a teenager forced to pay compensation to her school after she refused to cheer for the man who raped her

[Leverkusen]

I don't often post here, but I read this article today and was so appalled

link here

'A teenage girl who was dropped from her high school's cheerleading squad after refusing to chant the name of a basketball player who had sexually assaulted her must pay compensation of $45,000 (£27,300) after losing a legal challenge against the decision.'

From what I can see. the timelines have been ignored by the reporting:

An incident occurred in 2008.
A grand jury threw the case out. So under innocent until proven guilty the school had no grounds to throw the boy out.
Then she refused to cheer for him.
It wasn't until after that incident happened that a second trial happened and a second grand jury convicted him of assualt.

At the time of the cheerleading incident the boy had been told there was no case to answer, so the court action for the schools behaviour at that point in time is slightly different to how you might expect them to react had the second case occurred.

Yes, he's obviously a piece of scum, but people are reading it as more black and white than it really is.

Surely schools have the right to act as they see fit in regards to anything to do with disclpline? Within reason? They don't need a guilty verdict from a criminal court to expel someone, suspend them, remove them from a basketball squad, that sort of thing.

I would have thought that there were lots of things the school could have done to ease the situation for the victim, and certainly when she refused to cheer him the reaction of expelling her from the team seems completely wrong.

They knew that this had all happened, why the hell hadn't they thought about how to handle the situation, sorted out what they were going to do?

Rather than expecting her to carry on as normal including the cheer?

It makes no sense and seems remarkably callous.

SQ - I was speculating - nothing more. It did strike me though as a bit odd that dittany posted info about the father .i.e small business-owner, votes Republican and is a Texan Christian, as if all of that was germane to the case. Character evidence of the father which could be construed in a few ways for instance 'a solid upstanding member of the community', or, 'a bit of a redneck'. More's the shame we have had no input from the victim here.

and 'school's actions?' - they were necessarily defending a litigation brought against themselves - they would be required to do this. As I say, the asailant IMO should have been expelled upon conviction.

We seem to be agreeing on the moral turpitude of the assault, but differing on the tactic of how to deal with it. The wide reporting of it can also be seen as a good thing or a bad thing. A Bad Thing if dittany's observation is correct.

"The mere fact that this case is being discussed and reported in other countries is a victory of sorts, I'd have thought.

If everyone had just accepted the schools actions no-one would know anything about this. It has cast a spotlight into an appalling attitude towards victims of sexual violence in schools in parts of the US, I think it's important that these things are known."

Yes I think so too - it is a victory of sorts. Their efforts have not been in vain - it's a different type of justice, but the outrageous attitude of the school and the courts has been exposed to the world. Decent people WILL be outraged. Well done to the familly for pursuing this - and helping to speed up the girl's recovery,

i agree with Dittany (wow! i've never said that sentence before!)

this is disgusting and i hope that girl and her family continue to fight and get justice

ditttany - reporting being bogus? "Rapist". "Compensation". "Girl pays". None of it is accurate, supported by evidence or proven. Dreadfully slack reporting but as I said good to sell papers.

And your post re father's evidence? So what father said is the 'truth'? We know this? No we don't I'm afraid. It's his version and nothing more. You seem to have a v. low threshold about what is 'accuarate'.

ditttany - the points I raise are not random at all. They are specific. If they are unpopular with you then that's as may be. That doesn't chahnge their status.

yes, legally poorly advised it seems. It presents as the wrong remedy for a dreadful experience.

Dittany - if the bit about the father is a 'red herring' then why post it? As I say, it can go either way. good guy or a redneck. You posted it.

reorting? I have already stated what the mis-reporting of the case is above. Read it if you wish? Or don't It's up to you.

oh dittany. Legal bills and compensation are totally different. He hasn't been convicted as a rapist. Her reason to lie? You don't know this. If you think it's weak, then ok. IMO your postings are pretty weak and a bit desparate but hey-ho.

Bugging me about the rapist bit? No, not at all. You really are personalising this now which isn't good. But that's your choice to 'attack' anything I say. ok.

Hang on. Are you saying that I am bugged that a rapist isn''t being called a rapist? That really does deeply annoy me. Where on earth from your brain does that come from?

I am asking you to withdraw that observation please?

Ok big deal. You won't withdraw that groundless and breath-taking allegation. I'll live with it. That's up to you. We seem to have hit an impass.

am still breathless at your foundless arrogance but that's your view.

I'll invite you again to withdraw that allegation.

I am beyond the use of inverted commas, dittany.

You are being very graceless. And insulting.

I'd ask you again.