UVA Lacrosse Tragedy

[4decadedukie]

Within the last fifteen minutes, AP reported the following:
1) A UVa men's lacrosse player has been charged with first-degree murder in the death of a women's lacrosse player.
2) Charlottesville police said that 22-year-old George Huguely is charged in the death of 22-year-old Yeardley Love; both are seniors.

Given Duke's experiences with erroneous and premature judgments concerning serious crimes, I urge everyone to be judicious in his pronouncements.

In my opinion, UVa is the presumptive #1 seed in this year’s NCAA Men's LAX Tournament; the selection decisions will be announced (ESPNU) next Sunday.

[Duvall]

This would probably be better described as a tragedy for the women's lacrosse team than a problem for the men's team.

[4decadedukie]

With respect, Duvall, I suspect it is a tragedy for all parties, and an even more horrible one if it is true. I am truly not trying to pick "nits" with this comment -- I fear it will be awful for UVa, the individuals directly involved, the teams, the families, the coaches, their friends and classmates, and SO MANY others.

[DukeSean]

premature death is always a tragedy.

let's hope the justice system works in this case.

[roywhite]

Goodness, what an awful development.

Will await further news, but what a tragedy.

[David]

Agreed - terrible tragedy.

Maybe change thread title to "UVA lacrosse tragedy"?

[CameronDuke]

Terrible news and a tragedy. It appears the two were in a relationship.

It will be very interesting to hear the rest of the details of this event. There are lots of questions that many people currently have. Please, though, like other have said, wait before all details are released before judgments and notions are made. We all know the feeling of being judged before all facts are released.

God be with the families involved in this situation and all at the University of Virginia.

[Acymetric]

Agreed - terrible tragedy.

Maybe change thread title to "UVA lacrosse tragedy"?

Yeah, I would tend to agree that the title doesn't really accurately represent what happened.

As far as what happened (or what we know of it so far) its absolutely terrible. I would have been graduating this year if I hadn't transferred...it makes it even sadder when you consider that they were this close to graduating (unless they were taking 5 years for athletics). I can't imagine what its like for their friends. Truly awful.

[TampaDukie]

I lived on the same street as the apartment where Ms. Love's body was found during my first year of law school. It's shocking to think about a murder occurring there. I feel awful for all of Ms. Love's family and friends, and the University community, in general. What an awful thing to happen so close to graduation.

[loran16]

Agreed. What needs to be emphasized here is:

1. This is a tragedy because of Ms. Love's loss.

2. Mr. Huguely is innocent until proven guilty and we need to wait for the facts to come out.

3. This is a human tragedy (her death). The fact that it affects the lacrosse teams is incidental to the real magnitude of the situation.

[-bdbd]

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/local-breaking-news/maryland/uva-lacrosse-player-charged-wi.html?wpisrc=nl_sports

Obviously a very sad situation, especially for the young lady's family. 'can't imagine what they must be going through.

[4decadedukie]

This is so unbelievably tragic, words are inadequate to express just how awful it is. Here is the Washington Post's initial report: http://voices.washingtonpost.com/crime-scene/virginia/uva-suspected-homicide.html

[DukieInKansas]

Condolences and prayers for the family and friends of Ms. Love as they deal with this tragic loss.

Prayers also for the family and friends of Mr. Huguely as they struggle to come to grips with the situation and wait for a final determination of what occurred.

[cspan37421]

Agreed. What needs to be emphasized here is:

1. This is a tragedy because of Ms. Love's loss.

2. Mr. Huguely is presumed innocent until proven guilty and we need to wait for the facts to come out.

3. This is a human tragedy (her death). The fact that it affects the lacrosse teams is incidental to the real magnitude of the situation.

Above in bold, a non-trivial correction/distinction. He may not actually be innocent, but in the eyes of the law, the presumption of innocence is the default position unless and until a conviction.

On #3, I agree fully, and hope that a certain coach who compared a bad season to the Haitian earthquake would also.

[Big Pappa]

On #3, I agree fully, and hope that a certain coach who compared a bad season to the Haitian earthquake would also.

That's a great point, we have to remember there are so many things that make sports pale in comparison.

[Big Pappa]

Here is an article and video from ESPN:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5158985

[sagegrouse]

Here is an article and video from ESPN:

http://sports.espn.go.com/ncaa/news/story?id=5158985

And, of course, they screwed it up, saying that Huguely attended the same prep school as the accused in the Duke lacrosse case. Uh, no... Only David Evans attended Landon School in Bethesda, MD.

The reason for the linkage is that Huguely was quoted by the Wash Post as defending Evans during that period.

sagegrouse

[Newton_14]

Thoughts and prayers to all involved with this. Like any tragedy of this magnitude, the impact with be far reaching across family members, classmates, teammates, and friends of both. Just a tragic situation and 22 is way too young to die...

[Cavlaw]

This is just so sad to see. I don't even know what to say.

[Verga3]

What a tragedy....no words. Our Duke WLAX players have played with and against Yeardley through the years. Love and prayers to the Love family and to all that knew Yeardley.

[loran16]

Well one things for sure...unlike the Lacrosse case, there's no question that if there is a murder here, it's extremely likely they have the right guy.

http://www.readthehook.com/blog/index.php/2010/05/04/huguely-lawyer-yeardley-loves-killing-not-intended/



A Hook reporter has seen a court document which alleges that Huguely admits swinging the victim’s neck and shaking it violently and pounding her head against a wall. Also in the court document was confirmation that Huguely and Love had a relationship which had ended.


Lets just hope once again that the Justice System prosecutes this properly and takes NO SHORTCUTS (and also does not address the media unnecessarily).

[-bdbd]

Huguely appeared today at his bond hearing (via video). His attorney seems to acknowledge that he was involved, but that the death was "accidental."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050402215.html

Can't image -- going from expecting graduation later this month to dealing with this. Just wow. Very sad.

[allenmurray]

Huguely appeared today at his bond hearing (via video). His attorney seems to acknowledge that he was involved, but that the death was "accidental."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/05/04/AR2010050402215.html

Can't image -- going from expecting graduation later this month to dealing with this. Just wow. Very sad.

It leads to the question, "How does one kick open a locked door by accident?

[snowdenscold]

It leads to the question, "How does one kick open a locked door by accident?

The locked door is the least of his worries trying to pass off as an accident. How about repeatedly shaking her so that her hangs bashes against the wall? If that's what constitutes an 'accident' these days...

[allenmurray]

The locked door is the least of his worries trying to pass off as an accident. How about repeatedly shaking her so that her hangs bashes against the wall? If that's what constitutes an 'accident' these days...

I agree completely. However, I can imagine a lawyer making the argument that it is possible to assault someone with no intent to kill them, such that the assault is purposeful but the death is accidental. That was my (poorly phrased) point.

[Acymetric]

I agree completely. However, I can imagine a lawyer making the argument that it is possible to assault someone with no intent to kill them, such that the assault is purposeful but the death is accidental. That was my (poorly phrased) point.

Would that be involuntary manslaughter?

[allenmurray]

Would that be involuntary manslaughter?

I have no idea of how the differences between first murder, second degree murder, manslaughter, and involuntary manslaughter work. I hope I never need to know.

[loran16]

I agree completely. However, I can imagine a lawyer making the argument that it is possible to assault someone with no intent to kill them, such that the assault is purposeful but the death is accidental. That was my (poorly phrased) point.

I don't know Virginia State Law, but well...if you intend to do serious harm to a person but not to kill, and then you kill the person...you're still guilty of murder.

And a jury isn't likely to believe an intent not to do serious harm.

He's gonna have a hard time managing to not get 2nd degree murder here (1st degree requires premeditation, which he probably can argue never occurred...though VA law might make that difficult)....at the very least he's guilty of manslaughter.

[roywhite]

Don't mean to trivialize the tragedy involved, but has UVa decided to suspend their lacrosse season(s) or go ahead and compete in the NCAA tournament?

[ElSid]

I have a friend who is a former UVA Lax player and knows/knew both Huguely and Love.

He says it's well known that Huguely has been "out of control" recently and that he'd been "roughing her up". So this is the result of a pattern of behavior that people knew about.

This is accidental in the same respect that any domestic violence death is accidental. Many husbands kill or maim their wives every year in similar incidents. It wasn't an accident to kick in the door. Seems like clearly the act of an argument. Once inside, I HIGHLY doubt he intended to kill her. Chances of that are basically zero. But he'd been "roughing her up" before this, and in these situations, the pattern is usually one of escalation. Both sides say things that infuriate the other, on purpose, and it leads to really awful fighting. Not usually physical fighting.

