Contempt motion dropped against Ky. teenager

[Comrade_McKenzie]

Source: Associated Press

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (AP) -- A 17-year-old Kentucky girl who defied a court order by tweeting the names of two teenagers who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting her won't face a contempt charge.

David Mejia (meh-HEE'-yah), an attorney for one of the accused boys, says the motion to hold 17-year-old Savannah Dietrich of Louisville in contempt was withdrawn Monday.

Mejia says the decision had nothing to do with public sentiment in the case, although an online petition campaign had garnered more than 62,000 signatures. He said there's no need for the motion now that Dietrich spread word about the case over the Internet.

Read more: http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_TWITTER_TEEN_ASSAULTED?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

[AtheistCrusader]

1. What would have happened to her, 20 years ago?

What would have happened if this hadn't gone viral, and outrage marshalled against it?

Sad, really.

[Comrade_McKenzie]

2. Yep, I don't believe that lawyer for a second...

When he says that the public outrage had nothing to do with the decision.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

3. I can understand the request for a gag order

I can understand trying to cover up a crime against a 17 yr old.
I can understand it, but unless the boys were minors, in many cases, courts do protect the ID of yutes. If they were 18 or older, fuck em.

But, to seek sanctions AFTER the release of their IDs, now, someone was not thinking very hard ahead.

[1monster]

7. Regardless, there never should have been a gag order that pertained to the victim.

Telling her that she could not talk about her experience as a victim indefensible.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

10. I'm with you on this

I am surprised the judge granted it initially, and very surprised the atty decided to move for sanctions.

[AnotherMcIntosh]

4. Good to hear.

[Gothmog]

6. This is good news

This contempt motion would not stand up if challenged.

[4th law of robotics]

8. Good

I could see it if the trial was still ungoing but once they were found guilty? Makes no sense.

[A Simple Game]

9. No sense at all. Part of the reason for publishing the names of the guilty

is deterrent for people that may want to commit the same offense.

[Liberal_in_LA]

11. excellent!