RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, RR: 25 Posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1935 times:
This is a tricky one.
I don't claim to fully appreciate how seriously cheerleading in this context is taken in the States or indeed in Texas where this school is. However, it does seem somewhat repellent that this situation has been allowed to arise.
Whether or not she should be cheerleading, or whether or not the perpetrator should be allowed to play are perhaps valid questions, but to have to compensate the school just seems pretty wrong.
Bongodog1964 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 2575 posts, RR: 2 Reply 1, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1907 times:
Having read the article, it appears that she isn't being financially penalised for refusing to cheer, the school gave her a choice "cheer or leave the gym" The young lady and her parents then chose to launch as legal action against the school, no doubt encouraged by the US legal system claiming that her right to "free speech" had been violated. As she launched a silent protest I can't see that there was any speech involved !
They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
RussianJet From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, RR: 25 Reply 2, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 1899 times:
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her. Whether or not her case was deemed frivolous, there is bound to be a fairly understandable legacy of the incident apparently at the root of all this.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 4, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1854 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2): find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
At a personal level I can understand her unwillingness to cheer on a person who had been convicted of an assault upon her. However, a cheer squad is supposed to support players as members of a team. They are not there to cheer or "endorse" an individual as an individual but as a player for the team. Cheerleaders are part of a team as well and they perform as a team, not as individuals who can decide if they feel like cheering or not. I do not believe that this is a freedom of speech or expression issue as the whole point of a cheer squad is precisely to do that - cheer. Freedom of expression doesn't come into it at all.
The questions that arise are, was she aware that the player would be on the team when she agreed to appear as a cheerleader? If so, why didn't she excuse herself at that time, or make her feelings known before the game rather than deciding to make a public display at the event? Perhaps the school may have excused her for this appearance, but if the player was going to be in the squad on a regular basis I can see that her continuing membership of the cheerleader squad would become untenable. You can't have each member doing their own thing whenever they feel like it.
On the question of compensation it seems reasonable that if a person decides to bring a frivolous matter to court that they should be prepared to not only pay their own costs but the costs of the other party if they are unsuccessful. It is common practice in many countries for a winning party to seek costs from the losing party, although it is up to the courts to decide whether an order for costs should be made.
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 5, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 19 hours ago) and read 1847 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 3): What kind of high-school has a rapist on the team? I'd certainly not put my children there.
Certain areas like this Texas town don't care a thing about your morals if you are a star athlete and you might well be able to get away with murder (almost literally).
In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): As she launched a silent protest I can't see that there was any speech involved !
The first amendment doesn't just cover freedom of speech but also freedom of expression.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
Ok then the case should be dropped and this $45,000 should be to cover only the legal costs incurred by the school and nothing more.
dc9northwest From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, RR: 2 Reply 6, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1812 times:
"surrenders her constitutional right to free speech"
Really? Ok, then, kids, don't become cheerleaders!
This reeks of stupidity from both sides. Why was she cheering? Why did she sue when given the right to withdraw from the squad and hot have to cheer for her assaulter/rapist? I can certainly see her fault here, but the court decision above sounds really bad... Losing her first amendment rights for cheering for a school. But the right course of action was withdrawing from the squad. Period.
However, American schools tend to require a certain number of PE credits for graduation... Which can pose a problem if this was her last semester.
I guess the idea is not to go against bigger entities than yourself in the American justice system, because you'll lose. Seems very strange.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 7, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1807 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
Seems like the reasonable thing to do The way I see it, keeping rapists in school-sports teams is no better than keeping a child molester in a sports team. Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
Quokkas From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, RR: 6 Reply 10, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1752 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 7): Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
From the linked article:
Quote: In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6):
"surrenders her constitutional right to free speech"
Really? Ok, then, kids, don't become cheerleaders!
The trouble is that the first amendment is not absolute. It provides protection against action by the state for speaking freely and even then not in all circumstances. The first amendment does not provide protection for breech of the terms of your employment. Why we would see this as a particular problem of US justice, I do not know. A person working for a private company in Europe or Australia who actively undermined their employer would also face dismissal.
Asturias From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, RR: 19 Reply 11, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1747 times:
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Yes he was actually charged with rape (dropped, for unknown reasons) and was convicted of assault. Draw your own conclusions, but it sure isn't rocket science.
Furthermore it doesn't aid or change any fundamentals of my argument that a person convicted of assaulting a child should represent a high-school in a sports team. Let alone the fact that he probably raped the child.
One wonders if you would be so defensive for the convict if he had been a catholic priest.
Mir From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 17876 posts, RR: 59 Reply 12, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1733 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 9): The right action would have been to never allow a child molesting rapist to be on the school-team. Seems pretty self-evident.
