NY - Five men gang rape 18 yo woman in Brooklyn playground, January 2016

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
I agree, but I was thinking about what an attorney would do with a video that he can use to claim otherwise. Even if it is only 30 seconds.

That and the crap/lies that came out of the daughter's and "father's" mouth.

The "teens" won't be facing hard core jail time, that is why they are smirking and that is why one was wearing "court room glasses" and smirking as he was taken into custody.

They came across a very messed up situation and took advantage. They aren't the bigger than life monsters in this particular scenario, they are just symptoms of the disease.
 
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...changed-incriminating-texts-article-1.2498696

Brooklyn park rape suspects exchanged incriminating text messages, source says

Last paragraph...makes me uncomfortable.

"A day after all five suspects were released, NYPD Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce said the probe into the Jan. 7 case — with similarities to the Central Park Five case — was ongoing."

For anyone not familiar:

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/crimelaw/features/n_7836/
 
Last paragraph...makes me uncomfortable.
"A day after all five suspects were released, NYPD Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce said the probe into the Jan. 7 case — with similarities to the Central Park Five case — was ongoing."
For anyone not familiar:
http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/crimelaw/features/n_7836/

Momoffourboys
Yes, I see what you mean ^. But from wording, unclear to me who brought up Jogger case. IDK.

Did Chief of Detectives Boyce say this case is similar to the Jogger case? IDK.
Or did reporter insert comparison to old case into middle of Boyce's statement? IDK.
I may be splitting hairs here. Awaiting release of further developments.
 
Momoffourboys
Yes, I see what you mean ^. But from wording, unclear to me who brought up Jogger case. IDK.

Did Chief of Detectives Boyce say this case is similar to the Jogger case? IDK.
Or did reporter insert comparison to old case into middle of Boyce's statement? IDK.
I may be splitting hairs here. Awaiting release of further developments.

It really appears that the author of the article inserted the sentiment about the Central Park Five in there. NY Daily News is known for trying to stir the pot and having sensational journalism. If you look at the some of their other articles, they like to drop words like "goon" and the like in their posts. Also, IIRC I read a statement from one of the teens' defense attorneys comparing this situation to the Central Park Five. I have a hard time believing a chief of detectives would publicly compare this to the CPF. JMO.
 
Momoffourboys
Yes, I see what you mean ^. But from wording, unclear to me who brought up Jogger case. IDK.

Did Chief of Detectives Boyce say this case is similar to the Jogger case? IDK.
Or did reporter insert comparison to old case into middle of Boyce's statement? IDK.
I may be splitting hairs here. Awaiting release of further developments.

Someone brought it up, I think a defense attorney, saying "Have you forgotten about the Central Park Five?" But I don't remember where I read it. IMO so far this has little in common with that case.
 
Someone brought it up, I think a defense attorney, saying "Have you forgotten about the Central Park Five?" But I don't remember where I read it. IMO so far this has little in common with that case.


I have to agree with you, beyond there being 5 suspected attackers I see no real parallels between the cases from what we know so far.
 
I am not talking about 18 year old. All of the suspects are under 18. If they took any videos of sex acts, they would be making child *advertiser censored* of themselves, which isn't legal per our laws. As for a man talking on video and claiming she agreed, from the description of the video, it sure looks like she wasn't talking at all. I don't know how one "feels" that somebody is answering in the affirmative if somebody isn't answering.

The charging of minors as adults for rape while also charging them with producing child *advertiser censored* of themselves, thereby exploiting themselves while committing illegal acts they were technically too young to consent to, would be the most Kafkaesque case I could ever imagine.
 
Sounds like there were multiple cell phone videos taken. Police should act quickly. If any videos or parts of videos were deleted, my understanding the cell phone provider would only keep them on file for a short period of time.

So providers should be contacted ASAP.

Unless the videos were uploaded somewhere or sent to another phone, the cell phone company can't do anything. Videos and photos are stored locally on the device, so the cell company would only have access to it if it had been sent to another phone or uploaded to a "cloud" account.
 
Unless the videos were uploaded somewhere or sent to another phone, the cell phone company can't do anything. Videos and photos are stored locally on the device, so the cell company would only have access to it if it had been sent to another phone or uploaded to a "cloud" account.

Well, one of the main reasons teenagers take videos is to share them around.
 
The charging of minors as adults for rape while also charging them with producing child *advertiser censored* of themselves, thereby exploiting themselves while committing illegal acts they were technically too young to consent to, would be the most Kafkaesque case I could ever imagine.

Two 13 year old kids have been charged with statutory rape for having sex with each other...
Teenage girls have been charged with murder while their adult boyfriends were charged with statutory rape.
Can't consent to SEX but guilty of murder as an adult?
Yeah it makes absolutely no sense, but it happens. I doubt it will in this case though. :twocents:
 
Two 13 year old kids have been charged with statutory rape for having sex with each other...
Teenage girls have been charged with murder while their adult boyfriends were charged with statutory rape.
Can't consent to SEX but guilty of murder as an adult?
Yeah it makes absolutely no sense, but it happens. I doubt it will in this case though. :twocents:
There is this recent case:two 17 year olds who had nekkid photos of themselves on their cell phones. Charged as adults.
http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2015/sep/20/teen-prosecuted-naked-images-himself-phone-selfies
 
The charging of minors as adults for rape while also charging them with producing child *advertiser censored* of themselves, thereby exploiting themselves while committing illegal acts they were technically too young to consent to, would be the most Kafkaesque case I could ever imagine.

Our laws don't always makes sense but those are the laws we have. If anything of sexual nature is found on their cell phones, they can be charged as adults for making child *advertiser censored* even though the victims are themselves. So far we haven't heard anything about what was found on their cell phones except that short 14 second video of the woman mumbling and man claiming she consented. I find it hard to believe the only video they took is 14 seconds.
 

Some of them admit to performing "sexual acts" with her and pointed themselves out on the video

Two of the suspects told investigators that the father was having sex with the daughter when they found them in the park, officials said.

The teens also say they took part in sexual acts with the woman but it was consensual, citing a 12-second cellphone video they took of the woman before they had sex.

but..

The victim did not identify any of the suspects in a lineup. Their attorneys said this proved their clients did not commit the crime.

None of them have denied being there so what difference does the lineup make?

NYPD Commissioner Bill Bratton said that this doesn't necessarily clear them because trauma victims who are still reeling from an attack often can't identify the people behind it.
 
Some of them admit to performing "sexual acts" with her and pointed themselves out on the video



but..



None of them have denied being there so what difference does the lineup make?

I don't understand that either. They admitted they were there. Some of them admitted to sex acts. So police definitely got the right people.
 
I don't think it means anything that she couldn't pick them put of the line up. She was drunk, traumatized and in shock. She probably didn't look at their faces either. I wouldn't have.
 
I don't think it means anything that she couldn't pick them put of the line up. She was drunk, traumatized and in shock. She probably didn't look at their faces either. I wouldn't have.

Seems like the dna evidence from the rape kit would answer that question without a line up. Now if any were just watchers, that's low down, too.
 
A grand jury is expected to sort out the evidence and conflicting tales in the alleged gang rape of an 18-year-old woman inside a Brooklyn park, a top NYPD official said Wednesday.

Chief of Detectives Robert Boyce said police investigators had turned over some unspecified test results to Brooklyn prosecutors in the Jan. 7 case.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york...-alleged-brooklyn-gang-rape-article-1.2503305
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
73
Guests online
460
Total visitors
533

Forum statistics

Threads
608,349
Messages
18,238,065
Members
234,348
Latest member
Allira93
Back
Top