Not going to speculate anymore than that. But it's interesting to know that this isn't a singular event.

[ElSid]

Don't mean to trivialize the tragedy involved, but has UVa decided to suspend their lacrosse season(s) or go ahead and compete in the NCAA tournament?

both men's and women's teams are consdiering not pariticpating in the ncaa tournament. there has been no announcement yet.

my guess is yes they will both suspend the seasons.

[cspan37421]

Don't mean to trivialize the tragedy involved, but has UVa decided to suspend their lacrosse season(s) or go ahead and compete in the NCAA tournament?

I sense there's a comparison to the Duke lacrosse hoax of a few years ago.

While one would not want to stop short of any action honoring the memory of the young woman and player who lost her life in this tragedy, it would really further the emotional burden and unfortunate circumstance of the remaining players, who, as far as we know, had nothing to do with this tragedy.

In the Duke case, though the specific allegations turned out to be a hoax, the situation centered on an off-campus party attended by several members of the team. Specific allegations - later shown to be false - made against three. Without getting too deep into that morass again, the difference here is that it was one men's player as accused and one women's player as victim - that's it. There's no cloud of suspicion - falsely generated or not - hanging over either team.

It would unduly penalize them. Unless they wanted to call off the whole thing, it would seem appropriate and fitting to me if they wanted to petition to sport black armbands with the woman's number on it to honor her, or a ribbon logo on the helmet, or something of that nature.

[Billy Dat]

ElSid - thanks for the anecdotal info.

If what you say is true, a number of players from both teams are potential witnesses. With the spectre of that kind of process looming, it's hard to imagine their seasons continuing. Add to that the heinous nature of the crime, and the fact that both the victim and the perp probably have close friends on both teams, it would amaze me if those teams played.

[johnb]

then I think you should prepared to be amazed:

http://www2.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/local/crime/article/u.va._lacrosse_teams_to_continue_with_season/55731/

[weezie]

I have a friend who is a former UVA Lax player and knows/knew both Huguely and Love...
He says it's well known that Huguely has been "out of control" recently and that he'd been "roughing her up". So this is the result of a pattern of behavior that people knew about....But he'd been "roughing her up" before this.....
it's interesting to know that this isn't a singular event.

These are some stunning allegations. "People" actually knew that Huguely had been "roughing" up Love?
I guess we'll find out eventually what, if anything, was done to help protect her or to discipline him but it truly is shocking that his abusive behavior was apparently well known at the school. Wow.

[johnb]

Domestic abuse is fairly widespread, widely ignored by observers, and commonly rationalized/minimized afterwards by the participants. This horrendous situation appears to be perfect for raising awareness and perhaps contributing to a sea change in how people perceive violence against women (and sometimes violence against men).

[cato]

Here are some relevant provisions from the Virginia Code (http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm):


§ 18.2-30. Murder and manslaughter declared felonies.

Any person who commits capital murder, murder of the first degree, murder of the second degree, voluntary manslaughter, or involuntary manslaughter, shall be guilty of a felony.

§ 18.2-32. First and second degree murder defined; punishment.

Murder, other than capital murder, by poison, lying in wait, imprisonment, starving, or by any willful, deliberate, and premeditated killing, or in the commission of, or attempt to commit, arson, rape, forcible sodomy, inanimate or animate object sexual penetration, robbery, burglary or abduction, except as provided in § 18.2-31, is murder of the first degree, punishable as a Class 2 felony.

All murder other than capital murder and murder in the first degree is murder of the second degree and is punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than five nor more than forty years.

§ 18.2-33. Felony homicide defined; punishment.

The killing of one accidentally, contrary to the intention of the parties, while in the prosecution of some felonious act other than those specified in §§ 18.2-31 and 18.2-32, is murder of the second degree and is punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than five years nor more than forty years.

§ 18.2-35. How voluntary manslaughter punished.

Voluntary manslaughter is punishable as a Class 5 felony.

In my quick perusal of the code, I did not see definitions of murder or voluntary manslaughter (based on the admissions reported, I can't see how this could be involuntary manslaughter). I haven't had cause to look up the definition of these terms since taking the bar exam, so I will let other chime in if they want.

If the suggestions of abuse are true, but the facts do not otherwise support a murder charge, I wonder if the (soon to be) defendant was committing another felony that would support felony homicide?

[MCFinARL]

then I think you should prepared to be amazed:

http://www2.dailyprogress.com/cdp/news/local/crime/article/u.va._lacrosse_teams_to_continue_with_season/55731/

I think I may have read somewhere else that this report hasn't been confirmed by the university--there seemed to be some question about whether the teams had made this decision yet.

I would hope that this is a decision the coaches and players on each team would make together, and that everyone else will respect and support whatever decisions they make. I could see either team not feeling right about playing (especially if some team members really did know this was an unhealthy relationship--in which case they may be even more distraught than they would otherwise be, wondering if they could have done something about it), but I could also see them choosing to play as a way to cope and a way to remember Ms. Love.

[cspan37421]

I guess the UVA Honor Code, and perhaps most other such codes, only apply to academic matters.

There is no duty to report assault/battery? Not even among students, such as what you might expect in a code of conduct?

[MCFinARL]

Here are some relevant provisions from the Virginia Code (http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm):



In my quick perusal of the code, I did not see definitions of murder or voluntary manslaughter (based on the admissions reported, I can't see how this could be involuntary manslaughter). I haven't had cause to look up the definition of these terms since taking the bar exam, so I will let other chime in if they want.

If the suggestions of abuse are true, but the facts do not otherwise support a murder charge, I wonder if the (soon to be) defendant was committing another felony that would support felony homicide?

It looks like simple assault and battery are considered misdemeanors in VA, as is assault and battery against a household member (which seems to be the domestic violence provision). http://198.246.135.1/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+TOC18020000004000000000000
So I don't know that it would be a felony homicide unless there is some other provision that covers this behavior.

I'm guessing I took the bar exam even longer ago than you did, but your conclusion that this couldn't be involuntary manslaughter seems right. I think that is more for, say, when someone runs a red light and kills someone in the resulting accident (though even those situations can be considered voluntary if the person is driving with reckless disregard, I think).

[blueprofessor]

Domestic abuse is fairly widespread, widely ignored by observers, and commonly rationalized/minimized afterwards by the participants. This horrendous situation appears to be perfect for raising awareness and perhaps contributing to a sea change in how people perceive violence against women (and sometimes violence against men).

Actually, when the research uses scientific polling techniques,not self-selecting data generation like calls to police (men do not typically call the police to report domestic abuse against themselves), the abuse incidents are initiated about 50% by each sex. I learned this fact after providing input for a governor's initiative in the area. Anectdotal ( not scientifically sampled) data that has unfortunately created a false image is based on the reportage that women call police 9 times more frequently than men to report "domestic abuse". It is indeed a serious problem for both sexes.
Blueprofessor

[coldriver10]

I've read a few posts on here admonishing the friends of the victim and the accused for not intervening in an alleged abusive relationship. I can completely understand the frustration, and I know if it were my friend I would beg and plea for her to leave him. But I thought I should just say a couple things about this.

1. None of us knows what measures their friends took to stop the abuse. The very fact that their relationship was considered "ended" could indicate that their friends had indeed gotten involved, and that they thought the abuse had ended with the relationship.

2. No one can force a domestic abuse victim from leaving their abuser. One of the biggest frustrations I've experienced as a medical student is when I learned that in very few specific cases can a doctor report domestic abuse to the authorities (at least according to North Carolina law). The truth is that adults have free will and that they may simply not be ready to leave the situation, whether for emotional, financial, or safety reasons.

No one is to blame for this tragedy except for the accused. Not the victim, not their friends, but the accused. This is a terrible tragedy, and I can only pray for the victim's family and friends, the family of the accused, and for the justice system to do what is right.

[Merlindevildog91]

FWIW, I'm not employed in Charlottesville, or any of the surrounding counties. I know only what I've read in the media; the reports and the search warrant and affidavit.

First degree murder requires premeditation, a specific intent to kill. That specific intent can exist only for a second prior to the killing, and can be inferred from the actions of the defendant. More likely in this case is first degree felony murder, death in the course of an enumerated felony (in this case, burglary). In VA, burglary in this context is the breaking and entering a building with the intent to commit a crime. The act of opening a shut but unlocked door is sufficient for "breaking" (as would be kicking open a locked door). The crime of assault and battery would be sufficient as a predicate crime. The crime of larceny would be sufficient, if it could be shown that the entry was for the purpose of stealing, say, a laptop.

