defence attorneys did everything they could to try and potray that Leslie faber was a willing participant and actually enjoyed, if not the acts performed, her inclusion to the cool group. The defence portrayed Leslie as a Lolita(p. 362) and that her seduction was to great for the boys reject. They even mentioned the fact that were talking about sixteen year-old boys with hard-ons, what weree they supposed to do when faced with overt female sexuality? (p. 212)Leslies personal life was dragged through the mud for the entirety of the trial, leaving the jury to decide whether she had the capacity to refuse sexual advances and demands. Leslies entire life history and character were put on trial, eventhough none the sexual histories of any of the defendants was ever discussed. The defendants character was never was put to scrutiny, nor was their records of sexual deviance and general lewd conduct ever introduced at trial. It seems the everyone involved felt more inclined to protect a bunch of gang rapists, rather than a seventeen year old mentally handi-capped girl. The community even stuck behind its hometown heros showing overwhelming support for the jocks and condemned the Fabers and their cause.Through out the trial the defence council openly manipulated Leslie every way they could have. They attempted to confuse her and make her contradict herself, hoping perhaps, to make it seem as though she was making the story up. Their efforts however, only made the prosecutions case stronger by showing how vulnerable and eager to please Leslie really was. Through the entirety of her testimony, Leslie trade sides and versions of her story to suit whom she wanted to please. This allowed the jury to see the real Leslie, her true personality, moreover the jury was able to definitively conclude that she was unable to refuse the sexual advancements of the defendants.The prosecution in this case did a superb job trying this case. Theere case fa...
