ADVERTISEMENT

sexual assault article

Glen

Well-Known Member
Gold Member
Jul 2, 2001
2,294
958
1
I saw an article yesterday on Huff Post about the two directors of the new "Birth of a Nation" about the Nat Turner uprising. The article indicates they were roommates at Penn State in 2001 (note: doing this from memory and may be fuzzy on the year) and were on the wrestling team. They were accused of rape - with what sounded like a high profile trial. The article made the connection to Sandusky and made conclusions about the attitude at Penn State regarding sexual assault

Anyone have a better memory of the incident?
 
Fox Searchlight supports him and Nate Parker spoke about the incident in the article here.

http://www.vulture.com/2016/08/nate-parker-addresses-1999-penn-state-rape-case.html

Fox, for its part, says Parker and the film have their full support. “Searchlight is aware of the incident that occurred while Nate Parker was at Penn State,” the studio said in a statement to Deadline. “We also know that he was found innocent and cleared of all charges. We stand behind Nate and are proud to help bring this important and powerful story to the screen.”

Looks like one of those hit pieces by Huff when in reality it is, "nothing to see here, move along".
 
“We also know that he was found innocent and cleared of all charges. We stand behind Nate and are proud to help bring this important and powerful story to the screen.”

As a retired attorney, this kind of sloppy thinking/reporting pisses me off. If one is tried criminally, one is found either guilty or not guilty (the state did not satisfy its burden of proof). No one is "found innocent".
 
  • Like
Reactions: jtothemfp
As a retired attorney, this kind of sloppy thinking/reporting pisses me off. If one is tried criminally, one is found either guilty or not guilty (the state did not satisfy its burden of proof). No one is "found innocent".
It's called good marketing. Innocent sounds so much better than not guilty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: jtothemfp
As a retired attorney, this kind of sloppy thinking/reporting pisses me off. If one is tried criminally, one is found either guilty or not guilty (the state did not satisfy its burden of proof). No one is "found innocent".

So the implication here is that even if you are found "not guilty" by the jury, there is still a pretty good possibility that you are, in fact, guilty and that the state just couldn't prove it. In other words, the old medieval standard of guilt by accusation still applies today. Especially when someone is accused of sexual assault.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pennstate1985
So the implication here is that even if you are found "not guilty" by the jury, there is still a pretty good possibility that you are, in fact, guilty and that the state just couldn't prove it. In other words, the old medieval standard of guilt by accusation still applies today. Especially when someone is accused of sexual assault.
That's reading far too much into it. What it means is that the accused is presumed innocent and therefore does not need to prove his innocence. The burden is entirely on the prosecutor.
 
My remark was intended to be a sarcastic comment in general about the way our criminal justice system is inherently biased against the accused. And particularly so when it's a sexual assault incident. Our "objective" media is always ready to help too since sensationalism always sells more news to the gullible public. I don't need to go any further than the Duke case or JoePa to make my point there.
 
My remark was intended to be a sarcastic comment in general about the way our criminal justice system is inherently biased against the accused. And particularly so when it's a sexual assault incident. Our "objective" media is always ready to help too since sensationalism always sells more news to the gullible public. I don't need to go any further than the Duke case or JoePa to make my point there.

Plus, any article from the Huff post needs to be taken with a very large grain of salt. What a trash "news" website...
 
My remark was intended to be a sarcastic comment in general about the way our criminal justice system is inherently biased against the accused. And particularly so when it's a sexual assault incident. Our "objective" media is always ready to help too since sensationalism always sells more news to the gullible public. I don't need to go any further than the Duke case or JoePa to make my point there.

Actually, our criminal justice system is absolutely NOT biased against the accused. They are presumed innocent. The media and general public are the ones that are biased against the accused. The assumption by many is that if they were accused they were probably guilty but the criminal justice system could not PROVE that they were guilty.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dicemen99
You are guilty in the court of public opinion if you are accused of anything. Its unfortunate but a sign of the times we live in.

I have no opinion on this specific case as I don't have the facts so the above is just a general observation.
 
