Duke LaCrosse Team accused of gang-raping black dancer

[Legacy]

This whole wall of silence that the team has been hiding behind would not be allowed if the perps were black men..The photos and names of all the players would be on tv non-stop, the media would be outside the homes of the all the players relatives asking all kinds of crazy azz questions and all the white women pundits on tv would be up in arms and screaming for blood...But since the victim is black, they ain't asking for nouthin'..So much for solidarity among women--I guess white women think that the lives of black women aren't as valuable..

No doubt about how the media would treat black men in this situation. Also, I am hearing that locally there is some degree of activism. If this was a national story, you'd have more women speaking out.

I don't blame the young lady--she did use poor judgement and should have rolled out of there when the first racial slur was spoken and at the first sign of disrespect..But too many of our folks always give white men the benefit of the doubt and believe that they are such fine upstanding gentlemen..Undoubtedly, she hadn't read up on the history of the white male--especially the drunken frat boy jocks..

Yeah, she definitely put herself in a compromising situation. Again, it's amazing to me how a few black men can act like idiots & everyone willing to cast off the entire lot. A few white boys gang-rape a chick, we still got folx extolling the greatness of white men on this site.

I also wanna know where are the thugs in the black community? How come some of those cats with their heavily armed selves ain't emptied a clip or two into some of those white boys? Oh, that's right--the thugs only shoot black people who step on their Air Force Ones or who look at them funny..My point when I drag the thug into this arguement is that since so many of them are already doing things that are illegal, how come they never want to crack some white boys upside the head?

Right, that would assume consciousness & purpose!!!! - LOL

The real lesson for women is to avoid dealing with drunken white boys and maybe white men perioid, since they act like phucken cavemen if they have one or two drinks..And the thugs also need to be kicked to the curb since it's crystal clear that they ain't down with protecting nuthin' but that shiny crap that they put in their mouths or dangle around their necks..

Yeah, & to be fair I think this would have been a bad situation regardless of the race of the men involved. I just wanted to point out how the media surely didn't treat this story they way they would have had this been black men & how certain folx on this site like to condemn black men yet treat white men who gang-rape a sister with kids gloves.

[Obsidian]

Rational caution can only go so far, but a lack of rational caution goes nowhere.

Very true. And hindsight is always 20/20.  I'm not saying that "rational caution" or lack thereof isn't a factor in rape cases.  But it's easy to, having all the facts after the fact, make judgements. I have an aversion for blaming victims, as rape seems to be, in my eyes, the only crime for which people do pick apart and criticize the victim.  It's OK to, as you say, take lessons from each case, realizing that women are still quite vulnerable to attack; however, no person is equipped with printouts of another person's past, psychological profile, and susceptibility to violent rage. Err on the side of caution? That's the simple and most logical answer, of course.  But sooner or later trust is built, who's to say when it will be betrayed? Never trust anyone? Then how do relationships progress? That's what I meant by "rational caution" only goes so far. At some point we have to stop over-analyzing and criticizing the victim and start asking why this culture produces so many rapists.

[The Shepherd]

And hindsight is always 20/20... But it's easy to, having all the facts after the fact, make judgements.

These are not judgments after the facts. Rational caution is a principle exercised before the facts. How much sense does it take, or how many facts does one need, to determine that it is not rationally cautious to be drunken barhopping alone, stripping at private parties with up to 50 drunk men, or going to hotel rooms at 2am with men you've just met?

Those are dangerous situations, regardless of the outcome. Think about it this way, in most places the speed limit on the highway is 65. Let's say someone is driving 65 down the highway but it's in a snow blizzard. They are not breaking the law, but are they exercising rational caution? Now, if they slip on a patch of ice, crash into the median and are killed, does that change whether or not their initial actions were indicative of exercising rational caution?

The ice and snow blizzard caused the accident, but if the driver had exercised some rational caution they could have prevented the accident. Did we need to know the facts of an accident before we determined the driver did not exercise rational caution. Further, are we wrong for saying that a damm fool shouldn't be driving that fast in a snow blizzard?

