Thug Guards Rape Teenage Inmates; Generates Minimal News Coverage

Makes me wonder what race / class the victims where…if it was mostly white girls, this would be all over the place. alas…what else do you expect from todays media?

totally disgusting…

I don’t think that race is really that important here since black men don’t show a greater tendency toward child molestation than white men (probably less) and show a much less tendency toward actual pedophilia which involves pre-pubescent children. This case simply involves some idiots who had sex with teenage girls who were seemingly willing participants. They simply were below the age of consent and under the supervision of these men which amounts to a serious crime.

Maybe someone will take advantage of them when they are locked up.

Stories like this one are why I have come to believe that while race isn’t the roadblock many of us make it out to be, it’s almost always a factor in some fashion.

Governments hire and protect a sea of incompetent people. The largest unions are among government employees.

Affirmative action has been applied with a vengeance by governments.

When government incompetence/corruption becomes a scandal and it involves too many employees who are affirmative action hires, the liberal press runs for the tall grass.

(What would have been the outcome if the idiots at Abu Gharib had all been black?)

These “guards” are predators. There may well be a corrupt “culture” of sex for privileges at the jail. There may be a rotten core to this story that runs all the way through the local government where people have learned to “look the other way” and to “let sleeping dogs lie.”

The press may be afraid that if they scratch this scab, too many negative stories may erupt. In my experience, the majority of government affirmative action hires are significantly less skilled than the average minority hire in the private sector.

The racial component here is directly linked to affirmative action and the liberal penchant to protect it at all costs.

La Shawn,

About 10 years ago I investigated a similar situation except it involved adult women in a minimum security type facility. There was a racial component involved in that situation too and I also found that the involved guards had criminal backgrounds. In defense of the state, the facility was run by a civilian company contracted to do so, hence the lax (if any) background checks. I will email you about it.

Shade,

You are wrong about whites having a greater tendency toward child molestation crimes. In my professional experience it runs about the same regardless of race. You will find more whites charged in such crimes for a variety of reasons, but mostly because they make up a greater percentage of the population.

Well I’ve read six or seven articles about this story and none mention race. I did see one picture that made me think some of the accused were white but they didn’t really show enough to draw that conclusion. There was a picture of one of the alleged victims and she was definitely a white female. At least 3 articles dealt with the failure of the juvenile justice system but none mentioned race as a factor. And no article mentioned affirmative action. Marion County covers Indianapolis and both the county and the city are about 25% black.

LaShawn, isn’t that what we ultimately want; a society where race isn’t such a big factor? There are major issues here that can be discussed regardless of race. Employee background checks (lack of), training (lack of), accountability (lack of), abuse of females, minors, etc.

This is the first I’ve heard of this case. Who’s watching the watchers? If the prison administration was not being vigilant in policing the actions of their guards-if they so inept as to allow such a “culture of corruption” (thanks, Nancy!)-to grow within the walls of their facility-they should also be charged and punished. Is incompetence actionable?

Also Chris, I won’t say anything else about my comment, as it veers of topic for the post.

Montie

My stress was mostly on there being no greater tendency for blacks to molest children. I added the idea that it is probably less after reading that 70% of those convicted of such actions are white (which is consistent with whites being 70% of the population) and my observation that child molestation tends to be relatively high in the Hispanic community since sex with minors is not as taboo.

As far as pedophilia, everything that I have seen seems to point toward white males. I doubt that there are hardly any black members of NAMBLA and I’m not familiar with hardly any black child molesting priests.

As far as affirmative action, I doubt seriously if it ever really applies to correction officers. This is a low skill profession. Correction officers generally require a high school diploma or a GED. They go through training, take an exam, and are put to work. Roughly 25% of COs are black. There is no real shortage that mandates affirmative action. Black men are often hired for security type positions. The bodyguards of stars seem predominantly black. There are plenty of black police officers. The “intimidating black male” has often been the choice for security. What has simply happened in this case is a failure of background checks. This profession is not very coveted and often is filled with those who had few other opportunities. Few people want to oversee convicts.

