Rape

[Tony]

I find rape (of anyone, man, woman and child) to be one of the most disgusting things, maybe even worse than murder. When ever I think of my girlfriend, my mom or my sister (or any woman (or child)) being raped, by blood starts to boil. What should be the punishment for a rapist? I am thinking death. What are your thoughts on the matter?

[Pyrrho]

My sister was raped. I say imprison the SOB. Of course, our first thoughts were vigilante justice, but why drag ourselves into legal problems on his account? Back in the "good old days", however, me and my brothers would have done what was needful.

[Gem]

What should be the punishment for a rapist? I am thinking death. What are your thoughts on the matter?

Depends how sure you are the person did it. I would argue for a darn long prison term if the evidence isn't do damning. I don't want to put innocent on death row.

Gem

[Ralph]

One problem with this is that a lot of rapes are in a grey area.

While I'd have no problem seeing a sexual predator who rapes 10 year olds getting the death sentence......I'm thinking about situations where the "victim" is 17 going on 25 and is anything but innocent.

There's a fine line sometime between consent & rape and I'm not sure if would we should be too eager to deal out death in some of these cases.

One thing I do agree with though.....normally--someone can only use deadly force (as in handgun) against an aggressor if their life is in imminant danger. Usually this means the aggressor himself must be armed too or it's not considered justifiable self-defense.

I think most state laws allow women to use deadly force to stop a rapist..even if he's unarmed. I'm sure someone will argue that "well...he didn't want to kill her--only rape her--it was wrong to shoot him".......but I know what I'd want one of my loved ones to do in that situation...............

[aerocontrols]

No an example of what I think should be done, though I did experience a feeling of 'serves him right' when reading... (http://www.thedenverchannel.com/news/2547189/detail.html)

[Zep]

You would need to be VERY careful about this - "rape" can cover such a broad band of subjects and experiences... And it is such an emotive word too.

For example, years ago at our school while having a waterfight with buckets of water, one student was hit full-face while protesting that he did not want to be involved. He claimed that he was "raped" - forced against his will to participate in an activity he found repugnant. But this was extremely petty and trivial compared to "rape" as sexual violation of a young child. And yet both are CLASSED as such.

BTW, DO NOT take that to mean that I feel we should be soft on rapists - far from it. I believe the punishment should fit the crime. As I've said before, for truly nasty and convicted rapists, I have no sympathy at all. But death is too good for them - it is NOT a punishment but only a release from it.

Perhaps... McMurdo Sound airstrip usually needs continuous cleaning from penguin-poop.......by licking it only would be good.

[aerocontrols]

Originally posted by Zep
And yet both are CLASSED as such.


Yeah?

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Ralph
One problem with this is that a lot of rapes are in a grey area.


I agree. The mere charge of rape shouldn't make one's blood boil. It's very easy to make the charge. "He raped me," or "I was raped," are cheap and easy phrases to use far too often.

That doesn't mean that real rapes do not occur. Certainly, they do. Nevertheless, morning after regrets also make for a lot of false charges.


While I'd have no problem seeing a sexual predator who rapes 10 year olds getting the death sentence......I'm thinking about situations where the "victim" is 17 going on 25 and is anything but innocent.


This isn't directed at you so much, but your remarks here remind me of my experience with others, including defense attorneys who should know better. I'm amazed at how often people assume we mean "statutory rape," as in sexual intercourse with a girl deemed too young to give consent, whenever the word "rape" is used. Rape is much broader than that one circumstance. It also covers nonconsensual sex where force is used against the woman or where she is incapable of giving consent, such as when she is drugged with the so-called "date-rape" pill, for example.


There's a fine line sometime between consent & rape and I'm not sure if would we should be too eager to deal out death in some of these cases.


Absolutely. Just two weeks ago I finished trying a rape case to a jury and my client was acquitted. He was charged with Rape in the First Degree of a woman old enough to consent, but he was still facing a real possibility of life behind bars.

The defense was that the sex was consensual. Despite the police, the DA's Office, and the grand jury believing that this was a rape case and my client deserved to spend the rest of his life in prison, the twelve jurors who heard the case at trial decided unanimously that there was consensual sex between the defendant and the alleged victim. Thus, there was no crime. Not guilty was the verdict. Rest assured, the two assistant DAs who tried the case were certain that my client was a rapist and was going to rot in prison. Instead, he is back home and going to his job again. What a fine line there is sometimes.

It is so easy to be accused of a crime. Being accused does not mean one is guilty.

It is far too easy to slip into vigilantism, especially when someone close to us makes a charge of a serious crime. It is best to let the legal system handle the matter. Otherwise, we would live in a wild west frontierland of "justice" by the gun. I seriously doubt that anyone calling for death in this thread really advocates that.

AS

[Flame]

I really feel that nothing less than a life (meaning his/her entire life!) sentence could be accepted as justice.
The victim is stuck with a life sentence, so to should the rapist be.
Sounds cliche but that's how I feel.

Toni

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Ralph
.

I think most state laws allow women to use deadly force to stop a rapist..even if he's unarmed. I'm sure someone will argue that "well...he didn't want to kill her--only rape her--it was wrong to shoot him".......but I know what I'd want one of my loved ones to do in that situation...............


Generally speaking deadly force is justified if necessary to stop a felony that results in a substantial risk of death or serious bodily harm. Rape fits the bill, armed attacker or no.

[American]

You don't wanna go making jokes about it. Not even if you think your being funny- chances are your probably not. Even if your careful and you try and be all sensitive and not offend nobody, trust me, your audience may take it bad, and their apt to turn againt you something vicious.

Rape ain't nothing to go and joke about. Not now, not never!

[kittynh]

sniff sniff....what is that?


anyway, I had to testify in a rape trial once (for the defense!).

It was miserable, the girls were sincere, the three young men were scared. they were found guilty. I remember people being so mad at me because I dared to testify for them (I really didn't have a choice, but you better believe that I told the complete truth on the stand). Couldn't answer my phone without getting abuse, went on a long vacation. The emotions were intense and I wouldn't want to have been in the shoes of the jury (though I myself believe they were guilty). Rape bring up emotions that bring out the best and the worst in everyone.

[Mr Manifesto]

(quote edited by request)

Out of curiosity, how come you registered in May, but six of your posts (out of seven at time of writing) have been in the last two days?

[Tricky]

Speaking of rape trials, any of you ever read "To Kill a Mockingbird"?

[Jessica Blue]

I think that's a very eloquent comment Tricky...


Broadening the death penalty to include more offences, broadens the opportunities for irreversible errors. The laws which are seen to protect criminals also protect the innocent...anyone can be wrongly accused.

[Suezoled]

All I wanted was for those 4 frat bastards who gang banged me to admit they did it. To admit they did wrong. To admit they locked the door and guarded it while one guy held me down and the others took turns. But no, it would mean confessing they did something wrong and then paying for that crime. Poor boys.

Well it's not going to happen. They got off. They got off and decided it was fun to follow me around campus as a group. So I had to switch schools.

To those guys, 6 years ago, I wasn't a person, I was a b*tch. I was a b*tch who squealed. And even if I didn't win, I'm glad I did that much. If I had it to do over again, I would use deadly force if I could. I have the feeling those boys had done something like this before, because they moved so efficiently. I would spare anyone in the future the trauma by taking the sin of killing onto myself, if I could.

But simply put, I do not. So, I have worked very hard to overcome the rapists inside of me. The memories, the pain, the feeling of being alone when my dad blamed me for being raped. I still work to overcome.

Even though they got away, they won't defeat me. I won't give in. They won't defeat me. Not inside, not outside; I will overcome them. I have to. For the sake of me and the me inside of me.

I am not who I was. I will be better.

[American]

Originally posted by Suezoled
Even though they got away, they won't defeat me.


Got away from what? Was there a trial?

[renata]

Rape Survivors Message Board Links (http://pages.ivillage.com/rape_pathfinder_help/rapecrisispathfinderonlineresources/id9.html)

The Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (http://www.rainn.org/)

Sexual Abuse Resources (http://www.brokenspirits.com/resources/sexual_abuse.asp)

Resources and education for stopping rape (http://www.rape101.com/)

[Suezoled]

Got away from what? Was there a trial?

There was no trial.
The evidence kit that the hospital took, taking sperm and skin samples from my hair and nails, was contaminated. It was inadmissable. And the word of 1 girl against 4 guys. And then my dad even said I was to blame if it really happened. It was, I was told, at best a weak case.

[American]

Contaminated. I see.



Hellcat.

[Suezoled]

American, I don't like you.

People get raped every day. And many cases never see trial for one reason or another.

My case never went to trial. I lost. Those boys got away. How does that make me Hellcat?

Fine then; sorry to hijack the thread. The 3 biggest disturbing events of my life: I tried to commit suicide. I'm doing better. I was raped. I'm doing better. I had cancer when I was 11 years old and I've been cancer free for over 15 years.

Do I make people uneasy? Well if you like, why don't you have Hal or someone ban me. I'd rather be banned than make people uneasy, anyway.

[American]

"Those frat guys raped me" reminds me of my friend... his name is John Smith.

But when I read you talking about killing and revenge fantasies, I was truly concerned.



My sincere apology if my skepticism is misplaced or completely wrong. Good night.

[Suezoled]

If I had it to do over again, I would use deadly force if I could. I have the feeling those boys had done something like this before, because they moved so efficiently. I would spare anyone in the future the trauma by taking the sin of killing onto myself, if I could.

Yes, I will say it again. If I had it to do over again, I would have defended myself to the utmost. I would have used deadly force. If I had known it was okay to use deadly force, I would have. I would even have killed them to save myself and anyone else.

But when I read you talking about killing and revenge fantasies, I was truly concerned. My sincere apology if my skepticism is misplaced or completely wrong

It is misplaced and completely wrong. I do not fantasize about going out and killing people. I do think if something like this happened to me again I would fight back. I am honest about what I would do. What I would do if it happened again.

I don't see anything wrong with voicing what I would do to prevent something like this from happening again. I think being prepared and thinking ahead is a better plan than being totally unprepared and made a victim again.

Does that spell it out enough for your American?

[peptoabysmal]

Originally posted by Tricky
Speaking of rape trials, any of you ever read "To Kill a Mockingbird"?

Not as many times as I heard that darned song "Hang down your head, Tom Dooley" (Another Tom in trouble).

I haven't read it since I had a class in er... was it American Literature? I've taken lately to the loathesome habit of downloading old classics that I was forced to read and reading them again on a PocketPC. I might just read this one again, along with Grapes of Wrath. I have a definate fondness for the writings of H.G. Wells (yet another repugnant habit of mine). As soon as I finish the Crystal Egg (again), I should have freed up enough memory for another round.

The cool thing is that most of these old classics are free from the UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA'S E-BOOK LIBRARY (http://etext.lib.virginia.edu/ebooks/ebooklist.html)

Check it out.

[American]

Originally posted by Suezoled

Does that spell it out enough for your American?


Hellcat was banned a long time ago, and you registered in september. So how'd you know who that was? To me it looks more like I was calling you a hellcat, which would make more sense if you didn't know who that was, which you apparently did.

(This time I'm going to bed for real. Good night, again.)

[ImpyTimpy]

Uhhh.... I think the Hellcat I.D. kit has just exploded...

Originally posted by Suezoled
American, I don't like you.

People get raped every day. And many cases never see trial for one reason or another.

My case never went to trial. I lost. Those boys got away. How does that make me Hellcat?

Fine then; sorry to hijack the thread. The 3 biggest disturbing events of my life: I tried to commit suicide. I'm doing better. I was raped. I'm doing better. I had cancer when I was 11 years old and I've been cancer free for over 15 years.

Do I make people uneasy? Well if you like, why don't you have Hal or someone ban me. I'd rather be banned than make people uneasy, anyway.

[Denise]

Either way, I think I'm getting a dull headache....

[Flame]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Out of curiosity, how come you registered in May, but six of your posts (out of seven at time of writing) have been in the last two days?


Hiya

My husband is a regular here and has often said I should take the time to read and post - said it was well worth the time.

However, we have four small children and only on the friday did we get broadband access at home. Previously we had dial-up and here in Ireland it costs by the minute to use the internet on dial-up.
I preferred not to post until I had time to read and digest the threads.

Cheers
Toni

[Denise]

Originally posted by Flame



Hiya

My husband is a regular here and has often said I should take the time to read and post - said it was well worth the time.

However, we have four small children and only on the friday did we get broadband access at home. Previously we had dial-up and here in Ireland it costs by the minute to use the internet on dial-up.
I preferred not to post until I had time to read and digest the threads.

Cheers
Toni

All right, who's your husband? Come on spill it!

[LucyR]

Originally posted by Denise


All right, who's your husband? Come on spill it!

And just what are you trying to insinuate?

Wicked person.

[Flame]

Add on to my original post...


Somehow there needs to be more support in place for victims who don't have family support.
That would be a start...

Toni

[Denise]

Originally posted by LucyR


And just what are you trying to insinuate?

Wicked person.

All right, I'll admit it, I am hellcat. All of other posters are too. I've been really busy arguing with myself. Actually, Lucy, there are only two posters on this board. You and I. I feel better now!:D

I don't think Flame is Hellcat.

[Flame]

My husband is Graham. I have been informed that some people may think I am someone called 'hellcat' ?
I will need to apologise to him for posting his name in this manner in this type of thread without discussing it, but it has come to my attention that I may not be taken seriously by some because they think I'm someone else.
That was all a bit convoluted but you get the point ;)
Toni

[Cleopatra]

Amateur Scientist I have a question.

Before posing my question allow me remind to the rest of the people here ( I think that I have mentioned it to you in our previous discussions) that in my country the criminal law is a question of the victim versus an individual, it's not the State that prosecutes but the victim which is represented by a criminal lawyer who does the job a DA's office does- he has to prove the guilt of the accused. The State is present just to secure the procedure.

So, here is my question regarding your case.

When we see such a dichotomy between the Procecution and the Jury ( you said that their decision was unanimous-- that was impressive-congratulations BTW) don't you think that there is a problem?

Don't you think that we miss something? When it comes to such cases, personally I have the feeling that Justice wasn't served.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Flame
My husband is Graham. I have been informed that some people may think I am someone called 'hellcat' ?
I will need to apologise to him for posting his name in this manner in this type of thread without discussing it, but it has come to my attention that I may not be taken seriously by some because they think I'm someone else.
That was all a bit convoluted but you get the point ;)
Toni

Hi Flame

Welcome to the forum and thanks for your understanding regarding this...errr... issue :)

I hope you will enjoy your staying in this forum, Graham is a very intelligent and interesting poster.

I am looking forward to more of your posts :)

[ImpyTimpy]

Flame may or may not be Hellcat.. :eek:

But the Hellcat I.D. Kit created by Luciana is currently pointing to a certain poster who created a story here and then followed up with more life threatening dramas when challenged, just like the I.D. kit says it will.

Originally posted by Denise


All right, I'll admit it, I am hellcat. All of other posters are too. I've been really busy arguing with myself. Actually, Lucy, there are only two posters on this board. You and I. I feel better now!:D

I don't think Flame is Hellcat.

[Cleopatra]

Allow me to post a comment.

So far I have been lucky enough and I have never experienced such a violent incident but I cannot help wondering how a victim of rape feels when he or she reads posts like the ones above.

I am sure that in this board there are women who have been raped but they are not able to post such detailed accounts of this "experience".

Let us all have it in mind when we are discussing such delicate issues :)

[Denise]

I'm only speaking of Flame, and not any other poster if you know what I mean. Flame does not fit Luciana's Hellcat Detection kit tm. I do see a possible candidate, but am far from sure.

[renata]

Originally posted by Flame
My husband is Graham. I have been informed that some people may think I am someone called 'hellcat' ?
I will need to apologise to him for posting his name in this manner in this type of thread without discussing it, but it has come to my attention that I may not be taken seriously by some because they think I'm someone else.
That was all a bit convoluted but you get the point ;)
Toni

I thought you were Hellcat. Indeed it was me who specifically pointed to this thread as evidence of Hellcat style. My deepest apologies for this. I attempted to rectify my error, but it was too late, as the thread was quoted by another poster.

You, unfortunately, happened to have had several things in common in style of posting with a rather manipulative and unpleasant poster who I suppose made me rather paranoid. In particular, she had several dormant female identities from UK who she activated a few months in her posting. She also had a penchant for posting stories about cancer, abuse and rape. She was banned in July, but had a few socks still dormant. There was a resurgence of her activity in the last week.

The fact that you started posting again recently, had registered in May, were from UK, and had posted a harrowing story about rape all fit in with her style. Accusing you without further evidence was inexcusable, and I am deeply sorry for it. I am obviouly utterly unfit for dealing with this matter and will withdraw entirely from it.

As a side point, Graham is an utterly wonderful poster, and I extend my apologies to him as well.

[Denise]

Renata, that was a wonderful post. To be clear to the forum, another poster told me of suspicions that Flame might be Hellcat, not Renata.

I am, however, quite sure that Hellcat is still on this forum. She is probably gleeful at the chasm she has created in our community.

So, Renata, do we tell Flame about the skepchick hazing now or later?:D

[renata]

Originally posted by Denise
Renata, that was a wonderful post. To be clear to the forum, another poster told me of suspicions that Flame might be Hellcat, not Renata.

Thank you, Denise :)

But I did post in the ID kit, and link to this thread. I insinuated Flame was Hellcat...I need a break from this issue, I lost perspective.

Utterly inexcusable



I am, however, quite sure that Hellcat is still on this forum. She is probably gleeful at the chasm she has created in our community.

Wasn't that her purpose all along, really? Really the point of the sob stories is so we could never accuse her of lies, on the chance there is truth. And so, just as I feared...she succeeded. I blame myself, and her for not trusting and reaching out to a genuine victim. On a serious note, I also wanted to add something important on the subject of rape stories. One side effect with posting personal rape accounts on message boards is that rape victims reading them can get flashbacks. Someone once said that rape is not merely a crime against a person, it is a crime against memory. A friend of mine who was attacked still has anxiety attacks, and they get more frequent, in her case when someone talks derisivily about date rape, how victims deserve it, made things up. But other victims relive it with reminders from other sources. Just a thought, in case you wonder- who might be reading this. It just may be possible some victims read this thread and can't sleep, and are reliving the shame and the pain. Which is not to say victims should not feel free to share it if they wish- they have nothing to be ashamed of, or to hide. But this also goes to show on what harm does it do for the stories that are not real, that are fake. People who live through it for real have to experience real pain reliving fantasies of someone getting internet jollies.




