A very strange story about a sexual assault case

Amber Rhea sent me a link to a news story about a very bizarre ruling in a sexual assault case. It is a strange story and I'm wondering if it has been accurately reported. It sounds too awful to be true. If it is being accurately reported, it is beyond outrageous.
Here is what we can know based on the news story:
Melanie Ross alleges that she was sexually assaulted by Daniel Day at his Mercer University fraternity house in 2003. (According to the article, Day comes from a powerful Georgia family. His father is Burke Day, a State Rep and he is of the Days Inn Days.)
Melanie Ross is brought a civil suit against Day because of the assault.
A Bibb County judge ruled in the civil suit that the lacerations she had did not prove rape, and that she needed to provide a list of her sex partners because "only virgins can bring a case for sexual battery in civil court." In addition, she was ordered to pay $150,000 of Day's attorney fees.
Melanie Ross and her lawyer are appealing the ruling.
What we can't know based on the news story:
Why is this case being brought in civil court when it is a criminal matter? Did a prosecutor refuse to bring the case as a criminal matter?
Where does the civil court ruling about virginity and sexual assault being accurately reported, and if so, where does it come from? Is it an ugly artifact of not-so-distant past when rape was essentially a property crime? Is it an accurate interpretation of a bad law, or an inaccurate interpretation of the law?
It is important to note that the Georgia State statutes on sex crimes do not refer to a victim's status as a virgin or not in determining any aspect of the crime of sexual battery. But this case is not being brought in criminal court. It is being brought in civil court, so different rules apply. I'd like to know more about those rules.
I can understand that there might not be enough evidence to prove the offence. What I cannot understand, and what is outrageous, is that her status as a sexually active woman could have anything at all to do with the matter.
Does anybody have additional information about this case?





Utter shock.
What the hell?
That's all I can say right now. Just.... what the hell?
It sounds to me like someone's pulling stuff out of their ass -- either the judge or the reporter. I want to hear more about this.
“Writing is like prostitution. First you do it for love, and then for a few close friends, and then finally y
WTF? I'm a practicing
WTF? I'm a practicing attorney in Georgia and I have NEVER heard of some virginal requirement for civil suits. Granted I only do criminal defense, but I would suspect there's some sort of civil equivalent to the Rape Sheild Statute which prevents introduction of the victim's past sexual history (with limited exceptions).
But Georgia judges do unconstitutional crap all the time, so it wouldn't surprise me one of them just made up the law.
I'm starting to wonder...
...if the reporting was a bit off. The only court documents I can find refer to a civil suit brought by Melanie Ross against Mercer University. I can find no case brought directly against Daniel Day.
Here is a link to the order to dismiss a "motion for reconsideration" in the case against Mercer University, made by Ross's attorney in light of new evidence. (PDF, if you prefer, here.)
I'm sure there is much that is hard to find via a regular Google search, so again, if anybody has links to official documents or better info about this case I'd love to know about it.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
Mr. Day speaks
For what it's worth, I found this via Google...
Yesterday, Daniel Day said on Topix.com :
Kisses,
JanieBelle
Dream a little dream of me.
Amanda Farahany responds
Same thread, Ms. Ross' attorney speaks to some of the accusations and counter-accusations raised in that thread:
Kisses,
JanieBelle
Dream a little dream of me.
Media putts a "spin" on it...
This is a true case of the media putting a “spin” on cases and not reporting facts in cases. Without knowing more about this case, I certainly would have been outraged that this women’s voice was not heard. For those who have followed this case, we all know that this was just a simple case of blackmail in which Mr. Day did not surrender. If you read the facts, there was absolutely no evidence what so ever.
For example, "A judge determined lacerations do not prove rape, and that she had to list her past sexual partners, since only virgins can bring a case for sexual battery in civil court."
- Lacerations do not prove rape when there is a 0.5mm cut near you anus in which the plaintiff herself said in all probability came from shaving. Also, virgins are not the only ones who are allowed to bring sexual battery cases to civil court. For civil cases, the plaintiff does have to testify about her past sexual history which hurt Miss Ross in several ways. First, she had an extensive past sexual history and secondly, Mr. Day and Miss Ross had recently broken up after being in a relationship for several months. The judge ordering payment of attorney fees, further to the defendant just proves the frivolous nature of this case.
Frivolous cases such as these truly hurt those women who were sexually assaulted.
Supreme Court Tosses Ross Case Out
Every single court in which my son, Daniel, has been challenged, attorney Amanda Farahany has lost in the Ross case - evidence that my son is innocent.
Stronger laws are needed that make legal recourse for those upon extortion is used, then found groundless, are easier to file against irresponsible attorneys.
This has been a sad story, not only for my family, but for the Ross family, or so I presume.
It's over.
Now the long process of restoring a good name, trashed in this brouhaha, begins.
Link to GA Supreme Court Docket info
Back in September it appears that the GA Supreme Court did in fact toss this case out:
http://www.gasupreme.us/docket_search/results_one_record.php?docr_case_num=S08C1295
I haven't found any other information yet.
...because public space really matters!
Elizabeth
Opinion
I found this opinion. It seems to have some more insight into the case. I looked up Rep. Day. He represents part of Chatham County. Would have been interesting if Bibb County was in his baliwick. Bibb is strongly Republican and less safe territory than the rest of the state for anyone who does not carry a flag and slice of apple pie.
Here's this: http://bourgieadventures.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/some-judges-are-fuckin...
I'll dig further
~~~
Everyman's death diminishes me because I am involved in mankind...
~~~
Kelly
Your inference is a libelous lie
I hope you'll look for the truth more diligently than you infer wrong-doing.
Why is it so hard for you to accept the facts? Ross and attorney Farahany lost in every court, in every motion, period. Sure, it's great TV to assume the son of a legislator is steeped in steamy, sultry tales of deceit and stero-typical governmental abuse. But those fictional accounts exist mostly in lala land - or worse - forever in a viewer's mind.
I resent your inference that I might have somehow misused my entrusted position. It's a lie, something I KNOW hard research on your behalf will show.
Ross - Day - legislator response
Post new comment