Hackers leak video of Steubenville, Ohio Rape case.

reply to post by Xcathdra


Xcathdra

I am correct. You are being disingenious and argumentative for almost no reason.

You know very very well that immunity is ONLY granted if it is believed that the witness has material evidence and it is believed that granting immunity from prosecution is the only means of getting the information.

YOU KNOW - that juvenile officers are also police officers. You knew it all along but tried to pretend that police officers assigned to juvenile offenses somehow had lesser positions of investigation and arrest.

YOU KNOW - that Jane Hanlin the prosecuting attorney had a conflict of interest (her own son was one of those questioned) and that she breached conflict of interest rules in regard to her position.

While you may be a great resource but since you are more interested in being argumentative and feeling superior because of your (insider) knowledge, you are almost useless.

BTW - I am also a law enforcement officer.

Tired of Control Freaks

Originally posted by Afterthought
(Cover your ears. I'm about to use my outdoor voice.)
STEUBENVILLE NEEDS TO LEARN THAT NOT REPORTING A VIOLENT CRIME AND/OR DEATH IS A PUNISHABLE OFFENSE ACCORDING TO THE STATE THEIR TOWN IS A PART OF!!!!!
SOMEONE (I don't much care who) NEEDS TO GET OFF THEIR LAZY BUTT AND GO ARREST NODIANOS AND ANYONE ELSE ON THAT VIDEO THAT STATED DIRECT KNOWLEDGE AND SENSITIVE DETAILS OF THE ALLEGED CRIME.

Let me help you out, and I will use my inside voice because we are all adults here and not children.

Citizens need to learn what the laws are of the state they reside in, not Steubenville.

Secondly, I highly encourage you to actually understand the difference between an arrest and a prosecution, and how one can be arrested and yet not prosecuted.

I get what your point is, you are just fixating on the wrong issue for this. You are fixating on the wrong agencies that you think should be held accountible when in reality they have nothing to do with prosecution of a crime.

If I make an arrest, I have to submit a PC statement to the PA's office within 24 hours. If I dont, or if I submit and the Pa declines, the people are relased and no further action can be taken against them.

I find it humorous that in your quest to enforce the rule of law your willing to ignore it to reach your goal. Yet another reason why people should understand the laws and how they work before grabbing the pitchfork and mob mentality.

reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

Thank you for your above statement.
XCathdra fits the definition of a bureaucrat.
dictionary.reference.com...

bu·reau·crat
[byoo r-uh-krat] Show IPA

noun
1. an official of a bureaucracy.
2. an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

You also are ignoring the fact those people are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

No. I'm not. I just want the proper authorities to make sure these guys get their day in court.
I really don't need to know whose responsibility it is to make this happen. I just want them to do their jobs.

That proper authority would be the AG in this case, and they have decided on charges and those they are going to prosecute. Until they change their mind, your argument and posituion is a moot point.

Everyone is innocent untuil proven guilty in a court of law, including a person that goes on live TV and shoots and kills 15 people. The burden falls on the government to prove the person is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, not the person to prove their innocence.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Citizens need to learn what the laws are of the state they reside in, not Steubenville.

According to what I'm seeing, Steubenville is the only party that needs to learn the State laws.
Unless, you're suggesting a citizen's arrest.

reply to post by Xcathdra

Your obsession with following procedure is frightening.
It's as if you aren't even capable of talking about the video and its contents like a normal person. It's as if you're so brainwashed by bureaucratic bs that your brain has been rewired to not even see the forest for the trees.

Just because I'm curious, if I approached you while in uniform and told you I just witnessed a rape, what would you do?

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
Xcathdra

I am correct. You are being disingenious and argumentative for almost no reason.

Actually im not but feel free to attack me personally with nothing to support the claim...

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
You know very very well that immunity is ONLY granted if it is believed that the witness has material evidence and it is believed that granting immunity from prosecution is the only means of getting the information.

And that immunity requires the person receiving it to be factual and honest about their information. Any time that person omits information, lies, misleads, etc the immunity is void and the person is open to prosecution.

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
YOU KNOW - that juvenile officers are also police officers. You knew it all along but tried to pretend that police officers assigned to juvenile offenses somehow had lesser positions of investigation and arrest.

Please go back and read before again making a claim that is not true. I said all Juvenile officers are police but not all police are juvenile officers.

