C
Cancel5
Guest
This was very unfortunate.
Couldn't the gentlemen find another guard who could get her the medicine?
Couldn't the gentlemen find another guard who could get her the medicine?
Christofacist denies rape victim morning after pill
- Thread starter LadyT
- Start date
There is not even one jail where the guard or jail worker can get medication for a prisoner. So, no, they probably couldn't. The only people who can give any medication to a prisoner are those in an infirmary.
Once again we haven't the knowledge to be able to judge this man's action other than a one-sided story that missed 4 of the 6 questions that they were supposed to answer in a story...
Whatever. The outrage here is that a rape victim was thrown in a prison cell because of a long ago theft that she didn't "make restitution" on. Unless she was wanted for murder, that is beyond the pale, but doesn't surprise me. She was less than 100% pure, therefore, not really a rape victim.
And that attitude is still prevalant today, and that is what people should be outraged about.
And that attitude is still prevalant today, and that is what people should be outraged about.
I did make a point earlier about that. I doubt that she could get restitution. Just because you are a victim does not excuse you from justice for an earlier crime.
Now, IMO, there would have most definitely been a better response than this. But that is hindsight. She must have had a bench warrant otherwise they couldn't have held her... I would have just chosen to worry about that warrant at a later date.
Now as to the drugs, we will gain more information later, probably from an actual reporter who will answer the six questions that you are supposed to in a story rather than rush to get anything into the paper that promotes a POV. Maybe even this one. The Editor should have sent this out for elaboration rather than put it in the paper to get a response from a point of ignorance. I'll admit that I gave one. Now I await actual information before judging them all poorly.
Now, had they thrown her in jail without taking any report on the rape citing her previous activities as a reason I'd sit around agreeing with you and be just as angry. It's like an idiot who thinks that a prostitute couldn't be raped.
It's not that I think she should get restitution Damo. It's that I think it shouldn't happen. She should have been brought to a hospital.
This is a minor incident, but about three years ago I was going for a jog in my neighborhood. A man came up to me and wanted to give me 20 dollars to touch my breasts. (dont' even get me started on the small amount of money he was offering). I got very upset because he lived in the neighborhood, and of course, I was like, shit do I look like the kind of woman who goes around taking 20 bucks and letting men feel me up? Anyway, my boyfriend talked me into calliing the police and reporting him. (we also suspected he had been peeping into my bedroom at nights for various reasons). And I worried about this perv with young girls. Anyway, the cop made me give my driver's license and he made me give him all of this info about me first. And I was annoyed because if you do have a record, or even a damned unpaid parking ticket, are you really going to want to deal with that? Why are they always investigating the damned victim first? And as for actual rapes, it's just too prevalant that if you're not 100% clean and pure, your rape case is going to be a problem for you. And you already have enough problems if you've been raped.
Hence the reason I said, "I would have dealt with this differently if I could." or words to that effect. Was she taken anywhere at all or was she reporting it too late for a rape kit, once again another of those question that this lacking story doesn't answer "when". So that means that the actual story is simply an irresponsible mess that doesn't give us the meaningful information to make such a judgement as we have been making.
Earlier I said the dude should be fired for letting his religion get in the way of his job. Now I am unsure if that was even the reason for what he has done, mostly because the story just doesn't give enough information...
I went back and read the story and is says they arrested her the same day she reported the rape, and that she reported the rape the day that it happened.
But it did also say that the sheriff is instituting a new policy that will ensure that victims of violent crimes are not put in jail on outstanding warrants whenever reasonably possible. Which I am going to give him the benefit of the doubt and assume he means that except in cases of something like murder or another violent crime, (which I agree with) they won't be brought in. So that is something good that came from it and I'm glad to see that. The mother had to go to the press though in order to get action.
Usually people do. The press, without a doubt, serves a positive purpose.
Reporting on the same day doesn't necessarily mean that she wasn't reporting too late for a rape kit. Does the story go into whether she showered? Douched? Does it say that they didn't collect necessary evidence on the rape case? It doesn't even mention whether the prison worker was an infirmary employee other than the lawyer saying that he couldn't give her medication which leads me to believe that he wasn't.
No it doesn't, nor should it. For Christ sakes, allow her some privacy. Did she douche?! It says that she was raped the same day she reported the rape and by that evening she was in a jail cell. Even if she was given a rape kit, she was obviously traumatized and should not have been in a prison cell that night. Obviously, the sheriff has come to the same conclusion and that's why he has instituted this new policy.
Like I said. It could cover that without going into the actual information. I do notice that she is not suing because they didn't collect necessary evidence which tends to make me believe that they did all of that properly so there was likely a reason she did not go to the hospital for a rape kit.
There is a reason that we teach in rape defense classes that if the worst does happen to report it immediately so that the maximum evidence can be gathered. We know it to be uncomfortable (yes, I know overly mild) but I would give the same advice to a man who was raped by another man. Collection of DNA evidence is often the largest factor in getting a conviction.
So, "Give her some privacy" is nice, but in reality the cop needs to ensure such awful questions are asked so that they can collect the evidence necessary for a conviction on finding a suspect.
However, such questions should be asked before we judge the jail worker. It is clear that I rushed to a judgement against him without all of the information early on in the thread.
Just as I am against a Muslim taxi-cab driver using his religion to deny service and believe that he should get a different job that won't conflict with his religion, I too believe that a christian that cannot perform duties should seek a job without conflict.
Yet I understand that I rushed judgement after re-reading the story.
C
Cancel5
Guest
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
Ok I have several problems with this thread... AND the assumptions many (who apparently have not read the article) have made....
1) The worker is a WOMAN, not a man
2) Tampa attorney Jennifer D'Angelo, who represents the jail worker, said Tuesday that her client is prohibited from giving inmates any medication without specific orders. Thus, the worker was not in the position to provide medication.
3) The worker says she did not discuss religion at all when telling the victim she could not provide medication.
4) AT NO POINT in the article did it say WHAT religion the worker belongs to. So those ASSUMING she is Christian (while they may be correct) are simply showing their bigotry towards Christians in acting as if they know for sure.
That said, warrant or not, I don't think the police should have tossed her in jail after being raped. They should, in my opinion, have taken her to a hospital and had her under arrest there if necessary.
1) The worker is a WOMAN, not a man
2) Tampa attorney Jennifer D'Angelo, who represents the jail worker, said Tuesday that her client is prohibited from giving inmates any medication without specific orders. Thus, the worker was not in the position to provide medication.
3) The worker says she did not discuss religion at all when telling the victim she could not provide medication.
4) AT NO POINT in the article did it say WHAT religion the worker belongs to. So those ASSUMING she is Christian (while they may be correct) are simply showing their bigotry towards Christians in acting as if they know for sure.
That said, warrant or not, I don't think the police should have tossed her in jail after being raped. They should, in my opinion, have taken her to a hospital and had her under arrest there if necessary.
1) I don't believe I said she was a man, but if I did, my mistake. The jail workers gender isn't the issue here.
2) She had a prescription - I'd consider that an order. Even if she didn't, this jail healthcare worker was obviously her point of contact to getting medication to which she had a prescription for.
3) The article didn't specifically say she was a Christian. But I'm willing to bet she's a Christofacist nonetheless.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
1) I did not mean to imply that YOU had said she was a man... just that others were assuming it.
2) The article does not say that she had a prescription and it DOES say that the jail worker needed authorization to provide medication. She had been in her current job six months. Which means she probably hadn't been presented a situation like that before with regards to a RAPE VICTIM being tossed in jail. But no... to YOU she must be a religious nut. Pretty sad.
Again, I don't think a rape victim should have ever been taken to jail in the first place. In the second, she should have been provided with the medication. But for you to assume it was due to religion is bullshit.
2) The article does not say that she had a prescription and it DOES say that the jail worker needed authorization to provide medication. She had been in her current job six months. Which means she probably hadn't been presented a situation like that before with regards to a RAPE VICTIM being tossed in jail. But no... to YOU she must be a religious nut. Pretty sad.
Again, I don't think a rape victim should have ever been taken to jail in the first place. In the second, she should have been provided with the medication. But for you to assume it was due to religion is bullshit.
T
TRGLDTE
Guest
The story indicates that she was not given the second of two doses. That indicates that she had had medical attention.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
But she should have received the second dosage... it obviously said she received the first of TWO dosages.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
"So she will just go halfway to hell ?"
What? Why would she go to hell? Except perhaps to find the coward that raped her to torture the bastard.
What? Why would she go to hell? Except perhaps to find the coward that raped her to torture the bastard.
Cancel 2016.2
The Almighty
goofball