So, Renata, do we tell Flame about the skepchick hazing now or later?:D

Yes. First, she has to shave some wombats.... :D

[Graham]

Originally posted by renata


Yes. First, she has to shave some wombats.... :D

But she already has a shaved . . . oh, no - I've said too much! :eek:

[Denise]

I'm telling Randi!

[tim]

Originally posted by renata


Thank you, Denise :)

But I did post in the ID kit, and link to this thread. I insinuated Flame was Hellcat...I need a break from this issue, I lost perspective.

Utterly inexcusable




Wasn't that her purpose all along, really? Really the point of the sob stories is so we could never accuse her of lies, on the chance there is truth. And so, just as I feared...she succeeded. I blame myself, and her for not trusting and reaching out to a genuine victim. On a serious note, I also wanted to add something important on the subject of rape stories. One side effect with posting personal rape accounts on message boards is that rape victims reading them can get flashbacks. Someone once said that rape is not merely a crime against a person, it is a crime against memory. A friend of mine who was attacked still has anxiety attacks, and they get more frequent, in her case when someone talks derisivily about date rape, how victims deserve it, made things up. But other victims relive it with reminders from other sources. Just a thought, in case you wonder- who might be reading this. It just may be possible some victims read this thread and can't sleep, and are reliving the shame and the pain. Which is not to say victims should not feel free to share it if they wish- they have nothing to be ashamed of, or to hide. But this also goes to show on what harm does it do for the stories that are not real, that are fake. People who live through it for real have to experience real pain reliving fantasies of someone getting internet jollies.




Yes. First, she has to shave some wombats.... :D


NO RENATA, NOT AGAIN, I BEG YOU. IT'S ONLY JUST GROWN BACK FROM THE LAST TIME AND IT'S MID-OCTOBER FOR ED'S SAKE! PLEASE. PLEASE, PLEASE - HAVE MERCY ON A POOR DEFENCLESS MARSUPIAL! (sob, sob)

[Flame]

Originally posted by renata


'But this also goes to show on what harm does it do for the stories that are not real, that are fake. People who live through it for real have to experience real pain reliving fantasies of someone getting internet jollies.'


I think while making a valid point about the hurt that exposure to this sort of detail may cause (and I'm deeply sorry if I've done that to anyone) you also raise another good point.

Fake accusations have lead to the victim being put on trial and while I understand the need for 'innocent until proven guilty' I also feel that false accusations IRL and online have lead to people with genuine trauma being disbelieved because it seems that there are people out there who will falsely claim rape.
What a horrible and disgusting thing to do.

After reading through this thread again it seems that it has taken a detour from the original subject. I'm kind of regretting participating in it now and I'll step back now and leave it to others.

Regards
Toni

PS

Yes. First, she has to shave some wombats.... :D

okie dokie, clippers at the ready

[Denise]

Originally posted by Flame


okie dokie, clippers at the ready

It's been nice knowing you Tim!

[renata]

Originally posted by Flame
I think while making a valid point about the hurt that exposure to this sort of detail may cause (and I'm deeply sorry if I've done that to anyone) you also raise another good point.

Fake accusations have lead to the victim being put on trial and while I understand the need for 'innocent until proven guilty' I also feel that false accusations IRL and online have lead to people with genuine trauma being disbelieved because it seems that there are people out there who will falsely claim rape.
What a horrible and disgusting thing to do.

After reading through this thread again it seems that it has taken a detour from the original subject. I'm kind of regretting participating in it now and I'll step back now and leave it to others.

Regards
Toni

PS


Agreed absolutely. Any lie by anyone causes hurt to so many. Example- because Hellcat lied here I accused a genuine victim, hurting you, and perhaps other victims, for which, again, deeply sorry. Hellcat's descriptions can bring pain to real victims, who upon discovering the lie, hurt all the more. A false accusation of date rape hurts the man accused forever and brands him a rapish, but like you said, taints the real victims as well, as now people will be skeptical of such claims. It is an awful thing, and I regret the role I played in causing you any hurt, and in bringing back the disbelief and the hurt you experienced before. There are resources out available, and you will have support. Now, to the initiation.




okie dokie, clippers at the ready


I will knit you a sweater, tim....come here, tim.....

Can someone remind me of stage 2? It was so gruesome I tried to block it out of my memory, but I am moon rocks were involved.

[Denise]

Tim, I want to thank you for volunteering for our current hazing. It is what you were meant to do. Really. The sex part will be way, way, better than the shaving. Really!:D

[Denise]

Renata, it was moon rocks and the mile high club. I think Tim is prepared. He has been chanting for strength and stuff.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Amateur Scientist I have a question.

Before posing my question allow me remind to the rest of the people here ( I think that I have mentioned it to you in our previous discussions) that in my country the criminal law is a question of the victim versus an individual, it's not the State that prosecutes but the victim which is represented by a criminal lawyer who does the job a DA's office does- he has to prove the guilt of the accused. The State is present just to secure the procedure.

So, here is my question regarding your case.

When we see such a dichotomy between the Procecution and the Jury ( you said that their decision was unanimous-- that was impressive-congratulations BTW) don't you think that there is a problem?

Don't you think that we miss something? When it comes to such cases, personally I have the feeling that Justice wasn't served.

Your question is quite substantial, even if you didn't mean it as such.

The simple answer is yes, but I don't think it's the kind of problem you presume.

As an aside, thanks for congratulating me. In my jurisdiction criminal jury verdicts must be unanimous, otherwise there is a hung jury, which means they couldn't agree on a verdict. In such a case, if the judge is convinced they cannot agree, then the judge is obligated to declare a mistrial and the state is free to prosecute the case again in a new trial. In practice, this sometimes results in a renegotiated plea to a lesser offense, or in no new prosecution at all. In other words, a hung jury is nearly always regarded as a win by the defense, as it results in the defendant's not being found guilty (read that carefully--not being found guilty is not the same as being found "not guilty"), at least for the time being.

Back to your question. The "problem," if you wish to regard as such, is that investigators, prosecutors, and grand juries have access to only one side of the case. They only hear from the accuser or accusers (The defense has no right to be present at grand jury proceedings. Indeed, they are secret and take place in the district attorney's office). Thus, they get a very biased view of the facts. Add to this the very real tendency of many of those on the side of law enforcement to assume that nearly all accusations of criminal activity are true. This results in a big criminal justice machine which gathers momentum easily once someone has placed a call to the police to begin a criminal prosecution. It can be very hard to stop that machine once it is in motion.

Unfortunately for many, once an accused is placed in that machine, it can be very difficult to get out without a jury hearing the case at trial and hearing and seeing the accused's side of the facts. Thus, the jury is the last wall of protection for an accused between the awesome powers and resources of the state to imprison him or even to take his life, and his remaining freedom as an individual.

Juries often find that there is reasonable doubt about the facts as the state presents them which are necessary to establish a crime. When they do that, the accused is found not guilty and goes free. To characterize that as a "problem" is due either to a misunderstanding of the intended framework of the American criminal justice systme, or to an oversimplication of the issue.

At the top of this post I said the simple answer is "yes." By that I meant that the "problem" is that often the law enforcement side becomes overzealous and fails to use its critical analysis skills to recognize that it has serious problems with its proof that is admissible before a jury. Too often they just "know" that the person they have accused is guilty, and they become rigid in their stance and refuse to negotiate fairly or in good faith. Often, such refusals result in defense attorneys or their clients deciding the best course of action is to "roll the dice" with the jury.

In short, criminal justice in the U.S. is very much a balancing act between the prosecution and the defense. It is intended to be that way. It is not a broken system because it often results in guilty persons going free. We designed the system to allow that on the premise that such a result is much more preferable to one in which innocent persons are freely and often wrongly convicted.

In short, I lament that the public too often has the impression that persons in the criminal justice system rarely are wrongfully accused. Most practising criminal defense lawyers have seen many of their clients wrongfully accused of conduct that they probably didn't do. That is not the same as declaring them "innocent." It means that not only does the state sometimes target the wrong individuals for prosecution, but also that the state often overcharges defendants by exaggerating the nature of the charge, by stacking one charge after another on the same set of facts, and by exaggerating the facts pointing to criminal conduct.

You are simply offbase to declare that justice isn't served in served in cases in which a not guilty verdict is the result. To make such a statement is to misunderstand criminal justice in the U.S. as it was intended to function. The system isn't broken. What is broken are the public's understanding and perceptions about it.

AS

[Suezoled]

Hellcat was banned a long time ago, and you registered in september. So how'd you know who that was? To me it looks more like I was calling you a hellcat, which would make more sense if you didn't know who that was, which you apparently did.

Oh for the love of Ed! There are/were threads all over about people named Jedi Knight, Hellcat, and Ghengis Pwn (or however he spelled it). I lurked here for several months before I signed to join. Add to that the Hellcat ID kit, the fact I have had some life experiences she has named, and I'm fairly new. Is it that big a leap to figure when American spells "hellcat" he's not saying I am one in general? That doesn't fit the context of your insinuation, American.

I told a personal story. I wasn't looking for pity. I felt I was strong enough to tell other people a personal story, for people who didn't want to tell theirs. I wanted to let people know these things happen, not just to other people. And they are not alone. I'm here too. Maybe I'm no one, after all. But I can't judge how other people are. I only have my own experience to draw on, and I hope I haven't offended anyone.

[Upchurch]

Originally posted by Tony
I find rape (of anyone, man, woman and child) to be one of the most disgusting things, maybe even worse than murder. When ever I think of my girlfriend, my mom or my sister (or any woman (or child)) being raped, by blood starts to boil. What should be the punishment for a rapist? I am thinking death. What are your thoughts on the matter? My fiancee and I were watching an episode of Law & Order: SVU last night about a serial killer that would kidnap, rap and murder 7-10 year old girls. At the end of it all, he exchanged the name and location of his first victim, that the cops didn't know about, for not getting the death penalty. My fiancee, who is strongly against the death penalty said that if this were to happen to a child of ours, she didn't know she could not be for killing him.

But ultimately, revenge isn't justice. It's a fine line that I'm not even sure I could define if I were emotionally connected to the situation. It's not an easy question.

[American]

Originally posted by Suezoled

I told a personal story. I wasn't looking for pity. I felt I was strong enough to tell other people a personal story, for people who didn't want to tell theirs. I wanted to let people know these things happen, not just to other people. And they are not alone. I'm here too. Maybe I'm no one, after all. But I can't judge how other people are. I only have my own experience to draw on, and I hope I haven't offended anyone.


You're from Upstate New York? Time for 20-Questions, Hellcat.


- Name several towns in your area. Which ones are considered rich and snoby? Which are farm towns full of white trash?

- What are the major malls? Name a restaurant nearby (don't say "Burger King".)

- Where do young people go to be trendy? If they want to go out dancing or to a club?

- Radio towers are everywhere. Where are the big ones located near your highways?

My last question:

- Did you come?

[Alaric]

The whole rape issue is a mess and it seems to only get messier as time goes by. To many people are getting actually attacked while the court hears reports from people whose claims are meant to sully the reputation of another or simply keep theirs intact.

The death penalty seems a little harsh for rapists-not because they deserve better(im a fan of old germanic tribal justice in this case..let her relatives "deal" with him in any way they chose) but because to many turn out to be innocent. Here in Canada we had a case with a guy serving something like 10 years simply because the lady lied to cover her own ass. Heck-how can you ever make what happened to him better? Perhaps if there was some way to persecute an accuser if it turns out they lied.

Of course, that would lead to people being to frightened to come forward with what has happened to them.

Crap-I dont know. I just cant stand the idea of this occuring and an innocent gets hurt by an overzealous prosecution.

[American]

Originally posted by Alaric
... [too] many turn out to be innocent.

Case-in-point: girl makes up a story of gang rape and posts it right here. "The rape kit was contaminated." :roll:

This woman ever goes to trial, right there you would have 4 guys doing life in prison because she likes telling stories. But they're frat guys- who cares about them?

[American]

(Still waiting for Upstate New York to confirm her locale.)

[Suezoled]

Okay American, let me spell it out for you:
1.) I work. I have to pay attention to my work. So I can't come running when you clap your miserable little paws.

2.) I owe you nothing. You can try to provoke me all you want. You can call me a liar and laugh at me, call me Hellcat and blast me. Your attempt to humiliate and anger me are laughable. You are unworthy of any answer on my part. And; seeing as to how you already condemned me by calling me a liar, I refuse to feed your flames.

As one person said, God be with you.

[American]

Originally posted by Suezoled
Okay American, let me spell it out for you:
1.) I work. I have to pay attention to my work. So I can't come running when you clap your miserable little paws.

2.) I owe you nothing. You can try to provoke me all you want. You can call me a liar and laugh at me, call me Hellcat and blast me. Your attempt to humiliate and anger me are laughable. You are unworthy of any answer on my part. And; seeing as to how you already condemned me by calling me a liar, I refuse to feed your flames.

As one person said, God be with you.

Does anyone here believe this crap?


(Damn, why wasn't I a lawyer? Oh that's right, I have good ethics and basic moral values.)

[Tricky]

Originally posted by American
Does anyone here believe this crap?
Hmmm.... her credibility versus yours... what is the ratio of zero to zero?

Originally posted by American
(Damn, why wasn't I a lawyer? Oh that's right, I have good ethics and basic moral values.)
I suspect it has more to do with your inability to do college-level work.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Suezoled
All I wanted was for those 4 frat bastards who gang banged me to admit they did it. To admit they did wrong. To admit they locked the door and guarded it while one guy held me down and the others took turns. But no, it would mean confessing they did something wrong and then paying for that crime. Poor boys.

Well it's not going to happen. They got off. They got off and decided it was fun to follow me around campus as a group. So I had to switch schools.

To those guys, 6 years ago, I wasn't a person, I was a b*tch. I was a b*tch who squealed. And even if I didn't win, I'm glad I did that much. If I had it to do over again, I would use deadly force if I could. I have the feeling those boys had done something like this before, because they moved so efficiently. I would spare anyone in the future the trauma by taking the sin of killing onto myself, if I could.

But simply put, I do not. So, I have worked very hard to overcome the rapists inside of me. The memories, the pain, the feeling of being alone when my dad blamed me for being raped. I still work to overcome.

Even though they got away, they won't defeat me. I won't give in. They won't defeat me. Not inside, not outside; I will overcome them. I have to. For the sake of me and the me inside of me.

I am not who I was. I will be better.


Why did your dad say it was your fault?

[Suezoled]

Tony: it was easier for my dad to think it was my fault so I somehow deserved what happened. It made it easier to accept in his mind. It's hard for parents to accept, I guess, when their kids are hurt. So they make something to deal with the issue.

Or maybe trusting a guy to show me where the women's bathroom was is totally my fault. Dad said I should have been more careful. In that respect, dad was right.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Suezoled
Tony: it was easier for my dad to think it was my fault so I somehow deserved what happened. It made it easier to accept in his mind. It's hard for parents to accept, I guess, when their kids are hurt. So they make something to deal with the issue.

Or maybe trusting a guy to show me where the women's bathroom was is totally my fault. Dad said I should have been more careful. In that respect, dad was right.


That is such BS. Reminds me of something my dad said when I told him some friends of a friend had been murdered. He said" Well they shouldn't have been out that late". :rolleyes:

Did they give you any drugs or anything like that?

[Suezoled]

Tony: no drugs. I had been sipping a rum and coke earlier, but nothing else.

[Tony]

Thank you for sharing your story and answering my questions.

[American]

Originally posted by Tony
Thank you for sharing your story and answering my questions.

Suezoled didn't answer any of my questions:


----------
- Name several towns in your area. Which ones are considered rich and snoby? Which are farm towns full of white trash?

- What are the major malls? Name a restaurant nearby (don't say "Burger King".)

- Where do young people go to be trendy? If they want to go out dancing or to a club?

- Radio towers are everywhere. Where are the big ones located near your highways?
----------


You're not really in Upstate New York, are you Suezoled? No, you're not, because you can't answer a single question about the area.

Dads don't blame their daughters for being raped; they universally stand by them and blame the guy who did it, even if she initiated the whole thing. (Mothers are more prone to blame the daughter, because women know other women and that you're supposed to watch out for yourself to some degree if you're a woman.)

Frat guys don't do gang rapes. That's like saying bikers are criminals. The frat boys I knew were not predators. Many were involved in very fruity "sexual awareness" programs, workshops and theatre groups that set out to educate students about issues on sex, rape, STDs, homosexual tolerance (they really got through to me!).


You WISH you could be gangbanged by some gorgeous frat boys. But you can't have ONE of them for one night, let alone catch one to keep as a wonderful boyfriend. The fact that they reject you allows you to make up false stories of rape. Every girl who truly has been raped should be pissed at you, you neurotic liar!

You're like the mothers who poison their kids and rush them to the emergency room for attention. Are you feeding your daughter matchbooks? Remember that woman who called the parents of a missing child and claimed to be her? That's YOU. That's just what you're like. Can't wait to see your face on the news someday!

Don't ever change, Hellcat. You're one-in-a-million. Truly priceless.

[Segnosaur]

Originally posted by Tony
I find rape (of anyone, man, woman and child) to be one of the most disgusting things, maybe even worse than murder. ...What should be the punishment for a rapist?

Has anyone suggested stuffing raw hamburger down their pants and letting loose a pack of rabbid pit bulls been suggested yet?

On a related topic... I have wondered, what is it that makes people treat sexual assault as a more serious crime than say a mugging, where the actual physical damage is approximately equivalent? I'm not saying that sexual assult shouldn't be treated as a more serious crime; I am just curious about the reasons why it would be. Is it a biological thing (a mechanism to prevent against children from unsuitable mates), or is it more of a society thing? (Some holdover from the days when people thought women were 'frail' things that should be protected.)

