Attempted rape reported at Disney Pop Century Resort

[stemikger]

Until all the facts are out, I would be a little suspicious of this story. It could be true, but it also could be people trying to get a big pay day from Disney.

If it is true, it is very scary and a lesson to people with young girls. My daughter and niece were out until midnight on our last trip. My daughter is 13 but looks 16 and my niece is 15 but looks 19. Very scary. I will not let them stay out that late again.

 

[DancingBear]

Okay...he takes the key from her. And then she's going to fight with her attacker to get her key back?? Yeah. Okay.

Have you ever been in a struggle with anyone? Ever had something stolen off your person? You're talking about something that happens in a matter of moments. Someone grabs something from you, you try to grab it back; you don't stop and think "Maybe he really doesn't just want my key?" or "Okay, let him take the key, I can just call down to the front desk and have them cancel it."

And, again, how in your mind does that part of the story enhance the "scam"?

 

[LoveDoc143]

Yeah .. until all the facts are out. Those lying thieves.

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/documents/121807_Disney_battery_report.pdf

 

[DancingBear]

Okay...he takes the key from her. And then she's going to fight with her attacker to get her key back?? Yeah. Okay.

Have you ever been in a struggle with anyone? Ever had something stolen off your person? You're talking about something that happens in a matter of moments. Someone grabs something from you, you try to grab it back; you don't stop and think "Maybe he really doesn't just want my key?" or "Okay, let him take the key, I can just call down to the front desk and have them cancel it."

And, again, how in your mind does that part of the story enhance the "scam"?

Here's some more information from someone who claims to be in a position to know from another board:

The woman's story doesn't have holes - the published article that you read in a Newspaper that slanted the police report has holes. What scared off the attacker and what descriptively happened in that ten minute gap between 5:50p and 6:00p was not released for a specific reason. Also, never in the police report does it say "attempted rape" as it says "attempted groping" .. but "grope" doesn't give enough attention as "rape" when it comes to Disney properties. Look how much attention it's gotten just because of one vile word - a word that doesn't have ANYTHING to do with this incident.

Can we (everybody) please just think about all of this for a second if we're going to take the time to post something. A few people have stated that what they read didn't make sense and has too many holes (or just flat out the woman is lying). Would the s3x crimes unit STILL be investigating something that YOU ALL figured out from a slanted newspaper report, was "full of holes"? I'm not trying to tick anybody off here ... but don'tcha think there's more to the report then what this newspaper printed? The police have been investigating this incident for nearly a week now and if it was so full of the holes some of you proclaim it to be, they wouldn't be wasting their time and the woman (and her husband) would be arrested.

For the other people who say "it's a fake report to get free money from Disney like other tourist areas" .. note the hotel offered a free upgrade to a Deluxe resort which was turned down. Free food and beverages - also turned down. If they were up for "free grabs" on the whim of a "fake story" - none of what was just stated would have happened.

And here's a redacted copy of the police report:

http://media.myfoxorlando.com/documents/121807_Disney_battery_report.pdf

The crime is listed on the report as "attempted sexual battery." Florida, like many states, doesn't have a crime named "rape"; sexual battery is it, defined as follows:

"Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or ******l penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or ******l penetration of another by any other object.

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...TM&Title=->2007->Ch0794->Section 011#0794.011

American Heritage dictionary definition of "rape":

The crime of forcing another person to submit to sex acts, especially sexual intercourse.

Merriam-Webster definition of "rape":

unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent

So, is the Sentinel wrong for reporting this as an attempted rape? No.

 

[LoveDoc143]

You seem to be hung up on the "intercourse" issue. There was never any attempt, in any way, to have intercourse with the victim. Maybe if the situation was different, something worse would have happened, but thankfully it didn't.

By your own definition of the Florida statute, "a sexual organ comes in contact with another object". That is the argument I've been saying all along while you've been stuck on the intercourse aspect of this whole incident. You're saying all sexual battery cases are "rape" cases and that the newspaper was correct in stating that this was an attempted rape, when it wasn't. It's like saying all Mickey ice cream bars are vanilla ice cream and that all vanilla ice cream bars are obviously Mickey. It's NOT a duplicate two-way street by definition. So, is the Sentinel wrong in reporting "rape" when it's a "battery"? Yes. Just for clarification, "battery" includes any unwanted activity .. such as "groping".

I don't know why you're so hung up on continually trying to call this a rape. Then again, what do I know - I'm reading the same exact blanked out report you are ... right?

 

[sarcasticblonde]

Have you ever been in a struggle with anyone? Ever had something stolen off your person? You're talking about something that happens in a matter of moments. Someone grabs something from you, you try to grab it back; you don't stop and think "Maybe he really doesn't just want my key?" or "Okay, let him take the key, I can just call down to the front desk and have them cancel it."