Manslaughter, voluntary and involuntary, are "common-law" crimes, which means they aren't defined in the Code. Voluntary manslaughter is a rare charge; the paradigm is a person who comes home and finds his spouse in bed with someone else, and kills the spouse or the lover. Involuntary manslaughter is defined in case law as the killing of a person contrary to the intention of the parties, during the defendant's performance of an unlawful (not felonious) act or the improper performance of a lawful act.

A lot will depend on what the autopsy says, but at this moment, I would much rather be the prosecutor than the defense attorney.

[Newton_14]

These are some stunning allegations. "People" actually knew that Huguely had been "roughing" up Love?
I guess we'll find out eventually what, if anything, was done to help protect her or to discipline him but it truly is shocking that his abusive behavior was apparently well known at the school. Wow.

My thoughts exactly. If people knew he was beating this girl up on a regular basis why in the hell didn't someone intervene? Who if anyone stood up for this young lady? I am sorry but I have zero tolerance for men who beat up women.

I agree he will unlikely be charged with Murder 1 but disagree that "there is zero chance" that he intended to kill her. We don't know that. Only that kid and God know what his intent was.

[phaedrus]

It looks like simple assault and battery are considered misdemeanors in VA, as is assault and battery against a household member (which seems to be the domestic violence provision). http://198.246.135.1/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+TOC18020000004000000000000
So I don't know that it would be a felony homicide unless there is some other provision that covers this behavior.

Don't forget about the merger doctrine.

[loran16]

Here are some relevant provisions from the Virginia Code (http://leg1.state.va.us/000/src.htm):



In my quick perusal of the code, I did not see definitions of murder or voluntary manslaughter (based on the admissions reported, I can't see how this could be involuntary manslaughter). I haven't had cause to look up the definition of these terms since taking the bar exam, so I will let other chime in if they want.

If the suggestions of abuse are true, but the facts do not otherwise support a murder charge, I wonder if the (soon to be) defendant was committing another felony that would support felony homicide?


It looks like simple assault and battery are considered misdemeanors in VA, as is assault and battery against a household member (which seems to be the domestic violence provision). http://198.246.135.1/cgi-bin/legp504.exe?000+cod+TOC18020000004000000000000
So I don't know that it would be a felony homicide unless there is some other provision that covers this behavior.

I'm guessing I took the bar exam even longer ago than you did, but your conclusion that this couldn't be involuntary manslaughter seems right. I think that is more for, say, when someone runs a red light and kills someone in the resulting accident (though even those situations can be considered voluntary if the person is driving with reckless disregard, I think).


Don't forget about the merger doctrine.

I was about to point this out but then decided against it because my criminal law final exam is next week.

But as was stated before, if this was burglary to steal the computer, it's not under the merger doctrine.

[VAGentleman05]

I guess the UVA Honor Code, and perhaps most other such codes, only apply to academic matters.

There is no duty to report assault/battery? Not even among students, such as what you might expect in a code of conduct?

I hold degrees from both UVA and Duke, and I'm not aware of any "code" at either school that requires a student to report allegations of domestic abuse. In fact, I'm not aware that students are required (by the universities) to report anything.

[CrazieDUMB]

Actually, when the research uses scientific polling techniques,not self-selecting data generation like calls to police (men do not typically call the police to report domestic abuse against themselves), the abuse incidents are initiated about 50% by each sex. I learned this fact after providing input for a governor's initiative in the area. Anectdotal ( not scientifically sampled) data that has unfortunately created a false image is based on the reportage that women call police 9 times more frequently than men to report "domestic abuse". It is indeed a serious problem for both sexes.
Blueprofessor

I remember after the tiger woods incident last November there were a lot of articles about women abusing men after it was alleged that Elin busted up his face with a golf club. It's very difficult to find a study that can conclusively say that abuse incidents are 50-50 between men and women, and those that do usually equate a single slap with pushing a woman down the stairs. While certainly some women do abuse men, the heavy majority of domestic abuse cases are caused by men.

http://www.nomas.org/node/107

[MCFinARL]

I think I may have read somewhere else that this report hasn't been confirmed by the university--there seemed to be some question about whether the teams had made this decision yet.



Updating my own comment, JohnB is right--AD Littlepage issued a statement today saying that both teams will continue their seasons.

[ElSid]

"Roughing up", as my friend put it, doesn't have to mean "beating". It may have been just forcefulness in public, some pushing or leading around by the arm. It could have pertained to the type of language he used toward her. Who knows. I think everyone jumped to the most extreme conclusion about what this could mean when I wrote it. I haven't gone back to my friend for clarification because he's in a bad state about it. Maybe someday I'll ask him to clarify.

I think it's unfair to suggest that friends are somehow morally questionable for not reporting anything. These situations are very complex and have to get pretty extreme before the people that know you best decide to intervene, especially in something as serious as a domestic abuse charge. Who knows, maybe they did try to talk to him about it and he just didn't listen. I bet most people figured they could just get through this semester and after graduation, go their separate ways.

Admittedly my generalizations about sports are too broad. I basically said so when I typed them. I'm not going to go around profiling lacrosse players or football players. I was a (terrible) football player. Some of the lacrosse players I met at Duke were/are nice. Some were nice my freshman year and by senior year, had become completely unrecognizable to me, in a bad way. Who you are friends with matters a lot, at all ages.

I do suspect that the more violent the sport, the more likely the players who participate in it are prone to violence, in general. Can't cite any facts or stats, so it remains complete conjecture. It's not something I act on, but if I had to guess, based on the stories about NCAA football and the NFL every year, I'd bet that it's likely true to some extent. Basketball has its issues as well. Maybe it's not sports but the sense of entitlement that society bestows on sports figures?

And there are probably certain programs that have worse cultures than others. I don't think it's unfair to say that lacrosse should examine the cultures of its top programs following two high profile cases like this.

As for greek culture, yes. There is some deplorable activity going on there, too. Duke seems to be trying to deal with that. But they also seemed to turn a blind eye to really bad behavior by the lacrosse team when I was there. So...there was a double standard if you were an athlete. No surprise, I guess, but it's still disappointing.

Also when I said this kid was "out of control", no one really jumped on that statement. To me, this clearly meant that he was abusing alcohol. The news today confirms this. His friends should have intervened to stop him from getting violently drunk, but no one mentioned that. This may be the biggest ingredient of all in the tragedy. But who intervenes with a senior in college when he has an alcohol problem? No one. It's an endemic problem. I and my friends are as guilty as anyone when it comes to this. Saw some kids go Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde on lots of alcohol and didn't do much to stop it. Still don't, when I see it. Am I morally culpable if something bad happens to this guy down the road? Slippery slope.

[Merlindevildog91]

In Virginia, ANY unwanted touching can be the basis for an assault and battery charge. So a grabbing by the arm, by the clothing, etc., is sufficient.

Also, to clear up one other thing, assault and battery on a family or household member doesn't fit in this case. The parties would have to live together "as husband and wife" or have lived together in the same fashion in the previous twelve months, or have a child in common. Being boyfriend-girlfriend, or ex-boyfriend and girlfriend, isn't enough. Since the case is currently set in General District Court, they must not have lived together in the past year, or it would have been set in Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.

Having started my career as a prosecutor in JDR, I can tell you that it is extremely difficult for the abused in these situations to come forward, and those that do often recant.

[Reilly]

Since the case is currently set in General District Court, they must not have lived together in the past year, or it would have been set in Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court.

Having started my career as a prosecutor in JDR, I can tell you that it is extremely difficult for the abused in these situations to come forward, and those that do often recant.


This case is not 'set' in GDCt, is it? Doesn't GDCt simply handle the preliminary matters for matters that end up in Circuit Court ... where this will end up? That's why in GDCt yesterday.

[Merlindevildog91]

This case is not 'set' in GDCt, is it? Doesn't GDCt simply handle the preliminary matters for matters that end up in Circuit Court ... where this will end up? That's why in GDCt yesterday.

A good question. The case will end up in Circuit Court, but the preliminary hearing is in General District Court. Had the parties met the definition of family or household member, the preliminary would have been in Juvenile and Domestic Relations.

[MCFinARL]

"Roughing up", as my friend put it, doesn't have to mean "beating". It may have been just forcefulness in public, some pushing or leading around by the arm. It could have pertained to the type of language he used toward her. Who knows. I think everyone jumped to the most extreme conclusion about what this could mean when I wrote it. I haven't gone back to my friend for clarification because he's in a bad state about it. Maybe someday I'll ask him to clarify.