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Segnosaur

On a related topic... I have wondered, what is it that makes people treat sexual assault as a more serious crime than say a mugging, where the actual physical damage is approximately equivalent? I'm not saying that sexual assult shouldn't be treated as a more serious crime; I am just curious about the reasons why it would be. Is it a biological thing (a mechanism to prevent against children from unsuitable mates), or is it more of a society thing? (Some holdover from the days when people thought women were 'frail' things that should be protected.)

That's a very fair and legitimate question. I tend to think it's probably a holdover from more paternalistic days. Yes, women are frail, their "virtue" is precious, and their honor is to be defended. Witness the relative lack of outrage over the "rape" of a 14 year old boy by his adult woman teacher.

Yeah, it's a cultural holdover. It's completely inconsistent with the "I am woman; hear me roar" and "anything a man can do a woman can do better" feminist BS.

The Violence Against Women Act was inconsistent with that message too. Good thing the federal courts had the good sense to recognize it as the blatant affront to the Fourteenth Amendment that it was.

I'm no misogynist. I just wish a certain faction of feminists would stop being such manhaters.

AS

[kittynh]

well I'm as disgusted with a grown woman taking advantage of a 14 year old boy as a grown man taking advantage of a 14 yera old girl.

I think much of the world and some society even in the US would consider a girl raped to be "damaged goods". In some places it would require the young woman to kill herself.

Plus, there is the old, "she asked for it" by how she dressed, talked, where she was (out at night by herself), what kind of family she comes from, if she was drunk or high, if she accepted an expensive dinner...

Same thinking that says any 14 year old boy abused by an adult woman was ,"living every 14 year old boys dream..."

With Sexually transmitted diseases rape can become murder.

[renata]

When someone is mugged, the goal is not humiliation and power assertion over something very private, shared only when wanted. When someone is mugged, the victim does not get flashbacks everytime he or she touches a dollar bill, or handles a wallet. When someone is mugged, victim is not asked, if he or she enjoyed it, wanted to part with money. When someone is mugged, everyone knows who the attacker is, and who the victim is. When someone is mugged, victim does not have live in danger of dying from AIDS, getting a half dozen other illnesses or carrying attacker's child. When someone is mugged, victim's family supports him or her, does not blame him or her. When someone is mugged, victim is not ashamed to admit it to other people, because there is no stigma on the mugging.


And for the record, I feel as much outrage over rape of a man or a woman. Not everyone is a hypocrite.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by kittynh
With Sexually transmitted diseases rape can become murder. [/B]

Very doubtful. I've never heard of such a case. In most, if not in all states, in order for any assault to later become a murder the victim must die from the wounds inflicted within a certain amount of time, usually a year. Otherwise, the death is considered too remote in time to have been caused by the initial assault.

I do not know of any sexually transmitted disease which kills its victim within a year of transmission. It just doesn't happen. Therefore, I suspect that the most someone who knowingly transmitted a sexual disease to someone else through rape could also be charged with would be some kind of assault.

If you know of any such case in which the defendant was charged with murder, I would like to hear about it.

Interestingly, there was a young attorney in my city about 10 years ago who was accused of intentionally transmitting AIDS to a young woman he had recently met. There was no allegation of rape.

Once the woman discovered she had AIDS, she relayed her ongoing saga in several successive front page articles in the local newspaper over a period of two weeks or so. Although the paper never mentioned names, most in the legal community knew who the man was.

One day in court, I jokingly suggested to one of the DAs in the sex crimes unit that he should look into charging the young attorney with assault. "Can you describe the weapon used in the assault to the jury, please?" was the joke I set up.

Surprisingly, a few weeks later the DA's Office was in fact seriously looking into the possibility of charging him with assault on that very theory. I have no idea whether it was done independently, or whether my joking suggestion had anything to do with their actions.

They never got the chance. The attorney killed himself within a few weeks of being "outted" in the paper.

The woman died about 2 years later.

AS

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata
When someone is mugged, the goal is not humiliation and power assertion over something very private, shared only when wanted. When someone is mugged, the victim does not get flashbacks everytime he or she touches a dollar bill, or handles a wallet. When someone is mugged, victim is not asked, if he or she enjoyed it, wanted to part with money. When someone is mugged, everyone knows who the attacker is, and who the victim is. When someone is mugged, victim does not have live in danger of dying from AIDS, getting a half dozen other illnesses or carrying attacker's child. When someone is mugged, victim's family supports him or her, does not blame him or her. When someone is mugged, victim is not ashamed to admit it to other people, because there is no stigma on the mugging.


And for the record, I feel as much outrage over rape of a man or a woman. Not everyone is a hypocrite.

I didn't accuse anyone of being hypocritical. I do, however, sense a strong double standard on the issue. I think it is a holdover from earlier, more paternalistic days.

I disagree with your assessment of how mugging victims must feel and the generalization for the motivations for all robberies.

One of my best friends was held up at gunpoint by a gang in a covered parking lot and was scared to death. He thought he was going to die. He was only 17.

I was mugged in a foreign country when I was 19, but I was too intoxicated to be aware of the danger, and thus I was not scared. I do not believe I harbor any permanent psychological scars from the incident, but I'm not sure I wouldn't if I had been in fear for my life as my friend was.

I suspect there are many victims of robberies who carry with them deep psychological scars from the trauma.

I don't think money is always the motive behind robbery, just as I don't believe power or misogyny is the motive behind every rape. Despite the feminist rhetoric we've been fed for the last 20 years, sometimes rape is indeed about sexual desire.

AS

[ImpyTimpy]

Kitty, that's simply because you're a woman. Women seem to associate sex with emotions while men seem to associate sex with just physical pleasure. Most fourteen year old males would love to have an attractive woman sleep with them (that's because the hormones tend to go nuts at that stage). Assuming pregnancy is not an issue and the act itself is limited to the sleeping with (no relationship, just a physical act) is there a problem?

On the other hand, we do have the real danger of pregnancy and possible relationship or emotional blackmail by the older woman over the immature male. I think that is why, even though the fourteen year olds might disagree, the act remains illegal. Is it rape though if nothing comes from it? Is it really a morally depraved action if no party is harmed?

Originally posted by kittynh
well I'm as disgusted with a grown woman taking advantage of a 14 year old boy as a grown man taking advantage of a 14 yera old girl.

I think much of the world and some society even in the US would consider a girl raped to be "damaged goods". In some places it would require the young woman to kill herself.

Plus, there is the old, "she asked for it" by how she dressed, talked, where she was (out at night by herself), what kind of family she comes from, if she was drunk or high, if she accepted an expensive dinner...

Same thinking that says any 14 year old boy abused by an adult woman was ,"living every 14 year old boys dream..."

With Sexually transmitted diseases rape can become murder.

[renata]

As to knowingly transmitting HIV- there was a case a few years back in NY, when a man was charged with attempted murder, I think because he knowingly infected several women with HIV. It was the first of its kind, I can't find the link, but it made a splash at the time. It was particularly bad, because I think there was some evidence he was attempting to infect them.

More recently, there was a case in SF

http://www.equality.org.za/news/2003/09/18genehill.php


Former San Francisco health commissioner Ronald Gene Hill has been charged with intentionally infecting a former boyfriend with HIV.
Hill was arrested after a grand jury brought down an indictment accusing him of knowingly and intentionally exposing another person to the virus that causes AIDS. The 46 year old Hill is being held in a county jail pending the posting of $100,000 bail.

It's the first time that charges have been laid under the law which was passed in 1998.


I do, however, sense a strong double standard on the issue. I think it is a holdover from earlier, more paternalistic days.

I am sure there is a double standard. Perhaps it comes from men thinking that a 14 year old boy fantasizes about sex with his teacher, or that a man cannot get aroused by a woman and thus cannot be raped by a woman. However, you went into this assuming a double standard from a faction of man hating feminists. However, I think most feminists are very sympathetic to issues of male rape. I do not know who it is that is not, but I have never heard a feminist question it.


I disagree with your assessment of how mugging victims must feel and the generalization for the motivations for all robberies.


Well, I am sure there are some that are different, very gruesome. I am sorry if I do not put a disclaimer in every comment. Mine was a general asessment of the differences based on many things, among them 3 years as a peer counselor in college, for which I had to have some basic training in rape counseling. Oh, and we had a few mugging victims also. I know mugging victims can get severely bruised, some crimes are very gruesome and scary. Hey, car accident victims sometimes are afraid to cross the street! But I do not know of any crime against self that even in its mildest form creates so much suffering for the victim, for years. The worst mugging is worse than an average rape, probably. The nicest rape is horrendous.

I am very sorry your friend thought he was going to die. It sounds like an awful situation for a kid. Was he too ashamed to tell his family? Did he not tell his girlfriend because he thought she might leave him? Was he afraid to ever go shopping again? Did he have to have bloodtests for several months to make sure he was not going to die? Did anyone ask him if he enjoyed it? No? Then it was not like even the mildest rape. It is a very different situation. Rape victims are not just afraid for their lives for duration of the event, they are afraid for their lives for 6 months after. And the shame and fear and secrecy can last years. And if you knew the times boyfriends can't deal with the fact a woman is raped and leave because they are angry, because they don't know what to do, because they are afraid of getting an STD from a rapist. So I sympathize with him, very much. But I do not see much sympathy from you, but rather remarks about man haters, double standard, and feminist rhetoric.


I don't think money is always the motive behind robbery, just as I don't believe power or misogyny is the motive behind every rape. Despite the feminist rhetoric we've been fed for the last 20 years, sometimes rape is indeed about sexual desire.

I am sure there are exceptions to every rule. But, once again, my post, and this thread is not about exceptions. It is about the average. And the "feminist rhetoric" is mostly right, even if you choose to diminish it by slapping a label on it.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata

I am very sorry your friend thought he was going to die. It sounds like an awful situation for a kid. Was he too ashamed to tell his family? Did he not tell his girlfriend because he thought she might leave him? Was he afraid to ever go shopping again? Did he have to have bloodtests for several months to make sure he was not going to die? Did anyone ask him if he enjoyed it? No? Then it was not like even the mildest rape. It is a very different situation. Rape victims are not just afraid for their lives for duration of the event, they are afraid for their lives for 6 months after. And the shame and fear and secrecy can last years. And if you knew the times boyfriends can't deal with the fact a woman is raped and leave because they are angry, because they don't know what to do, because they are afraid of getting an STD from a rapist. So I sympathize with him, very much. But I do not see much sympathy from you, but rather remarks about man haters, double standard, and feminist rhetoric.




I think you are doing a good job of making Segnosaurus' point, assuming he had one by posing his presumptively rhetorical question. You have placed rape on a sacred pedestal, and by doing so you presume that other victims of violent crimes are affected less by their experiences.

Without a doubt, a violent rape is uniquely intimate, unlike any other violent crime in its personal intimacy. Without a doubt, that and the risk of pregnancy and disease carries with it unique fears and concerns and traumas for rape victims.

Are those really worse than having your life threatened? Are you serious? Have you ever had a gun pointed in your face?

I think you are letting defensive emotions get the better of you.

You accuse me of being unsympathetic, when in fact none of my remarks to this point in this thread have directly addressed rape victims. You equate my criticisms of some brands of feminism with a dismissal of the trauma and pain felt by real victims of rape. That's not fair or warranted.

Your snipping at me about manhaters and feminist rhetoric ignores that in fact there are feminists who claim that all sex is rape, that rape is about power, not sex, and that many young men are unfairly targeted and branded rapists by militant groups of vigilantes on college campuses after any woman claims to have been date-raped. Forgive me if to me that smacks of man-hating, but it does.

As a man, I assume no guilt for any other man's raping of a woman. Nevertheless, to hear so much talk on college campuses or on "Nightline" or elsewhere in the media, one would be justified in concluding that I am guilty by association. I have the Y chromosome, therefore, I am a potential rapist to some women. Pardon me if I do not appreciate being regarded as a potential felon simply because of my sex. Pardon me if I do not appreciate attempts to make me feel guilty because I cannot possibly know what it feels like to be raped.

Does your aggressive, slightly accusatory stance on the issue make you feel better? Do you think your stance might make me feel less welcome to speak openly about the issue? Does that make you happy?

Why is it OK for you to squelch my opinion on the matter? I'm not accusing you of anything. You, on the other hand, have deliberately tried to make me feel bad about it. Is that fair? Is it nice?

AS

[renata]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
[B]

I think you are doing a good job of making Segnosaurus' point, assuming he had one by posing his presumptively rhetorical question. You have placed rape on a sacred pedestal, and by doing so you presume that other victims of violent crimes are affected less by their experiences.

I have done no such thing. He asked what it might be a more serious crime, I told him my opinion on why. No sacred pedestal at all. I also do not denigrate any victim of a crime, do not talk abot hypocrites, and do not talk about special groups, or rhetoric. You, unfortunately have been the only one so far who have tried to bring politics and special interests into this.



Without a doubt, a violent rape is uniquely intimate, unlike any other violent crime in its personal intimacy. Without a doubt, that and the risk of pregnancy and disease carries with it unique fears and concerns and traumas for rape victims.


Which has been my point. So, we do not disagree.


Are those really worse than having your life threatened? Are you serious? Have you ever had a gun pointed in your face?


Do you want me to answer that? :) Because you might not like the answer. Remember where I came from, and when I came from there. Do you think, perhaps, as someone who lived through USSR trying to squelch seccession, sending soldiers and tanks down my streets, and Pamyat threatening pogroms and stonings I am somewhat familiar with concept of fear for personal safety. Look up 1989, USSR, riots. But I am not interested in upping the personal horror story index. Not my style, as you should know by now. I said I sympathize with your friend, as I would with victim of any violent offense. I am merely saying, as you confirmed above that victims of rape do indeed have a unique and particular trauma, in addition to the fear for their life and the immediate pain they feel during the rape, which sometimes also happens at gunpoint.



I think you are letting defensive emotions get the better of you.

I do not think I am getting emotional here.



You accuse me of being unsympathetic, when in fact none of my remarks to this point in this thread have directly addressed rape victims. You equate my criticisms of some brands of feminism with a dismissal of the trauma and pain felt by real victims of rape. That's not fair or warranted.

Almost every post here has inncluded a snipe at hypocrites, man haters, feminist rhetoric, protective holdovers. It seems a strange attitude in a thread about rape. I merely commented about that. Now who is being defensive?



Your snipping at me about manhaters and feminist rhetoric ignores that in fact there are feminists who claim that all sex is rape, that rape is about power, not sex, and that many young men are unfairly targeted and branded rapists by militant groups of vigilantes on college campuses after any woman claims to have been date-raped. Forgive me if to me that smacks of man-hating, but it does.

Yes, there is a lunatic fringe. But of course, once again we are not talking about lunatics, are we. Because then I would say you are ignoring predatory men, rape women with rohypnol, use the law to get off, that many young women are afraid to report rapes because they are maligned by society and by chauvinists. But you don't see me make those inflammatory comments, do you? Because that would make me focus on the fringe, on the exception rather than the the rule. Just because there are several radicals out there, does not mean the whole feminist movement is tainted, or that every discussion about rape needs to turn into this. Just as because there are radical environmentalists does not mean that every hike in the woods needs to talk about them, does it? Best discussions about the issues revolves around the middle, not about lunatics- on all sides.



As a man, I assume no guilt for any other man's raping of a woman. Nevertheless, to hear so much talk on college campuses or on "Nightline" or elsewhere in the media, one would be justified in concluding that I am guilty by association. I have the Y chromosome, therefore, I am a potential rapist to some women. Pardon me if I do not appreciate being regarded as a potential felon simply because of my sex. Pardon me if I do not appreciate attempts to make me feel guilty because I cannot possibly know what it feels like to be raped.

I think it is entirely shameful if anyone ever makes you feel that way. Besides, I do not think you cannot possibly know what it feels like to be raped. There is of course homosexual male rape, with most consequences, except the pregnancy. I think it is utterly fallacious for anyone to ever consider any man as a potential aggressor, and as someone who cannot imagine himself a victim of rape.



Does your aggressive, slightly accusatory stance on the issue make you feel better? Do you think your stance might make me feel less welcome to speak openly about the issue? Does that make you happy?


It was not my intent to be accusatory. If it came out that way, I hope you accept my apology for that portion of my post. I still stand in disagreement with you over your style in this, but I think you and I have disagreed in the past rather amicably, and can do over this matter as well.


Why is it OK for you to squelch my opinion on the matter? I'm not accusing you of anything. You, on the other hand, have deliberately tried to make me feel bad about it. Is that fair? Is it nice?

AS

Once again, not my intent to make you feel bad. But I was somewhat...surprised that your posts in this thread centered on the lunatic fringe, feminist rhetoric only. You seemed to forego majority of victims to focus your displeasure with a really tiny portion of feminist movement. You also seemed to first disagree with my list of differences...and then agree with it. My whole point was that the rape victims are prone to unique suffering. Perhaps, then perpetrators should have a different level of punishment. Perhaps not. Now we might get into a discussion over whether the punishment should be in proportion to the suffering of the victim, which I think is a different topic, but an interesting one, don't you think?:)


There was a fascinating article in the New Yorker that I know you subscribe to about 2 months back about evolution of rape laws, do you recall it? It talked about the jury selection, and how the worst jurors for prosecution for rape trials were elderly women, and the best men, who never buy into she asked for it BS. It also talked about evolution of rape laws and how some laws regarding consent changed only recently. I will have to look through my old stack to find the date.

[Tricky]

With all respect and adoration for Renata, I must agree with Amateur Scientist here. As a victim of a mugging, I have had many nighmares from it, although I admit they have diminished in recent years.

All situations are different. Some muggings are worse than some rapes. I have known rape victims who (apparently) recovered quickly and some who were permanently traumatized. The same with mugging victims. So it is simply impossible to put them each in a separate pile and claim they are different. A lot depends on circumstances.

But it is true that rape is something that gets all red-blooded people up in arms. Even suggested rape (or even flirting) was the cause of many lynchings in the South (southern US) in the post-civil war days. While it is an awful crime and should be punished severely, I also believe that there are a number of cases where unscrupulous females have use it to gain revenge against males.