I am going to assume that you are not a woman.

I'm 25 and since I was about 13 or so, I have been taught, as a woman, how to deal with the possibility of what to do in an attack/rape situation. No, I didn't take any special courses or pay extra money out of my pocket for such information. In my public school, instructors came in once a year and taught the girl's P.E. classes how to defend themselves or just how to get away in general. We were also taught in other classes the best way to get away from an attacker and not provoke him.

The woman who was raped was supposedly walking in a somewhat secluded spot, alone. That, to me, is a mistake. WDW is not safe. I can definitely take care of myself, but I know better than to walk alone in a secluded area. Also, women should be smart enough to know that when a man - who has been hiding in a secluded area - jumps out and attacks a lone woman that the probability that he wants something more than just your valuables is very high.

So, if I were in this situation, I would have done a few things. One, I wouldn't have given two craps as to what he did to my room key. And two, my first instinct would have been to run! I'm not saying this woman didn't try that. But you asked what I would have done. I would have scratched at his eyes and ran far, far away while he grabbed his bleeding eyes. I most definitely would not have struggled to get back a flimsy piece of WDW plastic.

But that is just what I would do. And that's nothing to do with the subject at hand.

 

[DancingBear]

You're right, what you have been trained to do or thing you would do has nothing to do with this discussion. The issue was that you acted as if the bent key element of the story made the story suspicious.

 

[sarcasticblonde]

You're right, what you have been trained to do or thing you would do has nothing to do with this discussion. The issue was that you acted as if the bent key element of the story made the story suspicious.

And I still do feel that way There is nothing wrong with me being suspicious just as there is nothing wrong with you NOT thinking it's suspicious. I'll agree to disagree with you. No skin off my nose.

 

[DancingBear]

You seem to be hung up on the "intercourse" issue. There was never any attempt, in any way, to have intercourse with the victim. Maybe if the situation was different, something worse would have happened, but thankfully it didn't.

By your own definition of the Florida statute, "a sexual organ comes in contact with another object". That is the argument I've been saying all along while you've been stuck on the intercourse aspect of this whole incident. You're saying all sexual battery cases are "rape" cases and that the newspaper was correct in stating that this was an attempted rape, when it wasn't. It's like saying all Mickey ice cream bars are vanilla ice cream and that all vanilla ice cream bars are obviously Mickey. It's NOT a duplicate two-way street by definition. So, is the Sentinel wrong in reporting "rape" when it's a "battery"? Yes. Just for clarification, "battery" includes any unwanted activity .. such as "groping".

I don't know why you're so hung up on continually trying to call this a rape. Then again, what do I know - I'm reading the same exact blanked out report you are ... right?

You're dead wrong. The definition of sexual battery includes penetration; that's more than "groping."

I'm not focused on intercourse at all. Let me try this again:

-Florida's "rape" statute uses the term "sexual battery," not "rape."
-The police report calls this an "attempted sexual battery."
-The dictionary definition of "rape" includes attacks, beyond intercourse, that are equal to the "sexual battery" definition in Florida law.

So, "Attempted sexual battery" = "attempted rape." It is perfectly correct and proper for the Sentinel to use the term "attempted rape" when describing what the police report says.

 

[DancingBear]

And I still do feel that way There is nothing wrong with me being suspicious just as there is nothing wrong with you NOT thinking it's suspicious. I'll agree to disagree with you. No skin off my nose.

Fine, but, again, what's your theory then as to just why the woman bent her key? How would that add anything to her "scam" story?

 

[sarcasticblonde]

Fine, but, again, what's your theory then as to just why the woman bent her key? How would that add anything to her "scam" story?

Listen, you may get a kick out of arguing with people or maybe you think you are going to prove me to be an idiot and you can feel vindicated in some way. I do have a theory in my head about what could have happened. But from my very first post on this thread, I have made sure to not say what I think could have happened. I wasn't really there and on the chance that this woman's story is 100% true, I don't want to make her feel worse by saying what I think might have happened.

I have no problem leaving it at, "I think it's fishy" or that the story "has holes". Despite the fact that I am suspicious, I'm still trying to hold some respect for the woman that was reported to have been attacked. My own theories and intuitions can stay in my head.

This is a message board, not Cold Case Files on A&E.

 

[LoveDoc143]

You're dead wrong. The definition of sexual battery includes penetration; that's more than "groping."

I'm not focused on intercourse at all. Let me try this again:

-Florida's "rape" statute uses the term "sexual battery," not "rape."
-The police report calls this an "attempted sexual battery."
-The dictionary definition of "rape" includes attacks, beyond intercourse, that are equal to the "sexual battery" definition in Florida law.

So, "Attempted sexual battery" = "attempted rape." It is perfectly correct and proper for the Sentinel to use the term "attempted rape" when describing what the police report says.