This is one of the first things that jumps out at me. Even if he only assaulted her (and to me it sounds like he did more than that, but got off on a plea bargain, perhaps aided by his athlete status), he still should have been off the team for at least a year. It would be a good opportunity for him to learn how to be a functioning member of society, and learn that the rules still apply to him even though he is unusually good at playing with a ball.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6): Why did she sue when given the right to withdraw from the squad and hot have to cheer for her assaulter/rapist?
She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
That said, I can see why she lost her case. But that doesn't mean the school was morally right to do what they did. They come out of this looking horrible, as does the court system that's making her pay $45,000.
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
This is why "loser pays" systems suck. It's not frivolous when a victim wants to fight being punished for not wanting to cheer for her assaulter.
-Mir
[Edited 2012-01-30 08:31:51]
7 billion, one nation, imagination...it's a beautiful day
Quote:
In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
/quote
Now I appreciate that the linked article doesn't go into further detail but it does state that he was not convicted of rape. Whether that was the result of a lack of evidence or as a result of plea-bargaining I do not know, but he was not charged with rape.
Quoting Asturias (Reply 11): Furthermore it doesn't aid or change any fundamentals of my argument that a person convicted of assaulting a child should represent a high-school in a sports team. Let alone the fact that he probably raped the child
I think if I were the girl and her family, I would consider pursuing a separate civil action against the young man for the money he has now cost the girl. Of course it would be dependent on the statute of limitations for the crime he was convicted of but if it were possible, then a civil trial is perfectly acceptable as it happens all the time when a criminal justice penalty turns out to not be appropriate.
Just a thought.
I can certainly understand her unwillingness to cheer for the guy, though if I were her parent I would have kept her from being at the game somehow or if that wasn't possible, discussing it with the coach and school principle beforehand.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
AirframeAS From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 12883 posts, RR: 30 Reply 14, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1712 times:
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2): I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
If he was found guilty of sexually assaulting her, he should NOT be playing basketball, period. However, from the article, this angers me:
Quoting News Article (Reply website): In court, Bolton pleaded guilty to the misdemeanour assault of HS. He received two years of probation, community service, a fine and was required to take anger-management classes. The charge of rape was dropped, leaving him free to return to school and take up his place on the basketball team.
WTH?! This dude got off easy only so that he can compete in basketball. This is sending the wrong message to kids. If this cheerleader was my daughter, I would tell her to find some other hobby for the time being and wait for the football season to come back and then cheer for that.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): They are not there to cheer or "endorse" an individual as an individual but as a player for the team.
While that may be true, but in high school, anything is possible. High School kids don't completely understand the cheering concept as a whole.
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
In the school district I attended to, this young man would have been expelled from the district pronto even with the deal he made with the prosecution.
Quoting dc9northwest (Reply 6): But the right course of action was withdrawing from the squad. Period.
She could have done that. Why she didn't, I don't know. In her defense, I don't think she knew that he was actually eligible to participate in basketball after all that happened between the two. Normally, the cheer roster is announced the previous year (before the summer break) before the basketball roster was to be announced (during the new school when the football playoffs are being done).
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): t does state that he was not convicted of rape.
He pleaded it out and the article states what he got in return. I quoted that above. He is still guilty even if he pleads it out. He only did that so that he can actually participate in the basketball team. He isn't stupid, he knew this all along. Now if he went through a trial and was found guilty, then he wouldn't be on the team, period.
A Safe Flight Begins With Quality Maintenance On The Ground.
Ken777 From United States of America, joined Mar 2004, 6127 posts, RR: 4 Reply 15, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 14 hours ago) and read 1602 times:
Quoting Bongodog1964 (Reply 1): They tried to take the school for a small fortune and the judge decided the case was frivoulous, perhaps others will learn a lesson.
Basic Texas legal system - the rights of some 16 year old little girl pales in comparison to the worship of athletes.
If the guy had not been an athlete he would have gotten 20 years.
Quoting RussianJet (Reply 2):
I get that, yet still find it hard to escape the fact that he was found guilty of assaulting her.
It was just rape. No big deal when it is the guy who was the star.
Quoting Asturias (Reply 3):
What kind of high-school has a rapist on the team? I'd certainly not put my children there.
What kind of high school? One that wants to win. And they will probably never understand why the rest of the world just shakes their head at them.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): Freedom of expression doesn't come into it at all.
Freedom to Win certainly overrides Freedom of Speech or Legal Integrity in that pi$$-a$$ town.