The officer in this case, and you can read his report because I linked it a few pages back, sent these people to the state juvenile office because the rapoe occurred.... wait for it... outside the jurisdiction of Steubenville...

Is there any particular reason you are trying to mislead people by claiming I said something I didnt? Talk about being disengnuous..

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
YOU KNOW - that Jane Hanlin the prosecuting attorney had a conflict of interest (her own son was one of those questioned) and that she breached conflict of interest rules in regard to her position.

Which is why she recused herself and assigned the AG as special prosecutor.. If your going to try and claim something is illegl how about you back it up with evidence and supporting laws? Once done, pleaset ell us about all of the other information involved in this case, incouding all evidence obtained, testimony received, etc.. that has not made it to the public realm because -

A. Its a juvenile case...
B. Its still on going....

Originally posted by TiredofControlFreaks
While you may be a great resource but since you are more interested in being argumentative and feeling superior because of your (insider) knowledge, you are almost useless.

The onlything useless I have done is attempt to engage you and a few others in conversation.... Whenever you and other have something pointed out you dont like or agree with , likes laws, jurisdiction, juvenile prosecution requirements, the authority of the PA to assign a special prosecutor, the fact the AG's office has investigators of their own, etc etc etc.

Your approach is typical.. When you want your position to be right, and it turjns out you are less knowledgable about the situation than you thought, you attack the poster personally.

Ive tiold you guys you need to know and understand the law and to date you guys have argued against that...

see where it got you?

I dont have any need to feel superior to anyone, especially people on a website. If you feel that is the case the im not sure what I can tell you that I have not already pointed out to you time and time again.

BTW - I am also a law enforcement officer.

Tired of Control Freaks

Nice try.. based on your responses and lack of understanding and knowledge of the law, Im not buying it. but if you need to claim to be one in order to try and lend credability to your posts and appear to others, who also dont feel any need to understand the law, as something your not.... by all means.. go for it.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by TiredofControlFreaks

 

Thank you for your above statement.
XCathdra fits the definition of a bureaucrat.
dictionary.reference.com...

bu·reau·crat
[byoo r-uh-krat] Show IPA

noun
1. an official of a bureaucracy.
2. an official who works by fixed routine without exercising intelligent judgment.

edit on 10-1-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)

Like I said.. You have nothing left to contribute or refute, so you resort to personal attacks.

Any chance you can bring the discussion back on topic instead of acting like a minor?

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Citizens need to learn what the laws are of the state they reside in, not Steubenville.

According to what I'm seeing, Steubenville is the only party that needs to learn the State laws.
Unless, you're suggesting a citizen's arrest.

No.. im suggesting that the citizens of Steubenville should learn what the law is, as the police of Steuibenville already know what it is and have corectly acted by referring this case to an agency who does have.. wait for it.... jurisdiction..

thats one of those terms, like knowing the law, that people dont seem to have any need to understand or know anything about...

/end sarcasm

reply to post by Xcathdra

im suggesting that the citizens of Steubenville should learn what the law is, as the police of Steuibenville already know what it is and have corectly acted by referring this case to an agency who does have.. wait for it.... jurisdiction..

If you'd read the Ohio State law I directed you to numerous times, you'd know that the word 'jurisdiction' is not mentioned ONCE. If I'm witnessing a rape or other felony and I dial 911, they aren't going to ask me what jurisdiction I'm in so s/he can connect me with the proper authority. ALL jurisdictions must follow State laws. Steubenville has not followed their state laws. If you weren't a bureaucrat, you'd be able to grasp this concept.

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

Your obsession with following procedure is frightening.

And your insistence on ignoring policy and the law, not to mention consitutional and civil rights, is scary as hell.
Without procedures, where would we be?

we have arrest procedures....
we have procedures on interviewing witnesses...
we have proceudre for interviewing suspects...
we have procedures for interviewing minors and their parents...
we have procedurres for filing charges...
we have procedures for obtaingin evidence...
we have procedures for challenging evidence...
we have procedures for court room motions...
we have procedures for being found not guilty...
we have proceures for sentencing..
we have procedures for a reason... Again it goes back to knowing the law and understanding how it works.. If you understand that basic concept then you would know why we have procedures and why we must follow them.

if we dont, criminals walk...

Originally posted by Afterthought
It's as if you aren't even capable of talking about the video and its contents like a normal person. It's as if you're so brainwashed by bureaucratic bs that your brain has been rewired to not even see the forest for the trees.

