Girl May Be Charged ForTweeting Boys Names Who Assaulted Her

[Hum]

A Kentucky girl who was sexually assaulted could face contempt of court charges after she tweeted the names of her juvenile attackers.

Savannah Dietrich, the 17-year-old victim, was frustrated by a plea deal reached late last month by the two boys who assaulted her, and took to Twitter to expose them--violating a court order to keep their names confidential.

"There you go, lock me up," Dietrich tweeted after naming the perpetrators. "I'm not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell." Her Twitter account has since been closed.

Attorneys for the attackers asked a Jefferson District Court judge to hold Dietrich in contempt for lashing out on Twitter. She could face up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine if convicted. The boys have yet to be sentenced for the August 2011 attack.

"So many of my rights have been taken away by these boys," Dietrich told Louisville's Courier-Journal. "I'm at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it. If they really feel it's necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don't understand justice."

Dietrich was assaulted by the pair after passing out at a party. They later shared photos of the assault with friends.

An online petition asking the judge to throw out the charges against Dietrich, launched Saturday, has already accumulated hundreds of signatures.

more

[thechronic]

The little twats need naming. Good on her.

[Charisma Veteran]

Well, that's just BS all around. I don't blame her one bit.

[articuno1au]

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that they are kids and the court specifically ordered that their names be suppressed.

[thechronic]

Yes lets because they committed a crime that they knew was wrong and should face consequences.

[ANON86364]

I understand her frustration, but from a legal point of view, what she did was illegal. I do hope the charges get thrown out though. I'm really curious why the attackers got off so easily.

[Charisma Veteran]

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that they are kids and the court specifically ordered that their names be suppressed.

Yes, she's a kid too and these two guys ganged up on her and traumatised her, probably for life. She has a point--if they put her in jail for that and don't end up doing anything to the attackers, that is severely messed up.

[argonite]

Yes lets because they committed a crime that they knew was wrong and should face consequences.

The consequences are determined by court. In our society, you listen to the court.

[articuno1au]

And so they shall.

The judge will throw their asses in gaol for however long the LAW deems necessary.

That is, as a society, what we view to be the acceptable and right way to do things. She has ignored the directions of a judge.

What's more she has done so knowing full well that what SHE was doing was wrong as well.

I'm sure she won't get hit to hard for the contempt of court charge. She was obviously under emotional stress at the time, but what she did was just as wrong as what those kids did.

[Cheatyface]

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that they are kids and the court specifically ordered that their names be suppressed.

They're lucky her father didn't kill them instead. I would have.

[DocM]

I understand what she did, but she was subject to a court order which she violated so....

Also, most states have laws that keep the names of juvenile offenders secret unless they are charged as an adult. It's likely the judges order was to enforce such a policy.

[Mathachew Veteran]

Maybe they can work out a plea deal? The severity of the crimes are night and day, but if those scumbags could get a plea deal for rape, surely she could for doing a moral service in identifying her attackers?

[articuno1au]

Morally right isn't defensible :\

If you shot Hitler in the head, it's still murder despite the fact the guy was an ENORMOUS scumbag (I'd use more descriptive language, but it turns it in to stars :()

I'm really torn on this one. While I feel the judge should go lightly on her because she was obviously traumatised by the event, I also think that she disobeyed a judge and as a society we can't allow that for any reason (beyond what the judge feels is reasonable). If she gets hit with 180 days in gaol, I'll feel sorry for her, but I won't think that it's the wrong answer..

[vanx]

If the court specifically ruled to keep their names confidential, she had no right to disclose them no matter how much morally acceptable she thinks she is. She is not above the law. Hopefully, she will get sufficiently long jail sentence to knock some sense into her.

[OOOOOOOO]

Yeah, lets ignore the fact that they are kids and the court specifically ordered that their names be suppressed.

Your sarcasm sickens me. EVERYONE should ignore those facts and name and shame the freaks of nature. Evil little a**holes. Sorry but in this instance, the law vs the people's thoughts should be in favour of the agreement of almost everyone... ie: drop the case and give those kids the beating they deserve. Btw, 17 year old's are not kids. They're fully able to be responsible for these abhorrent acts of sick behaviour.

[argonite]

Morally right isn't defensible :\

If you shot Hitler in the head, it's still murder despite the fact the guy was an ENORMOUS scumbag (I'd use more descriptive language, but it turns it in to stars :()

I'm really torn on this one. While I feel the judge should go lightly on her because she was obviously traumatised by the event, I also think that she disobeyed a judge and as a society we can't allow that for any reason (beyond what the judge feels is reasonable). If she gets hit with 180 days in gaol, I'll feel sorry for her, but I won't think that it's the wrong answer..

Best solution is to just let it go through the usual legal channels. Everyone's up in arms over the fact that she'll get an unreasonable punishment, but that's not certain.

[thechronic]

The consequences are determined by court. In our society, you listen to the court.

The decisions reached by a court are only as good as the people present on the day. For example, a good attorney could get the guiltiest man freedom. Doesn't make it right. On that basis, our legal system is flawed to say the least.