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 4): On the question of compensation it seems reasonable that if a person decides to bring a frivolous matter to court that they should be prepared to not only pay their own costs but the costs of the other party if they are unsuccessful.
A girl still in high school is EXPECTED to cheer the $hit that raped her? While he is making a "free" throw? That $hit got the free throw of all time when the rape charge was dropped. Maybe it can be in-instated.
DocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 14050 posts, RR: 55 Reply 16, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 13 hours ago) and read 1523 times:
Quoting StarAC17 (Reply 5): Certain areas like this Texas town don't care a thing about your morals if you are a star athlete and you might well be able to get away with murder (almost literally).
In any other place such as a city in Texas or another country he would have been kicked out of the school and perhaps the district for his actions.
In addition, it says that the charges of rape were dropped. I find that disgusting (if you're accused of rape, you should either stand trial for it or not; charges should not be dropped in a plea-bargain).
dc9northwest From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, RR: 2 Reply 17, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1441 times:
Quoting Asturias (Reply 9): The right action would have been to never allow a child molesting rapist to be on the school-team. Seems pretty self-evident.
Of course, that's also true. However, at the time of the cheerleading incident, that wasn't an option anymore.
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
That said, I can see why she lost her case. But that doesn't mean the school was morally right to do what they did. They come out of this looking horrible, as does the court system that's making her pay $45,000.
No, she didn't do anything wrong, per se, however, her not-wrong actions seem to be costing her $45,000 in court fees because she lost the case... which is, as you say, morally wrong coming from this "learning institution". I personally think no one is completely in the right here. Of course the rapist should probably be in prison (assuming he was guilty--which it seems he was, but without the details IMO we can't say that beyond a reasonable doubt).
Quoting Quokkas (Reply 10): Why we would see this as a particular problem of US justice, I do not know. A person working for a private company in Europe or Australia who actively undermined their employer would also face dismissal.
Hold on, though... undermined their employer... There's no employer here, is there? In this case I don't consider the school an employer--she's not getting paid at all; this is an extra-curricular activity undertaken on a voluntary basis--she's a volunteer, and should have the right to not participate when a conflict appears--she's representing the school, OK, I get that. However, it's on a voluntary basis and she is getting nothing out of it (except possibly enjoyment and because of the twisted US system a better chance at college... maybe). In my opinion it's unjust to expect the same commitment from an employee and from a volunteer. Don't know legislation on this subject though.
It's not a particular problem of US justice, maybe, but the incident did occur in the US.
tugger From United States of America, joined Apr 2006, 3557 posts, RR: 4 Reply 18, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 12 hours ago) and read 1431 times:
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 16): In addition, it says that the charges of rape were dropped. I find that disgusting (if you're accused of rape, you should either stand trial for it or not; charges should not be dropped in a plea-bargain).
I just thought of this:
Did the girl involved agree to have the charge of rape dropped if the assailant plead guilty to assault and she then would not have to testify? I would think it is a quasi-common option the victim is offered to consider so that there is no risk by going to trial (and losing, aka the assailant has a clean record) and the victim is not questioned and challenged on the witness stand.
Tugg
everything I have learned I have learned by mistake
cmf From United States of America, joined Jun 2011, 1060 posts, RR: 24 Reply 19, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 10 hours ago) and read 1375 times:
Quoting Mir (Reply 12): She didn't do anything wrong. Why should she be forced to walk away from cheerleading? Her solution sounded perfectly sensible - cheer for the team, not for the player.
Completely agree. He should be made to leave before her. Not making her a victim a second time. She should be commended for only taking the extremely lenient action of not cheering for him.
In hindsight, she should have asked for a restraining order.
Don’t repeat earlier generations’ mistakes. Learn history for a better future.
StarAC17 From Australia, joined Aug 2003, 2614 posts, RR: 4 Reply 21, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 9 hours ago) and read 1340 times:
Quoting greasespot (Reply 20): Here is usually part of a persons probation. Not sure what it is in the USA.
That would force him to find a new school.
Remember this is Texas and sports so it is likely that they would have kicked her out of the school to fulfil the restraining order if one ended up being granted.
czbbflier From Canada, joined Jul 2006, 891 posts, RR: 3 Reply 22, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1272 times:
Kinda reminds me of a situation where a couple of kids, in the middle of a hot summer, ambushed this guy with squirt guns. Enraged, he went home, came back and shot them. With bullets.
In response, the town acted by banning squirt guns.
Here is usually part of a persons probation. Not sure what it is in the USA.
That would force him to find a new school.
You are talking about Small Town Texas, where sports are far more important than silly little obstructionists stuff like Criminal Laws.
