Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Let Trenton Mays and Mal'ik Richmond and even Micheal Nodiano walk away from any legal consequences. It doesn't matter. They will never walk away from the social consequences. They are actually small fish in this matter. The big fish are the adults who allowed all of this to go on.
They will never walk away from the social consequences.
Originally posted by Afterthought
Doing some research into the laws of Ohio, I found this to be interesting:
Serious Youthful Offender (SYO) and Juvenile Blended Sentencing
If a juvenile is qualified as a "serious youthful offender" or SYO, he may be tried in juvenile court and sentenced both as a juvenile and as an adult. In this case the adult sentence is suspended pending successful completion of the juvenile sentence. At any time while the juvenile is still in institutional custody, on escape status, or subject to parole, aftercare, or community control, the juvenile court may conduct a hearing to invoke the suspended adult portion of an SYO sentence. But the court may only invoke the adult sentence if clear and convincing evidence exists that the juvenile, after reaching the age of 14:
1.Committed a violation of institutional rules or conditions of supervision that rises to the level of a felony or violent first-degree misdemeanor, or
2.Engaged in conduct that "creates a substantial risk to the safety or security" of the community, the victim, or (in the case of juveniles who are still in custody) the institution, and
3.The violation or misconduct "demonstrates that the person is unlikely to be rehabilitated during the remaining period of juvenile jurisdiction."
From the above, it appears that there's still hope they will receive adult sentencing even if they're tried in juvenile court.
Because the Juvenile Court found Jones amenable to rehabilitation, thus retaining jurisdiction, Jones will receive a blended sentence of adult and juvenile sentences.
His adult sentence will be stayed provided he successfully completes his juvenile sentence, during which he will be housed at the Department of Youth Services.
Originally posted by qvision
The first useful thing Anonymous has done, IMHO.
but if they are being tried as juviniles there is no jury...correct?
Originally posted by Xcathdra
Originally posted by AdamOver
When a crime is seen being committed with video/audio and picture evidence. So what if the public saw them first.
That does not change their contents nor intent.
Actually it does, whether you like it or not.
What you and others ignore is that little protection we call innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, not public opinion. The female in this case is a victim, no arguments there.. The kids involved are suspects, and again no issues there either.
By releasing this type of info it not only can prejudice the jury pool, it opens the door for a mistrial / acquittal.
Its bad enough what this girl went through.. Do you want to be the one who has to explain to her that they cant stand trial because of a technicality?
Once the first person is officaly seated on a jury / offical depositions occur, double jeopardy attaches. That means the PA cannot refile the same charges against them unless they obtain new evidence that is not connected to the video.
Originally posted by randomviolins
reply to post by Aquarius2150
Thank you for bringing up the subject, which obviously has a lot of interest. Forgive me for waxing philosophical, but do you think a position on this issue should be preceded by one's definition of "rape"? Do you think if that may be necessary, then doesn't the problem include how we define rape, as a culture?
Originally posted by truthinfact
No one is talking about the other rape mentioned in the video.