The lesson is that we need to tell women not to be damm fools by driving fast (albeit legal) in a snow blizzard.

Err on the side of caution? That's the simple and most logical answer, of course.  But sooner or later trust is built, who's to say when it will be betrayed? Never trust anyone? Then how do relationships progress?

The question would be how man of the 'date' rape victims actually built trust (and had it broken) with their assailant, and how many 'date' rape victims were just being reckless, cavalier, and/or naive? Women, no one, can ever be totally safe. However, that's why I speak of rational caution.

How many of these 'date' rape victims were drunk when it happened? How many of these 'date' rape victims were alone with men they hadn't yet built trust with? We don't know that. But we do know that if a woman uses some rational caution she could lessen her chances of being violated. It's not rationally cautious to be alone with a man you've only known a short (one month) time. It's not rationally cautious to be alone with a man after only 2 or 3 dates.

This is not an all or nothing proposition. It shouldn't be argued that since women are never totally safe, then an exercising of rational caution is just an exercise of futility. Some accidents are just going to happen. Some can't be prevented with rational caution or even extreme caution. However, don't be driving fast in a snow blizzard - even if you're within the legal speed.

At some point we have to stop over-analyzing and criticizing the victim and start asking why this culture produces so many rapists.

Hey, I'm always first in line to analyze this culture. But that's not going to stop some woman from driving fast in a snow blizzard this weekend. We can analyze culture anytime, but this situation and the St. Guillen situation offer an excellent opportunity to warn women, not just about how dangerous men are, but how dangerous these women's choices can be. 

Further, I'm not over-analyzing or criticizing any victim. This is barely-analyzing. Over-analyzing would be discussing why this woman chooses to strip naked for money. Over-analyzing would be discussing why St. Guillen felt it necessary to be getting drunk in the first place. Over-analyzing would be discussing why Desiree Washington wanted to go to Mike Tyson's hotel room at 2 in the morning.

I'm not over-analyzing, I'm (as Rick James would say) "I'm just warming up. I'm just getting started. Hold my drink!"

Does it hurt to inform women of the importance of them being the primary guardians of their safety? These were not 'car-jacked and kidnapped in the mall parking lot' crimes. These were crimes where a little bit of rational caution would have prevented a woman from being victimized.

[Veracious]

Snow and blizzards are natural occurrences.  The analogy suggests that men raping women is a natural occurrence.  In other words, men are free to rape women because they just cannot help themselves.  Just like snow and ice cannot help falling from the sky.

Most of the responses in this thread are sickening.  First, a stripper or exotic dancer is not a prostitute.  The very conclusion illustrates an ego, no, the need, to insult any and all strippers.  There would be no supply of strippers if there were no demand.  Why not hold the men feet to the fire for soliciting stripper and/or exotic dancers.

Again, it is implied that it must be the women who must be the custodian of virtue and not become strippers because the pathetic weaklings (men) just cannot control themselves.  If every woman on the planet decided to behave as modestly as possible, it would just be something else that gives the barbarians justification, “she moved her lips too much when she ate” or some other crap.

Moreover, since so many are blaming the victims.  What about that thread about “Is it black people’s fault that whites are racists” or whatever.  Using the same line of reasoning here, it would imply that whites only discriminate against blacks because blacks do not watch out for themselves, they do not take the necessary precautions to avoid it (i.e. assimilate to the extent that satisfies YT). In other words, blacks deserve discrimination.

And you are right Cool Breeze.  Thugs do want their video ho (oops there is that supply and demand thing again) but would never, NEVER, NEVER, go against a punk ass team of Lacrosse players because they raped a woman.  The very fact that black men are not outraged shows that they think white men are worthy of their women.  “Take her massa, you sho are worhty of my woman, I’s won’t cause you no problem, she been actin’ up lately anyways.”  Let us not leave the sorry ass black women out of this.  They are so busy cutting another sister down to puff themselves up that they blame her for being a stripper.  Fuck the fact she has two kids to feed (that some gigga is not feeding) and is going to school.