Actually, those Bubbas & Juniors down in Texas are missing some potentially great games. Have those Texas Prison play each other. Winner gets a week's worth of prime beef for all prisoners.
Now that would be some Real Red Meat Texas Football.
EA CO AS From United States of America, joined Nov 2001, 11864 posts, RR: 67 Reply 24, posted (3 months 3 weeks 4 days 6 hours ago) and read 1263 times:
I completely understand the girl's anger, however this isn't about what happened between them - that's what the criminal court system is for, and rightly or wrongly, the guy cut a deal that was essentially a slap on the wrist and that's the end of that.
What this case IS about is the fact that this girl has, based on her past interaction with this student/athlete, unilateraly decided that she can determine to what extent she performs in her role as a cheerleader. And while what this jerk got away with is horrible, it's ultimately no different than a cheerleader refusing to cheer for an ex-boyfriend who broke up with her or even just a guy she happens to not like for whatever reason.
The school was completely within their rights to counsel her on the need to cheer for him, despite her feelings. And when she refused, they were completely within their rights to remove her from the cheerleading squad.
It's unfortunate that she chose to take legal action in this instance.
"In this present crisis, government is not the solution to our problem - government IS the problem." - Ronald Reagan
25 Quokkas: Do you believe that we should have different standards of evidence and justice determined by who a person is? I most certainly don't. If he had been
26 Mir: It's pretty different. The guy assaulted her at least, possibly raped her. That goes above and beyond the normal ex-boyfriend teen angst stuff. Compl
27 EA CO AS: You make the mistake in assuming being a cheerleader is something EACH student gets to do, and that's not the case - they have to try out, and only a
28 EA CO AS: Again, I agree that what he got away with was beyond horrible. However, this is ultimately about saying to this girl she does not get to determine to
29 Mir: As I said before, I can understand why she lost the case (though I don't necessarily agree with the ruling - again, any reasonable person would see t
30 runner13: Being from Texas not small town though, it doesn't surprise me one bit. It is very sad and unforunate for the girl, but in small town Texas sports is
31 EA CO AS: No offense intended, but I can't understand why you can't understand it. Let me put it to you in another context: An employee comes forward with a co
32 Maverick623: Pssh. It happens all over the US, as we've seen in both collegiate and professional sports. Your analogy fails from the get-go: This wasn't merely an
33 EA CO AS: Assume then that he admitted he did touch her inappropriately outside of work, but again, it was outside of work. The company cannot take action on t
34 RussianJet: Can't agree with that. It clearly is different. We can't just pretend that there are no different shades in potential reasoning behind the course of
35 Asturias: Well, good for you and I do agree with the general sentiment, but that's not what I meant. A person *convicted* of assaulting a child (probably raped
36 Quokkas: I am unable to comprehend how you can make such a false deduction from what I have written. I haven't actually stated what I think of her assailant b
37 ltbewr: To me, her decision to not cheer for someone who has been convicted in a court of law for sexual/other assault on her should be considered to be the s
38 StarAC17: No but it does from the state and if this school is public then the first amendment is valid unless if violates the school's code of conduct. I guess
39 Asturias: I am unable to comprehend how you can make such a false deduction from what I have written. It is actually irrelevant that he wasn't convicted for ra
40 starbuk7: I found this article that might shed some more light on what happened. http://www.texasgopvote.com/naacp-ch...ape-charges-against-his-rel-002982
41 Asturias: Seems self-evident that justice was perverted to protect this obvious rapist, by the community itself, by his family and by the NAACP. This was clear
42 Aesma: I thought that any minor offense involving genitalia (even peeing in the street) got you on the sex offenders list, and that when on that list you cou
43 Mir: You just described why she lost the case, but that doesn't mean that the case is frivolous. But in any case: Your analogy falls apart right here. The
44 KiwiRob: Isn't this why every self respecting bible thumping southern baptist father of a daughter in the South has a gun, he could shoot the guy, since the ki
45 Mir: Yeah, but this is high school sports. Justice being served is the player remaining on the team so that they can win. -Mir
46 DeltaMD90: I think my biggest issue is with the school. I mean, come on, she was maybe raped, at least assaulted by the guy, let her sit that cheer out. Would've
47 tugger: It seems it went to the absurd and it just did not need to. Regardless of everything else, the school should not have made an issue of it at all. Als
48 DeltaMD90: But seriously, they couldn't just have her stand to the side? No offense to cheerleaders, but I usually never watch them at a game anyway. Maybe she
49 Asturias: If you read the article starbuck7 posted carefully, it's pretty evident that yes there was a whole chain of management - not just in the school but i
50 Maverick623: There is no right to participate in extracurricular activities. I figured that out long ago. The only evidence you need is that he was allowed to ple
51 EA CO AS: In a manner of speaking, they absolutely were - the both "worked" to represent the school in interscholastic athletic competition. Your choice not to
52 StarAC17: Then kick her off the team, that is not a violation of the first amendment. Edit: they did that.[Edited 2012-01-31 17:46:33]
53 Mir: Wow. Just...wow. You could consider them as members of two different divisions of the same company, I suppose. But they're not co-workers. They have
54 EA CO AS: C'mon now, one's "job" is to support the other while they're "working". They have plenty to do with each other in that regard.