But in no way do I think rape (or mugging) should be punished as severely as murder. While both may have horrible consequences, the victim is still alive, a condition that most of them prefer to death.

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tricky
With all respect and adoration for Renata, I must agree with Amateur Scientist here. As a victim of a mugging, I have had many nighmares from it, although I admit they have diminished in recent years.

All situations are different. Some muggings are worse than some rapes. I have known rape victims who (apparently) recovered quickly and some who were permanently traumatized. The same with mugging victims. So it is simply impossible to put them each in a separate pile and claim they are different. A lot depends on circumstances.

But it is true that rape is something that gets all red-blooded people up in arms. Even suggested rape (or even flirting) was the cause of many lynchings in the South (southern US) in the post-civil war days. While it is an awful crime and should be punished severely, I also believe that there are a number of cases where unscrupulous females have use it to gain revenge against males.

But in no way do I think rape (or mugging) should be punished as severely as murder. While both may have horrible consequences, the victim is still alive, a condition that most of them prefer to death.

Hey Tricky, just curious, where were you mugged?

[ImpyTimpy]

While both of your points are extremely well argued and quiet a pleasure to read, I must say I am siding with Amateur Scientist on this one. Renata, I think your comments do in fact trivialise serious crimes while making rape into something more unique. Whether that was your intention or not, as a third party, this is the impression I am given when reading through your material. AS's rebuttal seems to be fairly good although both of you appear to me as starting to become emotionally involved in this debate. Perhaps it is time to back off before the emotions get heated up even more and things are said which may be regretted later?

Finally, I think Tricky puts the point accross very well when he says:

But in no way do I think rape (or mugging) should be punished as severely as murder. While both may have horrible consequences, the victim is still alive, a condition that most of them prefer to death.

Couldn't agree more.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Tricky

All situations are different. Some muggings are worse than some rapes. I have known rape victims who (apparently) recovered quickly and some who were permanently traumatized. The same with mugging victims. So it is simply impossible to put them each in a separate pile and claim they are different. A lot depends on circumstances.


Yes, indeed, Tricky. I should have mentioned that I have seen and heard rape victims who were apparently not terribly traumatized. The alleged victim in my recent case was quite calm and matter of fact about it, and claimed to have slept through the whole thing, only to wake to a light grunting noise after the guy had already ejaculated in her. The physical evidence was unequivocal that he did ejaculate into her. Because of her highly implausible account, and because of her admissions that she had flirted, drunk, and danced with the guy earlier, and that apparently he knew where she lived in advance, the jury concluded that they had had a relationship that simply went bad. It was easy to get back at the guy by claiming he raped her.

Just last night I watched a re-run of a terrific show on Discovery Times about real cases in the state courts in San Francisco. One of them was a real rape trial with facts similar to mine. The victim claimed the defendant raped her in her sleep. She was very calm and matter of fact. The DA asked how she felt and her quick answer was "pissed off." She seemed to be no more pissed off than I was at age 23 when a guy plowed into my car and took the front door off and denied responsibility. I'm not equating the two events; I'm stating an observation about the lack of apparent trauma and horror she suffered.

In my case, to answer possible questions about her motive for bringing such a serious allegation without factual basis, I told the jury the story of Victoria Price, the despicable white Huntsville woman who wrongfully accused six of the nine black "Scottsboro Boys" of gang raping her on a freight train bound from Chattanooga to Memphis. She told her story under oath 16 times at 16 different trials of those poor teenage men. Only two of them eventually had their convictions overturned because their trials had been unfair. The rest spent decades, or died, behind bars for nothing. She never recanted or apologized. She took her reason for the false accusations to her grave decades later.


But it is true that rape is something that gets all red-blooded people up in arms. Even suggested rape (or even flirting) was the cause of many lynchings in the South (southern US) in the post-civil war days. While it is an awful crime and should be punished severely, I also believe that there are a number of cases where unscrupulous females have use it to gain revenge against males.


Absolutely. See above and read or watch To Kill a Mockingbird or Anatomy of a Murder. Lynch mobs routinely formed over such things. Hell, read John Grisham's A Time to Kill for the popular reaction and sentiment about the justified killing of a rapist by a girl's father. I'm not saying such feelings and reactions aren't normal or without any basis. Nevertheless, society is wrong to let those outraged by allegations of rape made by their loves ones to take matters into their own hands and exact vigilante justice. Such "justice" represents a complete breakdown of order and is an example of anarchy and lawlessness. It shouldn't be applauded in this or any other thread.


But in no way do I think rape (or mugging) should be punished as severely as murder. While both may have horrible consequences, the victim is still alive, a condition that most of them prefer to death.

Neither does the judicial or legal establishment.

AS

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tony


Hey Tricky, just curious, where were you mugged?
In Alabama, in the early 70's. I was fifteen and working a night job. I had missed the bus after work and was walking home through a "bad" part of town. I was tackled then surrounded by three black men. They looked like they were about to beat me up, and I said "peace, brother". That seemed to take them aback. They paused and said "you got any money?". I gave them everything I had (seven dollars). They took it and left. It was extremely traumatic for a teenage liberal (Yep. Even back then), and it made me rethink a lot of things. In the end I realized that they only wanted my money, but they would have probably done whatever it took to get it. My "peacemaking" and willingness to part with my money probably saved me from being beaten... or worse.

So I was one of the ones who was not severely traumatized by the mugging, but I can still see them in my mind, circling me, looking very dangerous and hateful. I wonder often what would have happened if I had done anything else.

[clk]

Originally posted by American

I have good ethics and basic moral values.

I nominate this quote for the "Joke of the Year Award".

[Tony]

Originally posted by Tricky

In Alabama, in the early 70's. I was fifteen and working a night job. I had missed the bus after work and was walking home through a "bad" part of town. I was tackled then surrounded by three black men. They looked like they were about to beat me up, and I said "peace, brother". That seemed to take them aback. They paused and said "you got any money?". I gave them everything I had (seven dollars). They took it and left. It was extremely traumatic for a teenage liberal (Yep. Even back then), and it made me rethink a lot of things. In the end I realized that they only wanted my money, but they would have probably done whatever it took to get it. My "peacemaking" and willingness to part with my money probably saved me from being beaten... or worse.

So I was one of the ones who was not severely traumatized by the mugging, but I can still see them in my mind, circling me, looking very dangerous and hateful. I wonder often what would have happened if I had done anything else.


Im glad you made it out ok. Take comfort in knowing those guys are either dead, in jail, or living in abject poverty.

[renata]

I have nothing but respect and friendship for AS, and I think he knows that- as well as Tricky and ImpyTimpy. If three people I like and respect tell me I am getting emotional, perhaps I am. :)

But explain this to me- if I told you, for example, that I had been a victim of child abuse, rape, pogrom threats, stoning, being chased and tank bearing down on me, would my arguments have more weight? Would that make you argue differently? Or make you change your mind? Why are the case stories about AS's friend, AS, or even you supposed to change your mind? I am not naive, I know a few things about muggings, and about rape, and about different variations thereof. We are not talking about particular stories, but about trends and averages.

With all respect, Tricky, the only people I saw marginilized here are feminists and "manhaters". When I locate the New Yorker article, I will post some info from it- some history about consent laws in the States, and about what the feminists did to change that. I sympathize with victims of mugging. I sympathize with victims of rape. I merely answered a question as to what sets victims of rape apart- they have to fear for their life longer, consequences are graver, they have the shame, they tend to be marginalized. And, it appears AS agrees with me that rape is unique. Nobody says there is no nightmares, fear from victims of muggings. I acknowledge that.

But as much as I hate appeal to emotion, imagine if a loved one is mugged, versus raped. Imagine your reactions as to how you would relate to her- would there be a difference to how you talk to her? And then you might know how the victims feel, and why there is a difference.

[American]

Originally posted by clk

I nominate this quote for the "Joke of the Year Award".


Yeah much thanks to all you blockheads for not backing me up! I love fighting one-man battles while you watch and do nothing.

That was the most egregious liar we've had since Hellcat, and chances are it was none other than Hellcat herself. All you guys did precisely dick to challenge her, despite obvious flaws in her posts. Instead you made me do all the dirty work fighting the little liar.

Thanks!

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by American
"Those frat guys raped me" reminds me of my friend... his name is John Smith.

But when I read you talking about killing and revenge fantasies, I was truly concerned.



My sincere apology if my skepticism is misplaced or completely wrong. Good night.

Zounds, you are even bettering yourself at being a jerk!

What an ass you are.

You are the reason people get away with rape American, this is the only crime where everybody gangs up and goes against the victim.

As I told Jedi, be sure to tell your mother, your sister and every womean you love that her charges of rape are false.

Be sure to tell every child who was ever assaulted that it was thier fault.

You have **** for brains, it is no wonder that you don't like people. You are just such ****.

Fart!

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by American



Yeah much thanks to all you blockheads for not backing me up! I love fighting one-man battles while you watch and do nothing.

That was the most egregious liar we've had since Hellcat, and chances are it was none other than Hellcat herself. All you guys did precisely dick to challenge her, despite obvious flaws in her posts. Instead you made me do all the dirty work fighting the little liar.

Thanks!

Gee, you look as happy as a dog with a turd in his mouth.

Even if it was hellcat, you support rape. Why don't you get a t-shirt that states how you think that rape is cool.

Fart!

[American]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Gee, you look as happy as a dog with a turd in his mouth.

Even if it was hellcat, you support rape. Why don't you get a t-shirt that states how you think that rape is cool.

Fart!


Fag.

[Suezoled]

That was the most egregious liar we've had since Hellcat, and chances are it was none other than Hellcat herself. All you guys did precisely dick to challenge her, despite obvious flaws in her posts. Instead you made me do all the dirty work fighting the little liar.

Let me repeat myself:
1.) Yes I was raped.
2.) Yes I has tried to commit suicide.
3.) yes I had cancer.
4.) Yes I live in Upstate New York.
(not neccesarily in that order)

I said 1-3 because I was through the Hellcat ID kit that these were earmarks that Hellcat left. I wanted to point out for future reference regular people have had these things. I said I had these things because it was similar to what Hellcat apparently said, but didn't think that would make me Hellcat.

I guess, this Hellcat person really did poison the well.

Why don't I answer American's questions? Because I won't answer to bullies, people who harass and accuse and have already decided I'm someone they think I am because they think so.

And since when is it anyone's duty to back you up, American?

[Tricky]

Originally posted by Tony
Im glad you made it out ok. Take comfort in knowing those guys are either dead, in jail, or living in abject poverty.
Why the hell would I take comfort out of that? Why wouldn't I (or by some strange twist of fate, you) hope that they outgrew this phase and became productive citizens? Perhaps in some O'Henry story, they would wind up becoming lawmen.

I don't want revenge. I don't want anyone dead or in jail or living in abject poverty, not even those who attacked me. Yes, at the time, I wish they had been caught and punished appropriately, (yes, I did call the police), but I'm not a vengeful person.

In my fantasy, I think that they heard my "peace brother" and they felt ashamed and never did such a thing again. Okay, I admit it is a fantasy. But maybe, just maybe, they realized that not all whiteys were hateful. Is that so impossible?

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by Tony
Thank you for sharing your story and answering my questions.

Thank You Tony for being a voice of reason, in this cess pool of a thread.

Hey American a Jerk!

Do you do more than assault women.

Hey schmuck , pull your head out of your ass and do your research, you will find that there are many ways that a rape kit can become un-useable in court.

Like veidence being left uattended for even a minute while in the ER.
Contamination of evidence is ofetn a problem because some police officer abused the eveidence and sneezed in it.
If you ahd half a brain you would go **** youself and do the world a favor.

remember to call your grandmother and tell her how you support rape.


Fart!

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata

With all respect, Tricky, the only people I saw marginilized here are feminists and "manhaters".


That's not an accurate assessment of my comments. This is what I said:

"I just wish a certain faction of feminists would stop being such manhaters." I was indeed referring to extremists. I did not label you or attempt to place yourself in that group. I was pre-empting anyone's calling me a misogynist, which is something I anticipated from my comments about lingering paternalism.

Apparently, my invocation of the term "feminist" set off bells within you as you self-indentify with the term. That's fine. That doesn't make you a member of that certain faction that I find to be man-haters. I am referring to extremists like Andrea Dworkin, a truly hateful person if there ever was one, and Catherine MacKinnnon, an equally hateful and truly twisted person whom does not deserve to teach law at a prestigious university. She holds despicable views about men.


When I locate the New Yorker article, I will post some info from it- some history about consent laws in the States, and about what the faminists did.


Please do. I must not have read that article. I do not remember it at all.

I merely answered a question as to what sets victims of rape apart- they have to fear for their life longer, consequences are graver, they have the shame, they tend to be marginalized. And, it appears AS agrees with me.



I agree only to the extent that true victims of violent rape must often experience a great deal of trauma which is unique in kind among the traumas suffered by the entire set of victims of violent crimes. It is not necessarily unique in degree. That is not what I intended to convey in my earlier remarks which you took as general agreement with your remarks.

Victims of non-violent rapes (yes, there are such victims, despite what Dworkin and MacKinnon maintain, not all rape or sex is violent) does not necessarily experience any fear for their lives. Indeed, I suspect most do not. I think you exaggerate the fear many supposedly have about contracting AIDS or other serious STDs. Apparently, the alleged victim in my recent case never even got tested, as she never mentioned it at trial or in my pretrial interview with her. The victim in the television show who was "pissed off" never mentioned fear of STDs or AIDS or any kind of fear at all in her trial or in her private discussions with the DA on camera. I find those glaring omissions at odds with your claim that it is common to rape victims in general.


But as much as I hate appeal to emotion, imagine if a loved one is mugged, versus raped. Imagine your reactions as to how you would relate to her- would there be a difference to how you talk to her? And then you might know how the victims feel, and why there is a difference.

Again, in my opinion, this is proving Segnosaurus' point.

I will toss out a wild speculative theory I just thought of for the sake of argument here. I wonder how much of our culture's outrage about rape is due to its repressive attitudes about sex in general, about how precious a young woman's virginity supposedly is, and about our general shame and guilt about sex in general.

Imagine if in our culture sex were no more special than driving. If that were the case, then would we regard rapists as no more disdainful as another driver who deliberately cuts us off in heavy traffic?

It's an extreme comparison, to be sure. Nevertheless, my point is that perhaps rape is so traumatic because we build it up to be so. We teach our little girls that their virtue is the most precious and valuable thing they own. Boys, on the other hand, are taught that sexual conquest is the most manly pursuit, and that being sexually promiscuous is a sign of success as a man. Those mixed messages are in inherent conflict, especially in the teenage years when hormones are raging and curiosity is at its peak and boys and girls mix unlike at any other time in their lives.

The powerful emotions sex can evoke, including the powerful emotions evoked by the sexual act itself, can lead to intense feelings and profound confusion among its participants. It should come as no surprise that many young men will misunderstand signals, that some of them will let their hormones get the better of them and their senses of decency. It should come as no surprise that some of them will attempt to dominate in the implied competition for sexual conquest among their peers, and in so doing be callous or indifferent to the desires or feelings of their female targets of conquest.

It should come as no surprise that some girls will inevitably get hurt and/or abused by some of those boys. It should come as no surprise that some girls who may have given off plenty of "go" signals later regret getting caught up in the moment and rationalize it away as date-rape.

Does our sexually repressive culture breed some rapes under some of the circumstances I've described?

(This is not meant to ignore the fact that rape exists in nearly every human culture, and that it exists among many higher species of animals, including the other great apes).

Just some food for thought, if anyone cares to continue with this inflammatory subject.

AS

[American]

Originally posted by Suezoled


Let me repeat myself:
1.) Yes I was raped.
2.) Yes I has tried to commit suicide.
3.) yes I had cancer.
4.) Yes I live in Upstate New York.
(not neccesarily in that order)


Why don't I answer American's questions? Because I won't answer to bullies, people who harass and accuse and have already decided I'm someone they think I am because they think so.

And since when is it anyone's duty to back you up, American?


Sylvia, your story sounds like the BS that it is, your circumstances are way beyond plausibility, your demeanor is nothing like a rape survivor, you wrote about people you shouldn't know about were you not Hellcat, and you refuse to describe ANY landmarks that could verify if you've ever been in Upstate New York.

You were not raped like you describe, your supposed suicide attempts are irrelevant, as is your supposed cancer, and you are DEFINITELY NOT anywhere in New York (Upstate, Downstate, East, West, Up-your-ass-state). You are a liar.

[American]

Originally posted by Dancing David

Hey American a Jerk!

Do you do more than assault women.

Hey schmuck , pull your head out of your ass and do your research, you will find that there are many ways that a rape kit can become un-useable in court.

Like veidence being left uattended for even a minute while in the ER.
Contamination of evidence is ofetn a problem because some police officer abused the eveidence and sneezed in it.
If you ahd half a brain you would go **** youself and do the world a favor.

remember to call your grandmother and tell her how you support rape.


Fart!


Fag.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata
I have nothing but respect and friendship for AS, and I think he knows that- as well as Tricky and ImpyTimpy. If three people I like and respect tell me I am getting emotional, perhaps I am. :)



Thanks, Renata. I like and respect you very much as well, as you know. I must admit that I was taken aback by what I felt were unwarranted attacks and insults directed at me. I was hurt by your lashing out at me.

I'm sorry if I overreacted, and if I insulted you. I accept your apology to me.

AS

[neutrino_cannon]

http://www.council.nyc.ny.us/textfiles/Int%200281-2002A.htm

In 2002, 2,013 rapes were reported to the New York City Police Department.


http://www.health.state.ny.us/nysdoh/cancer/table1.pdf

Incidence of cancer in New York.


Given the number of rapes, in one year mind you, against the incidence of cancer, and the fact the events are over several years, I do not find this at all implausible.

We are often too quick to snap. What harm is there in listening to a story, even if ficticious, and not immediatly criticizing it because it bears resemblances that make us feel uncomfortable?

Just because god supports rape (2 samuel 12:11) doesn't give you permission.

[kittynh]

well, I try to not walk in someone elses shoes.
Doesn't work, and I just respect and take their word for it.