A sissy ass Lacrosse team has more loyalty toward each other than blacks show.  For shame, for shame.

[The Shepherd]

Moreover, since so many are blaming the victims.  What about that thread about “Is it black people’s fault that whites are racists” or whatever.  Using the same line of reasoning here, it would imply that whites only discriminate against blacks because blacks do not watch out for themselves, they do not take the necessary precautions to avoid it (i.e. assimilate to the extent that satisfies YT). In other words, blacks deserve discrimination.

Veracious, there is nothing that black folks can do to stop white folks feelings of racism. However, are you saying that there was nothing that the Duke lady, St. Guillen, or Desiree Washington could have rationally done to prevent themselves from becoming a victim of those horrendous crimes?

Would St. Guillen have been kidnapped, raped, and murdered had she not been drunken barhopping alone? Would the stripper have been gang raped had she not put herself in a house with 40-50 drunken, sexually charged men? Would Desiree Washington have not been 'date' raped if she had not chosen to go to the hotel room of a man she barely knew at 2am?

Further, I am blaming the rapists for the brutal rapes. The lesson, though, is for women. What would you tell women? Would you tell women that it's wise to act as the three women above acted?

[Veracious]

They would not have been raped or the other one murdered if men did not leave virtue to women.  You are giving men a free pass.  And as I stated, if the women were not in that position the men would just justify raping them when they are in another position, i.e. eating a lobster alone at a restaurant in the middle of the day.  “It was the way she ate it, she deserved to be raped, I could not help myself, it is just natural, you try looking at a woman eat a lobster!”

On another note, here is a blog, http://sylvesterblogcom.blogspot.com/, actually an entry that may finally convince you to leave that loon O’Reilly alone.

[Veracious]

Actually, I should not say, “leave him alone,” that implies that you are insulting him.  I should say, it might convince you not to watch him or hold on to his words or mentality.

[Legacy]

3/29/06
Police release 911 tapes, players deny sex of any kind with dancer at party
Emily Rotberg and Steve Veres

http://www.dukechronicle.com/media/storage/paper884/news/2006/03/29/News/Police.Release.911.Tapes.Players.Deny.Sex.Of.Any.Kind.With.Dancer.At.Party-1763517.shtml?norewrite200603291714&sourcedomain=www.dukechronicle.com

The Durham Police Department released tapes Tuesday of 911 calls recorded in the early hours of March 14 during and after a party at which members of the men's lacrosse team allegedly gang-raped, sodomized and strangled an exotic dancer.

The captains of the team "unequivocally" denied the sexual assault and rape allegations in a statement-the group's first public statement about the situation.

A woman in the background, who identified herself as the owner of the car, confirmed that the alleged victim was "fairly drunk."

Media outlets also reported that Monday police searched a second residence-home to two Duke lacrosse players-and seized several unidentified items. Nifong told television station WRAL that more searches are likely to occur.

Kammie Michael, DPD public information officer, said a second search warrant was not issued. "The lead investigator does not know where it came from," she said. "No search warrant has been served."

As of press time Wednesday night, no charges had been filed. Officials are investigating the incident as first-degree forcible rape, common law robbery, first-degree kidnapping, first-degree sexual offense and felonious strangulation.

Forty-six of 47 members of the team provided DNA samples to DPD March 23. Nifong confirmed that three of the 46 teammates were not at the party.

Nifong said Monday that the large sample was necessary because members of the lacrosse team provided little information to investigators. He sent the samples to the Raleigh State Bureau of Investigation Monday and expects the results next week.

"The DNA results will demonstrate that these allegations are absolutely false," the lacrosse captains said in their statement.

Members of the Durham and Duke community have criticized the players for stonewalling investigators by not coming forward with full information about the party.

The captains' statement said the team has cooperated with the police investigation.

Brodhead-who said he met with the captains Tuesday morning-noted that the University began looking into the incident less than 24 hours after it took place.

"No employee has advised the players not to speak," he said, adding that he believes team members gave "lengthy" statements to the police. "I have to assume that they have legal counsel and that legal counsel has foreseen complexities associated with speaking out."