I still think race preferences factor in. I’ll do the research. – Admin

“What has simply happened in this case is a failure of background checks. ”

It also takes a lot of training and monitoring to keep male guards not only from using their position to seduce inmates but also to keep bored, promiscuous female inmates from seducing guards for privileges (and sex).

The white English women convicts sent to Australia did the same thing, so it’s not like it’s a new problem. But the age of the inmates is unusually young. One would have thought it some other guard would have found out and reported the problem sooner. It’s not easy to keep secrets in a closed prison.

La Shawn, there are tens of thousands of horrific crimes that take place in the US each year. All of them that involve an actual victim are worse — much worse — than the Duke Lacrosse deal (since it appears the only crime at Duke was the false report of the alleged victim). My point is that the media aren’t ignoring this particular case in Indiana any more than they ignore thousands of other cases as well.

The Duke case got media attention, IMHO, because of a complex combination of PC subplots. You had the feminist rallying cry that “just because she was a stripper didn’t mean she deserved it.” This brought out the “corn-fed, no make-up, natural fiber, no-bra needing, sandal-wearing, hirsute, somewhat fragrant hippie-chick pie wagons they call ‘women’ at the Democratic National Convention”-types to protest lack of police/administrative action in the face of the obvious guilt of the wealthy, privileged, white male attackers.

Then, you had the race angle. This brought out the “you would have locked them up already if they’d been black” folks as well as the “who cares if they’re innocent; throw ‘em in jail to make up for past injustices” types. A certain element of the race-issue crowd seems to view an attack on the credibility of any (non-conservative) black person as an attack on the credibility of all black people and therefore rushes to the defense (rather than distancing themselves, which might have been more prudent in hindsight).

The volatile combination was made even more volatile by the media-loving DA who accused the whole team of stonewalling and not coming forward even though, clearly, someone on that team knew what went on in that bathroom. It made it look interesting to the media — different from your run-of-the-mill rape (you know, where there’s, like, evidence and stuff) — because it was kind of a reverse OJ situation: the wealthy, privileged, white athletes were going to get away with murder because the victim was a poor, black woman/student/mother/”dancer”.

I think the media got conned just like the DA did. They were expecting the evidence to pan out in a way that was consistent with their prejudgments. They immediately assumed the truth of the allegations and viewed the initial flow of evidence in the light most consistent with the prism of bias through which they were viewing the case. Unfortunately, the DA can’t get passed his initial prejudgment while Newsweek evidently can.

There is no end to the list of cases more worthy of our attention than the Duke case. The fact there’s so much less actually there than meets the eye is one of the reasons I find the Duke case so fascinating. So, keep blogging about it. And keep pointing about these other cases because the contrast is indeed remarkable.

Shade, I’m not going to say it’s 100%, nothing is, I respect that you feel that way, but I went to a very racially diverse school. (30% white or so, 25% black, 25% various Latin american countries, and thge other 20% was either middle eastern or pacific rim) It catered to the “lower income” portion of the city, it was by no means inner city (we lived in a suberb of DC) there was a verifyable gang culture, and I can tell you right now, there were a number of noted instances where young black women were with older men, for reasons of status, money, whatever. In my experience the parents (while I am making this point remember, the majority of the black students in my high school were low income) either working their hind end off to better their lives, (admirable but sadly at the cost of attention to their child) or didn’t give a damn one way or the other about most anything.

#

Stories like this one are why I have come to believe that while race isn’t the roadblock many of us make it out to be, it’s almost always a factor in some fashion.

Comment by Mark La Roi — 06.20.06 @ 1:21 pm
#

Mark, will you elaborate? I think you’re on to something, and I’d like to hear more.

Comment by La Shawn — 06.20.06 @ 1:28 pm

While many Blacks see racism as a deciding factor in why they haven’t acheived the level of living/success which they would like to have, it isn’t even nearly the factor its given credit for being. However, because of the constant pushpushpush for the last 4 decades to be constantly aware of the color of the person with whom you are dealing, a great majority of the decisions being made now by corporations are race based, or to be more specific, race influenced.