I knew the guys I testified for were guilty. But I had to tell the truth and trust the justice system, flawed as it sometimes is.

I could have lied, I could have left town. I think rape is a terrible crime, but that didn't justify my breaking the law or my own moral code.
Of course, guys can be raped and I think I'd like to hear from that perspective. Would he rather be raped or mugged?

[renata]

Originally posted by renata


There was a fascinating article in the New Yorker that I know you subscribe to about 2 months back about evolution of rape laws, do you recall it? It talked about the jury selection, and how the worst jurors for prosecution for rape trials were elderly women, and the best men, who never buy into she asked for it BS. It also talked about evolution of rape laws and how some laws regarding consent changed only recently. I will have to look through my old stack to find the date


....and from another post....



With all respect, Tricky, the only people I saw marginilized here are feminists and "manhaters". When I locate the New Yorker article, I will post some info from it- some history about consent laws in the States, and about what the feminists did to change that.

Found it!
New Yorker, September 1, 2003 Jeffrey Toobin, Annals of Law: The Consent Defense pp. 40-44

It is not online, so I cannot link to it. Let me type some important points from it, and paraphrase some others.


For centirues the law regarder women as less than trustworthy witnesses, especially when it came to rape. For a man to be proven guilty, a woman could not be the sole witness to her own rape, so there were unique barriers to cionviction such as requirement of corroborating evidence. The most important justification for this treatment of rape came from Lord Chief Justice Matthew Hale, a sevenmtheetn century English jurist who said "rape is an accusation easlity to be made and hard to be proved, and harder to be defended by the party accused, tho never so innocent." Hale made this statement in the late sixteen hundreds, and three centuries later judges in many American courtrooms were still quoting it almost verbaim in their instructions to juries in rape cases.
Faced with these legal hurdles, many prosecutors more or less ignored the crime. In 1969, for example, police in New York City made 1,085 arrest for rape and only eighteen men were convicted.

The article goes on to quite Linda Fairstein, former head of Sec Crimes Prosecution Unit in the Manhattan District Attorney's office, who says they had to prove three elements of the crime
-someone besides the victim identifying the attacker going to or leaving the scene
-independent proof of sexual nature of the attack, before hospitals had evidence collection kits
-force, victims had to have bruises, so victim could not submit to a gun or knife.

Article goes on to explain the basis of need to show virtue- that women had to actively resist their attacker, or it was not rape.


According to an opinion by New York's highest court, in 1918, "Rape is not commiteted unless the woman oppose the man to the utmost limit of her power." This was still the law a half century later.

It also describes how defense attorneys would go into victim's sexual history and harass them to prevent victims from coming forward.

Then the article describes how the woman's movement of 1970's made the reform of the rape laws its top priority. First to go were the corroboration laws. Again, it quotes Linda Fairstein.
"The law doesn't require victims of other crimes- of assault, of robberies- to be corroborated, so neither should rape," Fairstein says. "Once you have a credible victim, what she gets is her day in court. It doesn't give rape victims an advantage; it just puts them on an even footing with victims of other crimes." This was a revolutionary notion. An editorial in the Times in 1972 had asserted that a system in which "any man could be convicted of rape solely on the unsupported charge of any woman is...abhorrent. " Nut by the mid-seventies most corroboration requirements were gone.

The article then goes on to duscyss how the requirement that a woman must protect her virtue was ditched, and development of rape shield laws.

It then goes in to the shadow of mixing of race and rape, and the fact that in the 50's and 60's liberals stayed away from the issues because they did not want to make the convictions easier, to avoid more lynchings. It says of he 455 men executed for rape in the US between 1930 and 1976, 405 where black, and almost all where charged with rape of white women. However, liberal feminists made alliances with victim's right movements, which was a conservative organization. In 1977 Supreme Court prohibited the use of death penalty in rape cases, lessening the stakes.


So this is a brief history of rape laws in US, and this is what feminists did to change it.

[Tricky]

Originally posted by renata
I have nothing but respect and friendship for AS, and I think he knows that- as well as Tricky and ImpyTimpy. If three people I like and respect tell me I am getting emotional, perhaps I am. :)
It is impossible not to get emotional. It is a very difficult thing to talk about. As a person who likes and respects you, I do not find fault.

Originally posted by renata
But explain this to me- if I told you, for example, that I had been a victim of child abuse, rape, pogrom threats, stoning, being chased and tank bearing down on me, would my arguments have more weight? Would that make you argue differently? Or make you change your mind? Why are the case stories about AS's friend, AS, or even you supposed to change your mind? I am not naive, I know a few things about muggings, and about rape, and about different variations thereof. We are not talking about particular stories, but about trends and averages.
I cannot deny that such a thing is true. I have family experience with a female who was sexually abused (though not raped) as a young child and has never gotten over it, though she is fifty years old now. Believe me, I do not dismiss the long term effects of such crimes. I also agree that society tends to look askance at women who cry rape, as if they somehow deserved it. I find that callousness abhorant.

But I also know rape victims who (as AS point out) have gotten over it quite easily. One of these is also in my family. Perhaps you are right that the numbers say that rape is harder to overcome than mugging. There may be many reasons for this, including the tendency to distrust rape claims and of course the tactic by lawyers to discredit rape victims. This is a great wrong of society, but I do not know any way to eliminate it without depriving others of the right to defend themselves. It is one of those terrible "no win" situations.
Originally posted by renata
With all respect, Tricky, the only people I saw marginilized here are feminists and "manhaters". When I locate the New Yorker article, I will post some info from it- some history about consent laws in the States, and about what the feminists did to change that. I sympathize with victims of mugging. I sympathize with victims of rape. I merely answered a question as to what sets victims of rape apart- they have to fear for their life longer, consequences are graver, they have the shame, they tend to be marginalized. And, it appears AS agrees with me that rape is unique. Nobody says there is no nightmares, fear from victims of muggings. I acknowledge that.
You are correct, and I did not mean to marginalize your point. It is true that rape is a crime that is almost always against females. Anybody can be mugged, but I have rarely heard of a man being raped by women, and if it happened, I cannot imagine that it would be a particularly traumatic experience.

But most of us have had various traumatic experiences of one kind or another. We get over them and move on. I pity those who can't move on, but I do not give them an exception because of the particular experience. Admittedly, some people can handle things better than others. Life is funny.

Originally posted by renata
But as much as I hate appeal to emotion, imagine if a loved one is mugged, versus raped. Imagine your reactions as to how you would relate to her- would there be a difference to how you talk to her? And then you might know how the victims feel, and why there is a difference.
I have been in both situations and my response was similar. I think possibly one of the worst things about being a rape victim is the fear that others will treat you differently. Fear that they will treat you like sluts or will overprotect you. I think you should treat them with compassion, but make clear that you love/like them no less because of their ordeal. I know that this is not the way the world treats them, so that is not a universal solution. But you do what you can.

[Suezoled]

Sylvia, your story sounds like the BS that it is, your circumstances are way beyond plausibility, your demeanor is nothing like a rape survivor, you wrote about people you shouldn't know about were you not Hellcat, and you refuse to describe ANY landmarks that could verify if you've ever been in Upstate New York.

You were not raped like you describe, your supposed suicide attempts are irrelevant, as is your supposed cancer, and you are DEFINITELY NOT anywhere in New York (Upstate, Downstate, East, West, Up-your-ass-state). You are a liar.

My demeanor is nothing like a rape survivor? Did I miss the "how rape survivors should act" class?
I wrote about people I shouldn't know if I weren't Hellcat? Must I repeat myself (again)? For Ed's sake, I lurked, and there have been threads about these people. Who else did I mention? jedi Knight? Ghengis Pwn? These other people were mentioned, too, in other threads.

Maybe it's a bit much for you to handle. People can have stuff happen in their lives, whether or not you believe it, American.

Oh and New York, Upstate, as you insist: I work in Albany about 2 exits off the State University of New York Albany (SUNY Albany) to us locals. You can catch a show at the Knickerbocker Arena (renamed Pepsi several years ago). One of the largest malls in Crossgates, at the end of the Northway. Or you can trek on over to Saratoga Downtown (30minutes on the Northway). The summer SPAC (Saratoga Performing Arts Center) season is over, but there are still local talents playing the clubs up and down Broadway (E. O'Dyer's is a blast when it hosts Sirsy) Stop by Wheat Fields, which makes their own fresh pasta, or Professor Moriarty's, which has outdoor seating in the summer. If you want good Japanese, Mino's Sushi Bar is on Caroline Street, but only at special hours. Don't worry, you don't need a reservation. (Actually, if you're a cute girl, the owner, Mino, might give you a free dessert.) When it's summer, the Saratoga racetrack is fun, if you like betting and the track. The rest of the year on and off can be busy, depending on if there's a convention at the City Center. If you do stay in Saratoga, the Gideon Putnam Inn is cute and quaint (just check for needles under the matresses, okay, because those rock stars are known to leave junk like that). If you need art supplies, Suave Faire is on Broadway. If you mention you're a student, a senior citizen, a parent, (basically, if you're breathing) you can get a 10% discount on art suplies at the desk. Paul is owner and proprieter of Celtic Treasures, which brings stuff from Ireland and sells in the US. For cheap eats you can go to Subway or the Bruegger's Bagels (across the street). Mrs. London's bread shop makes great cheese bread, but you have to get there mad early to buy a loaf. Collect basewball cards? Cargile Collectibles opened last year. Harry is an honest dealer, and very kind. He will explain everything he can about cards if you want. There's a Border's Bookstore, but if you want good comics or anime, go to Spa City Comics. If you like horse stuff, Equine Sports Center is not far from the track. You can pick up brushes, ointments, etc. No fee to go and in park and browse. Just don't wander or security will nab you.

;)

[American]

You had ALL DAY to glean that off the internet. You provided ZERO landmarks for 12 hours after I asked for ONE.

Further, we now need someone from that area to verify what you wrote, late as it was. (Not one of your sock puppets of course.)

[Mr.Kitchen]

I wish I had been mugged instead.

If i had been mugged then I wouldn't have panic attacks, I wouldn't hate myself, adn i wouldn't feel like I did something wrong. I would have graduated this semester instead of likely having to drop a class or two including senior project.

AS I can tell it has nevered happened to you, since you don't know what it is like. I hope it never happens to you, I wish noone else knew what this was like. Instead a shockingly large amount of the female friends I have it has happened too.

I have filed charges and I think the trial is set for then 28th.

[renata]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
[B]

That's not an accurate assessment of my comments. This is what I said:

"I just wish a certain faction of feminists would stop being such manhaters." I was indeed referring to extremists. I did not label you or attempt to place yourself in that group. I was pre-empting anyone's calling me a misogynist, which is something I anticipated from my comments about lingering paternalism.

Apparently, my invocation of the term "feminist" set off bells within you as you self-indentify with the term. That's fine. That doesn't make you a member of that certain faction that I find to be man-haters. I am referring to extremists like Andrea Dworkin, a truly hateful person if there ever was one, and Catherine MacKinnnon, an equally hateful and truly twisted person whom does not deserve to teach law at a prestigious university. She holds despicable views about men.


It appeared to me you talked somewhat sarcastically about "frail women", and and precious "virtue", and need to defend their honor, and double standards in male/female rape, and "feminist BS". After my reply, you mentioned "feminist rhetoric we've been fed for the last 20 years". So it seemed to me there was a bit of a sore point about feminist rhetoric, or BS- not just extremists.





Please do. I must not have read that article. I do not remember it at all.



Posted in a prior post.



I agree only to the extent that true victims of violent rape must often experience a great deal of trauma which is unique in kind among the traumas suffered by the entire set of victims of violent crimes. It is not necessarily unique in degree. That is not what I intended to convey in my earlier remarks which you took as general agreement with your remarks.

I have known victims of date rape who suffer flashbacks, betrayel, and are unable to date or trust for lengthy periods of time. I dealt with a victim from a violent stranger rape, who was over it in weeks, she was happy it was someone she did not know, because it meant she never had to see him again, it was a fluke. Generalizations are very difficult here.

And if you did not agree with me, so be it. Not the first time, not the last :)



Victims of non-violent rapes (yes, there are such victims, despite what Dworkin and MacKinnon maintain, not all rape or sex is violent) does not necessarily experience any fear for their lives. Indeed, I suspect most do not. I think you exaggerate the fear many supposedly have about contracting AIDS or other serious STDs. Apparently, the alleged victim in my recent case never even got tested, as she never mentioned it at trial or in my pretrial interview with her. The victim in the television show who was "pissed off" never mentioned fear of STDs or AIDS or any kind of fear at all in her trial or in her private discussions with the DA on camera. I find those glaring omissions at odds with your claim that it is common to rape victims in general.


You take one victim, whose alleged assailant you defended, succesfully, and use her as an example of most victims of rape? Forgive me if I do not take that example as adequate generalization. In my training, and in my experience I found that STDs, pregnancy is one of the major fears. At least it was at the time I was doing the peer counseling. It may have changed, and I am afraid I do not have studies to back it up.



Again, in my opinion, this is proving Segnosaurus' point.

I will toss out a wild speculative theory I just thought of for the sake of argument here. I wonder how much of our culture's outrage about rape is due to its repressive attitudes about sex in general, about how precious a young woman's virginity supposedly is, and about our general shame and guilt about sex in general.

Most rape victims have nothing to do with virginity, as I am sure you know. And I am not sure how you think it has to prove Seismosauraus (not Segnosaurus!) point. I merely, again point out the different psychological and physiological effect the crime has on the victims of different crimes.



Imagine if in our culture sex were no more special than driving. If that were the case, then would we regard rapists as no more disdainful as another driver who deliberately cuts us off in heavy traffic?

It's an extreme comparison, to be sure. Nevertheless, my point is that perhaps rape is so traumatic because we build it up to be so. We teach our little girls that their virtue is the most precious and valuable thing they own. Boys, on the other hand, are taught that sexual conquest is the most manly pursuit, and that being sexually promiscuous is a sign of success as a man. Those mixed messages are in inherent conflict, especially in the teenage years when hormones are raging and curiosity is at its peak and boys and girls mix unlike at any other time in their lives.

The powerful emotions sex can evoke, including the powerful emotions evoked by the sexual act itself, can lead to intense feelings and profound confusion among its participants. It should come as no surprise that many young men will misunderstand signals, that some of them will let their hormones get the better of them and their senses of decency. It should come as no surprise that some of them will attempt to dominate in the implied competition for sexual conquest among their peers, and in so doing be callous or indifferent to the desires or feelings of their female targets of conquest.

It should come as no surprise that some girls will inevitably get hurt and/or abused by some of those boys. It should come as no surprise that some girls who may have given off plenty of "go" signals later regret getting caught up in the moment and rationalize it away as date-rape.

Does our sexually repressive culture breed some rapes under some of the circumstances I've described?

(This is not meant to ignore the fact that rape exists in nearly every human culture, and that it exists among many higher species of animals, including the other great apes).

Just some food for thought, if anyone cares to continue with this inflammatory subject.


I am thinking about this. How does this theory apply to homosexual rape, you think?

I also understand that some date rape is of course signal crossing, morning after regret. But it seems a little strange that the discussion is frequently steering that way. Why is it that sometimes when someone says rape, some people think- horror, violent rape, and some think- date rape, mixed signals, feminist rhetoric. I am just curious.

It seems, AS, that we are talking on two parallel tracks. My thoughts, based on my experience are on one, yours on the other. My questions, which you took as insults, although you know my high regard for you :) stemmed from a surprise about that. Can you tell me about that?

[renata]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


Thanks, Renata. I like and respect you very much as well, as you know. I must admit that I was taken aback by what I felt were unwarranted attacks and insults directed at me. I was hurt by your lashing out at me.

I'm sorry if I overreacted, and if I insulted you. I accept your apology to me.

AS

Did you miss my prior apology, on page 2?

And I accept yours, as well. I guess, like I said before, I did not understand why we were talking past each other, and it is an emotional subject. But two friends can talk about even inflammatory subjects. Calmly. Slowly. Taking deep breaths. I guess those who wanted to see a fight between has have to make other plans :D

But Tricky and Impy...traitors...you I do not forgive! ;) Siding with the guy in the Spiderman suit and not with the girl with the naked avatar. Short sighted, my friends, very short sighted..... :nope:

[Chareen]

Originally posted by Tony
What should be the punishment for a rapist? I am thinking death. What are your thoughts on the matter?

Death is an easy way out for them. The victim has to live with the horrid memory.

Here is my solution, Graphic but I think it would be effective. It would only work for men assilents though.

Convicted rapists and child molestors should have their testicles nailed to the floor of a vacant building, given a dull knife and the building should be then be lit on fire. Seems like an adequate punishment to me.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Mr.Kitchen
I wish I had been mugged instead.

If i had been mugged then I wouldn't have panic attacks, I wouldn't hate myself, adn i wouldn't feel like I did something wrong. I would have graduated this semester instead of likely having to drop a class or two including senior project.

AS I can tell it has nevered happened to you, since you don't know what it is like. I hope it never happens to you, I wish noone else knew what this was like. Instead a shockingly large amount of the female friends I have it has happened too.

I have filed charges and I think the trial is set for then 28th.

I do not wish to diminish your trauma or pain. I do not think it fair of you to assume what I know or not, however.

I could just as easily accuse you of not knowing what it is like to be locked in jail without bond for a year waiting trial for something you didn't do. I won't. I've lived that pain and anguish with many of my clients. It's agonizing.

I strongly dislike it when persons assume the moral high ground and an air of self-righteousness. I'm not accusing you of doing that, but you might be coming close. I just hope you recognize that accusations can be made easily sometimes, and defending one's self against them can sometimes be next to impossible, especially in cases of rape or child abuse or molestation. In such cases, very often the accusation alone, even without a conviction, is enough to ruin the accused's life forever.

If you were violently raped or otherwise abused and taken advantage of, then I sympathize and wish you a speedy recovery, both physically and emotionally, from your pain. I hope that you get justice in the courts, if that's what you seek.

I do not appreciate being targeted for accusations of heartlessness or compassionlessness due to my stance here and due to my profession. Defense attorneys are not responsible, legally or morally, for the actions of their clients.

