The Steubenville Rape and Glen Ridge Rape cases feature various similarities and differences. For Steubenville Rape, it depicts a situation whereby the peers of the victim, a high school girl, sexually assaulted her repeatedly and publicly, with the peers documenting some of the acts on social media. For the perpetrators of the act, they comprised of two high school football players including Ma'lik Richmond and Trent Mays (North, 2017) . For the Glen Ridge Rape case, it entailed a situation through which Glen Ridge High School football team members raped the victim, a 17 years old girl with mental disability, with the use of a baseball bat and a broomstick (Shapiro, 2018) . The perpetrators of the incident comprised of Christopher Archer, Kevin Scherzer, Trent Mays, Kyle Scherzer, Bryant Grober, and Ma'lik Richmond (Iresearchnet, 2019) . In this case, the similarities here revolve around where the victims and perpetrators were high school students. In addition, the students were defenseless since the first one was drunk and the other was mentally disabled.
On the issue of victim-blaming responsibility, it prevails whereby the victim of a particular crime is held partially or entirely at fault for the harm that befalls them. From the two cases, they are similar in that the victim-blaming responsibility did not apply in their situation. Concerning the Steubenville Rape case, the victim felt party with around four plyers of football with which they attended a second one when the victim vomited and seemed completely drunk. The group later headed to home of among the key witnesses to the case whereby they removed the girl’s shirt with Trent Mays penetrating the vagina of the victim digitally while exposing her breasts to friends (Simpson, 2013) . In this sense, the victim was not to blame for the incident since she was unware of what was going on around her. When it comes to the Glen Ridge Rape case, the victim is not to blame as well. The case involved a 17 years old girl with mental retardation with one of the boys requiring her to head to the basement for a party. After declining initially, she later agreed after which she was subject to rape. The perpetrators took advantage of the girl who appeared desperate to have their attention who later raped her repeatedly (Iresearchnet, 2019) . She is also not to blame since she was subjected to the incident unwillingly.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The two cases attracted considerable attention from the community thereby leading the members of the community to respond in critical ways to the incidents. For instance, for the Steubenville Rape case, it realized considerable attention nationally with the New York Times covering the incident in part mostly owing to the role that social media played in the development of the story. A number of people publicized the occurrence on YouTube, Twitter, text messages, and Instagram. For the photo and video evidence, it revealed that the girl was subject to sexual assault for several hours while unconscious. A number of members of the community blamed the girl for the rape incident due in line with arguing that she cast a negative perception to the football team members as well as her town. However, criticisms also prevailed particularly owing to the shame that befell the perpetrators who had promising futures but ended up wasting them for the wrongful act (North, 2017) . Regarding the Glen Ridge Rape case, it also attracted the attention of the entire country mostly owing to the perceptions that the perpetrators received special treatment from local authorities and school owing to their status in line with being football stars (Shapiro, 2018) . The events would later be documented in TV movies and books. Such incidences lead the community to criticize the perpetrators.
On investigation, the Steubenville Rape case involved the police confiscating and analyzing 2 tablets and 15 cellphones where they gathered numerous messages from the students and interviewing around 60 individuals including parents, school officials, students, and coaches. These would avail information concerning the situation that took place during the incident based on their recollection of the events (North, 2017) . When it comes to Glen Ridge Rape case, the investigation commended with a staff member reporting the incident after hearing learners discussing rumors (Iresearchnet, 2019) . After reporting to the principle, the police were involved, after which they interviews the swim coach of the victim, the vice principal and from the victim after a period of three days since the incident.
Regarding prosecution, the state of the Steubenville Rape case resulted in accusations whereby the officials of the school and coaches had information regarding the rape and declined reporting it. Several texts messages in the evidence revealed that the coach tried to cover the incident to ensure that the players would not be implicated. The issue resulted to a countrywide outrage when he received a new contract to serve as the director to administrative services in the district. The grand jury was responsible for determining the crimes committed particularly whether officials of the school and coaches would be regarded as accessories to the rape case, which they failed to report (Simpson, 2013) . In the event of Glen Ridge Rape case, on the other hand, both Kevin Scherzer and Christopher Archer were convicted of sexual assault and conspiracy whereas Kyle Scherzer was found guilty of first degree and conspiracy to aggravated sexual assault by using coercion and force. For Bryant Grober, he was found guilty third-degree charges to rape conspiracy (Iresearchnet, 2019) . In this sense, it is evident that the two cases differed in terms of how the cases were determined and the criminals prosecuted.
When it comes to sentencing, the Steubenville Rape case saw Ma'lik Richmond and Trent Mays convicted of rape with the trial judge finding that they utilize their finders to penetrate the vagina of the victim digitally, while it was not possible for an incapacitated girl to agree to the act (Simpson, 2013) . By contrast, concerning Glen Ridge Rape case, it saw Kyle Scherzer, Kevin Scherzer, and Christopher Archer sentenced to serve 15 years in prison meant for young offenders with Bryant Grober serving three probation years and community service for 200 hours (Iresearchnet, 2019) . These deserved such punishments to help in setting an example to other perpetrators of what would happen to them in the event that they engage in similar acts.
From the cases, I have realized that the incidences usually involved high school kids who mostly took advantage of incapacitated girls to assault sexually. Concerning the Steubenville Rape case, the victim was incapacitated due to being drunk while the Glen Ridge Rape case involved a girl with mental retardation. These two victims were vulnerable to sexual assault particularly since they wished to associate themselves with popular students in their schools. In this sense, I would argue that students should ensure to avoid being alone in the company of people they do not feel safe. Rather, they should seek the company of their female friends to avoid being subjected to incidences of rape or other abusive acts during their vulnerable moments.
References
Iresearchnet. (2019). The Glen Ridge rape incident. Retrieved from http://criminal-justice.iresearchnet.com/crime/school-violence/the-glen-ridge-rape-incident/
North, A. (2017). 5 years ago, a girl was raped in Steubenville. Now her rapist’s father shot a judge. Retrieved from https://www.vox.com/identities/2017/8/22/16185174/steubenville-shooting-judge-nathaniel-richmond
Shapiro, J. (2018). How prosecutors changed the odds to start winning some of the toughest rape cases. Retrieved from https://www.npr.org/2018/01/16/577063976/its-an-easy-crime-to-get-away-with-but-prosecutors-are-trying-to-change-that
Simpson, C. (2013). The Steubenville victim tells her story. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/03/steubenville-victim-testimony/317302/