Last edited:
Your are guilty in the court of public opinion if you are accused of anything. Its unfortunate but a sign of the times we live in.

I have no opinion on this specific case as I don't have the facts so the above is just a general observation.

And don't forget, a jury is selected from the same public that forms those opinions.
 
And don't forget, a jury is selected from the same public that forms those opinions.

Being on a jury is very different in my experience. I was only on a jury once but it was a murder trial and my outlook based on the judges instruction and the whole experience was very different from what I expected. I was very aware of my responsibility to not allow my bias or opinion to sway what was expected of me. Of course, it was made easier in that the case I was on was pretty cut and dried, although that was not at all clear until the conclusion of the testimony.
 
I actually do have a small, somewhat humorous anecdote regarding Parker . . .

A probably lesser-known tidbit about Parker is that he spent a short time in Maine as a youth. I was assistant-coaching my younger brother's junior high team, and we ended up facing Parker that year. Mind you, this was mid-coast Maine in the 1990s -- blacks in my particular community were virtually non-existent outside adoption. Given that backdrop, and that Parker was already a physical specimen, all our middle-weights were driving themselves crazy at weigh-ins trying to guess who was going to have to wrestle Parker.

One of my brother's friends was the unlucky winner. He was almost sh***ing his singlet watching Parker during warmups. And that was the moment another assistant coach and I had to make the difficult decision about how to handle our guy psychologically. We told him that Parker looked tough, but he actually sucked. We assured our guy that he could take Parker. The poor sucker believed us and got all pumped up.

He went out for his match looking determined, and then got brutalized in a quick, less-than-30-second mat mopping. The look on his red, bloodied face when he came back to the bench was priceless, as he gasped "I thought you said he sucked?!?" The other coach and I couldn't help but bust out laughing. His teammates gave him crap about that match into and even beyond high school (he had switched to basketball by then, forever traumatized).

We were sure Parker would be a 4-timer in high school. But, he disappeared the next year, and we always wondered whatever happened to "that black kid from Bath who destroyed Kneedler." I found out when I got to PSU in 2000 -- I was grinning ear-to-ear upon learning he was wrestling D1 for a major program. I made sure to relay that news to Kneedler.
 
Well, things took a more tragic turn.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/nate-parker-rape-suicide-facebook-response-1201838968/

I think what Parker shared was pretty spot on:

I cannot- nor do I want to ignore the pain she endured during and following our trial. While I maintain my innocence that the encounter was unambiguously consensual, there are things more important than the law. There is morality; no one who calls himself a man of faith should even be in that situation. As a 36-year-old father of daughters and person of faith, I look back on that time as a teenager and can say without hesitation that I should have used more wisdom.

I look back on that time, my indignant attitude and my heartfelt mission to prove my innocence with eyes that are more wise with time. I see now that I may not have shown enough empathy even as I fought to clear my name. Empathy for the young woman and empathy for the seriousness of the situation I put myself and others in.

"(T)here are things more important than the law." It's got to be a tough thing to carry around for the rest of his life.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SRATH
Well, things took a more tragic turn.

http://variety.com/2016/film/news/nate-parker-rape-suicide-facebook-response-1201838968/

I think what Parker shared was pretty spot on:

I cannot- nor do I want to ignore the pain she endured during and following our trial. While I maintain my innocence that the encounter was unambiguously consensual, there are things more important than the law. There is morality; no one who calls himself a man of faith should even be in that situation. As a 36-year-old father of daughters and person of faith, I look back on that time as a teenager and can say without hesitation that I should have used more wisdom.

I look back on that time, my indignant attitude and my heartfelt mission to prove my innocence with eyes that are more wise with time. I see now that I may not have shown enough empathy even as I fought to clear my name. Empathy for the young woman and empathy for the seriousness of the situation I put myself and others in.

"(T)here are things more important than the law." It's got to be a tough thing to carry around for the rest of his life.
Especially with daughters. Many folks look back at periods in life with regret. Wisdom is a strange thing sometimes.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT