Utterly Meaningless » Blog Archive » THOSE SAFE SCHOOLS

    • THOSE SAFE SCHOOLS

    Filed at 8:41 pm under by dcobranchi

    This one is just outrageous. Ignore the fact that the kid was convicted of felony sexual assault and the school is considering allowing him to march with his class at graduation. Look at what they’ve done to the poor girl:

    The charge stemmed from a Nov. 2 incident when Lemaster engaged in sexual intercourse with a 16-year-old sophomore who had passed out at a party after consuming alcohol and Xanax.

    The girl woke up with her pants undone and abdominal pain, according to police reports. She later learned male students were circulating photos of her undressed on their cell phones. She went to a school guidance counselor Nov. 5, saying she thought she’d been raped…

    Birtle said she could not give any information on the girl’s status with the district because she’s under 18. Montgomery County Common Pleas Judge Dennis Langer indicated at Lemaster’s sentencing that she was being home-schooled due to harassment by other students.

    Raped, humiliated, and forced to leave school. And the school district’s concerned about him?

    Do I even have to pull out that quote?

    7 comments »

    7 Responses to “THOSE SAFE SCHOOLS”


    Comment by
    Not June Cleaver
    May 5th, 2008
    at 9:39 pm

    //Christopher Lemaster, 18, a senior at Stebbins High School, pleaded guilty April 3 to a fourth-degree felony charge of gross sexual imposition and was placed on five years probation May 1.//

    What the hell is “gross sexual imposition”? Is that some charge they invented for guys who rape drunk girls?

    Comment by
    COD
    May 5th, 2008
    at 9:45 pm

    It’s having sex with somebody that is too intoxicated to say no. So I’d say the answer to your question is yes.

    Comment by
    Daryl Cobranchi
    May 6th, 2008
    at 1:14 am

    The linked definition is pretty sick. Apparently it’s OK to get your wife spouse drunk and force her to have sex with you. Or with a third person, if I read that correctly.

    Comment by
    Lisa Giebitz
    May 6th, 2008
    at 9:33 am

    UGH.
    Consensual sex requires both people to say yes and to be able to say no without fear.

    Penetration without consent is RAPE.

    It’s rape EVEN IF
    – she was drunk
    – she was dressed suggestively
    – she flirted with you
    – she kissed you
    – she’s your spouse
    – you didn’t penetrate with your member
    – she didn’t say ‘no’
    – she’s said yes before

    The monstrous act described above has a name: rape.
    USE IT.

    Comment by
    NMcV
    May 6th, 2008
    at 11:17 am

    Thank you, Lisa.

    On behalf of the millions of women who “weren’t really raped”, thank you.

    Comment by
    Traci
    May 6th, 2008
    at 12:04 pm

    I am always just completely outraged & confused somehow the person that commits this kind of crime gets treated w/ kid gloves and the victim ends up bearing all the ugly fallout.

    For God’s sake would someone just please put a butter knife in the rapist’s back pack and get him the hell out of the school system.
    Then maybe the school board would step up & do the right thing.

    Well; then again, that would only work if the rapist was an honor student or something.

    He pleaded guilty!!!!!!!!! This is not about innocent until proven guilty.
    He deserves no benefit of the doubt. This is very different than the Duke rape case.

    Comment by
    Lisa Giebitz
    May 6th, 2008
    at 1:11 pm

    Thanks for the thanks (heh).

    I just get a little worked up whenever I read something like, “…when Lemaster engaged in sexual intercourse…”

    Um, no. He didn’t “engage in sexual intercourse”. HE RAPED HER.

    I really wish the mainstream media would stop trying to downplay these incidents by omitting the word “rape.” (I know it’s in the above quote, but look again at the context.)