The Promise Of Restraint

[Again, multiple posts today.]

It is not at all difficult to form an opinion about the two Duke University lacrosse players' indictment for rape. They are innocent men, all. You know, completely innocent until proven guilty. And I will not corrupt the jury pool with wild speculations or impassioned damnations. These guys, in the eyes of American law, are as pure as the driven snow.

My opinion is in no part any suggestion that the alleged victim is not a real victim. She may very well be. But we live in a country (here in the US) that holds dearly to the beautiful belief that indictments are not statements of guilt; and that each of us is above reproach until a judge and jury drop the gavel on our guilt. So the histrionics and posturing around this and all cases are to be avoided, even damned.

In a conversation last night with one of his callers, radio talk show host Jay Severin was somewhat chided for referring to the alleged victim as a "stripper or exotic dancer." The caller attempted to offer other, more suitable descriptions, like "daughter, mother, parent, full-time student." Severin's response to this was rather disappointing, as he suggested that he would continue to describe the victim as a stripper since, he announced, "every major media outlet in the country" was doing the same. That is not much of an answer.

The point of calling the victim a stripper is a good one: It is germane to the whole case. For the only reason the victim was in contact with the lacrosse team was due to her being a stripper; she was not at their party looking for a babysitter or for help with her college classes. This in no way implies that she "asked for" a rape; it merely describes the relation between her and her accused rapists: She is a stripper, and they are her audience.

Of course, I note that seemingly everyone refers to the alleged perpetrators as lacrosse players, though they are also sons, boyfriends, and full-time students. Plus, not only are there suggestions of depravity in the term stripper; there are similar connotations in the words lacrosse player and off-campus party, for we all know how, well, badly jocks can behave when they've had a bit to drink.

If a sniper shoots my father, it would be the odd newspaper indeed that continuously referred to the shooter as a shoe-salesman, even if that is his vocation. "Sniper" would be the commonly used term. But if my dad was killed by a shoe-salesman who squeezed my father's head into a brutally small pair of wing-tips, it would be appropriate to refer to the murderer as the shoe-salesman, irrespective of his domestic or academic background. Similarly, a woman raped while working as a stripper will be called by her professional name exactly the way a (woman) doctor raped in the operating room will be called a surgeon. The term establishes relationship, context, and some sort of framework for understanding.

Restraint, obviously, is in order. I am guilty, I admit, of too often forgetting that the United States gives legal benefit-of-the-doubt to the accused. It may be unfair, it may be unjust. But there seems to be no small amount of wisdom to that very liberal protection. But I hope to turn over a new leaf: From now on I shall try to restrain myself from jumping the gun regarding any legal case. I truly promise to stop befouling that which is held legally sacred by decreeing as just what I cannot possibly know.

Peace.

©Bill Gnade 2006/Contratimes - All Rights Reserved.

Technorati tags: Duke Lacrosse, Duke Lacrosse Team, Duke Rape, Reade Seligmann, Collin Finnerty, Duke University