 Nifong met Tuesday with Robert Ekstrand, a partner at Ekstrand & Ekstrand LLP, who is representing a majority of the lacrosse players. Samantha Ekstrand, Law '01 and a partner at the same firm, declined to comment about the substance of the meeting. "In the past week, we have been representing the group. At this point we are still in the process of confirming that number [of clients]," she said.

Roland Gaines, the vice chancellor for student affairs at NCCU, said Tuesday that administrators are talking with the university's students and waiting for more information before determining their plan of action.

"Duke did not do this," Gaines said. "This was a small group of students involved, and I think the criminal justice system has to go through its process."

Brodhead said Tuesday night he has made several attempts to contact the NCCU chancellor but has not spoken with him.

Donna Lisker, the director of the Women's Center, said Duke is reaching out to its neighbor school, inviting NCCU students to Wednesday night's Take Back the Night march-an annual rally intended to bring awareness of sexual assault and empowerment to women.



President Richard Brodhead said at a press conference Tuesday evening that the captains had denied to administrators that sex "of any kind" occurred with the dancer, reportedly a 27-year-old black student at North Carolina Central University.

District Attorney Mike Nifong said Tuesday on MSNBC's The Abrams Report that the circumstances of the case exclude the possibility that there was no sexual activity.

"I am convinced that there was a rape," Nifong said, adding that nurses observed vaginal trauma upon examining the alleged victim.

Teammates who did not commit or observe the alleged assault are potentially liable for charges of aiding and abetting the crime because of teammate relationships, he added.

In the newly released 911 tapes, a female caller who was driving past 610 N. Buchanan Blvd.-a residence leased by three members of the lacrosse team and the scene of the party where the alleged rape occurred-reported that a white man yelled racial slurs at her from in front of the residence.

"He just hollered out n- to me, and I'm just so angry I didn't know who to call," she said to the 911 operator.

Athletic Director Joe Alleva said at the press conference he has seen "no evidence of any racial problems with the lacrosse team."

In the second call released by DPD, recorded at 1:22 a.m. March 14, a security guard at the Kroger grocery store on Hillsborough Road said a woman in a car-the alleged victim-refused to exit the vehicle, which did not belong to her. The caller also said the woman seemed "intoxicated" or "drunk."

[Obsidian]

No, black people can't stop white people from being racist any more than women can stop men from being sexist as is clearly being illustrated by Shep.

[Obsidian]

Whether or not you, in particular, are over-analyzing is purely subjective. However, my statement was an all-inclusive "we".

You missed my point about hindsight as it relates to your idea of rational caution. Using hindsight, a person who thought they were being cautious enough can learn from a mistake and choose to be more cautious in future.  After a situation has taken place, one should learn from it and not do the same thing again or strive to improve themselves – that’s life. I also agree that one ought to learn a lesson from the past. My point is that "rational caution" is itself a subjective standard.  We all have heard that "common sense" is not common, right? So, your idea of rational caution may or may not be seconded by everyone else.  Now, I know what you might be thinking -- How can stripping and barhopping be seen as operating out of "rational caution" by anybody sane? Well, both women might have felt fairly safe in that they were in the presence of large numbers of people; and one is taught that public places are safer.  In their eyes, perhaps they were being cautious. Of course, knowing the outcome now, we can say that their conclusion was wrong.

All of the questions about date rape are, of course, speculative in nature and are also beside the point. When the statistics mention acquaintance rapes, it is not exhaustively rapes that occur on "dates", but rather, rapes where the rapist is known to the victim, which can happen in countless possible scenarios. I suppose we should go back to chaperoned dates?

Of course women should be aware that they are in constant danger. Women should also be the ones who are most outraged by rape and should be making strides to make their communities, this country, and the world safer for women, period. Unfortunately, there is little solidarity among women, and until there is, I doubt we’ll see a drop in rape. Maybe I’m a pessimist, but in my opinion, even if a woman exercises rational caution, men will just find another way to do the deed and another justification for doing it.