55 Mir: In order for that to be a valid argument, there'd have to be some evidence that the quality of performance of a cheerleading team has any effect at a
56 EA CO AS: Okay, now you're taking this to the ridiculous. The cheers the cheerleaders do explicitly refer to the team or individuals on the team, regardless of
57 Mir: Doesn't mean they have any effect on the team. Nor are they there to have an effect on the team. They're there to get the spectators involved and, in
58 tugger: This is all ridiculous. The idea that school and school extra-curricular activities as being equal to a work environment and situation is ridiculous.
59 EA CO AS: Equal, no. Comparable, yes. Yes she was, when she auditioned for and was selected to participate as a cheerleader. Yes she was, when she was counsele
60 tugger: Perhaps in a way but not the way you are applying it. If you cannot understand that teaching and teachers have a requirement to educate the students
61 EA CO AS: You make the mistake in assuming the teacher/student relationship is the same as the coach/student athlete relationship. It's not. In many ways there
62 Asturias: You're making the mistake of comparing a school for minors to any other place. The first and foremost duty and obligation of such a school is to ensu
63 Aesma: I remember reading here people defending decisions like the one that got a woman burned by hot coffee rich. Somehow, that wasn't a frivolous suit.
64 cmf: May I suggest some research in to the subject, you will get surprised. The real story is very different from the "public story."
65 tugger: Yes, I see, you do not understand. From the Texas Coaches Association code of ethics: http://thsca.pointstreaksites.com/fi...ocuments/386/THSCACodeof
66 EA CO AS: Which is exactly what happened. In a case where it's "cheer, or do not cheer" there were no other options available. As the student was now a detrime
67 tugger: It is not what happened here. The girl was willing to remain silent and the coach could have had her sit the game or that cheer out and there would n
68 EA CO AS: Read it again, from the article: when Bolton was about to take a free throw, the girl decided to stand silently with her arms folded. Not "sit out."
69 DeltaMD90: I think some of you are being way harsh. I'm no expert in women studies, and think the whole "rape ruined my life I can't get intimate anymore" mental
70 tugger: Still incorrect. And you are making massive assumptions about her intentions that are not contained in the article. If someone is injured (and you ha
71 Asturias: Coming from another very un-PC person, I agree completely. In fact I feel it smells of PC to stare blindly at the verdict of a court without consider
72 DeltaMD90: Exactly. I'd have to look into the details, but the court case and legal procession sounds like it was done correctly, and I'd probably agree with th
73 Maverick623: By definition, extracurricular activities are not required to be participated in. If they are, then they are no longer "extracurricular", but a part
74 DeltaMD90: You're right, there is no right. I would have hoped that the school realized this and kicked the RAPIST off the team instead of pressuring the girl t
75 tugger: Do you remember when you were in school just how important the clubs and sports stuff were to being "part of the school" to even having friends? Have
76 Mir: I can understand why the courts ruled against the case (though I don't necessarily agree). I don't understand why it was deemed to be frivolous (unle
77 Maverick623: Yep... and we see how well it worked out for those kids. A whole mess of underage drinking, sex, drugs, rape, and the thug life. Having experienced t
78 tugger: They do not "make" someone successful but they can be important elements to ones ability to be successful. Human social interaction and the ability t
Sponsor Message: 
From Kazakhstan, joined Jul 2007, 4953 posts, 
From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 2575 posts, 
From Spain, joined Apr 2006, 1767 posts, 
From Australia, joined Jan 2012, 440 posts, 
From Romania, joined Feb 2007, 1177 posts, 
The way I see it, keeping rapists in school-sports teams is no better than keeping a child molester in a sports team. Which he was in this case, since he raped that girl when she was 16.
From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2557 posts, 
WTH?! This dude got off easy only so that he can compete in basketball. This is sending the wrong message to kids. If this cheerleader was my daughter, I would tell her to find some other hobby for the time being and wait for the football season to come back and then cheer for that.
From Canada, joined Apr 2004, 3015 posts, 
Printer friendly format 
