Ben, Jan and Amy Ebeling Named in Sexual Assault Civil Suit

[Knights_Mom]

@CurrentlyHorseless

@Wilbury_Pie

The incident happened in 2017, so would a Statue of Limitations apply ?

In California, statutory rape can be charged as a misdemeanor or a felony, depending on the age difference. If the age difference is less than three years, it a misdemeanor. If greater than three years, it’s a misdemeanor or felony at the discretion of the prosecutor.

If charged as a misdemeanor, the statute of limitations is 1 year; if charged as a felony, 3 years.

I’m not so sure this is accurate.

[Knights_Mom]

@BigMama1

@happilyretired

have no idea where truth is in this situation. I do, however, think that there is an overall chilling effect for any young person looking for training from or to be a working student for an adult trainer.

I’m hoping there is a chilling effect for any trainer, adult, teenager or anyone in power who wishes to groom, drug, coerce, abuse, or sexually assault any minor.

Child abusers are well aware of the risks but their compulsion overrides the risk factor.

[SummerRose]

@CurrentlyHorseless

Why does the grooming and power imbalance matter if it was forcible rape through incapacitation? Which is it, forcible rape or manipulation of a minor?

In sexual assaults between people who know each other, it isn’t uncommon at all for both grooming and forcible assault/rape to occur. In fact, in the type of predatory sexual assault such as the type alleged, it is actually very common.

I have mixed feelings on whether I’m happy or not that this even needs to be stated. On one hand, it illustrates how little some people understand the nature of sexual abuse. On the other, I’m happy that there are some people in the world who have never experienced it, and don’t understand it because they’ve never seen it.

[BigMama1]

You seem to be blaming the victim or at least ascribing some ulterior motive to her, I’m not sure what. If events happened the way she claims and there is not enough evidence for a criminal case, then civil court is the way to go if the victim wants some type of justice / accountability on the part of her alleged attacker.

In addition, Safe Sport offers another avenue to seek accountability on a professional sense, and to perhaps prevent other people from being victimized in the way it’s alleged this young woman was.

And, given the age of both minors involved and that the complainant was presumably training with the parents and under their supervision, I don’t find it unreasonable that they would also be named in the suit. Certainly I think it’s unfair to assume they are being named simply because of their wealth.

I have no idea if the allegations are true or not. If not, the Ebelings will be cleared by the courts and by SafeSport, as they should be, and I personally would not think any less of them and don’t believe their reputations would be forever tarnished.

If the allegations are true, whether in whole or in part, I support the victim seeking justice through any and all avenues available to her.

[2tempe]

Sex Between Two Minors and Statutory Rape - Law Offices of Randy Collins

the second section, 2nd paragraph describes what could have happened in response to criminal charges. Irrespective of how each person here might feel, the fact that both parties were minors at the time presumably played a role in where this went from a legal perspective.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

Wow. Just read through the Chronicle article on this one.

The plaintiff is being represented by Mike Reck. He’s represented other plaintiffs in major SafeSport equestrian cases. I’m trying to remember who, but can’t offhand. Maybe one of the McDonald victims? Or the Kehrings? I can’t remember. But regardless, he’s a really good attorney and has a depth of knowledge about SafeSport and Equestrian related sport cases involving high profile perpetrators.

I guess the good news is that this allegedly happened a few years ago… which means that investigators digging into details and interviewing witnesses for both the civil discovery process and SafeSport investigation have a better shot at corroborating relevant details, if applicable, because people’s memories won’t be too removed from the present. And that makes it notably different from some other cases involving events that happened in the 1970’s or 1980’s.

As with all these cases… it just hurts my heart. I have no idea what the truth of any of it may be. But it all just hurts my heart. Makes me want to keep my kids extra close, and keep an extra watchful eye over them both, as they are entering/in the midst of their teen years now.

I wish no one ever experienced anything awful and violating during their teen years. I know that’s not realistic… but I still wish that this sort of thing just stopped happening to young people. It’s so sad.

[Knights_Mom]

@2tempe

https://www.cmcdefense.com/blog/2018/october/sex-between-two-minors-and-statutory-rape/

the second section, 2nd paragraph describes what could have happened in response to criminal charges. Irrespective of how each person here might feel, the fact that both parties were minors at the time presumably played a role in where this went from a legal perspective.

The fact that both were minors absolutely changes the probabilities of the case.

[Knights_Mom]

@BigMama1

You seem to be blaming the victim or at least ascribing some ulterior motive to her, I’m not sure what. If events happened the way she claims and there is not enough evidence for a criminal case, then civil court is the way to go if the victim wants some type of justice / accountability on the part of her alleged attacker.

In addition, Safe Sport offers another avenue to seek accountability on a professional sense, and to perhaps prevent other people from being victimized in the way it’s alleged this young woman was.

And, given the age of both minors involved and that the complainant was presumably training with the parents and under their supervision, I don’t find it unreasonable that they would also be named in the suit. Certainly I think it’s unfair to assume they are being named simply because of their wealth.

I have no idea if the allegations are true or not. If not, the Ebelings will be cleared by the courts and by SafeSport, as they should be, and I personally would not think any less of them and don’t believe their reputations would be forever tarnished.

If the allegations are true, whether in whole or in part, I support the victim seeking justice through any and all avenues available to her.

Agreed!

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@skydy

I would think, but I don’t know , that if a party is found liable in a Civil court they would be banned by Safe Sport as well.

I’m pretty sure you are correct on this, depending on the specifics of a case, and underlying allegations. SafeSport uses a “preponderance of the evidence” standard.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@lazaret

This is occasional only because information provided in discovery between two civil parties cannot by default be used as evidence in a criminal proceeding; this is primarily because a criminal court cannot compel a defendant to produce evidence against himself.

Since the defendant is party to the criminal action, but the plaintiff is not since the plaintiff in a criminal action is the State, items furnished to the plaintiff in interrogatories or depositions from a civil action that were compelled from the defendant would be compelling the defendant to incriminate himself.

While I’m sure it happens, it would be very treacherous waters for a prosecutor hoping to directly use civil discovery as evidence in a criminal proceeding.

This is a really educational and interesting comment. You explained this VERY well, in a way that makes complete sense, and highlights how someone’s basic civil rights might be violated if evidence gathered during civil discovery was subsequently used to pursue criminal charges.

Anyway - I appreciate the legal education. It’s definitely thought provoking.

[Scribbler]

@Knights_Mom

@2tempe

https://www.cmcdefense.com/blog/2018/october/sex-between-two-minors-and-statutory-rape/

the second section, 2nd paragraph describes what could have happened in response to criminal charges. Irrespective of how each person here might feel, the fact that both parties were minors at the time presumably played a role in where this went from a legal perspective.

The fact that both were minors absolutely changes the probabilities of the case.

Minors changes things I’m sure.

But I’m not sure why some of the other posters above were bringing in the concept of statutory rape. I understand that to be when an adult has sex with a minor that is effectively consensual, but the minor can’t legally consent of course. Obviously this is not a great situation from any perspective, but a certain percentage of teenage girls do find themselves with adult boyfriends. Those adults can be charged with statutory rape even if the minor defends them, especially if the minor’s parents get into the act (remembering some third hand gossip from the 1970s).

That said, I’m not sure if this is still the wording of relevant laws or if they are changed over to somethung like sexual abuse of a minor.

However the case as described here is not statutory rape. It is rape pure and simple and would be illegal between two adults.

On the other hand if the 14 and 17 year old had a mutually consensual dating relationship acknowledged by both families there would be no grounds for statutory rape with two minors and 3 years age difference. 14 is a bit young for a full sexual experience, but this differs a lot.

The boy is alleged to have drugged the girl and then raped her. That is not consensual and is crime of violence.

[Virginia_Horse_Mom]

@Scribbler

However the case as described here is not statutory rape. It is rape pure and simple and would be illegal between two adults.

On the other hand if the 14 and 17 year old had a mutually consensual dating relationship acknowledged by both families there would be no grounds for statutory rape with two minors and 3 years age difference. 14 is a bit young for a full sexual experience, but this differs a lot.

The boy is alleged to have drugged the girl and then raped her. That is not consensual and is crime of violence.

That’s how I see it too.

This is going to be VERY hard to prove well after the fact.

As far as the parents go, having minors have access to alcohol in their home… if it can be proven… is evidence of negligence. But… I have no clue as to what evidence or testimony from witnesses might be involved in the case, and go towards substantiating some of these allegations. That will be crucial, I would imagine.

[Knights_Mom]

@Scribbler

@Knights_Mom

@2tempe

https://www.cmcdefense.com/blog/2018/october/sex-between-two-minors-and-statutory-rape/

the second section, 2nd paragraph describes what could have happened in response to criminal charges. Irrespective of how each person here might feel, the fact that both parties were minors at the time presumably played a role in where this went from a legal perspective.

The fact that both were minors absolutely changes the probabilities of the case.

Minors changes things I’m sure.

But I’m not sure why some of the other posters above were bringing in the concept of statutory rape. I understand that to be when an adult has sex with a minor that is effectively consensual, but the minor can’t legally consent of course. Obviously this is not a great situation from any perspective, but a certain percentage of teenage girls do find themselves with adult boyfriends. Those adults can be charged with statutory rape even if the minor defends them, especially if the minor’s parents get into the act (remembering some third hand gossip from the 1970s).

That said, I’m not sure if this is still the wording of relevant laws or if they are changed over to somethung like sexual abuse of a minor.

However the case as described here is not statutory rape. It is rape pure and simple and would be illegal between two adults.

On the other hand if the 14 and 17 year old had a mutually consensual dating relationship acknowledged by both families there would be no grounds for statutory rape with two minors and 3 years age difference. 14 is a bit young for a full sexual experience, but this differs a lot.

The boy is alleged to have drugged the girl and then raped her. That is not consensual and is crime of violence.

A minor is legally not able to give consent but the courts acknowledge there is some sort of difference between dating 14 yr old and 17 year old and a 40 year old male with a minor girl.

[MHM]

@Knights_Mom

A minor is legally not able to give consent but the courts acknowledge there is some sort of difference between dating 14 yr old and 17 year old and a 40 year old male with a minor girl.

I agree.

I do feel the need to point out that it would be equally wrong if it were a 40-year-old female with a minor boy. Even if society is a little slow to catch up on that double standard.

[Knights_Mom]

Absolutely agreed.

[skydy]

@Knights_Mom

A minor is legally not able to give consent but the courts acknowledge there is some sort of difference between dating 14 yr old and 17 year old and a 40 year old male with a minor girl.

This is not a case of “dating”.

[hut-ho78]

Same.

[Knights_Mom]

@skydy

@Knights_Mom

A minor is legally not able to give consent but the courts acknowledge there is some sort of difference between dating 14 yr old and 17 year old and a 40 year old male with a minor girl.

This is not a case of “dating”.

Is there anywhere to access the complaint?

[LexInVA]

@Knights_Mom

@skydy

@Knights_Mom

A minor is legally not able to give consent but the courts acknowledge there is some sort of difference between dating 14 yr old and 17 year old and a 40 year old male with a minor girl.

This is not a case of “dating”.

Is there anywhere to access the complaint?

Doe-7032-vs.-ACR-Enterprises.pdf (782.2 KB)

[skydy]

@CurrentlyHorseless

[quote="CurrentlyHorseless, post:29, topic:77407

You’re right, it could be both.

But the police would only take action if it was forcible rape or statutory rape, and they declined to charge him. The “force” supposedly was “drugging her” into incapacitation. Wine was mentioned but not anything stronger. Two high school kids partaking of some underage drinking of wine?

The police declined to charge him for either forcible rape or statutory rape.

OK, so SS cares about a broader category of things, including grooming and imbalance of power, so they file a complaint with SS. It looks like they’re covering all their bases try to get something to stick.

Add to that trying to sue the big bucks parents, and dumping this in the news on exactly the day they did?

It is because of people who immediately assign ulterior and nefarious motives to a young person that reports a sexual assault (as you have done here), that victims of sexual assault are afraid to come forward.

I think your attitude is repulsive. I hope this young lady will be protected from social media so she won’t see your comments.

Did you read the article written by Carrie Kehring? If you haven’t, please do.