We dicsussed the video.. Ive watched the video.. my position on the video has not changed.. People want the kids in the video hanged from a tree without due priocess or underastanding how the law works, how is applied and prosecuted..

What else do you want to talk about in the video?
how its not within the jurisdiction of the Steubenville Police department?
IOr how about because its not whtin the jurisdiction of the Sheriffs department?
Maybe we can discuss how the Pa ceded jurisdiction to the AG's office?
How about we dsicuss the AG's involvement in this case and find out why they dont ffeel the need to go after the people in the video?

Or how about we discuss how people spouting of in a video like morons are somehow just as important to prosecute as the peopl who raped the girl.

how about we talk about prosecutorial objectives?

maybe we can see how the successful prosecution of these 2 can open the door to more damaging charges aside from failing to report a crime?

of course, if we spent time leanring the law and how it worked, we wouldnt be wasting time by me telling you the same thing over and voer because you choose to remain in the dark and refuse to learn.

Originally posted by Afterthought
Just because I'm curious, if I approached you while in uniform and told you I just witnessed a rape, what would you do?

edit on 10-1-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)

I would ask where it occurred at, and if outside my jurisdiction, I would refer you to the appropriate agency.

why you wonder?

because I have no authority to act in that instance.. The more I get involved the better the chances are of something going wrong down the line when it goes to court and the defense looks for anyhting it can to challenge evidence in order to get it thrown out in otrder to end the case by forcing the prosecution to not meet its burden.

But why bother with procedure right?

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

im suggesting that the citizens of Steubenville should learn what the law is, as the police of Steuibenville already know what it is and have corectly acted by referring this case to an agency who does have.. wait for it.... jurisdiction..

If you'd read the Ohio State law I directed you to numerous times, you'd know that the word 'jurisdiction' is not mentioned ONCE. If I'm witnessing a rape or other felony and I dial 911, they aren't going to ask me what jurisdiction I'm in so s/he can connect me with the proper authority. ALL jurisdictions must follow State laws. Steubenville has not followed their state laws. If you weren't a bureaucrat, you'd be able to grasp this concept.

You really need to learn what jurisdiction is for prosecution.. I dont know how many more time I can explain to you that you need to understand the law, all of it, including parts you dont think you need to know..

If a murder or rape is committed in Cuyahoga County, the police nor the sherrif nor the PA's office in Pike county can do anything about it. If you went to them with information, they are going to refer you to Cuyahoga County.

Why?

because they are the ones who have jurisdiction to investigate and prosecute the crime since it occured within the political boundaries of their county.

so again, how about more learning on your part and less anme calling? All it does is drag this further off topic and reinforces my point that you are not understanding what you are talking about.

Also, the crime did not occur within the boundaires of Steubenville, meaning they do NOT have jurisdiction.. are you really going to go down swinging on this one? just to try and prove a point you cannot make beause law does not support your position on it, and only for the sake of making an arguemtn against a person you dont care much for?

it amazes me you will pick a law that supports your argument while ignoring those laws that dont...

classic.

reply to post by Xcathdra

We dicsussed the video.. Ive watched the video.. my position on the video has not changed.. People want the kids in the video hanged from a tree without due priocess

You're beyond reasonable at this point.
Not once have I stated that these guys should be victims of vigilante justice.
I've stated several times that they need to have their day in court.
Every time I say this, you start going on and on and on and on and on and on ad nauseum about who should arrest and who should do the charging. Blah, blah, blah.

It wasn't a personal attack calling you a bureaucrat.
I was simply stating a fact considering the evidence you've provided thus far.

Which is why she recused herself and assigned the AG as special prosecutor.. If your going to try and claim something is illegl how about you back it up with evidence and supporting laws? Once done, pleaset ell us about all of the other information involved in this case, incouding all evidence obtained, testimony received, etc.. that has not made it to the public realm because -

So the PA knew there was a conflict of interest, then conveniently minimized all the charges to what was believed would be "acceptable", THEN recuses herself from the case based on the fact that her son was involved in it......

yeah....nothing shady here........

nothing to see here folks....move along.....

