|
| ,
I
am
not
as
quick
|
|
 |
|
 |
, I am not as quick to judge what happened with him in that situtaion as others I have seen. We have one article, an editorial very short on details, and I keep feeling like there is more to the story.If his only defense was he couldn't get an erection, and everyone else was convicted, how did the jury believe such a poor excuse? I could understand if it was a classic 1980s case of blame the victim, but if they handed out a bunch of convictions in the same case then that can't be it. Why wasn't he charged with attempted rape as Cameron Earle was? Why wasn't he charged as an accessory? There has to be more to him being acquitted than just saying "I wanted to, but I couldn't get it up". One person in a case that resulted in six other convictions gets out of it just because he says he was impotent?There has to be more to this story, and I don't feel comfortable condemning him as an attempted rapist, pretty much the worst thing out society can consider you, until I have more information.That doesn't mean he gets a pass either. This response was woefully inadequate. He didn't address anything and instead just told us a story about discussing the charges with his dad.I'm not saying he is a good guy, I'm not saying something bad didn't happen, and I'm not saying it's the victims fault or that she asked for it or deserved it. I'm just saying there is more to this story than either the article everyone is passing around or Lloyd Irvin is telling us.The thing that disturbs me the most is all the attention is on a rape case from 23 years ago instead of the current problems, both with the New Year's Eve tragedy and stories like posted on this blog. People online seem to be more concerned with going after Lloyd Irvin instead of facing the very real problems at many schools.
|
 |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(VISITOR) AUTHOR'S NAME
Shaikha
MESSAGE TIMESTAMP
16 december 2014, 23:21:54
AUTHOR'S IP LOGGED
62.210.78.179
|
|
|
|
