GoodBye Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 A similar situation happened to a teacher I knew in high school a couple years after I left. This guy was the JROTC instructor. A retired Navy Commander. Real straight laced guy. A family man. So this girl in the JROTC program alleged that he inappropriately touched her. The school fired him, he was charged, and his wife left him over it. His reputation was ruined, he lost his job, and his family over it. Well turned out when all was said and done she made it all up. She admitted that he never did a thing and that she lied about it for whatever stupid reason she said that I don't recall. That's exactly what I think this is about. They seem to be wanting to ruin her for what ever reason. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?? Maybe it was just a poor written article too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 That's exactly what I think this is about. They seem to be wanting to ruin her for what ever reason. What ever happened to innocent until proven guilty?? Maybe it was just a poor written article too. Impossible! Show me a recent case where anyone's tried to ruin a woman for any reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Impossible! Show me a recent case where anyone's tried to ruin a woman for any reason. What about this story... She made it all up!!... She has agreed to community service... No direct guy was implicated... But a business and business owner suffered for this hoax... Let alone 100's of thousand taxpayers dollars were wasted: Palos Heights Rape Hoax The part about being scared at her place of business - after the shop owner was skewered in the press for the perfectly legal act of letting an underage employee work a shift ending at 9 pm. And the part about the frightening "olive-skinned man" - which stoked anti-Arab-American sentiments in a town that has been nervous about seeing its population change significantly in the last few decades. The statement her lawyer released - after she copped to her lie in order to avoid being prosecuted for obstruction of justice when the physical evidence gathered after the alleged attack failed to substantiate her story - gave "deepest apologies" for the "unnecessary concern and time and effort from everyone involved." Which would presumably include the part where she terrified an entire community and cost the taxpayers and police an estimated $250,000 in investigation costs. The statement did not mention anything about being sorry for making the lives of all the "olive-skinned" people in the Chicago area tougher than usual due to her lapse in judgment. One misguided young woman who cried wolf just set us olive-skins back to somewhere around this time in 2001. What do you do in this case? October 14, 2008 By KIM JANSSEN, Staff Writer Everybody knows who she is. Nobody wants to say her name out loud. That, more or less, is the situation the 17-year-old girl who cried rape in Palos Heights Sept. 16 finds herself in today, five days after she admitted she made the whole thing up. The media has a longstanding policy of not naming rape victims in all but the most exceptional circumstances. News organizations - like the police - don't want to unnecessarily add to the stress of a traumatic sexual experience or to discourage other victims from coming forward. But when it turns out there wasn't a rape in the first place, the question gets more complicated, media ethics experts say. "I'd name her," said professor Jack Doppelt, who teaches ethics classes at Northwestern University's Medill School of Journalism. "The question which most people don't ask is, 'Why do we name anyone in any situation?' and the answer is for accountability, so that readers can trust what they're reading and weigh the reliability of the person involved," he said. "That rule is suspended for people who are the victims of rape or minors, but since that no longer applies in this case, I think she should be named, even if she is only 17." The SouthtownStar, which does not normally name suspects who have not been charged - as the 17-year-old has not - has decided not to name the girl. That was probably the right decision, according to Kelly McBride, ethics group leader at the Poynter Institute. "It's a fine balance," McBride said. "I wouldn't name her, but I also wouldn't fault an editor who chose to name her. "Rape is one of the most underreported felonies, but studies show that the public perception is that false rape reports are far more common than they actually are. "Journalists have to be careful that they don't discourage victims with legitimate complaints from coming forward, and that they don't reinforce the impression that most rape claims are false." While police say there is no doubt the girl in the Palos Heights case made up her story, many victims retract true rape allegations under pressure from investigators - another factor that should be considered before alleged hoaxers are named - McBride said. The girl's young age and apparently fragile mental state also should be taken into account, McBride said. "You have to ask what you're trying to achieve and see if there's another way of doing it," she said. But some argue shielding the names of rape victims stigmatizes them while giving license to those who make false accusations. Circuit Court Judge Richard Maroc said, "It comes from the old-fashioned and obviously wrong notion that 'good girls don't get raped.' "Robbery victims and murder victims are named, and nobody thinks they are to blame for what happened to them." Maroc said he has overseen several trials where men were falsely accused of child abuse or rape. "They were found not guilty, but once their name had been on page one, it didn't matter - their lives were ruined." Maroc cited the work of the Des Moines (Iowa) Register, which caused a stir in 1991 when it ran an editorial arguing that rape victims should be named. The article prompted rape victim Nancy Ziegenmeyer to come forward and led to a series that won a Pulitzer Prize. In the vast majority of cases, however, unless the victim volunteers to be named, they won't be. "Rape is different," McBride said. "It's a violation of a victim's body and privacy, and I think it has to be treated differently." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I did my student teaching but never actually liked it so I never pursued it as a career and I'm stuck with a degree in Brit Lit and that's been a huge help to me. I sure hope you didn't teach grammar. And doing your student while teaching is going to land you in jail. Read the link. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 So, they questioned some children and parents about this. Did they question the teacher before they made the arrest? How do they know if it's not the children setting this up to get rid of a substitute teacher they didn't like? You are so right. Between these people and the "anti duct taping a toddler to a car seat" crowd, we are turning into the USSR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dib Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Gosh I hope the 'victim' isnt scarred for life. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExiledInIllinois Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I sure hope you didn't teach grammar. And doing your student while teaching is going to land you in jail. Read the link. You are as sharp as a tack crayonz! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dr. Fong Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 That's hideous. I hope at least his ex-wife apologized to him. If she didn't trust him then her!!! Did he sue the school? I'm not sure whatever came of it. One thing I clearly remember is when he was being charged it was front page news. When he was cleared it was a tiny article buried in the back of the local section somewhere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
justnzane Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Gosh I hope the 'victim' isnt scarred for life. He's probably getting high fived for this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buckeyemike Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 You are so right. Between these people and the "anti duct taping a toddler to a car seat" crowd, we are turning into the USSR. My God...Crayonz is making sense. The Apocalypse must be near. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheMadCap Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 A similar situation happened to a teacher I knew in high school a couple years after I left. This guy was the JROTC instructor. A retired Navy Commander. Real straight laced guy. A family man. So this girl in the JROTC program alleged that he inappropriately touched her. The school fired him, he was charged, and his wife left him over it. His reputation was ruined, he lost his job, and his family over it. Well turned out when all was said and done she made it all up. She admitted that he never did a thing and that she lied about it for whatever stupid reason she said that I don't recall. This kind of thing happens all the time. I remember a story several years ago where a local guy in my town was arrested for allegedly assaulting these two teenagers in his neighborhood. Of course, the media and town jumped all over the story. The guy lost his job, family, money, reputation, everything. People were convicting him without even hearing the details of the case, indeed, before the trial had commenced. The man refused (under the direction of his attorney) to comment on the situation and was grilled publicly for this as well. "The sick perv doesn't even have the decency to apologies to us", was all they said. Turns out, his attorney was correct. He was able to break these two moron kids down in court. They admitted that the guy never did anything to them at all. Apparently, the problem was these two delinquents used to cut through his yard all the time, and the guy would always holler at them for it. So that was it. For yelling at him, they decided to make the whole thing up because he was perceived to be "mean" to them. Long story short, the guy won the case, but you would be hard pressed to find anyone in the area who would hire the guy. He ended up having to change his name and move to the west coast in order to start over. All because of some jackass kids stupid lies. I cannot remember if he ended up suing for damages, and how much he won but the damage to his life was probably not worth the trouble. Fact is, this can happen to ANY ONE OF US at any time. Right now, any woman, even if you know her or not, can call the cops and say you hit her, and they will come and lock your ass up. They won't even ask for proof, they'll just lock you up. If things like this happened, what would your friends and neighbors do? Would they stand up for you or would they say, "man, I didn't know he was a perv"... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drnykterstein Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 When I was doing my student teaching the school had a rule for after school tutoring. Two or more teachers would be in the same room tutoring different students and they would leave the door open. Ack. Real life sucks sometimes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steely Dan Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 I'm not sure whatever came of it. One thing I clearly remember is when he was being charged it was front page news. When he was cleared it was a tiny article buried in the back of the local section somewhere. I believe a law should be passed that any print or broadcast media that report a story about someone accused of a felony and the person is later found innocent should have to report the trial verdict in the exact same way they first reported the accusation. If a guy is accused of being a child molester on page one in 2" letters then the print media should have to print his exoneration on the front page in 2" letters. If a broadcast media outlet reports it on the first day 20 times during their news segments then they should have to report 20 times that the guy was aquitted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts