Chris,

I believe what you perceive as over-heated statements by Lyn and Marcia are 
reactions born of the fact that one such vaginal tear measuring an inch was 
brought forth as evidence during the hearing on the UTC incident, as was 
the description of the alleged victim as being "drunker than drunk" by one 
of the team members who was not involved in the incident.  If just offering 
them as proof is not enough, then I think that my fellow caucus members are 
right in questioning just how big the tears must be and just how drunk is 
drunk enough to make them sufficient evidence.

Lala

At 06:45 PM 1/31/2006, Chris Stuart wrote:
>Dear Colleagues,
>
>
>
>These remarks do not relate to the WC Resolution.  I have said all I have to
>say about that in my previous posting.  Rather, these are some more general
>thoughts on rape and the due process of law.  I am somewhat distressed by a
>similar thread in two recent postings by Lyn Miles and Marcia Noe.  Compare
>the two statements below:
>
>
>
>Lyn Miles writes:
>
>
>
>I note as an aside, that much as rape victims now have to defend how many
>vaginal tears they have, how long the tears are, and how "drunker than
>drunk" they were, etc.,
>
>
>
>Marcia Noe writes:
>
>
>
>How big does a vaginal tear have to get before we get concerned about
>it? Oh, one inch isn't enough? Would two inches be enough to get our
>attention? How about five or six? Maybe we should have some DEBATE and
>DIALOGUE about this question. If that girl had been abandoned in that dorm
>room, drunk and passed out, and had choked on her own vomit and died, would
>we get worried then? Or would we say, ah, well, it was her decision to
>drink, it was her decision to go back to the dorm with the boys, it was her
>decision to have sex with seven boys and then pass out and vomit? Students
>are really adults, aren't they, and what they do on their own time, in
>their own dorms, really shouldn't be regulated, should it? It might
>violate their civil rights to become seriously injured, or die. Why don't
>we debate that issue for a while?
>
>
>
>Clearly, both authors are very passionate about this issue.  In their heat,
>however, they seem to suggest that the person who brings a rape complaint to
>a district attorney ought not to have to be judged for the truth of her
>claims and ought not to have to go to the trouble of having them heard in
>all their details in a court of law.  How big does a vaginal tear have to
>be?  That's not a minor question in a rape case. Could that tear have come
>through consensual sex?  That's a crucial question to answer in a criminal
>trial.  How drunk does a person have to be?  That's also not a trivial
>question when what hangs in the balance is whether or not a man goes to
>prison for three to six years.  Rape is not a joke or a minor matter, and
>neither is prison a joke or a minor matter.
>
>
>
>The above messages suggest that in bringing up such "details" at the
>criminal trial the defense, or if I brought them up in my discussion of the
>appendix, we are being petty, that we are trivializing the crime by focusing
>on mere trifles.  Lyn Miles appears to insinuate that a woman who accuses a
>man of rape should not be put through the distress of demonstrating that she
>had vaginal tears, the length or depth of those tears, or whether  she was
>intoxicated (which as we have seen demonstrates nothing by itself in the
>eyes of the State).  That, however, is how our legal system works.  The
>burden of proof is on the state, not the defendant.  The jury or judge in a
>trial (as opposed to a hearing, yes, I know they aren't the same) has to be
>convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.  The fact that the process of
>convincing a jury beyond a reasonable doubt might be a severely
>uncomfortable process for the accuser does not change that, nor should it.
>
>
>
>After all, the authors of the above message would also argue vigorously,
>wouldn't they, for an accused person's right to a fair and speedy trial.
>That's a basic, constitutional right.  How are there to be fair trials if we
>do not take the time to look into "minor details" like the length and number
>of cuts on a victim or the degree of intoxication of a victim?  This is the
>stuff that all criminal trials - rape, assault, robbery, aggravated robbery,
>murder, etc. - are made of.  They are precisely the questions that are
>debated in courts every day all over the country.  The devil is always in
>the details, and whether or not a man is sent to prison for a decade or more
>frequently depends upon such petty, little, "details."  Let us remember that
>there have now been more than 100 people who have been released from death
>row because it was discovered they were the wrong folks.  What kinds of
>measures were presented at their trials?  Did prosecutors not present
>evidence like the length of tears, the depths of the cuts, and the levels of
>intoxication of their supposed victims in convincing a jury that their
>penalty should be death?  The process goes both ways.
>
>
>
>For those of you who feel so cheated by the court's recent decision, you
>should take some comfort in the fact that everything happened that was
>supposed to happen.  Professor Noe is wrong to insinuate that the case
>didn't get our attention.  The case DID get our attention and still HAS it.
>A young woman brought a complaint to the police.  They did not laugh in her
>face and tell her to go home.  Instead, they investigated.  The accused were
>dismissed from school and arrested.  State resources were expended so that
>the police and D.A.'s office could gather evidence.  The D.A. vigorously
>argued her case before a judge (and not a Grand Jury, the D.A.'s decision).
>The accuser in this case got everything that she was guaranteed by law and
>the constitution.  The only thing that did not happen was a conviction, and
>no complainant in this country is ever guaranteed the right to a conviction.
>
>
>
>In reference to Marcia Noe's final paragraph in her recent posting, I do not
>believe there is ever a time when passion or outrage ought to trump
>reasoned, civil argument.  That's why I think the criminal justice system is
>the best thing going, and it's why I'm heartened by the fact that
>prosecutors and defense attorneys will continue to battle it out over every
>half-inch "tear" and every beer drunk by every complainant and every
>defendant in every case.
>
>
>
>That's your protection and mine.
>
>
>
>Sincerely,
>
>
>
>Chris Stuart
>
>
>
>
>* UTCSTAFF home page:  http://raven.utc.edu/archives/utcstaff.html *
>* unsubscribe:  mailto:[log in to unmask]  *
>*   subscribe:  mailto:[log in to unmask]    *

************************************************************
"No hay libro tan malo que no tenga algo bueno."
         -Miguel de Cervantes- Don Quijote de la Mancha
**************************************
"I divide all readers into two classes:  Those who read to
remember and those who read to forget." -William Phelps
***************************************
Oralia Preble-Niemi, Ph.D.
Professor and Head
Foreign Languages & Literatures
University of Tennessee at Chattanooga
Chattanooga, TN  37403
Telephone:  423-425-4273
Fax:  423-425-4097
*************************************** 

* UTCSTAFF home page:  http://raven.utc.edu/archives/utcstaff.html *
* unsubscribe:  mailto:[log in to unmask]  *
*   subscribe:  mailto:[log in to unmask]    *