I’d like to know the names of the two boys who took advantage of an inebriated minor who was passed out at a party: they apparently assaulted her while she was unconscious, took pictures of the attack with their cell phones, and sent them around to their friends. I guess this was their idea of bragging. I’d like to know because I never want to have anything to do with them, ever.
Their victim, Savannah Dietrich, posted their names after they were found guilty of felony sexual abuse, but as part of the deal, was told that she was not allowed to ever mention their names in public. So they were found guilty, given a slap on the wrist, and then protected from the social stigma of being abusers. I guess the judge didn’t think they were quite so naughty that they deserved to be shunned from civilized company, or that the public didn’t deserve to know who these little monsters were.
After revealing their identities, Dietrich was threatened with 6 months in prison and a $500 fine (that charge has been dropped, fortunately). That was news: that the victim of sexual abuse could face greater penalties than the two jerks who took advantage of her. And it is now all over the web.
But here’s the strange thing: in all of these serious stories, especially the ones praising Dietrich for her bravery in coming forth with the details of the crime against her, none of them dare to name the two felons. Everywhere we have people talking about the victim, Savannah Dietrich, and we know her name well…but the criminals still remain sheltered by the major media and it’s tough to find them (but not too hard!), despite Dietrich’s stand. It’s weird.
Shouldn’t Austin Zehnder and Will Frey be far more notorious than Savannah Dietrich? Although Dietrich should be more widely recognized for her courage.
So it turns out she actually didn’t get raped. reported July 26, 2012. She
passed out topless after a throwing up violently from alcohol poisoning….they
only took pictures, noone touched her.
The boys plead guilty to sexual assault because it has fewer repercussions than child pornography charges (they also never posted her images online as was reported).
Thus why the DA accepted the plea, in cases of “rape” plea bargains are very rare because evidence so incriminating can support the crime.
It was only when she heard about the pictures MONTHS later and decided to take legal actions.
The Courier Journal, who originally published the story, is facing a lawsuit for publishing
false allegations because Dietrich used the words “rapists” and such when
interviewed. She was not raped and the media now is painting the boys charged
Basically she’s embarrassed and angry about the photos thus why she
took legal action only when they came out months later. Whiteness that were
with Dietrich the entire night who assisted her while throwing up said she
Can you read? Do you realize what plea bargain is? Their only crime was taking her picture, none of them touched her.
Honestly – US criminal system is a mess. 30% of Americans have criminal history. I mean – c’mon – they’re teenagers!
John Morales says
ryannewman: her assailants (Austin Zehnder and Will Frey) were convicted of sexual assault in the first degree after a plea bargain.
This is fact.
It was not proven that she was raped according to some legal criteria, but it was proven that she was sexually assaulted.
They are older than the person they sexually assaulted.
They are scum, and you are too, for having sympathy for the perpetrators and not for the victim.
The problem with your opinion is that it’s misinformed. The rape allegation in this case is apparently a hoax, similar to rape hoaxes in years past made by Tawana Brawley and Crystal Gail Mangum.
What I’m hearing now is that Savannah Dietrich went to a party, drank too much alcohol, took her shirt off, vomited, and passed out. Will Frey and Austin Zehnder, also at the party and probably also drunk, figured that if Dietrich was willing to expose her breasts to other party-goers, then she probably wouldn’t mind having them photographed. So they took pictures that proved that she had been behaving as a young lady ought not to behave. Among other things, the pictures showed that she was topless.
Some time went by. Evidently, several weeks. Then Savannah Dietrich became aware of the photographs and opted for legal action. Although she was less than a year away from being able to pose nude for Playboy, she could have pursued charges against the boys for making child pornography. While such charges would have been somewhat technical, the judge might have been required to impose penalties on the boys that were much more severe than what they received from the plea-bargain.
That’s why the boys were offered that bargain.
There has been some confusion between what actually happened and “rape.” Rape is, by common and by legal definition, sexual intercourse without consent. That didn’t happen. But someone tried very hard to give the public the incorrect opinion that Savannah Dietrich had been raped. That someone might have been Savannah Dietrich, herself, lying up a story that would bring her maximum sympathy and create mob surge against Frey and Zehnder.
In other words, the judge most likely wasn’t being irresponsible in telling Dietrich to refrain from identifying the boys as rapists. It seems to me now that this was a judge advising a lying girl that she had better not commit libel or slander, both of which are crimes. When the judge denied issuing any gag order, she was probably telling the truth, whereas Dietrich’s lawyers are trying to make the judge’s courtroom advice seem to be what it wasn’t.
This is why cases aren’t tried in the media. Publicity is a safeguard from official corruption, but when what is publicized is false there’s a risk of mob surge, political reaction following public outrage over a lie that has gained wide-distribution and the status of popular belief.
Contrast the behavior of law enforcement and the courts in the case of Savannah Dietrich with a similar case from Ft. Myers, Florida. Similar, that is, except for the fact that it involved some older teenage girls pulling off an 11-year-old boy’s pants and underwear in public, while one of the girls made a video of the assault and mocked the victim.
Oh, and there was one other difference: the police refused to do anything about it. The girls weren’t arrested. There were no criminal charges. And the child pornography aspect of the crime was overlooked.
It looks as if young female citizens get more protection from the laws than young male citizens do. Why is that?
David Marjanović says
For what? Smoking pot? Driving while black?
Because of the patriarchal expectation that “ladies” just don’t do such things.
See? Patriarchy hurts men & boys, too.