I think it's unfair to suggest that friends are somehow morally questionable for not reporting anything. These situations are very complex and have to get pretty extreme before the people that know you best decide to intervene, especially in something as serious as a domestic abuse charge. Who knows, maybe they did try to talk to him about it and he just didn't listen. I bet most people figured they could just get through this semester and after graduation, go their separate ways.

Admittedly my generalizations about sports are too broad. I basically said so when I typed them. I'm not going to go around profiling lacrosse players or football players. I was a (terrible) football player. Some of the lacrosse players I met at Duke were/are nice. Some were nice my freshman year and by senior year, had become completely unrecognizable to me, in a bad way. Who you are friends with matters a lot, at all ages.

I do suspect that the more violent the sport, the more likely the players who participate in it are prone to violence, in general. Can't cite any facts or stats, so it remains complete conjecture. It's not something I act on, but if I had to guess, based on the stories about NCAA football and the NFL every year, I'd bet that it's likely true to some extent. Basketball has its issues as well. Maybe it's not sports but the sense of entitlement that society bestows on sports figures?

And there are probably certain programs that have worse cultures than others. I don't think it's unfair to say that lacrosse should examine the cultures of its top programs following two high profile cases like this.

As for greek culture, yes. There is some deplorable activity going on there, too. Duke seems to be trying to deal with that. But they also seemed to turn a blind eye to really bad behavior by the lacrosse team when I was there. So...there was a double standard if you were an athlete. No surprise, I guess, but it's still disappointing.

Also when I said this kid was "out of control", no one really jumped on that statement. To me, this clearly meant that he was abusing alcohol. The news today confirms this. His friends should have intervened to stop him from getting violently drunk, but no one mentioned that. This may be the biggest ingredient of all in the tragedy. But who intervenes with a senior in college when he has an alcohol problem? No one. It's an endemic problem. I and my friends are as guilty as anyone when it comes to this. Saw some kids go Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde on lots of alcohol and didn't do much to stop it. Still don't, when I see it. Am I morally culpable if something bad happens to this guy down the road? Slippery slope.

You make some good points here. I agree that athletes are allowed to develop an extreme sense of entitlement in our culture, and the preppier kids in lacrosse are layering that on top of the general sense of entitlement many rich and upper middle class kids tend to have.

But the point you make at the end seems like the heart of the matter--getting blackout drunk is a widely accepted part of college social life these days, especially (but certainly not only) at schools with a Greek system. For some kids, this may just result in some terrible hangovers; for others, it may lead to really dangerous or inappropriate behavior with terrible consequences and/or alcoholism. To intervene requires being able to make a confident judgment about where someone is on that spectrum, being willing to risk a hostile (maybe violent) reaction from the person you are dealing with, and being willing to go totally against the grain of the prevailing social order--and with no real assurance that your intervention will help. Maybe someone would do this for one of their best friends, but it's a lot to take on.

Until we can figure out a way to change the cultural context, so that chronically abusing alcohol and getting out of control seems much more "abnormal" than it does now--and I have no good ideas for how to do that-- it's hard to be very judgmental about kids not stepping in to deal with this problem or report it to authorities. And you are right, of course--we don't actually know that they didn't.

[blueprofessor]

I remember after the tiger woods incident last November there were a lot of articles about women abusing men after it was alleged that Elin busted up his face with a golf club. It's very difficult to find a study that can conclusively say that abuse incidents are 50-50 between men and women, and those that do usually equate a single slap with pushing a woman down the stairs. While certainly some women do abuse men, the heavy majority of domestic abuse cases are caused by men.

http://www.nomas.org/node/107
Unfortunately, citing NOMAS for such information is akin to referencing Chavez for free and fair elections. NOMAS ,if you review its mission, appears to be suffering from the "experimenter effect", the tendency to bias any data, accurate or not, in the direction of that person's or organization's intensely -held beliefs. NOMAS possesses intensely-held beliefs on steroids.

Now, it is important to consult reputable studies such as the 1985 National Family Violence Survey, sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health, archived at Cornell (see link to complete study), which was based on a Louis Harris scientific , national poll. The findings were that women and men were abusing each other in about equal numbers. Men typically do more damage, but the numbers of attacks were the same.

Cornell link:http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu/NDACAN/Datasets/UserGuidePDFs/055user.pdf

There are other studies indicating the same results, including research published in The Journal of Marriage and Family.

Moreover,The Journal for the National Association of Social Workers found in a 1986 study among dating teenagers that girls were more frequently violent than boys.

Some PCers do not appreciate scientific studies because they level the incidents of abuse between women and men. As Harris or Gallup would explain, self-reporting (calling the local t.v. station's call-in poll of the day) is not reliable; scientific, random sampling is. Also, see the book and studies by R. L. McNeeley ( a professor at the School of Social Welfare at the University of Wisconsin) titled The Truth About Domestic Violence: A Falsely Framed Issue and Susan Steinmetz ( director at the Indiana U-Purdue U Family Research Institute), whose book The Battered Husband Syndrome led to threats of harm from certain radical groups (the experimenter effect at extremes).
None of this exonerates any abuser of any sex.
If we are to effectively combat such abuse , we must be honest in exposing distortions . The truth often leads to solutions.

Best wishes---Blueprofessor

[coldriver10]

Unfortunately, citing NOMAS for such information is akin to referencing Chavez for free and fair elections. NOMAS ,if you review its mission, appears to be suffering from the "experimenter effect", the tendency to bias any data, accurate or not, in the direction of that person's or organization's intensely -held beliefs. NOMAS possesses intensely-held beliefs on steroids.

Now, it is important to consult reputable studies such as the 1985 National Family Violence Survey, sponsored by the National Institute of Mental Health, archived at Cornell (see link to complete study), which was based on a Louis Harris scientific , national poll. The findings were that women and men were abusing each other in about equal numbers. Men typically do more damage, but the numbers of attacks were the same.

Cornell link:http://www.ndacan.cornell.edu/NDACAN/Datasets/UserGuidePDFs/055user.pdf

There are other studies indicating the same results, including research published in The Journal of Marriage and Family.

Moreover,The Journal for the National Association of Social Workers found in a 1986 study among dating teenagers that girls were more frequently violent than boys.

Some PCers do not appreciate scientific studies because they level the incidents of abuse between women and men. As Harris or Gallup would explain, self-reporting (calling the local t.v. station's call-in poll of the day) is not reliable; scientific, random sampling is. Also, see the book and studies by R. L. McNeeley ( a professor at the School of Social Welfare at the University of Wisconsin) titled The Truth About Domestic Violence: A Falsely Framed Issue and Susan Steinmetz ( director at the Indiana U-Purdue U Family Research Institute), whose book The Battered Husband Syndrome led to threats of harm from certain radical groups (the experimenter effect at extremes).
None of this exonerates any abuser of any sex.
If we are to effectively combat such abuse , we must be honest in exposing distortions . The truth often leads to solutions.

Best wishes---Blueprofessor
Hmm, that's odd. Here's a more recent publication, by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. They found that 85% of domestic violence in the late 90s was against women (link: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipv.pdf).

Considering 1/3 of women are abused at some point in their lifetimes and 1/3-1/5 of all women are sexually assaulted at some point, it seems highly unlikely (impossible, really) to me that men and women are abused at an equivalent rate....unless nagging is considered abuse, in which case I could see that :p

[Stray Gator]

Hmm, that's odd. Here's a more recent publication, by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. They found that 85% of domestic violence in the late 90s was against women (link: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipv.pdf).

Considering 1/3 of women are abused at some point in their lifetimes and 1/3-1/5 of all women are sexually assaulted at some point, it seems highly unlikely (impossible, really) to me that men and women are abused at an equivalent rate....unless nagging is considered abuse, in which case I could see that :p

The statistics you cite are from a DOJ report published in 2000, based on statistics from the late 1990s. The statistics from the 2010 version of that Special Report reflect what appears to be a dramatic improvement in the situation:

"The rate of intimate partner violence against females declined 53% between 1993 and 2008, from 9.4 victimizations per 1,000 females age 12 or older to 4.3 per 1,000. Against males, the rate declined 54%, from 1.8 victimizations per 1,000 males age 12 or older to 0.8 per 1,000."

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=971

Just out of curiosity, what is the source of your statement that "1/3 of women are abused at some point in their lifetimes and 1/3-1/5 of all women are sexually assaulted at some point," and how do you (or the source) define "abuse"? I understand and appreciate the problem of what might be characterized broadly as "relationship abuse," but those figures certainly seem higher than common experience--and the DOJ statistics--would support.