"Rape" is a specific term that falls under the category "sexual battery" - not vice-versa.. so they are not interchangeable.

Are you SERIOUSLY fighting me on this report, it's words and what it was that happened? What is wrong with you - seriously.

 

[DancingBear]

"Rape" is a specific term that falls under the category "sexual battery"

What are you basing this on? The term "Rape" doesn't appear in the sexual battery statute at all. But what constitutes sexual battery under the statute also would constitute rape under the dictionary definitions I cited above.

Are you SERIOUSLY fighting me on this report, it's words and what it was that happened?

Uhhh, no. I'm saying that based on a report that says "attempted sexual battery," it's fair for the Sentinel to say "Attempted Rape Reported at Pop Century Resort," because "sexual battery" = "rape."

What is wrong with you - seriously.

Chill, dude. Seriously.

 

[LoveDoc143]

So by your statement, and the proof you've given everybody, that means that in no court in Florida, is the word "rape" ever used .. because .. as you said, it's not in the statute.

Wow.

Everything that you have replied to has been retaliatory to somebody else. Constantly disagreeing with almost everybody about almost everything. Apparently, you're just trolling the thread trying to bait more information out that you cannot get to. Sorry .. it's not going to happen.

There is literally nothing left to say here. You weren't at the incident, you don't know what's behind the blocked part of the now semi-public report and clearly have no grasp of fundamental law practices.

As I said before, now that the new "piece" is out to help those who apparently need it, I'm done with this thread.

Have a happy holidays.

[EDIT]
As proven by the posts below me ... nothing but trolling.

 

[DancingBear]

Listen, you may get a kick out of arguing with people or maybe you think you are going to prove me to be an idiot and you can feel vindicated in some way. I do have a theory in my head about what could have happened. But from my very first post on this thread, I have made sure to not say what I think could have happened. I wasn't really there and on the chance that this woman's story is 100% true, I don't want to make her feel worse by saying what I think might have happened.

I have no problem leaving it at, "I think it's fishy" or that the story "has holes". Despite the fact that I am suspicious, I'm still trying to hold some respect for the woman that was reported to have been attacked. My own theories and intuitions can stay in my head.

This is a message board, not Cold Case Files on A&E.

I do enjoy a good argument, actually, but I'm not trying to prove you anything. It is a discussion board, however, so I thought if you posted that you were suspicious you might be willing to post why you thought so.

 

[DancingBear]

"Rape" is a specific term that falls under the category "sexual battery" - not vice-versa.. so they are not interchangeable.

Again, you are basing this on what?

 

[DancingBear]

By your own definition of the Florida statute, "a sexual organ comes in contact with another object".

Where did you get that quoted language from? Not from the statute:

"Sexual battery" means oral, anal, or ******l penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another or the anal or ******l penetration of another by any other object.

 

[EUROPACL]

[EDIT]
As proven by the posts below me ... nothing but trolling.

It was a long drawn out plan by DancingBear sign up for a website and post for 7 years just to wait for you and this thread to come along and start the trolling. Just the type of thinking that a James Bond villian would come up with. You should see his tank of sharks with lasers on their heads.

 

[DancingBear]

So by your statement, and the proof you've given everybody, that means that in no court in Florida, is the word "rape" ever used .. because .. as you said, it's not in the statute.

I never said anything remotely like that. I'm sure it is true, however, that the Orange County Sheriff's incident reports never identify "Attempted Rape" as the description of the offense, because no such crime exists in FL.

Everything that you have replied to has been retaliatory to somebody else. Constantly disagreeing with almost everybody about almost everything. Apparently, you're just trolling the thread trying to bait more information out that you cannot get to. Sorry .. it's not going to happen.

Yeah, I've got 5,000+ posts here, and you've got 50+, and I'm the troll.

There is literally nothing left to say here. You weren't at the incident, you don't know what's behind the blocked part of the now semi-public report and clearly have no grasp of fundamental law practices.

I've been practicing law for 20 years. There is no need for me to be there, or to see what is in the redacted portions of the report, to point out that in Florida there is no crime of rape, there is a crime of "Sexual Battery" and that any activity which would constitute "Sexual Battery" under FL law also matches the dictionary definition of rape.

Apparently you don't respond to specific questions, but I'll try again with a different one. Just what activity do you think would have to occur to make it okay for the Sentinel to report something as an "attemped rape"?

As I said before, now that the new "piece" is out to help those who apparently need it, I'm done with this thread.

 

[minnie61650]

The crime is listed on the report as "attempted sexual battery." Florida, like many states, doesn't have a crime named "rape"; sexual battery is it,

Does Florida have a crime named "grope" ?

If not ......How would the police write up a report describing that a woman was attacked and "groped"?

Just curious.