- Charged with rape, attempted rape, and kidnapping
Update II: Brooks was found not guilty on all nine counts this afternoon. (WEWS)
Update: Brooks has stepped forward to deny the allegations of rape, according to his employer, WEWS. “I am innocent of these charges,” he told Channel 5.
Some more details also have eked out of the prosecutor’s office. Channel 5 reports Brooks and the alleged victim were acquaintances before the incident; the woman also was seriously impaired on the night of the rape.
“The individual was substantially impaired either mentally or physically and was not able to give consent to the acts that were forced upon her,” assistant prosecutor Paul Myles told the station.
*****
Today the Cuyahoga County Prosecutor’s Office fired off this shocking piece of news: Channel 5 sports anchor Terry Brooks has been indicted on charges of rape, attempted rape, and kidnapping.
This article appears in Jan 26 – Feb 1, 2011.
Something just doesn’t seem right. Are all women or individuals who are under the influence and have sex, raped? Does being under the influence of alcohol and being of legal drinking age mean anything? Would someone who is legally drinking and intoxicated excused of their responsibilities. Can I get drunk and rob a abank and be considered impaired and not liable? My confusion with the courts is only growing. How after 4 months can someone make an accusation of such a serious crime without knowledge of when it happen, and it be taken to the point of multiplying of four counts each of rape and attempted rape? I have to say that this seems to br trumped up to attack a black man and his career, which will never be fully repaired. Without a conviction, I have to say the county of Cuyahoga and the greater Cleveland area has done a disservice and has spoken to me as a black man, as a place I would not consider for living or even visiting or vacationing.
I disagree completely with cashman. The woman may have been intoxicated, and if she was charging him for intoxicating her that would be a different story. Nonconsensual rape whether or not one is intoxicated is still rape. As a mother of a daughter who has had a similar situation I can tell you that she has wanted to come forward many times to pursue a legal case. Unless you have walked in these shoes I am questioning ones judgement and ability to understand the shame, helplessness and uphill legal battles in prosecuting such a case. My daughters rape happened two years ago and she is still in counseling. She takes responsibility for being intoxicated. However, unable to defend herself from the man could have happened sober. Oh yes, and he was married too. The courts are still having a hard time sorting this one out. It is a he-said she-said defense and prosecution and the winner is usually a he. What happened in this case will be left for the consciouses of both parties.
I agree with cashman. Should a person be given a “SUI” test first? Yes, some people are taken advantage of when intoxicated which is entirely wrong, but what separates the legitimate rape claims from the situations that result from a women who merely retaliates the next day after (embarrassingly) consenting to “SUI”?