[blueprofessor]

Hmm, that's odd. Here's a more recent publication, by the National Criminal Justice Reference Service. They found that 85% of domestic violence in the late 90s was against women (link: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/ipv.pdf).

Considering 1/3 of women are abused at some point in their lifetimes and 1/3-1/5 of all women are sexually assaulted at some point, it seems highly unlikely (impossible, really) to me that men and women are abused at an equivalent rate....unless nagging is considered abuse, in which case I could see that :p

Not odd at all. The Bureau of Justice statistics only include processed cases. This is not a national, random scientific sample seeking all abusive acts. Instead,there is self-inclusion here (recall the 9 to 1 ratio of female calls to the police).


Here is the way the BoJ collects data (remember,only processed cases): "Examines the processing of domestic violence (DV) and non-domestic violence (non-DV) cases filed in 15 large urban counties."

Best regards--Blueprofessor

[cato]

Don't forget about the merger doctrine.

How is it applied in VA, if at all? Also, how would it apply to this case? Are you suggesting that, if you can get someone on felony homicide, you don't convict him of the underlying felony as well? Seem to be separate crimes, since felony homicide is on the books. But I'm neither a criminal lawyer nor licensed in VA. Also, if someone is convicted of felony homicide, I'm not sure that the underlying felony really matters.

Of course, it sounds like they're going after this guy for first degree murder, which seems entirely appropriate.

[loran16]

How is it applied in VA, if at all? Also, how would it apply to this case? Are you suggesting that, if you can get someone on felony homicide, you don't convict him of the underlying felony as well? Seem to be separate crimes, since felony homicide is on the books. But I'm neither a criminal lawyer nor licensed in VA. Also, if someone is convicted of felony homicide, I'm not sure that the underlying felony really matters.

Of course, it sounds like they're going after this guy for first degree murder, which seems entirely appropriate.

Errr the Merger Doctrine is that you can't get someone for felony murder if the underlying felony is an element of the crime of murder. So what the underlying felony is really does matter.

So for example, if the felony is assault and battery...you can't make that into felony murder, because that's part of the crime of murder.

So in essence, if they can't use the felony murder rule to get around the intent requirement of 1st degree murder.

[Reilly]

But the point you make at the end seems like the heart of the matter--getting blackout drunk is a widely accepted part of college social life these days....

Both VT and UVa have had a female student killed this school year in a case garnering wide attention. Alcohol seems to have played some (though perhaps not the predominant) part in both horrible outcomes. Given the wide acceptance of alcohol abuse noted, I'm sort of amazed that there's not even more death on college campuses caused, at least in part, by alcohol. There's already enough; just surprised it's not even higher.

[cato]

Errr the Merger Doctrine is that you can't get someone for felony murder if the underlying felony is an element of the crime of murder. So what the underlying felony is really does matter.

So for example, if the felony is assault and battery...you can't make that into felony murder, because that's part of the crime of murder.

So in essence, if they can't use the felony murder rule to get around the intent requirement of 1st degree murder.

Your response confuses me.

First, my memory of the common law merger doctrine in criminal law is that you cannot convict someone of lesser included offenses in addition to the primary offense. So, for example, you couldn't convict someone of both murder and the assualt that resulted in the murder. The lesser included offense (assault) would merge into the primary offense (murder).

Second, I seem to recall that many states have done away with the merger doctrine completely. I wonder if VA has done so.

Third, even if the merger doctrine has been adopted into state law, the modern practice of codifying disparate elements of the crime into separate crimes seems to have significantly undermined its practical effect.

Finally, my question was not about felony murder (I am pretty sure that murder is a felony in every state), but felony homicide, as defined in Virginia Code s. 18.2-33:


§ 18.2-33. Felony homicide defined; punishment.

The killing of one accidentally, contrary to the intention of the parties, while in the prosecution of some felonious act other than those specified in §§ 18.2-31 and 18.2-32, is murder of the second degree and is punishable by confinement in a state correctional facility for not less than five years nor more than forty years.


§§ 18.2-31 and 18.2-32 are the sections for capital murder, first degree murder and second degree murder. So, the underyling felony for felony homicide must be a felony other than murder.

My original question was whether another felony may have been committed. You are suggesting that if the underlying crime is an element of the crime of murder murder, it is not sufficient to support felony homicide. Is that correct?

[tommy]

If they want to use the residential burglary (entering with intent to commit any felony) as the felony supporting the felony-murder rule, that would work. There is no merger there, as it is not necessary to commit the burglary in order to commit the murder. Not sure if in Virginia felony-murder with res burg is first or second degree, but it's still murder.

Also, another poster stated that he or she believed it was very unlikely or impossible (I forget the exact words) that there could be evidence first degree, premeditated murder here. Not true. What if there are messages on her voicemail or emails from him in the minutes preceding the crime, to the effect of "I've had enough of you. I'm going to come over there and kill you." That would obviously be enough for premeditation, and in fact, proof of premeditation often consists of much less than that.

[loran16]

Your response confuses me.

First, my memory of the common law merger doctrine in criminal law is that you cannot convict someone of lesser included offenses in addition to the primary offense. So, for example, you couldn't convict someone of both murder and the assualt that resulted in the murder. The lesser included offense (assault) would merge into the primary offense (murder).

Second, I seem to recall that many states have done away with the merger doctrine completely. I wonder if VA has done so.

Third, even if the merger doctrine has been adopted into state law, the modern practice of codifying disparate elements of the crime into separate crimes seems to have significantly undermined its practical effect.

Finally, my question was not about felony murder (I am pretty sure that murder is a felony in every state), but felony homicide, as defined in Virginia Code s. 18.2-33:



§§ 18.2-31 and 18.2-32 are the sections for capital murder, first degree murder and second degree murder. So, the underyling felony for felony homicide must be a felony other than murder.

My original question was whether another felony may have been committed. You are suggesting that if the underlying crime is an element of the crime of murder murder, it is not sufficient to support felony homicide. Is that correct?

That's the "merger doctrine" as i was just taught three weeks ago. It isn't that you can't convict someone of assault and murder, it's that assault as a felony can't be the felony-basis for a conviction of felony murder (Because Felony Murder doesn't require proving of intent, this would allow for every murder case the prosecution to not have to prove intent to find someone guilty of murder (claiming assault as the underlying felony).

That said, I don't think they really need to go for a felony murder conviction here and can just go for 1st or 2nd degree murder (depending on how VA treats premeditation...i have no idea on this, depends on the state) here.....as A. Intent to do serious harm to the victim usually suffices for at least 2nd degree murder and B. I doubt any jury is going to believe the lack of intent.



But as stated below, Burglary might work (though it's if the underlying felony for Burglary itself is assault, this seems backwards...though it would depend upon Virginia's case law).

More importantly, as stated before by

[MarkD83]

Given the latest round of messages in this thread and in other threads I have read here, there are quite a few lawyers contributing to this board. While I commend you for trying to dissect this tragedy in an analytical fashion, those of us in VA are still quite shocked by everything. Please keep in mind that the grieving process for many in Charlottesville, Virginia and Maryland is still going on so tread lightly.

Everything that has been posted so far is fine, but some may feel that this type of analysis this close to the tragedy may be a bit insensitive.

Just be careful.

[CrazieDUMB]

Not odd at all. The Bureau of Justice statistics only include processed cases. This is not a national, random scientific sample seeking all abusive acts. Instead,there is self-inclusion here (recall the 9 to 1 ratio of female calls to the police).


Here is the way the BoJ collects data (remember,only processed cases): "Examines the processing of domestic violence (DV) and non-domestic violence (non-DV) cases filed in 15 large urban counties."

Best regards--Blueprofessor

This is all very interesting. One of the things I love about these boards is that aside from bickering over starting lineups I also tend to learn some things as well. I reread the article that framed my opinion before (http://www.doublex.com/section/news-politics/mens-rights-groups-have-become-frighteningly-effective?page=0,0), and you're right, most of the studies they cite re: domestic violence are of the self-reporting nature. As a former Duke stat student, I should have caught that.

One of the problems with speaking up about this kind of stuff is that it's hard to mention this stuff without sounding like one is defending men who abuse women. I happen to disagree with most of the article linked above, but in respect to keeping this thread from getting too political I'll leave it at that.

[weezie]

Everything that has been posted so far is fine, but some may feel that this type of analysis this close to the tragedy may be a bit insensitive.

Just be careful.

I'm sorry that you are suffering MarkD83. DBR is a fairly calm and educated group of posters, you need not issue any warnings to the lawyers here. Everyone is keenly aware of the level of pain at uva.
No reason for you to see a threat when there is nothing but the utmost consideration for your situation. Your school/teams have decided to play on, proper respects are being shown towards the tragically deceased woman, and the State of Virginia is proceeding apace.

[Merlindevildog91]

Given the latest round of messages in this thread and in other threads I have read here, there are quite a few lawyers contributing to this board. While I commend you for trying to dissect this tragedy in an analytical fashion, those of us in VA are still quite shocked by everything. Please keep in mind that the grieving process for many in Charlottesville, Virginia and Maryland is still going on so tread lightly.

Everything that has been posted so far is fine, but some may feel that this type of analysis this close to the tragedy may be a bit insensitive.

Just be careful.

MarkD, there isn't an attorney on this forum who is not sympathetic to the family of Ms. Love and to what the students of UVa are going through.

What I was trying to do, as a Virginia prosecutor, is to clear up some misconceptions about the law as it applies in this case. I have read comments on ESPN.com, the Richmond Times-Dispatch, and the (Norfolk) Virginian-Pilot (Pilotonline.com), and have been stunned at the total lack of empathy toward anyone in the case, as well as the utter lack of understanding of Virginia law. While I have no desire to try to straighten up the bigoted misconceptions and utter hatred evinced by some of those readers, I did want my friends on this board to fell that they had some understanding of what the prosecutors and police were dealing with.

Please understand that no one here wishes to cause more grief; we just are attempting to make sense of the only part of the situation that we can.

[MarkD83]

Thank you Weezie and Merlindevildog for your kind thoughts.

I do not have a personal connection to Ms. Love but living in Richmond I have many friends whose sons and daughters go to UVA. What happened at UVA does hit home if you start to think about the fact that your child could be affected by the events.

I know that everyone on this board has the best intentions and that can be seen in many different ways. That is what makes DBR special.

[blueprofessor]

He compares the UVA lacrosse player's alleged murderer to the Duke lacrosse "sex scandal."

Time for intelligence tests for prospective CNN employees?
Ummm.
You will not believe this loser's take on the tragedy.

Link:http://www.mediaite.com/online/cnns-don-lemon-describes-uva-lacrosse-murder-suspects-connection-to-duke-lacrosse-sex-scandal/

Pray for CNN.

Best--Blueprofessor:)

[coldriver10]

The statistics you cite are from a DOJ report published in 2000, based on statistics from the late 1990s. The statistics from the 2010 version of that Special Report reflect what appears to be a dramatic improvement in the situation:

"The rate of intimate partner violence against females declined 53% between 1993 and 2008, from 9.4 victimizations per 1,000 females age 12 or older to 4.3 per 1,000. Against males, the rate declined 54%, from 1.8 victimizations per 1,000 males age 12 or older to 0.8 per 1,000."

http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=971

Just out of curiosity, what is the source of your statement that "1/3 of women are abused at some point in their lifetimes and 1/3-1/5 of all women are sexually assaulted at some point," and how do you (or the source) define "abuse"? I understand and appreciate the problem of what might be characterized broadly as "relationship abuse," but those figures certainly seem higher than common experience--and the DOJ statistics--would support.
Oh definitely, dramatic improvement indeed. My point was simply that abuse against males and females is not equivalent, which I believe is what BlueProf was saying (my apologies if I read that incorrectly, Professor!).

As for the other stats, the 1/3 of females are abused apparently comes from the same paper I cited. I say apparently because I read a different article that cited this paper having said that. As for the 1/3-1/5 are sexually assaulted, this is a really popular stat (I'm sure a google search will provide a bunch of articles saying this), and I put a range because I've heard anywhere between 1/3 to 1/5 of women are sexually assaulted as some point in their lifetimes. By assault they don't necessarily mean rape but anything that could constitute an assault.

You're absolutely correct that the terms are vague and open to interpretation. But to be honest, I can think of more women who downplay the abuse in their relationship (e.g. if it's not physical, it's not abuse) rather than exaggerate it.

[greybeard]

The Washington Post, once a great newspaper, has begun again the blood-libel against lax players with a headline and article that implies that alcohol abuse among UVa lacrosse players is out of the norm as compared to the general UVa student population, of course without a scintilla of evidence to support that proposition.

Like the war of drugs, which we have oh so badly lost at enormous expense in national treasure and ruined lives, the 21-year old drinking age is wrong-headed and honored only in the breach, among high school students on up.

No amount of statistics about deaths as a consequence of drunk driving will convince a teenager or young adult that the law is anything but an intrusive and impertinent "I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.," that is to be ignored.

It is and it will be a wrong-headed law, no matter what punishment the press forces sports coaches like this yum yuk at UVa, who I have no use for (more in a minute), to impose upon his players for being regular college students and doing what other students do.

At least 18 presidents of major universities have called for the repeal of this insane 21-age-drinking law which they believe serves only to encourage binge drinking and make hypocrites of everyone in authority as far as the young adults who attend their institutions are concerned. These people are the future leaders of this nation and cannot be treated in the way that the 21-age drinking law seeks to, which is like children.

The UVa coach, I have to say, is a crass hypocrite. When the national media practically demanded the cancellation of the Duke LAX season even though DNA evidence just weeks after the scandal hit provided PROOF POSITIVE that the accusations WERE A SHAME, the NCAA moved to help redress the wrong done, the slander done to every kid on that team, by taking the unusual step of granting all of them an extra year of eligibility. Most every LAX coach of any prominence applauded it, understanding that the media had tried to bury the entire sport under a blood libel against the supposed culture of white privilege that the press insisted surrounds their game. We hear the same blood-libel again, even while unfortunate incidents like this happen all the time in and out of university communities among young people with broken hearts--sometimes, way to often, it is self-murder, as in suicide, among young males, who are the most at-risk class in the country for suicide, but that is another story.

I say nearly every major LAX coach because this genuis at UVa was outspokenly up in arms about the NCAA ruling, railing about how it gave Duke an unfair advantage in its quest for a national championship, which the UVa wanted for his ownself. Oh, by the way, the guy did recruit and play a member of that Duke team who graduated Duke after four years of eligibility and played at UVa for his 5th season. I got no use for the guy myself. Do you?

Sorry for the rant, but I think it has some bearing on how this tragedy at UVa is handled.

[cato]

Everything that has been posted so far is fine, but some may feel that this type of analysis this close to the tragedy may be a bit insensitive.

Just be careful.

Thank you for the reminder Mark. And I agree completely. This is just my response to my anger when I hear defense counsel at a press conference claiming that everything was a mistake.

The press tends to be really bad at covering legal issues, so I have no hope that a newspaper or news show (let alone ESPN) will properly outline the standards at play for whether the attacker will be convicted of murder or some lesser offense. I hoped to get input from lawyers on the board with practical experience in VA criminal law, and got just that. Thanks to all who helped us understand what is at play.

[MCFinARL]

The Washington Post, once a great newspaper, has begun again the blood-libel against lax players with a headline and article that implies that alcohol abuse among UVa lacrosse players is out of the norm as compared to the general UVa student population, of course without a scintilla of evidence to support that proposition.

...

I say nearly every major LAX coach because this genuis at UVa was outspokenly up in arms about the NCAA ruling, railing about how it gave Duke an unfair advantage in its quest for a national championship, which the UVa wanted for his ownself. Oh, by the way, the guy did recruit and play a member of that Duke team who graduated Duke after four years of eligibility and played at UVa for his 5th season. I got no use for the guy myself. Do you?

Sorry for the rant, but I think it has some bearing on how this tragedy at UVa is handled.

Two things: first, re Starsia--not only did he play a Duke fifth year (although I'm not sure how much recruiting he had to do, since the player was headed to UVA for grad school and his brother had played at UVA), but he was happy to siphon off a key Duke recruit from the 2006 high school class when Duke released the incoming class from their commitments--so he benefited twice from that situation [not even counting the national championship UVA won when they went undefeated in 2006]. That being said, there were a lot of people who were pretty astonished by, and probably unhappy with, the NCAA ruling--they just didn't all talk as openly about it.

Second, re the Washington Post article: I have to agree it was much ado about very little--after making a big deal about how 8 of 41 players faced alcohol-related charges, they added that the charges were dismissed against 2 of them, so it's really only 6. And they offered absolutely no context in terms of, for example, whether these were all unrelated incidents (imagine the police come to a party and cite 25 people for underage drinking, 5 or 6 of whom are lacrosse players--that seems like much less of a concern than if there are 6 separate incidents), or as you point out, how this rate compares to the rates of other athletes at UVA or other students at UVA.

I was happy to see that a Duke law prof they quoted made that very point. Although noting that this level of alcohol-related charges represented a concern, he refused to take the bait and target UVA lacrosse without comparative data.

As for the drinking age, you are right--the decision to re-raise the drinking age to 21, which did apparently result in a reduction in drunk driving accidents (which was its primary goal), at least at first (haven't checked on this lately) has in most other ways been a disaster. That's not to say, though, that there isn't a problem with college kids drinking--far too much of the drinking that goes on-- maybe because it can't be done legally-- is wildly excessive and potentially dangerous. But I don't see this as a lacrosse problem--it's an American problem.

[allenmurray]

The Washington Post, once a great newspaper, has begun again the blood-libel against lax players with a headline and article that implies that alcohol abuse among UVa lacrosse players is out of the norm as compared to the general UVa student population, of course without a scintilla of evidence to support that proposition.

Like the war of drugs, which we have oh so badly lost at enormous expense in national treasure and ruined lives, the 21-year old drinking age is wrong-headed and honored only in the breach, among high school students on up.

No amount of statistics about deaths as a consequence of drunk driving will convince a teenager or young adult that the law is anything but an intrusive and impertinent "I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.I'm a real wanker for saying this.," that is to be ignored.

It is and it will be a wrong-headed law, no matter what punishment the press forces sports coaches like this yum yuk at UVa, who I have no use for (more in a minute), to impose upon his players for being regular college students and doing what other students do.

At least 18 presidents of major universities have called for the repeal of this insane 21-age-drinking law which they believe serves only to encourage binge drinking and make hypocrites of everyone in authority as far as the young adults who attend their institutions are concerned. These people are the future leaders of this nation and cannot be treated in the way that the 21-age drinking law seeks to, which is like children.

The UVa coach, I have to say, is a crass hypocrite. When the national media practically demanded the cancellation of the Duke LAX season even though DNA evidence just weeks after the scandal hit provided PROOF POSITIVE that the accusations WERE A SHAME, the NCAA moved to help redress the wrong done, the slander done to every kid on that team, by taking the unusual step of granting all of them an extra year of eligibility. Most every LAX coach of any prominence applauded it, understanding that the media had tried to bury the entire sport under a blood libel against the supposed culture of white privilege that the press insisted surrounds their game. We hear the same blood-libel again, even while unfortunate incidents like this happen all the time in and out of university communities among young people with broken hearts--sometimes, way to often, it is self-murder, as in suicide, among young males, who are the most at-risk class in the country for suicide, but that is another story.

I say nearly every major LAX coach because this genuis at UVa was outspokenly up in arms about the NCAA ruling, railing about how it gave Duke an unfair advantage in its quest for a national championship, which the UVa wanted for his ownself. Oh, by the way, the guy did recruit and play a member of that Duke team who graduated Duke after four years of eligibility and played at UVa for his 5th season. I got no use for the guy myself. Do you?

Sorry for the rant, but I think it has some bearing on how this tragedy at UVa is handled.

The relationship between a man beating a woman to death with his bare hands after kicking her door in, and the wisdom (or lack thereof) of raising the drinking age to 21 seems to be tenuous at best. To use the murder of this young woman as a launching pad for a rant about the drinking age seems callous. Ms. Love deserves better.

[greybeard]

The relationship between a man beating a woman to death with his bare hands after kicking her door in, and the wisdom (or lack thereof) of raising the drinking age to 21 seems to be tenuous at best. To use the murder of this young woman as a launching pad for a rant about the drinking age seems callous. Ms. Love deserves better.

I'm not sure if you are agreeing with me--that that is what the Washington Post did by writing an article creating a false portrait of alcohol use among the UVa male lax players--or rathre are criticizing me.

If the latter, sorry I'm not buying it. The fact that this crime has already morphed into a sports story and now into an assault on lax culture is a code word, I believe, for a resurrection of the good old days when ranting about the Duke lax team and the party-hearty atmosphere surrounding it sold papers, or did you forget. The press, I believe, created that scandal out of whole cloth, when responsible journalism would have burried Nifong for continuing with the hoax of a possible crime once the DNA report came out COMPLETELY EXONERATING EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF THE DUKE LAX TEAM. That remains a low point in American journalism.

Personally, I think that linkage between the Virginia lacrosse programs and this crime and tragedy is completely gratuitous by the press, and that the Post's trying to make a story about a so-called alcoholism issue involving the UVa lax team is salacious and irresponsible.

Why this thread is on the Main Board I am not quite sure.

To the extent it belongs here, one would presume has to do more with the media and the vestiges of the Duke lax hoax than anything else. It seems to me that the Washington Post, or as Mr. T likes to call it, "The Wall Street Post," in trying to raise a false attack on the lax culture at UVa seems only to happy to chart a path that, make no mistake about it, runs smack through Durham, at least in my opinion.

As far as sports goes, that's the story. It's happening again unless people are vigilant, in my opinion.

[greybeard]

"Roughing up", as my friend put it, doesn't have to mean "beating". It may have been just forcefulness in public, some pushing or leading around by the arm. It could have pertained to the type of language he used toward her. Who knows. I think everyone jumped to the most extreme conclusion about what this could mean when I wrote it. I haven't gone back to my friend for clarification because he's in a bad state about it. Maybe someday I'll ask him to clarify.

I think it's unfair to suggest that friends are somehow morally questionable for not reporting anything. These situations are very complex and have to get pretty extreme before the people that know you best decide to intervene, especially in something as serious as a domestic abuse charge. Who knows, maybe they did try to talk to him about it and he just didn't listen. I bet most people figured they could just get through this semester and after graduation, go their separate ways.

Admittedly my generalizations about sports are too broad. I basically said so when I typed them. I'm not going to go around profiling lacrosse players or football players. I was a (terrible) football player. Some of the lacrosse players I met at Duke were/are nice. Some were nice my freshman year and by senior year, had become completely unrecognizable to me, in a bad way. Who you are friends with matters a lot, at all ages.

I do suspect that the more violent the sport, the more likely the players who participate in it are prone to violence, in general. Can't cite any facts or stats, so it remains complete conjecture. It's not something I act on, but if I had to guess, based on the stories about NCAA football and the NFL every year, I'd bet that it's likely true to some extent. Basketball has its issues as well. Maybe it's not sports but the sense of entitlement that society bestows on sports figures?

And there are probably certain programs that have worse cultures than others. I don't think it's unfair to say that lacrosse should examine the cultures of its top programs following two high profile cases like this.

As for greek culture, yes. There is some deplorable activity going on there, too. Duke seems to be trying to deal with that. But they also seemed to turn a blind eye to really bad behavior by the lacrosse team when I was there. So...there was a double standard if you were an athlete. No surprise, I guess, but it's still disappointing.

Also when I said this kid was "out of control", no one really jumped on that statement. To me, this clearly meant that he was abusing alcohol. The news today confirms this. His friends should have intervened to stop him from getting violently drunk, but no one mentioned that. This may be the biggest ingredient of all in the tragedy. But who intervenes with a senior in college when he has an alcohol problem? No one. It's an endemic problem. I and my friends are as guilty as anyone when it comes to this. Saw some kids go Dr. Jekyll / Mr. Hyde on lots of alcohol and didn't do much to stop it. Still don't, when I see it. Am I morally culpable if something bad happens to this guy down the road? Slippery slope.

I have real trouble with this, I mean big time. You think that fraternities or sports teams foster a culture of violence, check out the drug scene that infuses every campus. Then you'll see you some violence. Check out the radical elements on some campuses, and the stuff that they support abroad and at home. Violence in a frat house, please.

No one knows what went on between the two as of yet but money says that she dumped him and that he could not handle it. No, I don't mean that he could not accept it, or did not like it, I mean he could not emotionally handle it. Guys his age are the most at risk of killing themselves as against any other group in the population. Football or lax or fraternities have something to do with that. Please. And, I'm just guessing here, only because great literature is filled with such stories, by a young man who has known the love of a woman and has that taken away, often does violence, to themselves or to their beloveds. At least, that's the way all the great novels read, many trashy ones too.

So, only at Duke would we jump from an apparent crime of passion due to a breakup of a love affair and make it into a commentary on culture surrounding a sport, or social organizations.

This has all the earmarks of a crime that was as up close and personal as it gets. Like I've said already, what this is doing on the main board bets me.