I have been attempting in this thread to get others with a bloodlust against those accused of rape to understand that very often there is another side to making an accusation. False accusations are a very real occurrence and a very real problem. Their consequences can be just as devastating to their victims, or even perhaps more so, as rape can be to its victims. Having seen those consequences up close, perhaps I have a better appreciation of them than many others.

Perhaps you understand and appreciate that point, or perhaps you do not.

AS

[Suezoled]

You had ALL DAY to glean that off the internet. You provided ZERO landmarks for 12 hours after I asked for ONE.

Well, looking past the fact you were already calling me a liar (and calling me Hellcat before then, even), you did get your answer. As for verifying what I said... go to it skippy. :p

[renata]

Originally posted by Tricky

It is impossible not to get emotional. It is a very difficult thing to talk about. As a person who likes and respects you, I do not find fault.



Thank you :)



I cannot deny that such a thing is true. I have family experience with a female who was sexually abused (though not raped) as a young child and has never gotten over it, though she is fifty years old now. Believe me, I do not dismiss the long term effects of such crimes. I also agree that society tends to look askance at women who cry rape, as if they somehow deserved it. I find that callousness abhorant.

But I also know rape victims who (as AS point out) have gotten over it quite easily. One of these is also in my family. Perhaps you are right that the numbers say that rape is harder to overcome than mugging. There may be many reasons for this, including the tendency to distrust rape claims and of course the tactic by lawyers to discredit rape victims. This is a great wrong of society, but I do not know any way to eliminate it without depriving others of the right to defend themselves. It is one of those terrible "no win" situations.

You are correct. As I mentioned earlier, to Toni, one lie casts a shadow on everyone. One false accusation of rape casts a shadow on all women who claim they are victims and an all men accused of rape, rightly or wrongly. And there is no way to fix it. But if we could be a little more compassionate, not go into- most date rape is made up- all men are predators mentality, I think it would be best. The fact is, women who are victims are afraid to share their stories, even with their loved ones, because they are afraid they will be cast in an unfavorable light. I heard many stories, freely offered of people who were in car accidents, or who were mugged. Other than close friends, or in my capacity as peer counselor no woman told me of abuse.


You are correct, and I did not mean to marginalize your point. It is true that rape is a crime that is almost always against females. Anybody can be mugged, but I have rarely heard of a man being raped by women, and if it happened, I cannot imagine that it would be a particularly traumatic experience.

But most of us have had various traumatic experiences of one kind or another. We get over them and move on. I pity those who can't move on, but I do not give them an exception because of the particular experience. Admittedly, some people can handle things better than others. Life is funny.

The women who get over it, are strong and I think it is wonderful. But the women who don't deserve care and respect as well.
I do not think I asked for an exception. The question was, why it tends to be treated as a more serious crime, I answered my thoughts on it.


I have been in both situations and my response was similar. I think possibly one of the worst things about being a rape victim is the fear that others will treat you differently. Fear that they will treat you like sluts or will overprotect you. I think you should treat them with compassion, but make clear that you love/like them no less because of their ordeal. I know that this is not the way the world treats them, so that is not a universal solution. But you do what you can.

Ah, you got the right answer...as far as these things go. Men tend to either smother or distance and view victims with suspicion. One girl told me her boyfriends refused to touch her and have sex with her, fear of STDs. Rational, maybe, but very hurtful to her. This, of course, does not extend to boyfriends. Victims of abuse, rape have many fears about stepping forward, reactions by relatives, friends, not to mention legal system. And frequently they are justified. A friend of mine had some slight molestations as a child by a close relative. No serious abuse, no penetration. She decided to tell her mother when she was 19-20. Her mother was in shock, said she would have noticed. The girl produced the relative, who confessed under pressure. Mother was devastated, as it reflected badly on her parenting skills. A few years later, mother confonted the girl and said she thought about it a lot, and decided the girl made it all up to show she was a bad mother, and tricked the relative into confessing. Relative happily retracted the confession, under mother's pressure. Girl is devastated. If she can't get her own mother to believe her, who will? Relative, by the way is not even on the mother's side.

[Mr.Kitchen]

I am not accusing you of being heartless just underinformed. And yes you are right it is terrible it is to be falslly accussed. Hopefully the legal system can sort it out.

I am not reacting to the defense of the accussed. I am just trying to let you know why what happened to me is different than being mugged.

The man who did it to me was not armed and he did not threaten violence yet i still froze up. The fact that io couldn't protect myself plagues me.

But you are right that a fasle accussation can ruins someones life.

[renata]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


I strongly dislike it when persons assume the moral high ground and an air of self-righteousness.


I agree with you entirely on this, which is why I dislike it when people bring personal stories to supplement their points in very sensitive threads like this.

However, emotionally manipulative as the question may be....is it fair to ask, whether given the same degree of physical damage a person would prefer to be raped or mugged?

I think most people would choose mugging. I would. Would that give us some insight into Seismosaurus' question?

By the way, I still want us to discuss whether punishment should be in proportion to the suffering of the victim. (Did you miss that post of mine on page 2?:)) It is a bit of a drift, but an interesting one, I think.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata


It appeared to me you talked somewhat sarcastically about "frail women", and and precious "virtue", and need to defend their honor, and double standards in male/female rape, and "feminist BS". After my reply, you mentioned "feminist rhetoric we've been fed for the last 20 years". So it seemed to me there was a bit of a sore point about feminist rhetoric, or BS- not just extremists.



I'm just going to respond to this part for now, as it is time for bed.

Here is where the discussion took an unfortunate nasty detour:

Originally posted by Segnosaur

editorial note to Renata--note this is in fact Segnosaur, not Seismosaurus!

On a related topic... I have wondered, what is it that makes people treat sexual assault as a more serious crime than say a mugging, where the actual physical damage is approximately equivalent? I'm not saying that sexual assult shouldn't be treated as a more serious crime; I am just curious about the reasons why it would be. Is it a biological thing (a mechanism to prevent against children from unsuitable mates), or is it more of a society thing? (Some holdover from the days when people thought women were 'frail' things that should be protected.)



(Now, here is my original response, which I believe is quite responsive to his parenthetical question at the very end):

That's a very fair and legitimate question. I tend to think it's probably a holdover from more paternalistic days.

(this next part is not meant to be sarcastic at all, but rather a restatement of the old, paternalistic line about attitudes towards women. I'm answering his rhetorical question about our modern attitudes about rape being a holdover from that era.)

Yes, women are frail, their "virtue" is precious, and their honor is to be defended.

Now, don't you think the above view is patronizing towards women? I do. It was the commonly held view at the turn of the century and well into the 20th Century in most Western societies.

****************

(This next part is simply a contrast to paternalism. Our remaining paternalism in culture regards boys as able to fend for themselves and not as sexual victims. It is in fact a double standard, as we do not regard young girls in the same fashion. This is to say we don't give the same credit we do boys.)

Witness the relative lack of outrage over the "rape" of a 14 year old boy by his adult woman teacher.

(The relative lack of outrage over the teacher--I can't remember her name now--was indeed remarkable. There were many who called for a lenient sentence for her. I seriously doubt anyone would have called for the same had the gender roles been reversed. Do you? This next bit is meant to demonstrate that our holdover paternalism is inconsistent with feminist slogans such as those below. If women are so strong, then why are they ever victims of rape by men? Shouldn't they be able to kick their asses? Clearly, the second claim is not true, nor is it true that anything women can do men can do better. They are equally preposterous claims. That's why I called it feminist BS. It simply isn't true. How many women have bench pressed 600 lb.? How many men have given birth to a child? See? Stupid. BS. Calling such ridiculous claims BS doesn't make me a misogynist, now does it? Nor does it make me unsympathetic to rape victims, or to victims of any other violent crimes.)

Yeah, it's a cultural holdover. It's completely inconsistent with the "I am woman; hear me roar" and "anything a man can do a woman can do better" feminist BS.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by renata


I agree with you entirely on this, which is why I dislike it when people bring personal stories to supplement their points in very sensitive threads like this.



In my defense, I brought up my friend's mugging at gunpoint only as a counterexample to show that a victim of a mugging is nothing to sneeze at. One can be in genuine fear for one's life. Many mugging victims end up dead. I didn't care to research to look for any other counterexample or any statistics. Call me lazy.

My own mugging, by contrast, contained no degree of fear at all, as I was too drunk. I thought it an appropriate contrast to my friend's. I suffered no ill effects of it other than losing my wallet and being slightly annoyed on my cab ride home. When I awoke the next morning hungover, for several minutes I was convinced that I had simply dreamt the mugging. I was only annoyed to discover the truth solely because I had to reconstruct the contents of my wallet. No trauma at all. Ever since, it has been little more than a silly, somewhat embarrassing story for me to tell on rare occasions.

I certainly didn't intend to elicit any sympathy with my own silly story. It wasn't much of a mugging from my perspective, althought legally it was definitely a felony robbery.

AS

[renata]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


I'm just going to respond to this part for now, as it is time for bed.

Here is where the discussion took an unfortunate nasty detour:

Good night. I was utterly sure it was Seismosaurus! I thought I checked! Hmmmm... That does not bode well, but at least you did not gloat :)

Actually, I felt the dicussion took a nasty turn when you responded to my response to Seismo..I mean Segnosaur. My first post was merely a response to him, with a line agreeing that male rape is just as outrageous as female rape, and thinking otherwise is hypocrisy. After your commentary about the rhetoric, we exchanged several...well more sharply worded posts than usual. But luckily, we respect each other enough to quickly get out of that.



(Now, here is my original response, which I believe is quite responsive to his parenthetical question at the very end)

That's a very fair and legitimate question. I tend to think it's probably a holdover from more paternalistic days.

(this next part is not meant to be sarcastic at all, but rather a restatement of the old, paternalistic line about attitudes towards women. I'm answering his rhetorical question about our modern attitudes about rape being a holdover from that era.)

Yes, women are frail, their "virtue" is precious, and their honor is to be defended.

Now, don't you think the above view is patronizing towards women? I do. It was the commonly held view at the turn of the century and well into the 20th Century in most Western societies.


Ah, but the way you stated it, appeared sarcastic. If you say you meant something different than what I read into it, I accept it and apologize. Thanks for the clarification.


****************

(This next part is simply a contrast to paternalism. Our remaining paternalism in culture regards boys as able to fend for themselves and not as sexual victims. It is in fact a double standard, as we do not regard young girls in the same fashion. This is to say we don't give the same credit we do boys.)

Witness the relative lack of outrage over the "rape" of a 14 year old boy by his adult woman teacher.

(The relative lack of outrage over the teacher--I can't remember her name now--was indeed remarkable. There were many who called for a lenient sentence for her. I seriously doubt anyone would have called for the same had the gender roles been reversed. Do you?

I am not sure I recall the case you mean. Is it the case where the teacher had the affair with the boy, went to prison, was let out, had sex with him again, and went back to prison? I think it is abuse of chil, trust and awful. Hence my comment that not everyone is a hypocrite. So far we agree.



This next bit is meant to demonstrate that our holdover paternalism is inconsistent with feminist slogans such as those below. If women are so strong, then why are they ever victims of rape by men? Shouldn't they be able to kick their asses? Clearly, the second claim is not true, nor is it true that anything women can do men can do better. They are equally preposterous claims. That's why I called it feminist BS. It simply isn't true. How many women have bench pressed 600 lb.? How many men have given birth to a child? See? Stupid. BS. Calling such ridiculous claims BS doesn't make me a misogynist, now does it? Nor does it make me unsympathetic to rape victims, or to victims of any other violent crimes.)
Yeah, it's a cultural holdover. It's completely inconsistent with the "I am woman; hear me roar" and "anything a man can do a woman can do better" feminist BS.


I think you misconstrue feminist slogans. Feminists know women are not as physically strong as the men, of course, and will always be at a disadvantage when it comes to rape. However, what they try to do is even up the playing field as much as possible. No, women can't bench press 600 lbs. But they can take self defense, learn to kick a man in the crotch, and do many other things. Will it always save them, or even save them many times? Of course not. But will it save a woman sometimes? Yes. Just because there are many biological differences, does not mean women everywhere should throw in the towel and abandon all hope. Fight as much as you can, when you can, I say.

I do not think "anything a man can do a woman can do better" is feminist BS. Remember the origins of those slogans. Don't you think they gave hopes to millions of girls, who are now athletes, doctors, lawyers? Without the movement, it would not have happened. Yes, it is quite obvious women cannot do some things men can, and men cannot do some things women can. But those slogans are not useless. They did something extraordinarily useful- inspired a generation of women to educate themselves, and to enter careers previously almost closed to them.

However, although I appreciate your clarifications, I want you to review your post and see the negative impression it gives out along with your subsequent points. Please see how it could be interpreted as anti feminist and unsympathetic. Hence my puzzlement.

[Cleopatra]

Ok. Mercutio and I are flaming each other for fun, why don't you join us to that innocent thread about shared vacation? :D

[Cleopatra]

Amateur Scientist

I thought that this thread would die in nonsense that's why yesterday I decided to take my time in replying you. Now the discussion took a different path.

Thanks for your detailed reply to my question.After reading this second account regarding your case, I think that I was right to congratulate you, it seems to me that it was one of those cases that the representation made the difference. You saved this man's neck.

It wasn't the fact that your client was acquitted that made me say that sometimes Justice isn't served. How can somebody suggests that Justice is served when a whole system is unable to see something that it was obvious to 12 people only? One can do nothing but wonder.

Also, I didn't suggest that your system is broken because I am not in the position to judge it but if I have read your post correctly it seems that litigators tend to interpret law quite differently than the "common" people.

In Greece, apart from the Jury, the three judges that represent the State in a trial have the right to vote too. In 8 out of 10 cases their vote differs from the vote of the Jury and I find this interesting and I feel that in those cases something goes wrong too.

Who misses something? The Jury or the Judges?

BTW. What will happen now to the woman who accused your client? Will she face charges of false accusations? In Greece with a unanimous verdict from the Jury she would be in real trouble.

Regarding the issue of rape, I will agree with you that rape isn't more serious a crime that other forms of assault.

Renata without wanting to play the psychologist I think that a man who has been mugged can experiene the same level of stress and feel the same humiliation with a victim of rape.

If a man finds himself in a position that he is not able to react then what he faces is an issue of power. Men are expected to be able to protect themselves and it's kind of humiliating to find themselves in a position that are not be able to do anything.

I think that the feelings of anger that victims of both crimes experience are similar.

Amateur Scientist

When I was at the University I was involved in Politics. I belong to the conservative right( nothing to do with the conservative right in the States!!) and I am an Israelite in a socialist antisemitic country :) A couple of times in late afternoons that we stayed at the Campus to discuss about things I found myself surrounded by guys that they were shouting things about my mother ( mostly) and they just wanted to scare me of course,they didn't even touch me.

I have to confess that in both cases it passed through my mind that if I could choose between being raped and being battered I'd choose the later. Why? Probably because as you pointed out rape is related with the sex taboos and because what follows a rape is very unpleasant for the victim.

Also, those incidents didn't bother me at all and they didn't leave anything " behind", on the contrary, they made me feel like a hero maybe because we are conditioned to believe that in politics, violence is part of the game.

So, I agree with you that it's a matter of conditioning mostly.

Renata since I started practicing Law I feel ashamed for the way many woman use this crime in order to clear up their differences with men. I wish they knew how much they harm with this attitude the real victims of rape. Interestingly, although the Greek society is very patriarchal men rarely question the sincerity of a victim. Women are those that pose more questions :) I have observed that in the Police Stations.

On the other hand I will disagree with AS and others that rape is a grey area.

I don't like this term when we are describing crimes. When it comes to a crime there are no grey areas. The fact that it's difficult to define if the crime of rape was committed doesn't make it a grey area, I prefer to say that this crime is different in nature than other crimes.

What distinguishes rape from either kinds of assault though is the fact that the victim has to prove first that it didn't ask for it something that a victim of mugging is never asked to.

From what I read none seems to disagree on that.So, I don't see where AS and you disagree :)

[tamiO]

Originally posted by Suezoled



Oh and New York, Upstate, as you insist: I work in Albany about 2 exits off the State University of New York Albany (SUNY Albany) to us locals.

I am going to be up in that area soon enough and would love to meet you for a cup of something. :)

[Nikk]

Originally posted by American
You had ALL DAY to glean that off the internet. You provided ZERO landmarks for 12 hours after I asked for ONE.

Further, we now need someone from that area to verify what you wrote, late as it was. (Not one of your sock puppets of course.)

What's the point of asking a question if you are in no position to assess the truth of the answer?

You could ask her to take a lie detector test of course;) .

[American]

Originally posted by Nikk


What's the point of asking a question if you are in no position to assess the truth of the answer?

You could ask her to take a lie detector test of course;) .

No offense on my lawyer remark. I didn't mean you! I assumed there would be someone else in the area who could confirm for us.

[Nasarius]

Well I'm in Buffalo...really not close enough, though ;)

[clk]

Originally posted by American


No offense on my lawyer remark. I didn't mean you! I assumed there would be someone else in the area who could confirm for us.

American has officially lost his little "fight" with Suezoled.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29156

My guess is that American will still claim that Suezoled is Hellcat, and not admit defeat....typical Conservative tactics.

[American]

Originally posted by clk


American has officially lost his little "fight" with Suezoled.
http://www.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=29156

My guess is that American will still claim that Suezoled is Hellcat, and not admit defeat....typical Conservative tactics.


You're suck a ***** idiot, you little turd. Linking to that page does not show loss of any fight, nor imply anything of "conservative tactics". It just shows what an idiot you are. A liberal idiot, but an idiot first and foremost.

[Morwen]

Derailing this for a second...

Suezoled: GREAT avatar! :)

I had this avatar since I first joined the forum and recently I changed to a fluffy cute little kitten to throw away suspicions and make people think that I was a nice fluffy harmless girl but I saw your avatar and got Bebop cravings, so I had to change back and tell you this... *inhales deeply*... and that's all. Please carry on. Sorry about the interruption.

Yeah, okay, so I'm a freak, so what...

(Edited to add rambling)

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by American



Fag.

