A 15-person jury didn’t reach a unanimous decision in a mock date rape trial Monday night. The fifth annual mock trial, part of the Encore program, aims to raise student awareness about date rape by bringing a private issue into a public forum, said counseling and testing official Cathey Soutter.

The forum, however, brought greater understanding of date rape through confusion and conflicting stories.

THE STORY

Two SMU theater students played the plaintiff and the defendant. They played friends who often studied together in the residence hall during their first year. After hours of studying for an important exam one night, they had a couple of beers and watched a movie. She began to fall asleep on his roommate’s bed. She woke up and saw him in boxer shorts and a shirt. He sat on the bed, then lay down behind her. She sort of snuggled back into him, falling in and out of sleep.

The students’ stories changed from that point, conflicting and clashing. She woke up as he was undressing her. She said she had struggled. He had raped her. He thought she wasn’t objecting. The sex was consensual.

She said. He said.

THE PROCESS

The attorneys tried to clear up the blurred lines between the opposing parties, asking about past interactions-what was their relationship like before? Had she told her boyfriend about this guy she studied with? Had she had sex with her boyfriend?

Neither the questions nor the answers helped the jury.

They had no more than 10 minutes to decide. The deliberation revolved around “beyond a reasonable doubt.” Had he definitely committed sexual assault?

The final vote, nine not guilty, six guilty, released the defendant from the charge. Students on the jury expressed their feelings after announcing the verdict.

“In the closing, [the defense attorney] said if there’s any doubt, then the defendant is not guilty,” said sophomore theater major Harrison Ford. “I thought he did it, but the prosecution didn’t fill the burden of proof.”

Another jury member said that because the defendant said the plaintiff struggled, he knew she didn’t want to have sex with him. She had voted guilty.

REALITY

“This case resembles the acquaintance rape cases [the Serious Offenses Judicial Board] hears,” said professor Fred Moss of the Dedman School of Law, who presided over the trial as judge.

“They were both drunk, impairing their judgment and brakes. They trusted each other and signals crossed, leading to tragedy,” resulting in what Moss called an “uncomfortable hellish situation.”

ACTION

Talking about those hellish situations can help, and coordinator of women’s programs Courtney Aberle encouraged those who may have been raped or know someone who has been hurt to take action.

Soutter agreed.

“These are the kind of things that can short-circuit a great college experience,” she said. “A well-educated student makes better choices. It’s such a personal issue, and the victims often feel they’re to blame.”

Victims should express their feelings of shame. Not just adults have taken up the charge, spreading the word and building support networks for victims.

Psychology and sociology major Courtney Ippolito is forming Women Against Rape (WAR). She hopes to focus on peer education, integrating it into orientation through the wellness program and working towards funding a student-run hotline.

“We’re going to do training, so if you call, it’s your peer, not some random adult,” she said.

Ippolito envisions WAR working as a liaison between the victim and counselors, being a friend when they feel the most alone.

“If they have somebody holding your hand instead of some cop,” she said. “It’ll be less traumatic.”

Treatment and counseling are available. The trial’s underlying message, however, was for students to consider their actions. Thinking before doing prevents paying.