Tuesday, October 31, 2006

Duke Lacrosse Rape Case Bombshell

ABC News


Dancer Kim Roberts made the new allegation -- which she has not shared with authorities -- in an interview with Chris Cuomo that aired today on "Good Morning America."

...

As she drove the accuser from the March 2006 Duke lacrosse party, Roberts told ABC News the woman was clearly impaired and "talking crazy."

Roberts said she tried several different times to get the accuser out of her car.

"The trip in that car from the house ... went from happy to crazy," Roberts told Cuomo. "I tried all different ways to get through to her."

"I tried to be funny and nice," she said. "Then I tried to, you know, be stern with her. ... We're kind of circling around, and as we're doing that, my last-ditch attempt to get her out of the car, I start to kind of, you know, push and prod her, you know."

Roberts said she told the woman, "Get out of my car. Get out of my car."

"I ... push on her leg. I kind of push on her arm," Roberts said. "And clear as a bell, it's the only thing I heard clear as a bell out of her was, she said -- she pretty much had her head down, but she said plain as day -- 'Go ahead, put marks on me. That's what I want. Go ahead.'"

Roberts said the comments "chilled me to the bone, and I decided right then and there to go to the authorities." (bolding mine)

...

She [Roberts] has said consistently that she doesn't know whether or not a rape occurred.

When I first read this description of events I thought that if it were true that it would undermine the prosecutor's case. However, as I read it again and thought about what the security guard saw and considered all of the elements included and the key elements which I bolded, it hit me that this described behavior fits with a post-rape scenario. Victims are often giddy when they escape a dangerous situation. Then when the risk is over adrenaline can nosedive.

After my own rape it was like I was no longer in my own body so the description of "crazy" isn't surprising to me at all. Nobody who saw me later that day had a clue what happened to me so the failure of people to see this woman as a rape victim is no surprise either.

There was a case a while ago where a woman was held as a man's sex slave and then let go unexpectedly. The woman wasn't believed when she went to the police because someone saw her saying thanks and assumed she was thanking the man who let her out of his car. Only when the police found where she had been held and saw that it matched her description did they finally believe her.

She was thanking God for getting out alive. She wasn't thanking her rapist. The observer had the details right but had the meaning of those details all wrong.

The words which were reported as being spoken by the Duke rape alleged victim and which many people are interpreting as a request to fake evidence were spoken when the alleged victim is sitting in the passenger seat with her head down. She's unresponsive or at least incoherent until she's pushed. Then those words ring out. By the time the security guard is asked by Kim Roberts to help get the alleged victim out of the car, she is unresponsive.

If the alleged victim was gang raped, being pushed could bring that danger back to the surface as if it were happening again. Adrenaline could make her words come out clearly and she could be experiencing both the present (being pushed and yelled at) and the past (rape).

'Go ahead, put marks on me. That's what I want. Go ahead.'

If those words were spoken during a flashback even the echoes of a gang rape would send chills down my spine too.

With the physical and cognitive state of the alleged victim as described when she was in that car, the idea that this outburst is a request to falsify evidence makes absolutely no sense. It's only supported by what people read into those words and their beliefs about this case or about rape.

The witness-given evidence in this case is what witnesses saw and heard, not the conclusions witnesses came to based on what they heard and what they saw.

People see the sun come up every morning and see it go down every night, but it isn't true that the sun circles the earth once per day even if some people have assumed that's what happens based on watching the sun move from horizon to horizon.

Update: I received an anonymous comment which I deleted since it included claims about the alleged victim's medical file, but the bottom line in the comment was that her history proved that she had to be lying and couldn't have been raped.

This person doesn't seem to realize the gaping fallacy in this idea. No medical condition, state of mind or criminal activity or job protects someone from the possibility of rape. What it often does is make men feel they can get away with raping that person though they will likely not think of it in terms of rape since that would make them think of themselves as rapists.

"She's just a stripper. She lets everyone do it to her."

That attitude can actually put these women at greater risk of being raped since they are perceived as having no credibility. "It's her word against mine and my word is golden."

Technorati tags:
Bookmark and Share
posted by Marcella Chester @ 12:09 AM   1 comments links to this post

1 Comments:

At October 31, 2006 10:10 AM, Anonymous Faith said...

The words spoken are also indicative of an act of submission to the pain she was experiencing (which I believe is basically what you are arguing). Abuse victims are rampant in the BDSM community due to their need to try to take back control of themselves and their bodies. They often try to relive the experience of past abuse in a fashion where they feel they are in control and thus empowered. Her words are her way of trying to lessen the pain and power the men had over her while they were raping her. As someone who has done the same thing in the past, I'm quite convinced that was actually what occurred.

Blessings.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home