For good or bad, every story every major media company runs in every major country on the Earth is, I believe, in some way presented with a recognition of the ethnicity of the people involved. This could mean that someone skews (even unintentionally) a story to avoid making a certain group sound bad, even if the party committed a negative act. Michelle Malkin has done a great job of exposing this with the MSM coverage of Muslim acts of violence in the last couple of years.

We have had the topic of race and equality/inequality/”justice” so beaten into us that now with so many seated judges holding the mindset of righting perceived wrongs instead of merely carrying out law, companies are basing many of their daily operating decisions based on public perception of how they treat minorities. (See 40 White Male Professors)

“Did we hire enough ______”, did that last statement sound fair to ______”, “If I pull over this car am I going to be accused of being racist?”, “Was I just pulled over because that officer is racist?”, “how come COPS makes _____ look so bad?”, “do they want immigration reform because they want a safer country or because they don’t like Mexicans?”, “Can I ask my Black friend if he’d like some watermelon without offending him?”, “Can I eat watermelon in front of these White people without them thinking I’m some stereotype?” and so on.

The creative media stereotypes to an insane degree. When they try not to stereotype they end up following the “anti-stereotype, stereotype”. (Black kid goes to college, BUT gets in trouble because ________, which is just SO unfair.) (White kid reaches out to suffering Black youth, and his family is greatly divided over it…yawn.)

On another site I saw Cuba Gooding jr. lambasted by several commentators for not doing movies in which he does “Black” things, and that in my opinion is because we’ve been so well-conditioned to think that Blacks have only one way of expressing life, Asians another, Latinos another, Whites another, and to cross those lines is to “sell out” to some imaginary dragon which is always waiting to eat “people like us”.

Heck, we’ve actually been brainwashed into accepting “White” and “Black” as ethnic groups instead of colors, and even the wisest among us has come to accept that!

That is why I say race, and attitudes toward race, have come to flavor everything we see. For good and for bad.

The thing is, it isn’t the roadblock many say and think that it is, but ironically, the more they focus on it and declare it to be an issue, the more they give strength and life to it actually becoming an issue!

It’s like calling your kid stupid. He or she could be the brightest child around, but eventually, that’s gonna mess their heads up, and they’re likely to underperform because we humans tend to live up or down to the expectations of the people around us.

Call a man racist enough times without actual proof, and you just water the seed of racism in him. Scream “__________ people are so-and-so!” enough times, and they’ll learn to limit themselves to your accusations, or at least will begin to be hampered by that thought every time they do something that doesn’t fit within that framework.

That’s why so many Black and Brown kids in school are afraid to “act White” by reading well and studying hard. they’ve been told so many times that they wouldn’t be that way if they are being “true”, that they have to fight guilt over doing well!

Even when we permit ourselves to accept a positive stereotype, we have put people into a box, and then we carry that box every single day. I’m sick of this box ’cause it’s so darn heavy.

and so on, and so on…

Greg,
It’s a dangerous standard, but you know what? It’s the case, that’s what hit me hard, same events. I was told “oh, you’re a big guy, you can hold your booze better then a girl”

“About affirmative action, I said I had no proof, didn’t I? It’s just a gut feeling I have. No article is going to read, “These men were hired through affirmative action,” for crying out loud. If I dug more into this story, which I may end up doing, I’ll probably find that most of the employees with criminal records are black. ”

“I can’t prove it, but I attribute these and other atrocities to affirmative action hiring.”

The atrocities aren’t linked to the policy of affirmative action. Usually, I’m pretty quiet about the speculative nature of some of your analysis, but without proof, it’s irresponsible to say that affirmative action hiring caused the rape of these young girls.

Hiring thugs with CRIMINAL records is the focus, tvd. I contend that in order to hire guards, the company had to drop standards and hire people with criminal records. Dropping standards and defining deviancy down has all sorts of consequences. But disagree all you want. Free country. “Irresponsible”? You’ve got to be kidding.

And yes, I’m speculating. What do you call what you’re doing? Offering a fact-based and well-sourced analysis to counter my arguments? – Admin

“That’s why so many Black and Brown kids in school are afraid to “act White” by reading well and studying hard. they’ve been told so many times that they wouldn’t be that way if they are being “true”, that they have to fight guilt over doing well!”