So eloquent.

A-hole!

the problem is that unlike alot of the other posters who are talking about rape in a neutral way, you are going out of your way to support your impression that SL is Hellcat and a liar.

Fine!

Except for the fact that this is a thread about rape and you are supporting the societal convention that all women who claim rape are liars.

Unintended perhaps but you are still supporting rapist and other similar crimes of silence.

At least I get along with women, am married and know how to make love with one. If that makes me a fag then so be it.

You sirrah are a dog with a turd in his mouth.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


-snip-

I do not appreciate being targeted for accusations of heartlessness or compassionlessness due to my stance here and due to my profession. Defense attorneys are not responsible, legally or morally, for the actions of their clients.

I have been attempting in this thread to get others with a bloodlust against those accused of rape to understand that very often there is another side to making an accusation. False accusations are a very real occurrence and a very real problem. Their consequences can be just as devastating to their victims, or even perhaps more so, as rape can be to its victims. Having seen those consequences up close, perhaps I have a better appreciation of them than many others.

Perhaps you understand and appreciate that point, or perhaps you do not.

AS

AS, I would like to comend you for the neutral stance that you have taken, as have Renata and many others.

I agree that the consequences of a false accusation can be totaly devastating, especialy when there is the allegation of child abuse.

However, I feel that society does support the accused more than the accuser. It seems that often society, in terms of it's institutions does not support rape victims. Say in tha case of a college of high school that tolerates and encourages rape.

But then I am a staunch defender of all of our rights, I will take into consideration your statements that you feel a rape charge is hard to beat. It seems from the DV and SA side that the victim hardly ever gets there day in court and when they do show up, there are .. shall we say...um.. members of your profession who show a low ethical standard?

[clk]

Originally posted by American

You're suck a ***** idiot, you little turd. Linking to that page does not show loss of any fight, nor imply anything of "conservative tactics". It just shows what an idiot you are. A liberal idiot, but an idiot first and foremost.

Hey American, what do you think of Suezoled describing her part of NY? She must have gotten all of that off of Google, huh? :rolleyes:
What's the matter? You don't like being baited?

[American]

Originally posted by Dancing David


So eloquent.

A-hole!

the problem is that unlike alot of the other posters who are talking about rape in a neutral way, you are going out of your way to support your impression that SL is Hellcat and a liar.

Fine!

Except for the fact that this is a thread about rape and you are supporting the societal convention that all women who claim rape are liars.

Unintended perhaps but you are still supporting rapist and other similar crimes of silence.

At least I get along with women, am married and know how to make love with one. If that makes me a fag then so be it.

You sirrah are a dog with a turd in his mouth.


Is it true there's more than 1 kind of Guiness in England? All we got here is the pub kind, and those big cans with the cartridge in them.

[renata]

Originally posted by Dancing David



But then I am a staunch defender of all of our rights, I will take into consideration your statements that you feel a rape charge is hard to beat. It seems from the DV and SA side that the victim hardly ever gets there day in court and when they do show up, there are .. shall we say...um.. members of your profession who show a low ethical standard?

DD, I think that is unfair. I may disagree with AS on some things, but a lawyer who defents a client, even if a lawyer thinks a client is a scumball, he has to provide a zealous defense. And, in that capacity they absolutely must do what they can. Defense lawyers are a crucial part of our society. Of course there are some that are unethical, no more than there are unethical prosecutors, police officers, plaintiff attorneys, false rape victims....anyone. If I ever find myself accused of a crime, whether I am guilty or innocent, I will want a defense attorney that will rip prosecution to pieces. Because that is their job.

The New Yorker article showed nasty tactics by some defense attorneys. But it was the focus of the article. However, had I focused on the portion in it about death penalty rates for conviction of black men for rapes of white women in the south, we would be singing praises for courageous defense attorneys who took those cases.

Sometimes our vision of defense lawyers gets clouded by attorneys on TV, like "Practice" or "Law and Order" where dirty tricks are used to set the obviously guilty free. And, sometimes, we see defense lawyers for OJ, Kobe Bryant, or that Central Park preppy killer, whose name I forget. They are flamboyant, they drag the names of victims through the dirt. But remember their job is not to be nice to the memory of the victim. Their job is to convince 12 people there is reasonable doubt, that is all. If they are unethical, they will be reported to their bar association. Otherwise, they are just doing their job.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Dancing David



However, I feel that society does support the accused more than the accuser. It seems that often society, in terms of it's institutions does not support rape victims. Say in tha case of a college of high school that tolerates and encourages rape.

Depends on who the victim is and who the accused is and their social standing. People are not as fair as they should be, due to economic and racial bias. Not exclusive to rape cases.
Society only supports the accused because he is a (by definition at that point) an innocent man whose liberty is at stake. How would you suggest the legal system "support" the victim if not by doing it's best to accurately identify the assailant? Should it cut corners to make sure someone pays for the crime for therapeutic purposes?

But then I am a staunch defender of all of our rights, I will take into consideration your statements that you feel a rape charge is hard to beat. It seems from the DV and SA side that the victim hardly ever gets there day in court and when they do show up, there are .. shall we say...um.. members of your profession who show a low ethical standard?

A rape charge can be hard to beat, sometimes not so hard. Always risky and touchy in that in most courtrooms the verdict is more a function of jury prejudice than truth. Plus, they usually do not go to trial without substantial evidence, so you are seeing a vastly different sample of cases if you view the system from a social work standpoint.

As far as the ethical standards go, keep in mind that the defendant is a (legally) innocent person at risk of loss of liberty and being branded a sex criminal for life, with all the registration fun that goes along with that. I guess you suggest an attorney should value the feelings of an accuser over his innocent client? The only ethical standards that matter are not presenting false evidence and putting on a vigorous defense. Feelings of the accuser don't even enter into it. Life is sometimes not so nice.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Dancing David
Except for the fact that this is a thread about rape and you are supporting the societal convention that all women who claim rape are liars.

Unintended perhaps but you are still supporting rapist and other similar crimes of silence.


David I am surprised!

You know where "American" comes from. Only in the summer he openly stated his "ideas" regarding rape.

Do I need to bring back this thread?

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by renata


DD, I think that is unfair. I may disagree with AS on some things, but a lawyer who defents a client, even if a lawyer thinks a client is a scumball, he has to provide a zealous defense. And, in that capacity they absolutely must do what they can. Defense lawyers are a crucial part of our society. Of course there are some that are unethical, no more than there are unethical prosecutors, police officers, plaintiff attorneys, false rape victims....anyone. If I ever find myself accused of a crime, whether I am guilty or innocent, I will want a defense attorney that will rip prosecution to pieces. Because that is their job.

The New Yorker article showed nasty tactics by some defense attorneys. But it was the focus of the article. However, had I focused on the portion in it about death penalty rates for conviction of black men for rapes of white women in the south, we would be singing praises for courageous defense attorneys who took those cases.

Sometimes our vision of defense lawyers gets clouded by attorneys on TV, like "Practice" or "Law and Order" where dirty tricks are used to set the obviously guilty free. And, sometimes, we see defense lawyers for OJ, Kobe Bryant, or that Central Park preppy killer, whose name I forget. They are flamboyant, they drag the names of victims through the dirt. But remember their job is not to be nice to the memory of the victim. Their job is to convince 12 people there is reasonable doubt, that is all. If they are unethical, they will be reported to their bar association. Otherwise, they are just doing their job.

Renata I certainly did not intend to smirch AS, especialy when I had just praised him! So if I did , I apologise.

And yes I agree that all are entitled to the best defense possible. I see it from the other side though, where the perpetrator has the moeny and the high power lawyer. I have seen attorneys bait witnesses in the court room prior to testimony , and other low down tactics.

I am not saying that there should be weak lawyers, it just bugs me some of the stunts that private attorneys pull.

You are quite right.

[BillyTK]

Hi AS,
Originally posted by AmateurScientist
[...]
I am referring to extremists like Andrea Dworkin, a truly hateful person if there ever was one, and Catherine MacKinnnon, an equally hateful and truly twisted person whom does not deserve to teach law at a prestigious university. She holds despicable views about men.
[...]
Victims of non-violent rapes (yes, there are such victims, despite what Dworkin and MacKinnon maintain, not all rape or sex is violent)


I wonder if you could outline which of MacKinnon and Dworkin's views you find dispicable? I ask, because one of the most common views variously attributed to this pair (that "all sex is rape" and variations thereof) has been demonstrated to be a fabrication (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/mackinno.htm). As noted on the link, what Dworkin has said about sex being violent is:
Penetrative intercourse is, by its nature, violent. But I'm not saying that sex must be rape. What I think is that sex must not put women in a subordinate position. It must be reciprocal and not an act of aggression from a man looking only to satisfy himself. That's my point.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Dancing David


Renata I certainly did not intend to smirch AS, especialy when I had just praised him! So if I did , I apologise.



No offense taken. Renata and Suddenly already did a fine job of responding to that part.


And yes I agree that all are entitled to the best defense possible. I see it from the other side though, where the perpetrator has the moeny and the high power lawyer. I have seen attorneys bait witnesses in the court room prior to testimony , and other low down tactics.


I have to chuckle at the "perpetrator has the money" bit, as I suspect Suddenly will as well. Sure, there are rich criminal defendants like Klaus von Bulow, William Kennedy, O.J. Simpson, and now Kobe Bryant. The reality, however, is that the vast, vast majority of those charged with serious felony crimes are indigent. That means too poor to hire a lawyer, of course. Therefore, in most cases by far, a lawyer is appointed by the court to represent the defendant. The lawyer isn't "free" in the sense that he's doing it for nothing. The state pays the lawyer at a statutory rate, which is almost always below that of a market rate, but in most cases isn't so low that the lawyer will starve.

Practicing criminal defense lawyers are nearly always those who accept at least some appointed cases. There are very few in each locality who have big enough names to establish a criminal defense practice consisting solely of retained cases. The reason is that most criminal defendants aren't rich.

Now, as to tactics. "Baiting" an opposing witness, as you call it, is a perfectly acceptable way of discrediting a witness or of getting him or her to admit to something which favors your case. It is hardly unethical. Indeed, when done skillfully, is a beautiful thing to watch.

I enjoy taking a smug opposing witness down a primrose path during cross examination only to force him or her into admitting something which undermines all that he has just said for the other side. That's what every trial lawyer hopes to do.

The simple fact is that every case has facts which favor one side over the other, and facts which favor the other side. In other words, there are always flaws in both sides' cases. A skillful and prepared lawyer will expose his opponent's flaws and exploit them in argument. That's his job.

There is no need to be dirty in doing so. I hate dirty tricks myself. Contrary to what many in the general public may believe, it is not hard to be very polite and respectful and also to be skillful enough to force opposing witnesses to admit things they do not wish to admit. Several times in my practice I have actually had so-called hostile witnesses approach me later and compliment me on my cross-examination of them. Others have not been so kind. Never have I had anyone accuse me of being unethical or untruthful with them, however.


I am not saying that there should be weak lawyers, it just bugs me some of the stunts that private attorneys pull.



It sounds as if some of the consequences of an adversarial system of trials bug you. Some of those consequences are insisting that an accused have the same opportunity to subpoena witnesses and to conduct direct and cross examination that the prosecution does. Another is that the accused's attorney must be just as zealous and advocate for his side as the prosecutor is for his. If that bugs you, then that probably just means you are rooting for the other side in that particular case.

No big deal. Most observers choose one side or the other pretty early and hope that side wins. They may later change their minds and decide the other side won, but most choose sides anyway. It's not much different from choosing the Yankees or the Marlins in the World Series.

AS

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by BillyTK
Hi AS,

I wonder if you could outline which of MacKinnon and Dworkin's views you find dispicable? I ask, because one of the most common views variously attributed to this pair (that "all sex is rape" and variations thereof) has been demonstrated to be a fabrication (http://www.snopes.com/quotes/mackinno.htm). As noted on the link, what Dworkin has said about sex being violent is:


Well, I can link to a source just as you can, although I do not vouch for its accuracy anymore than you should automatically vouch for snopes.com's.

How's this?

Selected Man-hating quotes from Radical Feminists (http://www.menweb.org/throop/bash/quotes.html)

If Dworkin's quotes attributed to her there are accurate, then I would argue that they are quite hateful and twisted. I would say the same about the one quote on the page attributed to MacKinnon. It is utterly subjective and cheapens the term "rape." It allows alleged victims to decide based solely on their own subjective feelings whether or not a very serious crime has been committed. Of course, that view is not surprising coming from the chief proponent of allowing alleged victims of sexual harassment to decide if they were harassed based solely on their subjective feelings.

Law must have objective tests for liability. Subjective tests do not allow any reasonable actor to decide in advance whether his or her behavior is lawful or not. Subjective tests remind me very much of a lyric from Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher."

"I don't feel tardy."

:D

Surely you understand that being tardy is an objective measure. How one feels about it has nothing to do with it. (Yeah, I know, it's a very rough analogy because being tardy doesn't involve an alleged victim, etc. I'm just voicing my thoughts aloud.)

AS

[edited to add a source I found attributing the "all sex is rape" business to MacKinnon, complete with a reference and page number. Here it is, if you care to look into it:

"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."

-- Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, pg 129

Look down page for MacKinnon's name (http://www.mfnbc.com/webliography/quotes.htm)

[edited a second time to add a quote from Dworkin which comes very close to calling all men potential rapists. I'm comfortable calling her views despicable.

"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."

-- Liberty, pg 58

(Also found on the site where the MacKinnon quote is attributed)]

[kittynh]

off the topic, but my neighbor last year did jury duty. It was amazing to me what effect the LOOK of the defense attorney had on his decision. The defense attorney wore "a gold bracelet" (a male). This didn't make my neighbor think he was gay, just as it put it, "That kid hired such an expensive lawyer, you know he was guilty." Sad to say that and the expensive suit worn was a serious part of his choice to vote guilty. Here, many lawyers only wear a nice sweater, it's kind of informal formality. Plus, it's cold.

[Chanileslie]

Originally posted by Tony
I find rape (of anyone, man, woman and child) to be one of the most disgusting things, maybe even worse than murder. When ever I think of my girlfriend, my mom or my sister (or any woman (or child)) being raped, by blood starts to boil. What should be the punishment for a rapist? I am thinking death. What are your thoughts on the matter?

While I agree that rape can be a violent and horrific crime, I do not think that it is comparable to murder and definitely not worse. If one is murdered, that's it, nothing more can be done or said. That person can not offer anything else to the world or experience any of the joys and wonders of the world. Rape on the other hand (providing that it doesn't end in the death of the victim), the person continues to live, and can recover and can have new and wonderful experiences.

I have heard the "I'll never recover" or "That person will never recover" or "He/She/It is tainted forever because of that" attitude, and I think it is just wrong. By taking on the mentality one is allowing the rapist/abuser to win. Yes, it may be traumatic and it may be some time before one may feel normal and yes, one maybe changed by the experience, but then one is changed somehow by almost every experience whether one realizes it or not, but it does not mean that one will never feel love, compasion, see and understand beauty and accept wisdom. It does not mean that one will never have something worthwhile to contribute.

I think focusing on being the victim instead of focusing on one's life is more detrimental in the long run than the horrific crime that began the vicious cycle.

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by kittynh
off the topic, but my neighbor last year did jury duty. It was amazing to me what effect the LOOK of the defense attorney had on his decision. The defense attorney wore "a gold bracelet" (a male). This didn't make my neighbor think he was gay, just as it put it, "That kid hired such an expensive lawyer, you know he was guilty." Sad to say that and the expensive suit worn was a serious part of his choice to vote guilty. Here, many lawyers only wear a nice sweater, it's kind of informal formality. Plus, it's cold.

I love juries.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


No offense taken. Renata and Suddenly already did a fine job of responding to that part.



I have to chuckle at the "perpetrator has the money" bit, as I suspect Suddenly will as well. Sure, there are rich criminal defendants like Klaus von Bulow, William Kennedy, O.J. Simpson, and now Kobe Bryant. The reality, however, is that the vast, vast majority of those charged with serious felony crimes are indigent. That means too poor to hire a lawyer, of course. Therefore, in most cases by far, a lawyer is appointed by the court to represent the defendant. The lawyer isn't "free" in the sense that he's doing it for nothing. The state pays the lawyer at a statutory rate, which is almost always below that of a market rate, but in most cases isn't so low that the lawyer will starve.



I am certainly aware of the nature of the people in felony court,
I am just thinking of some cases involving domestic violence that also happened to involve child abuse. In these limited number of cases the perpetrator(alleged) was the one with the money and the power. It is very disheartening to counsel children who are grateful to be under an order of protection, and continue to provide them support as the alleged perpetrator gets them back into custody and makes those allegations go away.

I am a firm believer in the fact that most people who make it into felony court are poor, the middle class has a better resource base to work from.

Public defenders are vastly overworked but amazingly good in my county.

I did not mean to make any statement that most rape defendants have money, certainly they would never be arrested if they did, and given the nature of eye witness testimony, I would not want to be wrongly charged.

As a DV worker I am just over aquainted with the idea that perhaps not all parts of our system work to the benefit of victims.


-snip-

Now, as to tactics. "Baiting" an opposing witness, as you call it, is a perfectly acceptable way of discrediting a witness or of getting him or her to admit to something which favors your case. It is hardly unethical. Indeed, when done skillfully, is a beautiful thing to watch.

actualy I was thinking of a local case where I witnessed a lawyer barge into a private conference and threaten the plantiff and insult her, and then he went into the court room and badgered a witness and actualy called her a 'farking idiot', before the judge entered the room. This realy rattled the plantiff and the witness. When they complained they were told to file a complaint with a state agency.

Court room manuvering is a whole other beast! And one that is very complex, when I watch court TV, testimony is a painful drawn out process.

I enjoy taking a smug opposing witness down a primrose path during cross examination only to force him or her into admitting something which undermines all that he has just said for the other side. That's what every trial lawyer hopes to do.

Sounds exicting and certainly more fun than working with state children's welfare agencies!


The simple fact is that every case has facts which favor one side over the other, and facts which favor the other side. In other words, there are always flaws in both sides' cases. A skillful and prepared lawyer will expose his opponent's flaws and exploit them in argument. That's his job.