This girl was just making sure there was some consequence for their actions. Their right to anonymity means there would have been none. I am not suggesting we all take the law into our own hands and truthfully i could not be the man to say where we should draw the line on this but in my heart, i agree with her.

[OOOOOOOO]

If the court specifically ruled to keep their names confidential, she had no right to disclose them no matter how much morally acceptable she thinks she is. She is not above the law. Hopefully, she will get sufficiently long jail sentence to knock some sense into her.

The crime was against her. No court would stop me naming and shaming. No court has the right. When crimes are committed, even by so called kids (17 is not young enough to be able to get away with it), the person who was attacked should have every right to spread their names around all over the place. The guys sat in court making these decisions were sat in their lovely houses enjoying meals or whatever while that girl was abused. They felt nothing of her pain, and they have no say in it if you ask me.

[argonite]

Your sarcasm sickens me. EVERYONE should ignore those facts and name and shame the freaks of nature. Evil little a**holes. Sorry but in this instance, the law vs the people's thoughts should be in favour of the agreement of almost everyone... ie: drop the case and give those kids the beating they deserve. Btw, 17 year old's are not kids. They're fully able to be responsible for these abhorrent acts of sick behaviour.

If you don't like our legal system, try living in a country without one.

We have it for a reason. We are absolute for a reason.

[argonite]

The decisions reached by a court are only as good as the people present on the day. For example, a good attorney could get the guiltiest man freedom. Doesn't make it right.

This girl was just making sure there was some consequence for their actions. Their right to anonymity means there would have been none. I am not suggesting we all take the law into our own hands and truthfully i could not be the man to say where we should draw the line on this but in my heart, i agree with her.

And it's good that you have an opinion. When you're called to jury, you can represent it. Until then, we define "right" using the law and not exclusively by the opinions of the people in this forum. It's not a perfect system by far, but it's the best we got. So we have to follow it, lest we devolve to something much worse.

[OOOOOOOO]

If you don't like our legal system, try living in a country without one.

We have it for a reason. We are absolute for a reason.

The legal system is massively imperfect. If you're happy to walk along in life allowing injustices to be made, fine. But let's see how you feel when something works against your favour so horribly. I don't mean a parking ticket. I mean something as heinous as this case. You would have a very different attitude then. Don't even bother arguing. You would.

Laws can be changed. If enough people stand up and speak about a law, it can be changed. That's the way our countries are built. We're the power, not the government. As individuals we may have no power to speak of, but as a group we have all the power. So don't be so blind and accepting.

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

And so they shall.

The judge will throw their asses in gaol for however long the LAW deems necessary.

That is, as a society, what we view to be the acceptable and right way to do things. She has ignored the directions of a judge.

What's more she has done so knowing full well that what SHE was doing was wrong as well.

I'm sure she won't get hit to hard for the contempt of court charge. She was obviously under emotional stress at the time, but what she did was just as wrong as what those kids did.

You cannot possibly think that tweeting the boys' names is anywhere as wrong or severe as what they did to her. Have some common sense, will you?

Yes, what she did is contempt of court, but it's nothing I can blame her for. Here's hoping she won't be punished too harshly for it.

[Nerd Rage]

Not saying I wouldn't have done the same thing as she did, but if you defy a court order, you have to be prepared to face the penalties. It sounds like she is prepared to take her punishment.

[argonite]

The legal system is massively imperfect. If you're happy to walk along in life allowing injustices to be made, fine. But let's see how you feel when something works against your favour so horribly. I don't mean a parking ticket. I mean something as heinous as this case. You would have a very different attitude then. Don't even bother arguing. You would.

Laws can be changed. If enough people stand up and speak about a law, it can be changed. That's the way our countries are built. We're the power, not the government. As individuals we may have no power to speak of, but as a group we have all the power. So don't be so blind and accepting.

I would have a different attitude. But that's why my attitude doesn't influence the judge's decision either. No opinion of what's "right" should influence the application of the law.

I'm don't think of myself as blind, but the fact is the system has NOT changed. Which means that people don't want it to change (or are impartial). And I'm fine with this imperfect system until we get a better one, because to have everyone follow what's right in their heart, while good on paper, is a terrible idea in practice.

[vanx]

The crime was against her. No court would stop me naming and shaming. No court has the right. When crimes are committed, even by so called kids (17 is not young enough to be able to get away with it), the person who was attacked should have every right to spread their names around all over the place. The guys sat in court making these decisions were sat in their lovely houses enjoying meals or whatever while that girl was abused. They felt nothing of her pain, and they have no say in it if you ask me.

No court would stop you. However, a court can and will impose a fine and/or a custodial sentence. If you are a repeat offender, those punishments will get more severe. Your choice to decide if it's worth it.

Nobody is saying that those kids should get away with it. They have been found guilty of their crimes and are awaiting sentencing. While the crimes are different, she broke the law in principle just as they did. Sentencing impatience is not a legal defence.