“You may hear some people say that those who have been raped were somehow "asking for it" because of the clothes they wore or the way they acted. That's wrong: The person who is raped is not to blame. Rape is always the fault of the rapist. And that's also the case when two people are dating - or even in an intimate relationship. One person never owes the other person sex. If sex is forced against someone's will, that's rape.”

Women: Avoid men like driving in snow blizzards!

[The Shepherd]

Okay, Veracious, rational caution be dammed! Tell me, as I asked previously, What would you tell women? Would you tell women that it's wise to act as the three women above acted? Would you tell women that nothing they do, no behavior they engage in, no decisions that they make has any direct effect of whether or not they are victimized and violated?

By the way, I watch Bill O'Reilly because I don't agree with him - most of the time. On any given day, I agree with O'Reilly 25% of the time. Our agreement are on many of the issues regarding child abuse, education, and immigration.

I was taught by a teacher in high school that if you are going to be able to defeat someone else's point of view, then you need to thoroughly know what their point of view is. I watch O'Reilly and then look at my wife and say "here's where he's wrong". Folks have got to get out of the mentality that they should just flippantly disregard those they don't agree with.

[The Shepherd]

Obsidian, The Shepherd a sexist? That wouldn't be indicative by the postings in this thread.

You're right about one thing, though. Rational Caution is a subjective standard. However, I don't think a drunk at a bar, or a woman stripping to make a living, or a groupie is in any position to determine what is or isn't rationally cautious. You and I, though, can agree that according to our subjective standard that even before the facts of those three ladies situations became known to them or us, that the behavior they were engaging in was NOT rationally cautious. Right? This is just me and you talking.

I suppose we should go back to chaperoned dates?

Don't get overly cynical on me, now. I never insinuated that. I only stated that a woman should get to know a man over a certain period of time (1 month) or a certain amount of dates (more than 2-3) before she can even begin to build up enough trust to be alone with him. As I said before, women cannot afford to be cavalier or naive about the world. Their lives are at stake!

Maybe I’m a pessimist, but in my opinion, even if a woman exercises rational caution, men will just find another way to do the deed and another justification for doing it.

Generally, I'll agree with that regarding men who are rapists. Specifically, though, that does not apply to any of the situations I posed. It doesn't apple to St. Guillen, it doesn't apply to Duke lady, and it doesn't apply to Desiree Washington. They, specifically, could have rationally prevented what happened to them on those terrible nights.

Women: Avoid men like driving in snow blizzards!

Come on. We're having a good discussion here. Don't get overly cynical on me!

[Obsidian]

Don't get overly cynical on me, now.

Oh, this isn't me being overly cynical. Not even by a long shot. Maybe just a bit, but not overly. I can get pretty cynical.

I only stated that a woman should get to know a man over a certain period of time (1 month) or a certain amount of dates (more than 2-3) before she can even begin to build up enough trust to be alone with him.

And my point is that even that may not be enough. Six months may not be enough. These men don't have a rapist decal that will eventually show through the skin on their foreheads after a month of exposure.  Maybe after a month of waiting and building frustration, they can't take "no" for an answer. Maybe they were being "perfect gentlemen" (chivalrous) just to get the prize; maybe they've been deceptive as to their true nature all along. . .That's why I say again, rational caution can only go so far, meaning that every situation can't be saved by it.

You're right about one thing, though. Rational Caution is a subjective standard. However, I don't think a drunk at a bar, or a woman stripping to make a living, or a groupie is in any position to determine what is or isn't rationally cautious. You and I, though, can agree that according to our subjective standard that even before the facts of those three ladies situations became known to them or us, that the behavior they were engaging in was NOT rationally cautious. Right? This is just me and you talking.

I, personally, would not drink alone because I can't , as they say ,"hold my liquor", LOL, and I wouldn't want to be taken advantage of. However, the main reason why I don't strip, beyond being educated and hating the exaggerated objectification of women in this culture, is because I wouldn't like taking my clothes off in front of a group of horny men. Now, if I was down on my luck, had two mouths to feed, was putting myself through school, and had few other options? Well....

