Court Rules Severely Disabled Woman Wasn't Raped Because She Didn't 'Bite, Kick or Scratch' Her

page: 3
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 01:24 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


I'll have to agree with your reasoning on this subject, even though I don't agree with the court decision. Do we know the mental capacity of the man, the circumstances of the alleged rape?

This may sound callous and cold, but if she has the mental capacity of a 3 year year old, how does she know she was raped? How do those helping her know she didn't enjoy it? Many a young child has been convinced to say things about a parent that aren't true, just keep that in mind.

Now, if this is a normal guy that had sex with this girl, I will say he is a twisted person, but that doesn't make it rape.




posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 
considering this state law the Supremes are interpreting (incorrectly imho), who (as a victim) could prove (beyond the shadow of doubt) that they physically objected to a rape ??

voluntary sex acts often include biting, kicking, scratching.
how could anyone discern which of those acts were in "objection" rather heat of passion ?



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   
I'm too disgusted to even make a comment.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 01:45 AM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
So, a woman has to communicate lack of consent? So, a man can have sex with any woman he wants and it's just assumed that she consents, unless she states otherwise? It's her responsibility to deny consent? Are they serious?

Ridiculous! I hope the advocates get all over this!


These are the liberals you love. I guess party affiliation only matters when it's Republicans doing something stupid. The ruling should be since she could affirm consent he should have gotten it. We have in Massachusetts a rapist suing for custody of the child he fathered raping an underage girl. He threatened her with violence if she wouldnt do it.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 06:58 AM
link   
Who witnessed the rape/found the evidence since she couldn't speak for herself?.... and why was their testimony not taken into consideration?

I want to know who contacted authorities.......if someone felt so strongly to do so......there has to be some irrefutable evidence that in my opinion would give this monster a jail sentance.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 07:01 AM
link   
reply to post by kat2684
 


The american jsutice system seems strange. so let me guess they tried to get him to put the glove on and it didnt fit.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 08:35 AM
link   
This story beggars belief!!! I want to know why a vulnerable person - which is what the victim is by virtue of her mental capacity - was not represented as such. She is a vulnerable person and the law needs to protect her.

I am beyond rage. I know legal systems and their applications can be convoluted and difficult to understand - but - what is there to not understand that sex with a vulnerable person is an offence????!!!!

I will hazard a guess that the sexual assault was reported due to sexually transmitted disease/physical injury/admissions by the predator that committed the offence...who cares it was reported.

When will the public realise that psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists are in positions of authority and making decisions that defy logic, empathy and humanity.

The predator who committed this crime is no better than the judge. Heaven help them if their identities are released and this story becomes viral on the internet. The predator and the judge will have no where to hide.

Much Peace...to the Victim and her Family...



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:45 AM
link   
"for we fight not against flesh, but against principalities and powers and rulers in high places"

I am sickened by this story and the outcome thereof - so if the judge and jury was bound and gagged and thrown in a cell with Bubba and he did his thing, then its not rape because they did not - not consent to it and there were no scratch marks etc to prove otherwise.

Pathetic decision - they will be judged accordingly.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 09:55 AM
link   
If she was unable to communicate unwillingness, how do you know she was unwilling? How would the guy know she was unwilling?

I think there's a certain degree of bias. Someone says, "Cour made a stupid decision about rape" and immediately all the people who are sensitive about sexual assault topics join the ranks of judicials pitchforkers in a rant against the system in general. Go ahead, flame me, but that's my opinion.

Over and out.
edit on 4-10-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:02 AM
link   
reply to post by DaesDaemar
 




This may sound callous and cold, but if she has the mental capacity of a 3 year year old, how does she know she was raped?


Is that you Todd Akin? Trying to see if there was a "legitimate rape"? If there was sex, she was raped. PERIOD!



How do those helping her know she didn't enjoy it?


I'm going to give the you the benefit of the doubt here and suspect that you meant to say that she may have initiated sex.

There is no argument on behalf of a rapist that states that the victim "enjoyed" it!



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:05 AM
link   
reply to post by windword
 


Windword, take a moment and think. If she has difficulty communicating, unless someone else was present, HOW DO WE KNOW WHAT HAPPENED???

Someone who has the mind of a 3 year old is going to have an extremely difficult time imparting their thoughts, emotions, and making known the precise events that occurred. How do you expect any semblence of a coherent conversation to occur in a court room with someone like that?

That's what we're trying to explain. Set your emotions aside, my friend. They will only confuse you and establish bias in your heart.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
The ATS court is now convened and finds that court ruling guilty of the crimes of being as stupid as the year is long...

What a bunch of idiots must be related to Akin.