This is, to a great extent, a myth. Being studious is not generally grounds for being accused of acting white. Other qualities must be present. A studious black kid may be more likely to be less popular, but not necessarily labeled as acting white.

#37 Shade intones that “This is, to a great extent, a myth. Being studious is not generally grounds for being accused of acting white. Other qualities must be present. A studious black kid may be more likely to be less popular, but not necessarily labeled as acting white.”

Whew! Perhaps Shade includes the “to a great extent” clause and the “not necessarily” qualifier to provide wiggle-room for his dictum. But then he would lose the “myth” claim.

“Oreo’s” in advanced level classes are not likely to agree with Shade.

33

UNK,
Thanks for pointing out that 3 women have accused this cadet, as the title says of “preying” on them. He is accused of intercourse, sodomy, etc. Not your usually drunk cadet. THREE different women have come forward. That article implies more will come forward, who knows. So the question is, when is Newsweek going to run a cover with this cadet and the quarterback at Navy, both black, both accused of raping white women? Remember the story about the Air Force acedamy being too religious? Where the story about jocks gone wild at military academies that have ships? Hum, there is a whole nother angle, maybe the water made them do it. Kemp

To Greg, No, but it’s easy to find people with this problem. I was innocent, but I counseled a young man who had met a girl at his freshman dorm a week into college, they went to a party, got smashed, and according to both their stories, started getting frisky, he asked her (according to them both) at least three times, if she was okay with what was happening. She told him he could continue and he did so. Fast-forward to the following morning and she remembered she had a boyfriend. Suddenly he had taken advantage of her. I got wrapped up in my own case before his was concluded, and I hope it came out alright, but I know his life was irreparably effected as was mine, and this was in less then one year at a small college, I can’t imagine the numbers on it nationwide. Especially with the rise of the concept of date rape and alcohol assisted rape, we are going to see more and more women who decide they were raped after the fact. Some righteously some not so much. What America needs is a support group for these young men. They’re at an already confusing part of their lives, and suddenly everything is turned upside down for no reason they can discern. I think there’s a relatively large number of people who have gotten drunk and done something foolish. If I recall from her Bio Ms. Barber has her regrets. Where would we be if she had been accused of rape and placed in jail?

It’s not quite as much an issue, but I spent a great deal of time in the south, I speak, when I’m with friends and most of the time at work I speak with a slight but noticible southern drawl. I use ya’ll (which should be a word, damn no 2nd person plural english language). When my friends from home hear me around my friends from college (because I try to make myself more “respectible” and because my college wasn’t in the south, so I lost it around northerners.) I heard constant jokes and grief that I was betraying my roots by speaking clearly and correctly around my college friends. It started to get frustrating, I’m sure it’s not the same, but I want it clear that every subculture sees this sometimes.

#46 John,

great example! Perhaps the heart of this type of comment is something we haven’t figured out yet.

Can someone remind me of the point to the “talking white” discussion? Oh, and for maybe the third time, let me say that this proud dad has two smart teenage daughters who’ve had the “talking white” slur directed at them; and it doesn’t bother them. My 17 year old says all of her friends are smart and articulate so she doesn’t hear it that often. She says she and her friends have “egos” and that’s why it doesn’t faze them. In other words, they like showing off their intelligence. Interestingly, she labels those who do talk about people for “talking white” as “regular people.” (as opposed to labeling them stupid, racist or lower class etc.) And, it’s more complex than sounding white just because you’re articulate. My 17 yr. old belongs to a snooty all black girls’ club. Most of the girls live in upper class suburbs and go to majority white private schools as opposed to my daughter and her smart friends that attend majority black Detroit Public Schools.(OK, her school has won national recognition and 95% or more graduate andgo on to college but still it’s a majority black urban public school) Anyway, she says the suburban blacks in this snooty club may “sound white” because they’re articulate but they’re more colloquial than pedantic; the words they use are not as “big” as the ones my daughter and friends use.

Like I said, what’s the point?

This comment is off-topic. Please discuss this subject in the education post. – Admin

About affirmative action, I said I had no proof, didn’t I? It’s just a gut feeling I have. No article is going to read, “These men were hired through affirmative action,” for crying out loud.

