Gang Rape is Not OK: Women respond to the De Anza Rape Case

someone should photoshop that DeAnza logo and hang a 'Rapists welcome' sign over that doorway... that's effectively what the D.A. is saying by not prosecuting anyone.

Wow. I am so used to having public defenders say to poor people confronted with trumped up charges "golly, I don't think we can win, you should take whatever plea bargain we can get", but this is disgusting. The DA has all the resources that they need to bring charges against anyone for anything, and they do routinely bring ridiculous charges against innocent people, especially to cover for their racist thugs in the police department like the Custodio family where a 50 year old was beaten along with her 2 sons who were tased for being Filipino. See: http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2007/05/16/18417368.php

What about the folks who have been shot or tased to death in San Jose, like the guy who was tased to death last week? See: http://www.mercurynews.com/valley/ci_6000193

Now, the DA wants us to believe that she just can't bring charges for fear of wasting resources and the good name of her and her department and defaming some jock rapists? Hahaha! Why is it that the administration of DeAnza and the DA identify so much more with the baseball players and their concerns than with the victim/rescuers/women and their interests? If the DA is suddenly so sensitive to the interests of defendants, I have some cases she should review because this is the first I have heard of it.

really , jocks are brethren of cops, they attacked me (mixed race) , police protected themk, how much do we take? people are seeing whats going on, but they better wise up...

Was she tested to see if a date rape drug was present in her? The effects of those are much stronger than alcohol and can explain why evidence of a physical struggle is absent. I am just speaking in general since I don't know the details of this case. The presence of a date rape drug can also suggest a person did not even choose to injest the substance(s) that made him/her susceptible to rape. I am concerned that in too many cases on college campuses, the chance to test for a date rape drug is missed. People often assume the person is drunk and don't realize the signs of being drugged are similar. The puke is also a likely effect that we'd expect to see if a victim was given a date rape drug.

If a victim is drugged, it is even more difficult for him/her to remember what happened consistently. A severely traumatic event is hard to remember as it is, but a drug that knocks out memory makes the task of remembering extremely difficult. Depending on how relaxed the survivor is, he/she may be open to remembering more (or not). So, he/she may respond differently to questions when asked at different times, because different information about what happened is accessible to his/her mind (or not).

I was disturbed that in the Duke University rape case involving the lacrosse players, inconsistency in the victim's account was seen as a reason to disqualify the case. I don't have the details, but inconsistency in what the person can and is willing to remember is a sign of trauma. That victim showed other classic signs of rape trauma. The alleged Duke victim also showed signs that she would show had she been given a date rape drug. Was that victim tested for a date rape drug when she was examined? People said her reports of what happened that night were inconsistent, but if you've just been traumatized (and possibly drugged) and are in a disoriented state, how can people expect you to be clear? That's just not a reasonable understanding of how a person who is raped (and drugged?) is likely to behave. If a person has been raped several times, as was suggested in the Duke case, the memories can come back all mixed together. It takes time and support to clarify them. Since mixed-up memories are a symptom of rape, they should be regarded as circumstantial evidence. People have to know what the evidence of rape looks like before they go about judging what cases to disqualify. Rape kits that don't test for date rape drugs these days are behind the times. People that aren't experts on sexual assault can't know how to judge a case. It's very different than other crimes because rape terrorizes and disorients the mind which gives the report.

A victim becomes conditioned through trauma to give the people he/she perceives to have power over him/her what he/she thinks they want. This can apply to authorities who question the victim. So, if the victim thinks they don't want to believe the rape happened, this can influence how the victim replies. The victim can have a reflex to tell them what he/she thinks they want to hear to ward of his/her instinctive fear (from the trauma) that if he/she doesn't, they will hurt him/her like the predators did.

I think the best thing is to have experts on sexual abuse talk to the victim as the memory is pieced together. He/she may be most comfortable opening up to such people who support victims of abuse. The pressure of authorities who consider that he/she may be lying can make it harder for her to believe what happened. Traumatized people may take suspicion as a signal that the people desire the memory to be kept down. Emotional symptoms, trouble remembering and mixed-up memories are all signs that result from rape. These should be considered circumstantial evidence but are often seen as case disqualifiers instead. This shows that people involved in these cases do not understand how real victims of the most severe crimes behave. I don't know if that is an issue in this case, but in general authorities should know this so they don't destroy or oppose the emergence of the evidence (the very fragile memories) in the victim's mind.

Redmond demands transparency


as She is confused by the legal system.