one party.If liberalism is a trademark of the democrats then you libs should sue the **** out of Bush.Not all democrats are liberal and not all republicans are liberal,so this has nothing to do with making a party feel better.


Nevertheless, this is an appalling story
Click to expand...
The sentence the rapist recieved is appauling,,the school's incompetence and the fact the school tried to cover it up is appauling and the fact the mayor has not said anything or even tried to use any influence is appaulling.
 

Again, the judicial philosophy that would cause a judge to set aside his own personal feelings for whether a defendent was guilty or not and choose to give him a light sentence based on the letter of the law, rather than the heavier one we might all agree he deserved, is a CONSERVATIVE one, not a LIBERAL one.

Liberal judges (and by liberal, I am referring to "living constitution" types) are the ones most prone to substituting their own judgment for the letter of the law.
 
It doesn't matter which party you belong to, or what your political leanings are. This crime is heinous no matter how you slice it. The girl should not have been put in the care of an already at-risk boy who probably didn't know how to care for her in the first place. The judge should not have thrown out the case, no matter what technicality bullshit there was. That boy should have received at least a year in the slammer; he has truly traumatized this poor girl, and two weeks is not enough punishment for a dirtbag like him. And finally, sexual assault is NEVER pleasurable for anyone. Ever.

I hate our nation's legal system.
 
A level of 50 to 70 is considered mildly retarded. If the boy had a 0.0 average he may have been somewhat retarded as well. I think a lot of below average kids have diminished mental capacity.

I agree a kid that is a juvenile delinquent shouldn't be alone with a young girl, but who knows all the intricate details as to why they were together.

I'm not a big advocate of mainstreaming because I've seen the types of kids they are trying to mainstream and there's no way this is good for them. They want to play, and they are being forced to go on job-sites when there's no way in hell they will ever be able to work. Some of the so-called teacher's aids are mean to the kids and belittle them. They need to just be taking a nap, and they are forcing them to do menial work that they can't do. Same thing with school, they can't learn past a certain point. Can't be done.

This girl should have been in a school that cares for the mentally retarded, and they have the facilities for them. Putting them in a school with "normal" kids is just very unkind and they can't be monitored as well. The teacher's aids even have to change diapers on some of these kids. They don't need to be in High School. They need to be more in a School/Hospital situation.

I think this whole area of care needs to be re-thought out.
 

Stupid due process.
 

I think there should be mandatory sentencing so that rat liberal judges do not pull this kind of **** again.
 
jamesrage said:
I think there should be mandatory sentencing so that rat liberal judges do not pull this kind of **** again.
Click to expand...

This is the third time you've said it, and the third time that I've pointed out that you're wrong. Just because a judge does something you disagree with does not make them a "liberal activist." Back up your statements with an argument, not just silly rhetoric that makes us all look bad.
 

Do you honestly believe a conservative judge would allow such scum to practically walk free?
 
jamesrage said:
Do you honestly believe a conservative judge would allow such scum to practically walk free?
Click to expand...

Yes, of course. Hell, I bet it WAS a conservative judge.

Do you know the definition of conservative and liberal?

Let's say one judge believes that his own personal opinion should not impact the rules of a case. He believes that no matter whether or not he believes a person is guilty, he will not bend the law to fit his own feelings. He will interpret the laws of the land and the Constitution as they exist and be faithful to his duty.

Lets say another judge believes that the law as it stands is outdated and outmoded. He believes in a "living Constitution," and desires a moral victory in all of his cases. He believes that he has the authority to determine if a person should walk free or be punished, and disregards the law when it doesn't fit him.

Which one is "conservative" and which one is "liberal?" Furthermore, which one would let this guy go because the law requires it and which one would decide not to obey the Constitution?

(Of course, this is obviously an exaggeration, because any judge would let this guy go considering what happened with the case. Few judges are really as extreme as the portrait I painted.)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn more…