But there is a difference between stripping in a club and stripping at private parties. Generally, if you're going to do private parties, I would say get all the info. concerning the gig that's possible to have AND bring some form of protection (a group of people, guard, etc.).  Unfortunately, it takes something like what happened to this girl to make the latter clearly necessary...There's a reason we say we should learn from history.

If men can't handle seeing strippers perform, maybe we should outlaw stripping for the safety of women.

[chocolateladee]

I refuse to give this thread to much of my energy simply because I agree with Veracious, some of the comments on this issue are sickening.

Quinn, being raped does not come along with the job, thats retarded.

And DP, how you going to call a dancer a freakin prostitute? You need to get over your personal issues with dancers  , for real. Get help.

Veracious you definitely make the most sense here. Thumbs up.

[DianaPrince]

Legacy,

What makes Susan Smith more newsworthy...

the main drama and concern in her case was the fact that there was an accusation of a Black man MURDERING her two young CHILDREN.

Anytime someone black commits ANY crime, it's all over the local news!!

And why do you have a problem with that? Would it make you happy if they stopped publicizing any crime that Blacks commit?

Would you have spent so much time talking about the victim & not the men who committed this act had they been black men?

Yep...if the victim was a prostitute.

Aren't these the white men that you & the rest of your irk fawn over in the IR post?

I dont fawn....but if I were to fawn over WM, it would be 75% of them who have never raped a woman.

And in case you dont realize it, since most rapes are intra-racial, the overwhelming majority of BW who are raped, are raped by BM, so when you see BW on here fawning over BM, I expect to see you ask them the same question.

Most of the responses in this thread are sickening.  First, a stripper or exotic dancer is not a prostitute.

They are overtly and directly selling SEXUAL stimulation.  There is a reason why their performance involves them removing their clothes and gyrating their ass in specific way to simulate typical movements of SEX. They are PROSTITUTES.  And as a Libertarian...I can live with that, but I sure dont have to downplay or dress up the scum service that they choose to provide to their scum clients for a fee.     

The very conclusion illustrates an ego, no, the need, to insult any and all strippers.

Hmmm...I wouldn't say there is a "need".  Its not MY vagina (and other orifices) that just got tore up by a bunch of filthy White scum.
And I find it interesting that you are suggesting that its "insulting" to strippers to be referred to as prostitutes(according to the distinction that you regard as relevant).  So, on exactly what grounds are you judging "prostitutes" to be less deserving of respect than "strippers".  In my eyes...one tease the dyck for a fee and one sucks the dyck for a fee....the objective and end result is the same...stimulating scum to cum.   

There would be no supply of strippers if there were no demand.

I have referenced the supply:demand relationship often enough to deserve a patent.  However, when the "supply" is a sentient adult, acting as a willing agent of their own degradation, as well as the degradation of their collective gender...I will NOT issue them a free pass to escape ALL responsibility for their contribution.     

Why not hold the men feet to the fire for soliciting stripper and/or exotic dancers.

Since I was the one advocating for the raped prostitute to go on a killing rampage...I think that qualifies as more than just "holding their feet to the fire".  Let ALL who play with fire get burned. 

Let us not leave the sorry ass black women out of this.  They are so busy cutting another sister down to puff themselves up that they blame her for being a stripper.

Strippers/Prostitutes may be YOUR "sisters" but they are not MINE. MY sisters are those females who are not content to spend their life degrading MY gender....providing evidence of proof to men who are already inclined to want to see ALL women as nothing but shallow money grubbing whores who can always be had for the right price.  So, how does one "cut DOWN" that which has already sunk so LOW? Please!   

Fuck the fact she has two kids to feed (that some gigga is not feeding) and is going to school.

Biggest BS excuse.  There are all sorts of tax payer $ that are available to FEED the kids of those who deem themselves entitled to the right to fluck losers and infest society with their unwanted offspring over and over again.
Get a full time job, and got to school part-time.  Its not as quick and lucrative as being a prostitute, but also less likelihood of getting you ass tore up and maybe even HIV infected by a bunch of depraved animals.