My VERY CONTROVERSIAL take on Damaged (Law and Order 8x22)

This is going to risk me getting downvoted to oblivion...but I'm going to say it anyway.

BY THE WAY THE EPISODE IS PRESENTED, I don't disagree with Judge Wright's decision to overturn the jury verdict.

Now I understand what the episode was trying to portray. Three teenage boys taking advantage of this young woman with mental difficulties, and deciding to force themselves on her, which she didn't have the mental cappacity to provide consent for.

Here's my issue with the actual episode itself. I don't get the impression that the girl was THAT mentally challenged to the point that she was unable to provide consent. I've been with multiple teenagers, whose mental difficulties are considerably worse. Don't get me wrong, she was CLEARLY naive to the boys' intentions. They clearly didn't respect her at all, seeing her solely as a source of pleasure. But with that said, there wasn't any indication in the episode itself (at least not to my memory) that she didn't want the boys to stop.

Even at the end of the episode, the girl's speech about how she's mocked in school as "the r****d that got raped," it was clear that she was well aware of what rape actually was (or at the very least the basics of it), and denied it completely. She does have developmental issues, yes, but I also don't subscribe to the idea that she is this hopeless person who is this useless member of society who was unable to think for herself either. Hell, if I remember correctly, she was working in the kitchen when we were first introduced to her.

Don't get me wrong, the boys were all terrible people, and I wouldn't have complained if they were all locked up. But I do believe that the nature of whether the girl was able to consent is as black and white as McCoy thought it was, and therefore I don't believe Wright was wrong to overturn the verdict.