The speculation about culturals surrounding various sports and whether they are a good or bad influence on participants seems oh so ridiculous to me. This is a story of two former lovers, who were fighting as a consequence of an apparent breakup, and one of them killed the other instead of himself. They write novels about such things, make movies about them. They are profoundly sad for all involved.

Anyone who knows of souls who were lost as a consequence of such affairs of the heart has to feel for both sides in this tragedy. Two lives lost, one to death and another to a living hell that was for all appearances born so completely of love, or at least the passion often associated with it.

The sports pages, go figure!

[Indoor66]

I have real trouble with this, I mean big time. You think that fraternities or sports teams foster a culture of violence, check out the drug scene that infuses every campus. Then you'll see you some violence. Check out the radical elements on some campuses, and the stuff that they support abroad and at home. Violence in a frat house, please.

No one knows what went on between the two as of yet but money says that she dumped him and that he could not handle it. No, I don't mean that he could not accept it, or did not like it, I mean he could not emotionally handle it. Guys his age are the most at risk of killing themselves as against any other group in the population. Football or lax or fraternities have something to do with that. Please. And, I'm just guessing here, only because great literature is filled with such stories, by a young man who has known the love of a woman and has that taken away, often does violence, to themselves or to their beloveds. At least, that's the way all the great novels read, many trashy ones too.

So, only at Duke would we jump from an apparent crime of passion due to a breakup of a love affair and make it into a commentary on culture surrounding a sport, or social organizations.

This has all the earmarks of a crime that was as up close and personal as it gets. Like I've said already, what this is doing on the main board bets me.

The speculation about culturals surrounding various sports and whether they are a good or bad influence on participants seems oh so ridiculous to me. This is a story of two former lovers, who were fighting as a consequence of an apparent breakup, and one of them killed the other instead of himself. They write novels about such things, make movies about them. They are profoundly sad for all involved.

Anyone who knows of souls who were lost as a consequence of such affairs of the heart has to feel for both sides in this tragedy. Two lives lost, one to death and another to a living hell that was for all appearances born so completely of love, or at least the passion often associated with it.

The sports pages, go figure!

I agree with you, Bearded one. Sometimes the analysis on this board is so arcane as to be foolish. I also agree that the question of why this thread is not on the off topic board is beyond understanding.

[slower]

The press, I believe, created that scandal out of whole cloth, when responsible journalism would have burried Nifong for continuing with the hoax of a possible crime once the DNA report came out COMPLETELY EXONERATING EVERY SINGLE MEMBER OF THE DUKE LAX TEAM. That remains a low point in American journalism.

Seriously, man, get a sense of perspective. "A low point in American journalism"? Really? This may be a big thing in the Duke community, but NOT in the totality of American journalism.

[Lid]

...another to a living hell that was for all appearances born so completely of love, or at least the passion often associated with it.
I have problems with many things that you wrote; however, I will chalk most of our disagreements up to what I will assume is a deep difference in cultures, norms in our communities, etc. People can come at the same situation from different perspectives, yet still both be well-meaning.

However, IMO someone needs to point out the problem with your statement above. There is no love involved, or "passion associated with love", when someone commits violence against another person. There is no love in violence. This man created his own "living hell," which was born from his lack of control, or drinking problem, or ego, or need for power, or some other situation we can't know about; it was NOT born of love.

[Reilly]

...

So, only at Duke would we jump from an apparent crime of passion due to a breakup of a love affair and make it into a commentary on culture surrounding a sport, or social organizations. ...

The speculation about culturals surrounding various sports and whether they are a good or bad influence on participants seems oh so ridiculous to me. This is a story of two former lovers, who were fighting as a consequence of an apparent breakup, and one of them killed the other instead of himself. They write novels about such things, make movies about them. They are profoundly sad for all involved. ...

1. I agree. The tragedy here is one of self-worth, one of the human condition. The alleged murderer seemingly had a bruised ego (perhaps perpetually bruised), not enough self-worth. He lashes out. It could’ve been at himself (tragic enough); unfortunately, it was at another (doubly tragic).

2. The ‘connection’ of self-worth to lax culture is a thin thread – it is just enough to fuel the speculation about the culturals. There is a notion of white privilege/inflated self-worth around lax, just as there is around Duke. Not saying there should be that notion or that notion is correct. Perhaps that notion of white privilege is simply imposed by outsiders and is the outsiders’ perception; maybe it’s historical and is waning. But as we see with Duke hate, and the quick-to-judge media and academic reaction to the Duke lax hoax, that notion of white privilege is out there – and so folks will seek to blame it.

3. Alcohol can be a great elixir, but alcohol fuels the bad. I wish a cultural norm when the guy gets jilted is that he goes out for a 10-mile run instead of a 10-hour bender. Listen to the country station to see it’s not: “I started shooting doubles when you walked in.” Alcohol is in the mix here.

4. In addition to the speculation about culturals surrounding certain sports, there is also the speculation about the responsibility of the institution (as well as the institutional culture). The notion that the school is to blame somehow or that matters were preventable and that ‘procedures’ need improving.

Let’s compare VT, UVa and Duke.

VT suffers mass murder. Some of the media are calling for the president’s head. Greta van Susteren incessantly asking ‘why wasn’t the school on lockdown’ (like you can put a city of 20,000 on ‘lockdown’). Hokies – rank-and-file Hokies – circled the wagons around their administration. The inherent conservatism (conservatism in the sense that human nature is enduring; there’s not somebody else or some institution to blame; the individual pulled the trigger) of Virginia Tech came through at that moment, saying, “no, we’re not sacking the president and administration.” Did the president and administration make every perfect decision or decision you wished they had? Not at all. Did the institution somehow drop the ball earlier and miss warning signs? Perhaps. But ultimately the institution was not to blame for the tragedy.

Virginia sees one athlete allegedly kill another. If we want to talk about the culturals, and examine drinking culture, and believe that the institution could have and should have prevented this tragedy (‘why didn’t they know the past history’), then Virginia should cancel the seasons and issue a press release saying “this is not a time to be playing games” but rather time for self-examination. But Virginia has that same inherent conservatism as greybeard and that VT displayed – human nature doesn’t change; the individual and his human condition is the ‘cause’ here – yes, we can try to change institutional and cultural things around the margins to prevent these things marginally, but that institutional and cultural improvement or lack thereof is not the real culprit.

Compare the reaction of VT and UVA to that of Duke – the Gang of 88 reaction; Brodhead’s ‘leadership’ in the face of elite media criticism. Duke’s reaction was to fuel speculation about the cultural – to blame the cultural and the institutional, not the individuals (and in the lax hoax, the right individuals to blame are the complainant with the make-believe story and the outside-the-lines prosecutor looking to secure a pension via election). The tragedy of the lax hoax was the railroading of the innocent, and it was fueled in part by giving in to the ‘cultural-and-institutional-are-to-blame’ mentality.

[greybeard]

Seriously, man, get a sense of perspective. "A low point in American journalism"? Really? This may be a big thing in the Duke community, but NOT in the totality of American journalism.

Okay, I'm game. Tell me one.

This was the entire National media not getting that this was a shame from the moment, two weeks after the accusation was made, that DNA evidence COMPLETELY REFUTED THE ACCUSER'S CLAIM THAT ANYBODY ON THE DUKE LAX TEAM HAD SEXUALLY ASSAULTED HER. This went on in the National Media for more than a year, just about daily, and is still resurrected as the Duke lax "scandal" by many in the media until this day.

Tag, you're it.

[slower]

Okay, I'm game. Tell me one.

This was the entire National media not getting that this was a shame from the moment, two weeks after the accusation was made, DNA evidence COMPLETELY REFUTED THE ACCUSER'S CLAIM THAT ANYBODY ON THE DUKE LAX TEAM HAD SEXUALLY ASSAULTED HER. This went on in the National Media for more than a year, just about daily, and is still resurrected as the Duke lax "scandal" by many in the media until this day.

Tag, you're it.

Let me just be clear about what you're saying. Are you seriously alleging that this is "a low point in American journalism", spanning the years from, let's say, the Hearst-induced Spanish-American War, through all the 20th and 21st-century stories about politics and war and other NATIONAL and GLOBAL events?

I just want to be clear about what it is you're trying to express.

Just tell us, in what SPECIFIC sense is this "a low point in American journalism"?

[Reilly]

The Baltimore Sun on the alcohol angle:

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/opinion/2010/05/campus_drinking_and_the_link_t.html

[-jk]

I think everyone has had their say. We're neither reliving the lax hoax nor reopening the ppb.

I'm closing this one down.

-jk