I agree with neo!
Going to get my head examined now.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Amanda5
This story beggars belief!!! I want to know why a vulnerable person - which is what the victim is by virtue of her mental capacity - was not represented as such. She is a vulnerable person and the law needs to protect her.

I am beyond rage. I know legal systems and their applications can be convoluted and difficult to understand - but - what is there to not understand that sex with a vulnerable person is an offence????!!!!

I will hazard a guess that the sexual assault was reported due to sexually transmitted disease/physical injury/admissions by the predator that committed the offence...who cares it was reported.

When will the public realise that psychopaths, sociopaths and narcissists are in positions of authority and making decisions that defy logic, empathy and humanity.

The predator who committed this crime is no better than the judge. Heaven help them if their identities are released and this story becomes viral on the internet. The predator and the judge will have no where to hide.

Much Peace...to the Victim and her Family...



I agree with this entirely and really made me think.

Can you imagine how this girls FATHER feels about this?
Imagine if she was your girl? He really must feel like he got kicked in the gut over this.
I know I would and might be tempted to take the law into my own hands.
A disgusting and inexcusable ruling. That judge should be recused.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:53 AM
link   
reply to post by newcovenant
 


So what does the victim have to say on the subject? Yep, just like I thought. I don't see any sort of testimony, only a heavily biased article that doesn't tell us exactly what happened, only releasing the pieces that incite the most controvery and emotional outrage.

I'm only seeing emotion here, not fact-based conclusions. Sure, rape is rape; but do we have all the facts? No. What do we have? An incomplete report that is aimed to cause strife. And it's working.
edit on 4-10-2012 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:54 AM
link   
Wow.

So everybody gets mad at the judges for actually following the law, but nobody is crying for the heads of the politicians that write the laws?

Folks, judges administer law. They do not write it, they do not make assumptions on it. They are bound by what is written in it. For all we know the judges are just as pissed as the rest of you, but their hands are just as tied as ours.

If you want to go after somebody for crap like this, head to the state political offices and get changes made.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 10:59 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


There's lot about this case that we don't know. But, what we do know is the this guy was convicted of raping this young woman, so "rape" was established.

We know that the verdict was overturned on the technicality that there was no evidence of physical resistance, therefore, the panel determined consent was given.

This is clearly a case of "legitimate rape" mentality! Ignorance, it is alive and well.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 11:19 AM
link   
When are you people going to get sick and tired of headlines like this?

And some of you wonder why I'm always screaming about Armed REVOLUTION.

This is to commonplace. The entire system is corrupt. It Must GO.

Until then if there is any justice, somehow this will find a way to get overturned. It's the old saying, " if you don't like the laws, change the laws" but common sense should demand you cannot apply the current laws to THIS situation.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 11:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by newcovenant
 

So what does the victim have to say on the subject?
nothing ... she was required to point to the word, yes or no, in response to questions presented.
which begs any reasonable person to ask ... with a 3yr old mentality, did she understand the qustions ?


Yep, just like I thought. I don't see any sort of testimony, only a heavily biased article that doesn't tell us exactly what happened, only releasing the pieces that incite the most controvery and emotional outrage.
the prior conviction is public record, did you bother to look at or review it ??
nope, just as i thought, you'd rather spew nonsense as it suits you.


I'm only seeing emotion here, not fact-based conclusions.
excuse you ... the state Supremes are reviewing the facts which led to a conviction or did you skip that part on purpose ?


Sure, rape is rape; but do we have all the facts? No.
maybe, maybe not ... but that is really irrelevant as the conviction had already been established.


What do we have?
a warped judicial system incapable of logic, reasoning or performing the acts required to protect the citizens of their state.



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by AfterInfinity
reply to post by newcovenant
 


So what does the victim have to say on the subject? Yep, just like I thought. I don't see any sort of testimony


Didn't you read This -->

“has severe cerebral palsy, has the intellectual functional equivalent of a 3-year-old and cannot verbally communicate.”



posted on Oct, 4 2012 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by peck420
Wow.
So everybody gets mad at the judges for actually following the law, but nobody is crying for the heads of the politicians that write the laws?

Folks, judges administer law.
IF that were true, the request to consider over-turning the prior conviction would have been tossed out with the other garbage of the day.


They do not write it, they do not make assumptions on it. They are bound by what is written in it. For all we know the judges are just as pissed as the rest of you, but their hands are just as tied as ours.
nice try but the Supremes get to decide which cases they will hear.
if they are bound by what is written in the law, please indicate which law requires a mentally challenged person or a 3yr old to physically object, verbally object or present any objection in order to prove a sexual invasion occurred.


If you want to go after somebody for crap like this, head to the state political offices and get changes made.
no, this is the type of situation that screams for vigilante justice as that seems to be the only justice accessible at this point.





new topics
top topics
 
19
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join