Spring Break
Victim on trial
Issue date: 3/4/08 Section: Forum
The United States has a great policy of being innocent until proven guilty. However in rape cases, it often seems as though the victim is guilty until proven innocent, and that is what determines the outcome of the trial.
On Feb. 28, OSU student Melchor Avila, 28, was acquitted on charges of raping and strangling another OSU student.
On New Year's Eve Avila was arrested after the female student pressed charges.
The woman reported that on Dec. 29, 2007 she spent a long period of time drinking, she ended up at Avila's apartment with a friend and she ended up getting sick. The friend left her at Avila's apartment, where she fell asleep and - according to her - woke up when Avila was raping her.
According to published accounts, Avila's actions did not appear to be on trial, but instead the woman's handling of the situation was.
Yes, she reported it two days later, but this is not uncommon. According to the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, 59 percent of all rapes go unreported. A report from 2005 stated that 72 percent of rapes are committed by either friends, intimate partners or relatives.
This may be a large contributing factor to why rapes are under reported.
Avila's defense attorney, John Rich, said his client and the woman had consensual sex. But other reports say they were in the process of having consensual sex and then she "went crazy."
Other comments made by Avila's attorney focused on her activity after the fact - like her behavior and interaction with Avila before blacking out, not coming forward immediately or going out to the bars two days after the alleged rape occurred.
At this point the debate is no longer "did a rape occur?" Instead, the debate is "does she act like a victim?"
Why were the victim's actions put on trial?
Why does the victim's life - in any type of sexual assault - have to be exposed? Since when was wearing a short skirt or being drunk an open invitation for sex?
While this may be a question people are tired of hearing, this is an example that hits close to home. The woman's clothing was not brought up, but her actions were, much like so many other victims are.
Many, if not most, other crimes do not even bring up any part of the victim's life when it comes to the verdict. However, in these cases, why put the victim's life on trial? Aren't they the ones who are supposed to get justice? Is it really justice to have their personal life publicized to win a case?
Editorials serve as a means for Barometer editors to offer commentary and opinions on issues both global and local, grand in scale or diminutive. The views expressed here are a reflection of the editorial board's majority.
On Feb. 28, OSU student Melchor Avila, 28, was acquitted on charges of raping and strangling another OSU student.
On New Year's Eve Avila was arrested after the female student pressed charges.
The woman reported that on Dec. 29, 2007 she spent a long period of time drinking, she ended up at Avila's apartment with a friend and she ended up getting sick. The friend left her at Avila's apartment, where she fell asleep and - according to her - woke up when Avila was raping her.
According to published accounts, Avila's actions did not appear to be on trial, but instead the woman's handling of the situation was.
Yes, she reported it two days later, but this is not uncommon. According to the Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network, 59 percent of all rapes go unreported. A report from 2005 stated that 72 percent of rapes are committed by either friends, intimate partners or relatives.
This may be a large contributing factor to why rapes are under reported.
Avila's defense attorney, John Rich, said his client and the woman had consensual sex. But other reports say they were in the process of having consensual sex and then she "went crazy."
Other comments made by Avila's attorney focused on her activity after the fact - like her behavior and interaction with Avila before blacking out, not coming forward immediately or going out to the bars two days after the alleged rape occurred.
At this point the debate is no longer "did a rape occur?" Instead, the debate is "does she act like a victim?"
Why were the victim's actions put on trial?
Why does the victim's life - in any type of sexual assault - have to be exposed? Since when was wearing a short skirt or being drunk an open invitation for sex?
While this may be a question people are tired of hearing, this is an example that hits close to home. The woman's clothing was not brought up, but her actions were, much like so many other victims are.
Many, if not most, other crimes do not even bring up any part of the victim's life when it comes to the verdict. However, in these cases, why put the victim's life on trial? Aren't they the ones who are supposed to get justice? Is it really justice to have their personal life publicized to win a case?
Editorials serve as a means for Barometer editors to offer commentary and opinions on issues both global and local, grand in scale or diminutive. The views expressed here are a reflection of the editorial board's majority.
Note: writers will not reply to comments.
Comments by registered users are approved by default.