My friend Barb has a great post--and one totally outside the usual subject matter for her blog--about the Tory Bowen rape case and her own related experience. I strongly suggest reading it, and I'm not going to rehash all the facts here. In case there's anyone who has been away on Mars for the past few days, Tory Bowen is an "alleged" rape victim whose case did not end in conviction after (coincidentally, I'm sure), the judge banned the use of all relevant terminology from the courtroom. That's right...can't use a nasty, prejudicial word like "rape" in a rape case. Can't describe a "rape kit" as a "rape kit", even though that's what they've been called since their inception and the way that all professionals in the fields that use or rely on them refer to them.
As a former criminal defense attorney, I probably find the judge's ruling less shocking than a lot of people. I'm very familiar with the process of pre-trial motions to exclude preducial language and information--even information everyone in the room knows to be true. And there's a good reason for that process.
But it can be equally prejudicial to prevent a victim--or any witness--from providing testimony in terms that make sense to him or her. That's true because the language impacts the way the story is received, the way a jury perceives the victim's (or witness's) actions and reactions, and it's also true because when a witness isn't allowed to express him or herself naturally, it leaves him searching for words, pausing, rephrasing, or using prepared phrases that can impact the perceived truthfulness of the testimony.
There's a legal issue here that will undoubtedly be dissected and determined in days to come. I may even do some of that dissecting myself. But today, my interest is more in the way the human issues affect the legal treatment of sexual assault cases, and the way that legal treatment in turn affects public perception, and the vicious spiral it creates.
Before I'd graduated from college, two of my closest female friends had been violently sexually assaulted, one at knifepoint by a stranger who'd broken into her apartment. Their reactions were very different, and they expressed themselves very differently. Any psychological professional will tell you that's very important, that people who have been traumatized are free to express themselves in the way that works for them. Tory Bowen, obviously, didn't have that freedom, and depending upon whether the case is appealed (and the outcome of that appeal), the case may kick off a long line of cases in which women aren't free to tell the whole truth about what they experienced.
And that will take us another step down the road back to the world where women knew better than to tell.
Teenage girls are molested every day and don't tell their parents because they think they'll be blamed, or because they think they won't be believed. Women are sexually assaulted every day and don't report the assault because they think that they'll be blamed, or that they won't be believed. Often, they're right. And, far worse, often they buy in to that perception.
Many years ago in another state, I happened to see the same man acquitted of two different rapes. Of course, I knew things the jurors did not--most notably, that at least three women had independently accused this man of sexual assault under similar circumstances.
After one of the trials, a juror made this statement: What happens between people of that nature is not our concern.
Of course, I disagree for a lot of reasons. I disagree because all people deserve respect and protection, regardless of walk of life, education, race or anything else you might be able to dream up as a reason to devalue a person. I disagree because even if you somehow believed that some people didn't count, I couldn't see any reason this woman might have fallen into the "no" column.
And--probably most important to those who would make such a statement--I disagree because I know quite well that what we tolerate, what we close our eyes to, what we make acceptable WILL come back to haunt us. Because when we create a culture that says it's okay to force sex on some people under some circumstances, or that it's wrong but really not such a big deal, or that the person who says she was sexually assaulted or molested is probably exaggerating, or any of a hundred other things we like to say in order to close our eyes to ugly realities in this world, we edge our world a little closer to a place where it's just okay across the board.
The woman it's "okay" to assault because she was drunk in a bar in revealing clothing slides into the woman it's "okay" to assault because she was in a bar alone, even though she wasn't really drinking much. And then if it's okay to assault women who went to bars, isn't it okay to assault women who go to big campus parties and drink? And then, is a big campus party really so different from a smaller party of mostly friends and acquaintances, but where you know some people will be drinking? And one day...lo and behold...that middle-class juror who didn't think we should concern ourselves with such things gets a phone call from her daughter, who was raped on her way home from a fundraiser for the College Republicans...and that's perfectly understandable, really, because after all, they served cocktails at the fundraiser, and the girl was walking back to her dorm late at night. And then...
But no. That won't happen, will it? Because that girl will know better than to tell her mother, or anyone else, what happened to her.
7 comments:
Thanks for speaking out and for making the connections and the logical progressions that come when we refuse to give a victim a voice. It has been my experience, as the victim of a sexual assault when I was newly adolescent by an adult father of two --that an evil unnamed grows in power. Some things, even distasteful things, have to be taken out into the light and examined in order to be depowered. It's why I've made the decision to tell my two daughters what happened to me and what the lifelong consequences have been. I hope they will know that they always, always have a voice. And I hope it's in THIS country--the country of their birth.
Wow, that was a powerful post. I don't understand the judges logic in removing the word or why he would get away with doing it.
You are right though, girls don't talk because they are afraid. I was molested by my uncle when I was 6-7 years old. His threat to "kill my parents if I told" was enough to silence me. I suppressed the memories for about 7 years, and then one day I had flashbacks. My uncle was long gone and my sis convinced me I had to tell mom and dad. Then, I was afraid they'd think I was lying. It turned out my mother couldn't accept who the culprit was, her brother, and she tried to insist it must have been an "older brother" who was actually gay (figure that one out).
After she accepted who it was she wanted to press charges, but we found out that the statute of limitations had ran out and nothing could be done.
He had been 15 when he took advantage of me and we had also since moved to another state.
This is a video I made in college that deals with sexual child abuse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RBX6J0VQq-w
This is a wonderful article. It's very interesting to see the legal aspects from someone who's familiar with them. I hadn't realized it was a usual thing to exclude certain language from the trial, though I guess this is an extreme example?
I have very little experience in these matters, but I would like to say I think "Political Correctness" is a vile practice that is going to destroy the minds of younger generations. They can't defend themselves any longer and are afraid to express themselves.
Language is policed so much now in public schools that they have the illusion of a very limited world.
Well, FUCK THAT! RAPE IS WRONG PEOPLE! Excuse my language, but hey...
Damn, everyone is so afraid these days of expressing themselves in the wrong way, you can even breath the wrong way without someone threatening to take you to court.
The problem is the other side of the coin. There are an increasing number of cases where innocent men are accused of rape where sex was consensual at the time, but was afterward regretted. If you're both drunk and you AGREE to sex, you're stupid -- but neither was raped. If you were drugged against your will (or similar) -- well, that IS rape.
What seems to be happening is a backlash to many recent accusations and trials, and it's very unfortunate. The old lesson of the boy who cried "Wolf" is very applicable.
Before, I agree that's a problem and definitely won't deny that it happens, and that the men to whom it happens are as much victims as the women who are truly assaulted. I also believe--though I've gotten a lot of flack for saying this before and expect I will again--that there are many cases in which a woman sincerely feels forced or coerced and a man sincerely feels that sex was consensual. But I'm not sure that I see the causative relationship that you do, or at least only see that particular issue as a small slice of the cause. Don't forget that 50 years ago, when such false allegations were much rarer and it was even rarer that we'd hear about them, women and girls came forward even less frequently than they do now.
Sorry, I just found this today and decided to comment.
Wow, what a fucken retarded post...
Cry cry can't call someone a rapist raper or say they raped someone in a trial...or say you were rape victim.
You also can't say someone is a killer; stabber...the bs list goes on and on. Because innocent until proven guilty is the way of this country... Using words like rape and saying you were raped is for the jury to decide.
So, that would just be calling him names and guilty making him get judged by a jury, under those pretenses that he is already guilty... and that it has been proven that she has been raped (implying that there is some proof at all, besides her word GOD FORBID SHE BE LYING, you know like alot of people do when they hate someone, want money, or they just are plain crazy.) As for rape kit terminology that better say rape kit on it...because when it is identified as rape kit and it is a bottle of Jack Daniels, a pack of pills possibly Tic Tac's, and a book of poems...I don't think you could call that a rape kit...though alot of people would try.
Do you or your friend "Barb" get it. You and your friend "Barb" are 2 fucken retarded cunt bitches ...I've called you that so thus you are that. I could probably offer proof on that, but why people will believe it anyways. ;-)
Post a Comment