LaShawn, I think some reporter would mention affirmative action if it was obviously there; that would generate controversy and thus plaudits for the writer and his/her venue. Hey, maybe you’ll dig it up, expose it and gain more eclat.

By the way, did you know Michiganders will be voting this fall on whether to ban affirmative action in the state? Ward Connerly is leading the fight for the ban. I know you would vote for the ban, but I wonder how many of your readers support a law banning affirmative action?

That court was ruled by a white republican for 15 years. He hired every one of those guys. My money is that Mr. ellison saved the tape for his own protection.

There is a huge story here that you will not want to hear as the issue is really the prosecutor needing a case for the summer of an election year.

I bet every one of the defendants has thier case dismissed or is acquited.

The feminist-lobby lost any respect from me when the NOW crowd didn’t condemn Bill Clinton’s sexual harassment of an intern at the White House, not to mention the probable rape of one woman and the sexual harassment of another – all while he was President. That ANY human (male or female) is victimized in this way is utterly despicable. What are we becoming? To me this is the logical outcome of denying the presence of God in so many areas of our lives.

The miracle is that God still cares about us – in spite of the leftists among us. Why he hasn’t hit us with a thunderbolt is testament to his patience!

UNK at #53, I think you overstate the case a bit. Too drunk to consent would be passed-out drunk. Just plain drunken sex has not become rape in 2006. Everyone knows alcohol lowers your inhibitions. And if the woman thrice consented even though voluntarily intoxicated, that can’t possibly be rape. I’m no criminal law expert so maybe I shouldn’t be speaking out of school, but I’ve got to think the law doesn’t simply conform to feminist claptrap about the line between sex and rape.

That being said (and to get this back on topic), I still think there are reasons why the Duke case got attention that these cases posted above aren’t getting. La Shawn is part right about race but there’s more to it. And part of it is what I identified above — where feminists draw the line between rape and consent and where the law draws the line aren’t necessarily in the same spot. And that’s what drove the feminists out of the woodwork. (And wherever there’s angry feminists marching, TV cameras won’t be far behind).

How many times in the early part of the Duke case did you see or hear people recite the mantra, “just because she was a stripper doesn’t mean she deserved to be raped”? The feminists really believe that *men* think it’s OK to rape strippers. Just like this whole myth about the “black rape fantasy” white guys supposedly harbor. I wasn’t going to dignify this “theory” by getting offended by it but the fact of the matter is I’ve never fantasized about raping anyone regardless of color.

No, I think the answer is that the Duke case is the perfect storm of controversy because it implicated all kinds of PC sacred cows: wealth, race, gender. About the only thing that could have made Hurricane Crystal more powerful is if she’d been a lesbian.

“Too drunk to consent would be passed-out drunk.”

Most people would also consider falling-down drunk too drunk to consent. There is a line from passed out to sober and the question is where to draw the line.

But one is playing with fire if one has sex with people to out of it 1) to remember if they consented or not and 2) even if they did consent, a jury of your peers might think she was obviously so far out of it she could not consent and was taken advantage of.

If your friends are into drunken casual sex, too bad they missed the 1970s.

“Most people would also consider falling-down drunk too drunk to consent.”

They would? I don’t know how the law defines rape. I’d imagine it has to do with consent. Common sense tells me that if the woman is too incoherent to talk and is virtually a non-pariticpant, then it’d be kind of tough to argue consent, but those aren’t the facts that were described. In the facts that were described, the woman was a coherent and willing participant. If that’s rape when she later sobers up and regrets her drunken behavior, then the pendulum has swung too far.

This reminds me of what La Shawn posted on the Shelby Steele entry where comments weren’t open. In the excerpt from Steele’s book, La Shawn highlighted passages that talked about how the black Harvard student would have to argue for the inferiority of his race in order to justify continued affirmative action (Dr. Steele said it much better than I did).

The feminist agenda does the same thing. Women are strong, BUT … we need to protect them from regretting sex by defining consent in a way that strains credulity. Women are strong, BUT … we need to shield them from sex-talk in the workplace (unless they’re the ones talking about sex, in which case it’s OK — until they get offended by someone else’s sex talk, at which point it’s no longer OK).

But, UNK, just to make sure I understand your position, you’re saying that if a man and a woman go get drunk and have sex together where she verbalizes and willingly participates in the sex act, whether rape occurs or not depends on whether the woman regrets it after she sobers up. Do I have that right?

“rape occurs or not depends on whether the woman regrets it after she sobers up. Do I have that right? ”

On this, you are wrong. I and no one, even radical feminists would say a woman’s regret makes sex rape. It’s inability to consent that makes it a crime – just as if I asked you for your car when you were drunk and kept your car. It’s true that some women regret sex, than believe it’s rape, but no one supports this position.

Actually, the Duke AV in the parking lot would according to feminists be a good example of someone unable to consent to sex, and I would agree. If Kim just dumped the AV on the side of the road in a wrong part of town, and some man talked the AV into sex knowing she was unable to say her name and seeing things, I would agree with feminists that it should be (and most likely is) a crime (I don’t know NC law).

But feminists also claim that while drunk/high/crazy women are often so wasted and “obviously” unable to consent to sex, these women “never” file false rape reports. Feminists can’t have it both ways.

You know, I don’t agree with someone taking advantage of an inebriated person, but there is a double standard. If a person who is drunk beyond the point of really knowing what they are doing commits a crime, they are just as legally responsible for the crime as they would be if they were completely sober. If we stay consistent with this, a person who willingly sleeps with someone while in a drunken state would be held responsible for their actions regardless of their intoxicated state. Being passed out is a whole different story, but often times an intoxicated woman will be very flirty and even promiscuous and will have no memory of doing things that they would never do while sober. If they made the decision to drink heavily, aren’t they responsible for what they do in that state?

I’m not against laws that prohibit intoxication rape, but these laws do take away personal responsibility. If you don’t want to get caught in a bad situation, don’t drink.

Shade, finally we agree. That is exactly what I was saying in my other post. Where is the line? It’s clearly not whether the victim willingly consumed the intoxicant. Where does the victim become the accused. You’re not responsible for your actions unless you harm someone else? The other factor in this is that, with the exception of rohipnol and similar date rape drugs, this issue is nearly exclusively one of colleges and similar educational institutions. The only situation where you might find something similar in the “real world” is perhaps an office party where people have too much to drink. Adults, when they go to a bar or club with someone, or alone, get willingly drunk, and go home with someone tend to accept that they are adults and go on with their lives. When dealing with this, I was told by a lawyer it was a rare DA willing to waste time on a case as unwinnable as a rape caused by inability to consent from voluntary alcohol consumption. Between the inborn privacy of sex and the fuzzy line of consent, it’s difficult to make a conviction with nothing but a victim’s testimony.

You’re an inspiration. It’s wonderful to know that there are other female and black conservatives other there, and that your voice is heard by many. Your blog is part of my regular reading; always insightful, and always provocative. Keep up the good work!

Link? We don’t need no stinkin’ link. UNK, I’m relying on my own powers of observation. By way of example, however, John Stossels did a story for 20/20 a few years back where the feminists at Brown U. essentially took the position I’ve described. I don’t know how to find archives of old 20/20 shows but if you find it, perhaps you could post the link.

I’m not making this stuff up, of course. It’s not so far fetched, either, when you consider the kind of nonsense that feminazis like Catherine MacKinnon and Andrea Dworkin used to spout (perhaps MacKinnon still does).

What I take from what you’re saying, though, is that a drunk woman can say she consents and act for all the world like she consents and it can still be rape if she later claims that she didn’t want it.

I assume you’d agree with me that at least some drunk women actually do want to have sex. Therefore, from the position you appear to be taking, you can’t differentiate between those who “consent” and those who do not by their conduct at the time. You can only discern their will, evidently, by their contentions after the fact. Ergo, ex post facto regret evidently equals lack of consent.

I’ll say it again: if willing participation is not sufficient to infer consent, then the pendulum has swung too far. And this begs an additional question: If the evident “yes” can also mean “no”, wouldn’t it stand to reason that “no” can also mean “yes”? Beware the slippery slopes on which we trod.