I'm curious why linking has been permitted to Lee Stranahan's blog(s?), since it is not a Main Stream Media source.
I have not found Stranahan's writing on this case to be exceptionally credible and unbiased. The first article of his "The Steubenville Rape Case: Everything You Know is Wrong" that caught my attention via Twitter had a very misleading headline based on Stranahan's assumption that readers are only familiar with a "narrative" which he chooses to selectively highlight and then perportedly debunk. I have also never seen a journalist who choose to selectively post public court documents on a personal blog, rather than release the whole document unedited (redacted as necessary) on a third-party site like Scribd.
I am deeply concerned with Strahahan's and other's contention that if specific acts were not part of testimony in the probable cause hearing then they absolutely did not happen and anyone who alleges they did (specifically but not limited to sodomy) is perpetuating or buying in to a false conspiracy to make this case about a liberal anti-America agenda, an anti-football/sports agenda, a naive and false belief in "rape-culture" agenda, etc.
Legal jurisdictions vary in how crimes are charged. In some states, no matter how many times a victim is repeatedly raped, even if it is over days/months/years or in different locations, there is only one count charged per victim, and so to simplify, evidence related to only one charge is what is likely to be presented at trial. Typically if prosecutors do not believe they have the evidence to prove a crime, charges will not be brought. Unlike crimes like battery (where there is physical evidence) and theft (where possession of stolen property can be clearly proven), sexual assault often does not meet the evidence standards.
The prosecutor and police have repeatedly (and continue to) made public statements directly in mainstream media that there are witnesses with information about the alleged crimes against Jane Doe and the events that transpired on August 11/12 2012 that have not come forward. Digital evidence has disappeared. But clearly, as in the case of the uncharged witnesses who admitted to taking and later deleting photographs and videos of Jane Doe while she was at least partially nude and/or being assaulted, just because a crime isn't charged, doesn't mean it didn't happen. MN's comments on Twitter and his video regarding "wang in the
" are not directly related to the very specific charges of rape against TM and MR, but that does not mean they aren't related to the assaults against Jane Doe potentially happening on the evening of August 11 and early morning of August 12.
I'm not advocating that the information on Local Leaks is accurate or should even be referred to. Additionally, while the December 16, 2012 New York Times article brings to light many of the facts of the case, it aslo contains some bias, such as the phrase, "football-crazy county." I'm just so very frustrated by those who wish to control this story by constricting the sphere of potential accuracy to the statements made by 5 youths in a hearing at which they all either admitted to or were alleged to have committed wrong doing, faced some negative consequences for their actions, and could likely be motivated to minimize the assault in order to avoid further punishment or protect other witnesses/participants.