Originally posted by Afterthought
reply to post by Xcathdra

 

We dicsussed the video.. Ive watched the video.. my position on the video has not changed.. People want the kids in the video hanged from a tree without due priocess

You're beyond reasonable at this point.
Not once have I stated that these guys should be victims of vigilante justice.
I've stated several times that they need to have their day in court.
Every time I say this, you start going on and on and on and on and on and on ad nauseum about who should arrest and who should do the charging. Blah, blah, blah.

Again, you ignore the info that doesnt support your position and attack those who challenge you to learn.

Originally posted by Afterthought
It wasn't a personal attack calling you a bureaucrat.
I was simply stating a fact considering the evidence you've provided thus far.

edit on 10-1-2013 by Afterthought because: (no reason given)

Of course not because calling a person a bureaucrat is meant as a compliment..

again, you get called out and you back peddle and try to claim you meant something different...

any chance you want toc ome back to the topic instead of name calling?

Originally posted by Xcathdra
As for going from house to house in an unconscious manner - I noticed that the guys were also charged with kidnapping, however those charges were dropped. I ahve not been able to figure out why based on the available info, which tells me we dont have all the facts.

Think I figured this one out -

The crime(s) happened in Stuebenville Ohio.
The victim lives in Weirton West Virginia.
She came to Stuebenville by her own means and was dropped at her residence
by what is assumed to be her assailants.

There must have been speculation on whether there were crimes committed in W.V.
as apparently the victim was driven home by her assailants and left on her doorstep.

Without evidence of a crime being committed in W.V. it was probably assumed the
assailants just dropped her off.
Hence no proof of kidnapping - no charges.

Originally posted by Darkphoenix77

So the PA knew there was a conflict of interest, then conveniently minimized all the charges to what was believed would be "acceptable", THEN recuses herself from the case based on the fact that her son was involved in it......

Who was granted immunity?

what type of immunity was granted?

What information did the person provide for that immunity?

How about you provide that info before attacking the PA? Or is this one of those cases where a person doesnt need to know the law or procedure and can just make blanket claims without all of the info?

Originally posted by Afterthought
yeah....nothing shady here........

pot.. meet kettle..

Originally posted by Afterthought
nothing to see here folks....move along.....

I agree.. you have not provided any of the informaion thats been asked a few times noow in other posts where the same claims were made about the Pa and her conflict of interest...

nothing to see here folks.. just a character assasination based on a lack of information coupled with a lack of knowledge on how this works.

Unless you have the info to show us as to who got immunity, Why, they got it, WHAT they gave for it, and HOW that info does not outweigh the public intrest in non prosecution?

reply to post by Xcathdra

As I'm off to bed, I'd just like to remind you that you didn't answer the question I asked you earlier.
If I approached you while in uniform and told you I witnessed a rape, what would you do?
I'm sure you'd ask me a bunch of questions regarding when and where it happened, but would you take a report or would you direct me to someone else?

I'll check back tomorrow for your answer.

reply to post by HumAnnunaki


I wonder how they knew where she lived. Did the ex-boyfriend tell them her address so they could dump her there?

Originally posted by HumAnnunaki
Think I figured this one out -

The crime(s) happened in Stuebenville Ohio.

No, they did not. Its already been established the crimes occurred outside of their city limits. It occurred in the unicorperated areas of Jefferson County, OH.

Originally posted by HumAnnunaki
The victim lives in Weirton West Virginia.

Unless the crime started in one state and ended in another, this part doesnt play a part. (if she was forced to leave and they crossed state lines it would play into it).

Originally posted by HumAnnunaki
She came to Stuebenville by her own means and was dropped at her residence
by what is assumed to be her assailants.

by her own means is important in a kidnapping charge.

Originally posted by HumAnnunaki
There must have been speculation on whether there were crimes committed in W.V.
as apparently the victim was driven home by her assailants and left on her doorstep.

Without evidence of a crime being committed in W.V. it was probably assumed the
assailants just dropped her off.
Hence no proof of kidnapping - no charges.

Close.. If they were charged with kidnapping in that manner, it would be a federal charge and not a state one since it crossed a state boundary.

Ohio Statute 2905.01 Kidnapping.


The way the law is written im thinking it has to do with her being restrained against her will at the place this occurred at. In my state our kidnapping law covers a person who is prevented from leaving a location, regardless of how it occurs.

Im thinking it might settle around this part -

(4) To engage in sexual activity, as defined in section 2907.01 of the Revised Code, with the victim against the victim’s will;

and im wondering if it plays into the text message the defense attorney was talking about.