In our county it seems to really make a difference if you have a private attorney, the public defenders are very overworked and mainly cut the pleas with the State's Attorney. For some reason judges seem to favor the private attorneys in our county.


There is no need to be dirty in doing so. I hate dirty tricks myself. Contrary to what many in the general public may believe, it is not hard to be very polite and respectful and also to be skillful enough to force opposing witnesses to admit things they do not wish to admit. Several times in my practice I have actually had so-called hostile witnesses approach me later and compliment me on my cross-examination of them. Others have not been so kind. Never have I had anyone accuse me of being unethical or untruthful with them, however.

As stated before I did not mean to smirch you, I wish that there were more with your ethics!

sinip

AS

I am not an impartial observer, I am a children's advocate at a DV shelter, so I only hear the worst of the worst, the best of the worst get what they need from us and never look back.

hats off to ethical lawyers!

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by Dancing David

hats off to ethical lawyers!


The ethical lawyers are more than people can imagine and this stands for every country.

When I was a student at the University it was very common to hear from students of the School of Medicine that they want to become doctors in order to to become rich. I have never heard anything similar from a lawyer, those of us that became "drug-lawyers" ( as we call them here) have higher moral standards than many people I know and the most important is that they don't think that they are Saints.

As my business associate ( who practices Law for 30 years now) says "If God could make it in court he would be a lawyer too" meaning that things are totally different when you are in the arena.

[BillyTK]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


Well, I can link to a source just as you can, although I do not vouch for its accuracy anymore than you should automatically vouch for snopes.com's.
I agree; snopes.com is not unproblematic, but it does typically provide evidence which can be used to verify its claims (and yes, I've checked to see if snopes's accusation against Cal Thomas is accurate, and it appears to be so, albeit there is always the possibility that someone else wrote the article in question and attributed it to him).

I'm less willing, though, to accept the accuracy of a problematically referenced collection of quotes, which is reproduced, in an un-reflexive manner, ad nauseum throughout the internet (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&q=%22Heterosexual+intercourse+is+the+pure%2C+forma lized+expression+of+contempt+for+women%27s+bodies. %22+&btnG=Google+Search) which in and of itself betrays the bias of those publishing these pages. But I notice you don't vouch for its accuracy, so that's okay then. ;)
How's this?

Selected Man-hating quotes from Radical Feminists (http://www.menweb.org/throop/bash/quotes.html)

If Dworkin's quotes attributed to her there are accurate, then I would argue that they are quite hateful and twisted.

I'd be cautious about committing to a position on Dworkin without confirming the validity and context of these quotes.
I would say the same about the one quote on the page attributed to MacKinnon. It is utterly subjective and cheapens the term "rape." It allows alleged victims to decide based solely on their own subjective feelings whether or not a very serious crime has been committed.
Bearing in mind the caution I make above, I would note that quote attributed to her commences with "Politically...", which directs the context and meaning. However...
Of course, that view is not surprising coming from the chief proponent of allowing alleged victims of sexual harassment to decide if they were harassed based solely on their subjective feelings.
Interesting... The implication of this would be that a women cannot know if she has been harrassed or violated, unless it has been objectively tested by the legal system. But surely the law has to take into account this subjective experience in deciding if a criminal act has, indeed been committed?

Law must have objective tests for liability. Subjective tests do not allow any reasonable actor to decide in advance whether his or her behavior is lawful or not.
I'd argue that this approach is problematic, in that the fundamental issue os one of consent, rather than legitimacy. For instance, I understand that in the US there are a number of sexual acts which, regardless of the consent of the people involved, prohibited by law. However, with regard to rape we're tlaking about an act that in and of itself is not illegal, but rather it's the context of the act. I don't see how one can objectively test that context. For instance, if a women doesn't explicitly protest, could the act be considered rape? As an aside, it's interesting to note that rape inside marriage has only recently been recognised by British law, which problematises traditional ideas of consent within marriage, and particularly the idea of a wife's duty.
Subjective tests remind me very much of a lyric from Van Halen's "Hot for Teacher."

"I don't feel tardy."

:D

Surely you understand that being tardy is an objective measure. How one feels about it has nothing to do with it. (Yeah, I know, it's a very rough analogy because being tardy doesn't involve an alleged victim, etc. I'm just voicing my thoughts aloud.)

AS
I'm equally unfamiliar with the word "tardy" as I am of the works of Van Halen (I was an indie kid, sorry!). But please continue to voice your thoughts, and I hope you'll indulge me as I do the same (as I have above).

[edited to add a source I found attributing the "all sex is rape" business to MacKinnon, complete with a reference and page number. Here it is, if you care to look into it:

"In a patriarchal society all heterosexual intercourse is rape because women, as a group, are not strong enough to give meaningful consent."

-- Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies, pg 129

Look down page for MacKinnon's name (http://www.mfnbc.com/webliography/quotes.htm)
The link doesn't work for me, it requires some kind of log-in? Anyway, this charge is not exactly uncommon on the internet, and as snopes.com mentions, it appears to arise from an article by Cal Thomas (version available here (http://chblue.com/Feb1999/022699/silence022699.htm)) which incorrectly attributes authorship of this book to MacKinnon. Bearing in mind that the book is a rather... one-sided critique of feminism, it's quite possible that she is quoted therein. Conditions as outlined above apply here, except to note that it's an interesting conflation to take the above and arive at "all sex is rape".

[edited a second time to add a quote from Dworkin which comes very close to calling all men potential rapists. I'm comfortable calling her views despicable.

"Under patriarchy, no woman is safe to live her life, or to love, or to mother children. Under patriarchy, every woman is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's daughter is a victim, past, present, and future. Under patriarchy, every woman's son is her potential betrayer and also the inevitable rapist or exploiter of another woman."

-- Liberty, pg 58

(Also found on the site where the MacKinnon quote is attributed)]
Usual terms and conditions not withstanding, I don't find this statement dispicable; I find it problematic in that it appears to treat patriarchy as monolithic, but I would be uncomfortable about interpreting this to mean that all men are even potential rapists, because in noting the condition that her analysis applies to, she gives both men and women a choice, and as such recognises their agency to make that choice. It's the essentialists (you are evil because you are a man, end of story) who are the bad bunch, and Dworkin sure isn't one of them!

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by American



You're suck a ***** idiot, you little turd. Linking to that page does not show loss of any fight, nor imply anything of "conservative tactics". It just shows what an idiot you are. A liberal idiot, but an idiot first and foremost.

You forgot 'ad hominem', clk.

[AmateurScientist]

Here is but one anecdotal account of a fabricated rape or sexual assault charge, in today's news:


18 year old recants charge of sexual assault (http://www.nbc10.com/news/2575986/detail.html)

Discuss?

AS

[Chaos]

Fabricating such a story should be a punishable offense (if it isn´t already). Maybe punishable by exactly the sentence her victim would have gotten.

However, when/if I ever have kids, I hope I won´t be the kind of father that makes them so embarrassed being late from a party (and/or having sex) that they feel they have to fabricate such a story to avoid embarrassment.

[Cleopatra]

If this happened in a Greek court the judge would ask for her immediate arrest and she would be in real trouble.

[Dancing David]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
Here is but one anecdotal account of a fabricated rape or sexual assault charge, in today's news:


18 year old recants charge of sexual assault (http://www.nbc10.com/news/2575986/detail.html)

Discuss?

AS

very sad, I would never deny that such cases exist myself. And I agree that as in any I say/ you say situation the credability of the witnesses is very important.

Belief me from my twelve years in mental health i am aware of the strange world of the psyche and how people made wierd accusations. the worst perhaps was towanna Brawley. Then this is held against every other potentail rape victim.

My personal feeling is that when individuals no longer approve of rape, date rape and other non consensual sex will decrease some.

Should we talk about marital rape?

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Dancing David



Should we talk about marital rape?

I will say this. One of my clients is doing 30 to 75 for that. If he would have done the deed 1 month earlier, W.Va. had a special statute dealing with marital rape that would have made that a 6 to 30. Talk about bad timing.

Plus, given the circumtances, if he would have just killed her, he would have most likely had a better shot at a lesser sentence. Silly Guy!!!

I hate perverse incentives.

[AmateurScientist]

I watched one of the first marital rape trials in my state about 11 years ago. The defense lawyer did a great job of exposing the case as little more than a marital spat between an elderly couple (He about 72, she about 68) with a lengthy marriage and a spotty history of violence between them. For instance, the wife had recently shot the husband in the arm (unrelated to the charge of rape or that incident). She testified that during the "rape" he hurt her hip during sex after she had recently returned from the hospital after having hip surgery.

It was embarrassing to hear their silly dirty laundry aired in court. No one believed there was any force or other unsavory circumstance involved. I was ashamed of the DA's office for prosecuting it. They do have the right to use discretion to say no to cases. Unfortunately, they exercise it too seldom.

AS

[nightwind]

My thoughts? Sure, I think it is ridiculous to say that the death penalty should be punishment for a rape, unless there is also a murder involved.

But I was just thinking. The Kobe Bryant case I guess is the most publicized case at this point regarding rape.

My question is, if Kobe Bryant is found guilty of rape, should he get the death penalty, if it was available?

Or should be be spared because of his "star" status?

[renata]

Originally posted by Suddenly


I will say this. One of my clients is doing 30 to 75 for that. If he would have done the deed 1 month earlier, W.Va. had a special statute dealing with marital rape that would have made that a 6 to 30. Talk about bad timing.

Plus, given the circumtances, if he would have just killed her, he would have most likely had a better shot at a lesser sentence. Silly Guy!!!

I hate perverse incentives.


Suddenly, perhaps this is a topic for a new thread, but something that always puzzled me is seemingly contradictory sentencing guidelines. In California's three strike sentencing laws we have people receiving life sentences for third offenses that are very minor (like that case that went to the Supreme court, the guy that stole DVDs or some games) but murderers and rapists get out with much less time. It seems to me there is so much variation from case to case, even in the same state, it makes little sense. Wouldn't some standardized method be preferrable?

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist
I was ashamed of the DA's office for prosecuting it. They do have the right to use discretion to say no to cases. Unfortunately, they exercise it too seldom.

AS

(Nods head in agreement. And violently so.)

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by renata



Suddenly, perhaps this is a topic for a new thread, but something that always puzzled me is seemingly contradictory sentencing guidelines. In California's three strike sentencing laws we have people receiving life sentences for third offenses that are very minor (like that case that went to the Supreme court, the guy that stole DVDs or some games) but murderers and rapists get out with much less time. It seems to me there is so much variation from case to case, even in the same state, it makes little sense. Wouldn't some standardized method be preferrable?

The 3 strike laws are a standardized method. The fact is that judges dealing with individual cases are much more likely to be reasonable than legislators dealing with classes of offenses. However, as the strawman goes, since judges sometimes screw things up, the clamor goes out for legislative control, which screws things up more often. However, since legislative controll (in recent practice) screws things up in favor of harsher sentances, nobody cares.

[Chaos]

Originally posted by renata



Suddenly, perhaps this is a topic for a new thread, but something that always puzzled me is seemingly contradictory sentencing guidelines. In California's three strike sentencing laws we have people receiving life sentences for third offenses that are very minor (like that case that went to the Supreme court, the guy that stole DVDs or some games) but murderers and rapists get out with much less time. It seems to me there is so much variation from case to case, even in the same state, it makes little sense. Wouldn't some standardized method be preferrable?

In case of the "3 strikes" law, it occured to me that another method might be better: how about saying that for the third offense, the normal sentence is doubled, instead of a flat 25 year sentence. Then it is doubled again for the fourth offense, and so on.
Another idea: the sentence is increased whenever someone committed an offense that is at least as serious then the one they were convicted for earlier, perhaps combined with the "3 strikes" or my above idea.
Well, I´m not a lawyer, I don´t know if that was feasible.

[AmateurScientist]

Originally posted by Chaos


In case of the "3 strikes" law, it occured to me that another method might be better: how about saying that for the third offense, the normal sentence is doubled, instead of a flat 25 year sentence. Then it is doubled again for the fourth offense, and so on.
Another idea: the sentence is increased whenever someone committed an offense that is at least as serious then the one they were convicted for earlier, perhaps combined with the "3 strikes" or my above idea.
Well, I´m not a lawyer, I don´t know if that was feasible.

It doesn't matter about the details. The whole idea behind the criticisms of such mindless automatic applications of a rigid sentencing structure is that it removes all attempts to consider human factors, degrees of culpability beyond the mere "did he do it?" analysis, and the relative seriousness of the circumstances of the particular offense involved. The automatic application of so-called "three strikes" sentencing laws is that for subsequent offenses, they create perverse disincentives to plead guilty or to accept responsibility. The courts become overburdened with cases which could have been resolved without a trial if not for the draconian sentences required by mandatory minimums.

The only persons who benefit from "three strikes" laws are politicians who propose and support them (Virtually no politician will publicly oppose or criticize them; that's political suicide). The general public is almost completely in the dark about the perverse, unintended consequences of such laws. Judges hate them, defense attorneys hate them, even some prosecutors hate them because they have to try more cases as a result and thus the judicial system slows down. Nobody wins. Repeat. Nobody wins.

Our country simply has to get over this horribly misguided notion that the way to a better quality of life for American society is to "lock 'em up and throw away the key" when considering how to treat serious crime. We have a greater proportion of our own citizens in jails or prisons than any other free nation. That is a shameful reflection on our knee-jerk response to crime.

A terrific start to addressing crime rationally would be to decriminal all drug offenses immediately. All drug offenses. All drug offenses.

AS

[Cleopatra]

Originally posted by AmateurScientist


A terrific start to addressing crime rationally would be to decriminal all drug offenses immediately. All drug offenses. All drug offenses.

AS

Suddenly, do you agree with that?

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Cleopatra


Suddenly, do you agree with that?

Absolutely. I'd want regulation though. At a minimum I would suggest making all drug crimes (possession, sale, manufacture) no more than misdemeanors.

Most of the damage caused by drugs here is due to the fact that they are illegal. Drugs just aren't the dramatic demons they are made out to be. Take away the crime, and the price goes down and addictions can be managed and cured rather than seen as some absolute evil.

A lot of violence results from the fact that there is no legal recourse if someone breaches an agreement w/r/t drugs. When that coke someone buys turns out to be milk sugar, they can't call the cops, or sue. So they go shoot people.

Plus, the illegality raises the price. So there is a lot of property crime to pay for drugs.

Drugs being legal would cause some problems, due to wider availability, but all in all those are the problems I'd rather have.

[Cleopatra]

Thank you.

Needless to say that I add my voice to that.I have had this discussion with colleagues many many times and all of us agree with yours and AS's reasoning plus that we believe that it would clear our profession, the Police and the Judicial system from a lot of dirt.

But listen to the funny part.

The 2/3 of the Greek MPs are lawyers. When they become MPs and they have the power to vote for the change of the legislation they seem to forget what they were saying when they were practicing law something that makes you wonder about the way the state uses the drug legislation.

[Chaos]

Amateur Scientist
I guess you are right. I apologize for not thinking far enough.


Concerning drugs:
Alcohol and nicotin (sp?) are also, chemically/biologically speaking, drugs; they are legal, however, with certain restrictions.

In you opinion, (and this goes for the other lawyers here, too) would it help matters to have the same legislation for alcohol, nicotin, and the now-illegal drugs? I am thinking about the laws like they are for alcohol right now, i.e. minimum age to buy/use legally, driving "under influence" is prohibited, etc.

[Suddenly]

Originally posted by Cleopatra
Thank you.

Needless to say that I add my voice to that.I have had this discussion with colleagues many many times and all of us agree with yours and AS's reasoning plus that we believe that it would clear our profession, the Police and the Judicial system from a lot of dirt.

But listen to the funny part.

The 2/3 of the Greek MPs are lawyers. When they become MPs and they have the power to vote for the change of the legislation they seem to forget what they were saying when they were practicing law something that makes you wonder about the way the state uses the drug legislation.

I have a feeling that in many counties it is less a question that reform would make sense than one of maintaining a relationship with the U.S.. Our government gets real miffed when other countries fail to be as stupid about drugs as we are. Plus, we are heavily armed.

[TillEulenspiegel]

I didn't read the whole thread but , recently the US courts affermed that a charge of rape could be filed by a woman MID-COITUS aginst a sexual partner if they did not desist when asked . I understand the laws intent of an absolute authority over one's body , but behaviorally I have a hard time squaring our legal code and such primal behavior. Before anyone jumps on me re-read the last sentince

I think this comes under the umbrella of assumed risk or informed consent, maybe the males in our society should carry around personal liability relese forms

[Dancing David]

TillE,
I understand the sentiment but there are reasons for disagreeing with it, respectfuly,

first, the slippery slope of saying that a biological imperative justifies a crime, men for years have used it, 'I was aroused' as a defense

second is to draw the line, from the following scenario, say that the victim (female) agrees to remove her pants and allow herself to be stimulated clitoraly but does not agree to penetration? For too many years there has been a ' well she removed her bra' mentality.

third is the actual nature of consent: in the Kobe case the bystanders are already saying; "well she went to his room, so she knew what was going to happen, so she consented". These laws are to draw a clear line, consent to go to a room is not consent to have sex.

Imagine the following scenarion, you are totaly drunk one night, so drunk that you are barely consious, and you end up having sex in some ones car, first the person preforms fellatio upon you (assuming in this case that you are male) but then they try to penetrate your anus with thier finger. If you say no, does the other person have the right to penetrate you?

(TillE: I find you view point to be a very common one, and one that I would have to agree with to some extent, but there are reasons for the consent law to exist, how they will bear out in court is different)

[jj]

Originally posted by renata
But explain this to me- if I told you, for example, that I had been a victim of child abuse, rape, pogrom threats, stoning, being chased and tank bearing down on me, would my arguments have more weight?

It would affect my opinion, to some extent, on matters that would be expressed inside a victim.

I wouldn't say "more weight", but I'm sure that there must be a difference between people who have been victims of violent crime (or attempted victims, too) and people who have never had the experience, in terms of attitude.

Understanding that difference would be of interest, simply because it's there...