Hollywood Film Project:
'The Accused'
Brief synopsis of the person, event, & conflict on which the film was based:
Cheryl Araujo, a 21 year old New Bedford, Massachusetts woman, was violently gang raped on March 6, 1983.
Araujo left her home late in the evening the night of March 6th to purchase cigarettes.
Stopping by a couple convenient stores, which were closed, she then went into Big Dan's Tavern.
Araujo sat down, had a few drinks, and engaged in conversation with patrons of the bar.
As she was leaving she was 'propositioned by a couple men', when she declined, they grabbed her, threw her on a pool table, stripped her clothing from the waist down, and forcefully raped her.
Araujo's tragic story was the basis of the 1988 film, 'The Accused', starring Jodi Foster.
Foster's character, Sarah Tobias, (Arajuo) was framed in the film as having been provocatively dressed, dancing, & flirting with the men in the bar; which in turn, depicts her behavior as 'asking for it'.
Some of the major differences between historical records and film translation were:
Cheryl Araujo was a mother of two, living with her daughters and their father- her 'high school sweetheart'- in a trailer home in New Bedford, MA. She left late at night to buy cigarettes in a local bar near her home; she was later viciously raped by several men.
In the movie, Araujo's character, Tobias, was a single white woman who went to the bar after getting into a fight with her 'live in boyfriend'. She was seeking revenge on him by flirting with multiple men at the bar. She was portrayed as an alcoholic, and drug user with a criminal background.
She was wearing a very low cut top, sleeves falling down, a short skirt, and was laughing and flirting with the men in the bar. All these things implied she was at fault through her actions and
behavior.
Major similarities between historical records and film translation were:
Cheryl Araujo went to a bar late at night, by herself. As did the character in the film, Sarah Tobias.
Araujo, and Tobias were drinking and flirting with patrons of the bar; which ultimately transitioned into being raped by several men with a crowd surrounding, & cheering them on.
Both were largely blamed by others for the event saying 'she put herself in that situation'.
In both the film and in real life, the women wished for their identities to remain anonymous.
Media coverage of the trial ultimately revealed the woman's identity; because of this, she was harassed and threatened by the community.
She desperately tried to prove her innocence to a jury and community that didn't support her.
These are the main similarities between the film and the historical records.
The ideological perspectives determine:
Araujo could have avoided this event had she "stayed at home" or 'acted differently'.
The Portuguese community which she lived in turned against her, nobody believed her story and most blamed her for the rape. She was brutally patronized by others, both inside and outside the courtroom, while ultimately trying to prove her innocence.
The men who helped her when she ran into the street after the rape, were her only real testament to what had happened. Their involvement helped her case immensely.
Among two of her 'rescuer's' that night; brothers Dan O'Neil and Michael O'Neil, who had stopped to help Cheryl Araujo were later revisited in a Herald News Article, twenty-six years later:
Among two of her 'rescuer's' that night; brothers Dan O'Neil and Michael O'Neil, who had stopped to help Cheryl Araujo were later revisited in a Herald News Article, twenty-six years later:
"Dan said if he had to do it all over again, he would still save Araujo from the men that came after her that night. If they hadn’t, a jury never would have believed her testimony against the other men involved at the bar, he said.
“We would have helped her, but I don’t think we would have got involved with the police or the DA’s office. There was a circus atmosphere to it and there were so many times they were trying to put words in our mouths,” he said.
“So many things came out with the case, so many lies — that she was a whore, and things like that — but my thoughts were always that a woman, no matter what, has the right to say no,” said Michael, “and frankly, even if she was a whore, it doesn’t matter, because she said no.”
Read more: http://www.heraldnews.com/news/x665149028/After-26-years-brothers-break-silence#ixzz2R2nDG8Qe
What is privileged- Truth or 'Truthiness'?
"Truthiness is what you want the facts to be as opposed to what the facts are.
What feels like the right answer as opposed to what reality will support"
-Stephen Colbert:
-Stephen Colbert:
I believe that the 'truthiness' of this story was more privileged in the film.
Even though the movie portrayal, as well as the true life version had some similarities.. (i.e. blaming her for the rape, being interrogated & cross examined in court).
The characters in the film were completely fabricated.
The film cast her, the victim, as well as her attackers as all being Caucasian, when they were actually all Portuguese.
This demonstrates a very obvious 'truthiness'.
The town of New Bedford, during this time, was 50% Portuguese. As a result of this, stronger support allies were given to her attackers.
The film, however does NOT address this.
Having made them caucasian frames the story differently; had the filmmakers used their true ethnicities, it would have undoubtedly created more controversy to the film.
The primary focus of this film- related to Media Effects Theories was:
Framing-
Framing Theory (Robert Entman)
"Frames work to interpret and evaluate events, people, and issues. They guide and limit
the range of possible interpretations, and in turn, affect our understandings of social
problems, political issues, and people.
• Selection:
Framing news involves selecting which stories are newsworthy and which aspects of the
stories to emphasize." - MediaEffectsTheoriesLectureNotes.pdf
The story 'framed' the victim as 'getting what she deserved' in a sense.
Walking into a bar late at night, by yourself, dressed provocatively, can get you into trouble so they say..
This film, along with the true life characterizations of this woman, identified her as being 'the perpetrator' rather than 'the victim'.
Her tragic story along with the struggles she endured, raised a nationwide controversy regarding women and rape.
* Below is a section from 'The Law Library- Notable Trials and Court Cases
(1981-1988')
(1981-1988')
Naming all the people involved, along with the defendants' sentencing.
Defendants: John Cordeiro, Jose M. Medeiros, Virgilio Medeiros, Victor Raposo, Daniel Silva, and Joseph Vieira
Crime Charged: Aggravated Rape
Chief Defense Lawyers: Edward F. Harrington, Judith Lindahl, Kenneth Sullivan, and David Waxier
Chief Prosecutors: Ronald A. Pina and Raymond P. Veary
Judge: William G. Young
Place: Fall River, Massachusetts
Dates: February 23-March 21, 1984
Verdicts: Cordeiro, Raposo, Silva, and Vieira, Guilty; Jose Medeiros and Virgilio Medeiros, Not guilty
Sentence: 6-12 years imprisonment
Crime Charged: Aggravated Rape
Chief Defense Lawyers: Edward F. Harrington, Judith Lindahl, Kenneth Sullivan, and David Waxier
Chief Prosecutors: Ronald A. Pina and Raymond P. Veary
Judge: William G. Young
Place: Fall River, Massachusetts
Dates: February 23-March 21, 1984
Verdicts: Cordeiro, Raposo, Silva, and Vieira, Guilty; Jose Medeiros and Virgilio Medeiros, Not guilty
Sentence: 6-12 years imprisonment
SIGNIFICANCE: Reports of the crime spurred a national debate as to whether a woman's independent or (as some saw it) compromising behavior made her partially responsible for sexual crimes committed against her; the conviction of four of the men was widely hailed by feminists, who insisted that rapists, and not the character of their victims, should be tried in court.
A gang rape that took place March 6, 1983, in Big Dan's Tavern, New Bedford, Massachusetts, quickly became national news. The first reports were of a 21-year-old mother of two raped by a half-dozen men over the course of two hours, while the bar's 15 other patrons cheered. Later investigation of the evidence reduced the size of the cheering squad, but confirmed the other details of the crime. According to eyewitness testimony, two men tried to force the woman to perform oral sex; two others threw her on a pool table and raped her; the bartender was physically restrained from going to a phone; and another nonparticipating man—who first ignored the bartender's instructions to call the police—dialed a wrong number and then didn't bother to try again.
Sources:
The Lewiston Daily Sun -Google News Archive
Herald News - Oct 25, 2009
Associated Press -News Archive Dec 17, 1986
Washington Post- Nov. 1, 1988
Houston Chronicle- Dec 21, 1986
Boston Herald- Sept 27, 1992
Google Books- The Law Library Notable Trials & Court Cases (1981-1988)
law.jrank.org pages/3382/NewBedford-Rape-Trial-1984.html
YouTube.com
YouTube Videos-
The Accused (8/9) Movie CLIP - On the Stand (1988) HD
Websites:
