Introduction
The Glen Ridge and Steubenville rape cases are two high-profile sexual assault cases that took place in the United States. The Glen Ridge Rape Case occurred in 1989 and involved the sexual assault of a mentally disabled seventeen-year-old girl by a group of high school students in Glen Ridge, New Jersey (Adoga, 2019). The Steubenville Rape Case, which took place in 2012, involved the rape of a sixteen-year-old girl by two high school football players in Steubenville, Ohio (Barca, 2018).
This essay will compare and contrast the two cases regarding the victims, perpetrators, victim-blaming, community response, investigation, prosecution, and sentencing. Both incidents involved high school students as victims; however, the Glen Ridge victim had a disability, whereas the Steubenville victim had been drugged. The perpetrators in both cases were also high school students, but differed in their level of involvement in the assaults. While both cases share some similarities, such as the age of the victims and perpetrators, the differences in the cases, such as the severity of the assaults and the community response, demonstrate the unique challenges and nuances of addressing sexual assault in different contexts.
Victim
The victim in the Glen Ridge Rape Case was a mentally disabled seventeen-year-old student at the high school where the perpetrators were enrolled, who was sexually assaulted with objects. In the Steubenville Rape case, the victim was a sixteen-year-old student who had been drugged and raped. In comparing both cases, the victims were high school students, and the perpetrators were high school age. However, the Glen Ridge victim was disabled, and the Steubenville victim was drugged. Furthermore, the Glen Ridge victim was assaulted with objects while the Steubenville victim was raped.
Perpetrator(s)
In the Glen Ridge Rape Case, the perpetrators were four high school students, aged 16 and 17, who coerced and intimidated a severely mentally disabled young woman, aged 17, into performing sexual activities with them in 1989. In the Steubenville Rape Case, the perpetrators were two high school football players, aged 17 and 16, who sexually assaulted an intoxicated teenage girl aged 16 at a house party in 2012.
The perpetrators of both cases were all high school boys who took advantage of an incapacitated girl. The Glen Ridge perpetrators manipulated the victim into a feeling of dependency, used physical force and strength of numbers to overpower her, and used her disability to prey upon her. The Steubenville perpetrators used an excess of alcohol to incapacitate their victims and then acted on the opportunity to commit a crime. Both sets of perpetrators ignored their victim’s protests and violated her in a way that was seen as socially acceptable by their peers.
Victim-Blaming/Responsibility
The victim-blaming prominent in the Glen Ridge Rape Case included minimizing the severity of the assaults and heavily criticizing the victim for their behavior and degree of intoxication the night of the attack. In the Steubenville Rape Case, the blame was placed on the victim for placing herself in a vulnerable position, and the offenders and community expressed extensive victim-blaming. The comparison between the two cases includes a similar amount of victim-blaming, primarily shifting responsibility away from the offender and placing it on the victim. A notable contrast between the two is the reception of the judicial ruling. The Glen Ridge case saw convictions for the five defendants, while the Steubenville case only acknowledged two.
Community Response/Influence
The community response in Glen Ridge was largely sympathetic toward the perpetrators of the rape, and blame was placed on the victim and her mental capabilities due to her disability (Burrow et al., 2021). In Steubenville, the community responded with outrage towards the accused and quickly called for the full consequences of the crime to be applied to them. The two cases differ in the way that the community responded, with Glen Ridge being largely sympathetic toward the rapists and Steubenville calling for justice. Both cases received nationwide attention and sparked considerable debate on the topic of rape culture and justice.
Investigation
The investigation into the Glen Ridge Rape Case took place shortly after the case was reported to the police and included multiple interviews with the victims and other witnesses. The Steubenville Rape Case had a more delayed investigation, with more than a year passing before any accusations were filed, and the focus was more on covering up the crime than uncovering it. Both cases were investigated thoroughly, but the key difference was that the Glen Ridge case was approached with the victims’ best interests in mind, and the Steubenville case was focused more on protecting the perpetrators.
Prosecution
The prosecution in the Glen Ridge Rape Case took the approach of demonstrating a culture of accepted violence in the boys’ community that enabled the assault to occur. They focused on alcohol and consent and compellingly presented the facts. The prosecution in the Steubenville Rape Case followed a similar approach, emphasizing the role of alcohol and using witnesses who went beyond the victim’s story. They also put social media evidence front and center, demonstrating the indifference of many who knew about the crime but did not report it.
Both prosecutions sought to challenge social norms and demonstrate an overarching culture of indifference or acceptance of violence, especially against women or girls. They both used varied evidence to bring an issue out of the shadows and opened the door for other victims to come forward.
Sentencing
In the Glen Ridge Rape Case, the main perpetrators were sentenced to between 5 and 15 years in prison for aggravated assault, endangering the welfare of a child, and conspiracy (Carty, 2022). In the Steubenville Rape Case, two of the main perpetrators were sentenced to one to two years in a youth correctional facility. Both cases involved horrible acts of sexual violence against minors; however, the sentences handed down were significantly different. In the Glen Ridge Rape Case, the perpetrators faced much harsher sentences, whereas in the Steubenville Case, the perpetrators faced a much more lenient sentence.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the Glen Ridge Rape Case and the Steubenville Rape Case serve as stark examples of the harm caused by sexual assault and the way it is addressed in the justice system. Both cases highlight the need for a better understanding of victims’ experiences, increased awareness of rape culture, and improved support for victims coming forward. There are still many challenges to be faced in advancing gender justice and ensuring that victims can access the justice that they deserve.
References
Adoga, M. (2019). # Metoo, meet inclusivity: Criminal procedure in sexual assault cases should include people with intellectual disabilities. Fordham Undergraduate Law Review, 1(1), 8.
Barca, L. A. (2018). The agency factor: Neoliberal configurations of risk in news discourse on the Steubenville, Ohio rape case. Critical Discourse Studies, 15(3), 265-284.
Burrow, C., Miller, A., Meadours, J., Davis, L. A., & VanMattson, S. (2021). Sexual assault prevention and response for people with intellectual and developmental disabilities: A gap analysis framework. Journal of Forensic Nursing, 17(1), 53-62. Web.
Carty, V., (2022). Using social media tools to contribute to and challenge endered violence. In Gender Violence, Social Media, and Online Environments (pp. 192-208). Routledge.