TX: Cheerleader dropped from squad for not cheering sexual assailant, must pay up by court - Polidicks

[QUOTE=Teracotta;29683636]This is why I would never live in Texas. They are all fucking crazy.[/QUOTE] this is why I don't like [insert race, religion or political party here]. they're all fucking [rapists/terrorists/retards]. [editline]7th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=certified;29685177]And life goes on in Dumbfuckistan Place is practically a Ten Commandments state. Those places are even worse then Middle Eastern Sharia States. Relevant image to the news in this thread [U][img_thumb]http://humourtouch.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Holy-Bible-Rape-Laws-Made-Easy-2.png[/img_thumb][/U] [img_thumb]http://loltheists.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/rape-the-biblical-way.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE] holy bible? [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of_Deuteronomy[/url] funny that they go through the effort of reading it and interpreting it but they either had no idea where deuteronomy came from or purposely lied about its source it's like quoting timecube and attributing it to any sane person

[QUOTE=Zeke129;29679696][B]I hope the media backlash destroys his sports career[/B] and drives the school into the ground[/QUOTE] The funny thing is this is small-town Texas we're talking about, High School sports is all they have.

Wow, this is fucked up. Way to go, American Judicial System. You haven't ceased to amaze me. [editline]7th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=Canuhearme?;29686646]The funny thing is this is small-town Texas we're talking about, High School sports is all they have.[/QUOTE] Kind of a 'Coach Carter' scenario.

[QUOTE=kevinseven;29663409]:wtc: So some one gets dropped from a cheer leader squad for refusing to applaud for some one who RAPED HER! And the courts don't see this as an infringement of freedom of speech?[/QUOTE] Because from a purely legal standpoint free speech does not come under effect here. The court actually explained it pretty well. She was not representing herself at the moment but an institution. The school had full legal right to expel her. Think of her as an employee, the cheerleading squad as the employer and the players as clients. The employer could easily kick an employee out for not fulfilling the contract to the client. The problem is that [i]morally[/i], what they did is completely and utterly downright wrong and rotten. more or less inexcuseable. The problem here is that the parents went to the court, while any lawyer worth his salt would have recommended instead to push at the school trough the public instead. Because while it is morally vile, legally it is clear cut. And while courts do retain some leaveway, they have to work intra leges, not contra leges. The judicial system is not at fault in this case. You really don't want judges to make decisions purely on what they feel is right. You want them to uphold the law and remain morally impartial as much as they can be permitted to.

I wish I could say it like that :allears:

[QUOTE=wraithcat;29686725]Because from a purely legal standpoint free speech does not come under effect here. The court actually explained it pretty well. She was not representing herself at the moment but an institution. The school had full legal right to expel her. Think of her as an employee, the cheerleading squad as the employer and the players as clients. The employer could easily kick an employee out for not fulfilling the contract to the client. The problem is that [i]morally[/i], what they did is completely and utterly downright wrong and rotten. more or less inexcuseable. The problem here is that the parents went to the court, while any lawyer worth his salt would have recommended instead to push at the school trough the public instead. Because while it is morally vile, legally it is clear cut. And while courts do retain some leaveway, they have to work intra leges, not contra leges.[/QUOTE] I think its wrong that we value law more than human decency. You going to look into a girl's eyes, and tell her that she's wrong because she didn't want to cheer the kid on who caused a traumatic event? That's bull in my opinion. I could never do such a thing. I would respect her wishes, rather then expel her and make her pay $45,000 in legal fees.

[QUOTE=Identity;29686713] Kind of a 'Coach Carter' scenario.[/QUOTE] Doubt it'll even ruin his sports career as well, Gary Neal raped a girl in his college career while he was on the team and only got a slap on the wrist, and he went on the join the NBA.

[QUOTE=Canuhearme?;29686778]Doubt it'll even ruin his sports career as well, Gary Neal raped a girl in his college career while he was on the team and only got a slap on the wrist, and he went on the join the NBA.[/QUOTE] No, I'm saying in the sense that since it's small community, sports is the only real outlet and candidate for college, scholarships, etc. So when something like this comes up, the community rather go for the players, rather than the reasoning, or in this case the victim. I don't care about the kid's career at all.

Texas, we should have let Mexico keep it. [editline]8th May 2011[/editline] [QUOTE=wraithcat;29686725]Because from a purely legal standpoint free speech does not come under effect here. The court actually explained it pretty well. She was not representing herself at the moment but an institution. The school had full legal right to expel her. Think of her as an employee, the cheerleading squad as the employer and the players as clients. The employer could easily kick an employee out for not fulfilling the contract to the client. The problem is that [i]morally[/i], what they did is completely and utterly downright wrong and rotten. more or less inexcuseable. The problem here is that the parents went to the court, while any lawyer worth his salt would have recommended instead to push at the school trough the public instead. Because while it is morally vile, legally it is clear cut. And while courts do retain some leaveway, they have to work intra leges, not contra leges. The judicial system is not at fault in this case. You really don't want judges to make decisions purely on what they feel is right. You want them to uphold the law and remain morally impartial as much as they can be permitted to.[/QUOTE] I get your logic, but still, the court should have little more morality. If I was the judge I would've thrown the book through that rapist's face

[QUOTE=Identity;29686764]I think its wrong that we value law more than human decency. You going to look into a girl's eyes, and tell her that she's wrong because she didn't want to cheer the kid on who caused a traumatic event? That's bull in my opinion. I could never do such a thing. I would respect her wishes, rather then expel her and make her pay $45,000 in legal fees.[/QUOTE] Well the issue is that we have to find a balanced view of both. The problem here is that it really is somewhat clear cut. Again morally questionable and rotten. The court has to observe stuff from a broader perspective though sadly. They let this one go trough and you suddenly find yourself with a bazillion civil lawsuits with similar pretexes. Personally I'd love to read the dissents in the case if there are any (my thoughts are that there will be) since the moral objections to the whole thing will most likely emerge there. In the end this feels more like a brutal mistake from the parents who went to sue without actually consulting it with anyone decent. Yeah the law can be a bitch and strict positivism leads to massive issues (Soviets, Fascists and Nazis are an example of strict positivist views for instance) But purely subjective systems aren't too great either. You need a balance and I'm afraid in this case, for the sake of future bullshit cases you have to this morally wrong decision down. I admit I don't know the US legal system that much, but I am aware that there's been cases in Europe that contest a similar freedom (freedom of religion) that have gone in favour of the accused (employer on similar grounds) Essentially they had a woman in contact with clients who converted to Islam and decided to wear the Burka. She was then told that due to to her contact with clients and how many of them can be put off by the Burka (as many of the clients are jews and overall a lot of germans don't like it) she is obliged to not wear it while at work at her current position else the work contract will be terminated. She refused and went to court. The court argued in favour of employer, that due to the woman working in direct contact with the clients, her wearing a Burka posed a damage to the employer who had full right to terminate the contract. Had she not been in a position of client contact, she would be able to wear it without issues, company policy be damned. Essentially this case has a number of overlapping points and the reasoning behind both feels quite similar.

This girl needs to do two things: 1) Make damn sure the rapist gets what he deserves for screwing her over (in multiple ways) 2) Move to a state that [b]isn't[/b] full of idiots. I can vouch for Washington.

I'm pretty sure this exact thing happened on a TV show once.

[QUOTE=Bigby Wolf;29663454]If she was raped by him why the fuck would she stay in the same school let alone stay on the cheer team while he's playing for the school? [/QUOTE] I should rape people that I don't like so they leave my school.