Sexual assault victim's tweets about attackers prompt contempt case against Louisville's Savannah Dietrich

didymus · #1 Jul 22, '12, 1:27 pm

(Louisville) Courier-Journal:

Quote:

Sexual assault victim's tweets about attackers prompt contempt case against Louisville's Savannah Dietrich

Frustrated by what she felt was a lenient plea bargain for two teens who pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting her and circulating pictures of the incident, a Louisville 17-year-old lashed out on Twitter.“There you go, lock me up,” Savannah Dietrich tweeted, as she named the boys who she said sexually assaulted her. “I’m not protecting anyone that made my life a living Hell.”

Now, Dietrich is facing a potential jail sentence, as the attorneys for the boys have asked a Jefferson District Court judge to hold her in contempt because they say that in naming her attackers, she violated the confidentiality of a juvenile hearing and the court’s order not to speak of it.
A contempt charge carries a potential sentence of up to 180 days in jail and a $500 fine.

“So many of my rights have been taken away by these boys,” said Dietrich, who waived confidentiality in her case to speak to The Courier-Journal. Her parents also gave their written permission for her to speak with the newspaper.
“I’m at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it,” she said. “If they really feel it’s necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me ... as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don’t understand justice.”
The boys have not yet been sentenced.

Interesting.
Judges usually dislike being disobeyed, thus come down hard on contempt of court.
But what of Ms Dietrich's 1st Amendment's rights? She is "publishing" her own firsthand knowledge, not something she learned in the courtroom.

lerapt78 · #2 Jul 22, '12, 2:27 pm

I can understand the call for protection of the boys' names if they were found innocent of the crime, however the article claims they pleaded guilty. I personally don't understand why we afford greater respect for the privacy of juvenile offenders.

april32010 · #3 Jul 22, '12, 2:43 pm

good for her. i will be praying for her.

Gods_Peace · #4 Jul 22, '12, 3:22 pm

Stupid Liberal Anything-Goes Lawyer.

Farsight001 · #5 Jul 22, '12, 5:11 pm

Quote:

Originally Posted by didymus

(Louisville) Courier-Journal:

Interesting.
Judges usually dislike being disobeyed, thus come down hard on contempt of court.
But what of Ms Dietrich's 1st Amendment's rights? She is "publishing" her own firsthand knowledge, not something she learned in the courtroom.

It's also important to note that she did not know that she was going to be required by law to stay silent until the court's decision was final and she was being informed as such by the judge. She never agreed to any gag order as a condition of anything. It was simply imposed on her well after it was too late to try to change it.

didymus · #6 Jul 23, '12, 3:24 pm

UPDATE:

Contempt motion withdrawn for sexual-assault victim Savannah Dietrich who tweeted attackers' names

Quote:

Defense attorneys for two boys who pleaded guilty to assaulting a 17-year-old Savannah Dietrich have withdrawn their motion that she be held in contempt for tweeting the names of her attackers in defiance of a court order.

David Mejia, an attorney for one of the teens, said now that the Louisville teen’s story has gone global because of a Courier-Journal article on Saturday there was no reason to continue the contempt motion.

“What could contempt do now?” Mejia said in an interview, adding that the boys names have already been circulated far beyond the original tweet. “Seems like a rather useless exercise doesn’t it?

It makes a little more sense now. I thought the judge was issuing the contempt order on his own initiative & didn't pick up that it was on a motion from the defense.

Cider · #7 Jul 23, '12, 4:02 pm

Quote:

“I’m at the point, that if I have to go to jail for my rights, I will do it,” she said. “If they really feel it’s necessary to throw me in jail for talking about what happened to me ... as opposed to throwing these boys in jail for what they did to me, then I don’t understand justice.”

I agree with her, this is messed up. Especially because:

Quote:

Dietrich said she was sexually assaulted by two teen boys she knew in August 2011. She had been drinking at a gathering, she said, and became unconscious. Months later she learned that pictures of the incident had been taken and shared with others.

So she knew them, and there are pictures. Why can't she talk about it? The attackers shouldn't have the right to silence their victim.