Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

OneGrassRoot

(23,953 posts)
6. That's just what I was going to say. Geesh, rawstory. edit to add more...
Tue Aug 13, 2013, 03:50 PM
Aug 2013

And I also bristled at this:

"One victim, now an adult, told police that she had a sexual relationship with Joynes for three years when she was a child in the 1990s. Those offenses were what led to the charges of rape and child abuse."

The article states that the victims were between the ages (grades) of kindergarten and second grade.

I highly doubt a victim would refer to abuse as a "sexual relationship" given the age of the abuse.

I could be wrong, but I highly doubt it.

I'm tempted to write the author of the piece to suggest he remove the photo, and to make sure "sexual relationship" was the verbiage used by the victim or else edit it.

Both have the potential to at least slightly derail this important news story about abuse for readers of RS. It agitated me, and I'm not easily agitated; I can usually focus on the story at hand without being sidetracked by such things. But this bugs me.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Maryland child rape case:...»Reply #6