♫anna♫
Global Moderator
Aug 18 2017 - Always In Our Hearts
The Federal Reserve Act is the Betrayal of the American Revolution!
e x a l t | s m i t e
karma:
Posts: 11,769
|
Post by ♫anna♫ on Dec 14, 2012 5:26:46 GMT
Another dumbo judge, who should be thankful that he's not in a jail cell with a violent sodomite! www.foxnews.com/us/2012/12/13/us-judge-says-victims-body-can-prevent-rape/ QUOTE: California judge says victims' body can prevent rape
December 13, 2012 Associated Press SANTA ANA, Calif. – A Southern California judge is being publicly admonished for saying a rape victim "didn't put up a fight" during her assault and that if someone doesn't want sexual intercourse, the body "will not permit that to happen." The California Commission on Judicial Performance voted 10-0 to impose a public admonishment Thursday, saying Superior Court Judge Derek Johnson's comments were inappropriate and a breach of judicial ethics. "In the commission's view, the judge's remarks reflected outdated, biased and insensitive views about sexual assault victims who do not `put up a fight.' Such comments cannot help but diminish public confidence and trust in the impartiality of the judiciary," wrote Lawrence J. Simi, the commission's chairman. Johnson made the comments in the case of a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver, beat her with a metal baton and made other violent threats before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes. Though the woman reported the criminal threats the next day, the woman did not report the rape until 17 days later. Johnson, a former prosecutor in the Orange County district attorney's sex crimes unit, said during the man's 2008 sentencing that he had seen violent cases on that unit in which women's vaginas were "shredded" by rape. "I'm not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something: If someone doesn't want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case," Johnson said. The commission found that Johnson's view that a victim must resist to be a real victim of sexual assault was his opinion, not the law. Since 1980, California law doesn't require rape victims to prove they resisted or were prevented from resisting because of threats. In an apology to the commission, Johnson said his comments were inappropriate. He said his comments were the result of his frustration during an argument with a prosecutor over the defendant's sentence. Johnson said he believed the prosecutor's request of a 16-year sentence was not authorized by law. Johnson sentenced the rapist to six years instead, saying that's what the case was "worth."
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 6:59:01 GMT
The story seems to have distorted the judge's comments . Unless he made other remarks not quoted, he never said that a woman must put up a fight. Neither did he say that the body could prevent rape, only that in rape there is some physical evidence of damage. Shredding is severe, but if rape investigators find bruising that is used as evidence. Lack of it doesn't necessarily mean the woman consented, as he seems to imply, though!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 14:06:34 GMT
He seemed to be saying that when its rape then there will be damage. He seems to be implying that if there is no evidence of damage to the victim then it isn't rape.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 15:40:50 GMT
I don't see it in the same way as most people on here will (and I'll probably get a lot of people angry with what I say).
Look, too often comments get taken literally when they're just a sort of aside that's only part of the judgement or remarks.
Recently Hunny accused me of quoting hateful misandrist words by feminists out of context. (I'm not sure I agree but I've been trying to stay off subjects where I rile people because I'd rather keep the peace).
I'm sure this judge's words have been quoted out of context as well.
Now as it happened I WAS raped when I was 18 years old so I KNOW what rape is.
For what it's worth if I HADN'T been too drunk to know what I was doing I certainly WOULD have resisted and probably done the bloke some serious damage.
So what the judge is saying isn't as stupid or callous as some people are trying to make out.
For what it's worth the way I see rape is that it's a FORCEFUL way of having sex.
That means that there HAS to be coercion for it to BE a rape.
If there's for example a gun at your head, a knife at your throat or you're helpless for some other good reason then it's obviously rape and no one in their right mind would deny it was rape.
But if you've got the chance to fight or the chance to break free and you DON'T take that chance then I have to say I agree with the judge.
I get sick of the whole idea that feminists push about how women are 'victims' and that men are always aggressive bullies and rapists.
If they really believe we're as good as men then we have the SAME duty to stand up and fight if we're under attack.
Just lying back and moaning about it afterwards and saying how hard done by you've been and what a victim you are turns my stomach.
If I hadn't got drunk there's no way I would ever have been raped.
If I'd been sober I'd have fought like a tigress to defend myself.
So would any normal woman.
And for what it's worth I think the change in the law in California in 1980 so that the woman DOESN'T have to be resisting the alleged rape is a BAD piece of law and should be repealed.
If you resist, it's rape; if you don't resist, it isn't.
That's how I see it.
The ONLY exception I'd make to that would be if you're INCAPABLE of resisting because you're drunk or been given Rohypnol or something like that because then you CAN'T resist so you really ARE helpless and incapable of fighting.
Other than that it's your DUTY to fight.
Otherwise IMO it simply ISN'T rape.
This man should never have been sentenced to ANY prison time.
(Oh Lord, now the brickbats are going to come flying my way!)
|
|
|
Post by Hunny on Dec 14, 2012 16:25:27 GMT
Recently Hunny accused me of quoting hateful misandrist words by feminists out of context. (I'm not sure I agree but I've been trying to stay off subjects where I rile people because I'd rather keep the peace). Ooh, I guess I did do that to you, I'm sorry, I didn't look at it that way. I sort of thought I was pointing out how anyone and everyone will selectively accumulate evidence to support their point. We all do it. But obviously there you felt you'd successfully avoided that pitfall, and hey maybe you did. But anyway, I am sorry if I made you feel "accused" of anything. I didnt think I'd stated anything that strongly. Also, I can promise you I'd never get "riled" at you, not in writing anyway (lol, I'm kidding! ;D ). No you didn't rile me. But we both feel passionately on opposite sides of that issue, we found out. As to your comment about this thread, I found it interesting, but I'm waiting to see what others say, rather than comment, because I'm no expert on law or rape. There are others here who are much more well read in that area I bet
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 16:29:39 GMT
Recently Hunny accused me of quoting hateful misandrist words by feminists out of context. (I'm not sure I agree but I've been trying to stay off subjects where I rile people because I'd rather keep the peace). Ooh, I guess I did do that to you, I'm sorry, I didn't look at it that way. I sort of thought I was pointing out how anyone and everyone will selectively accumulate evidence to support their point. We all do it. But obviously there you felt you'd successfully avoided that pitfall, and hey maybe you did. But anyway, I am sorry if I made you feel "accused" of anything. I didnt think I'd stated anything that strongly. Also, I can promise you I'd never get "riled" at you, not in writing anyway (lol, I'm kidding! ;D ). No you didn't rile me. But we both feel passionately on opposite sides of that issue, we found out. As to your comment about this thread, I found it interesting, but I'm waiting to see what others say, rather than comment, because I'm no expert on law or rape. There are others here who are much more well read in that area I bet I didn't mean to make it sound like I was having a go at you, Hunny. Although we've only met not long ago you seem like a really nice person. But just because a bad law IS a law doesnt make it a GOOD law. And IMO the change to the law in 1980 IS a bad law. And I've got personal experience of what being a REAL rape victim is like so I think I've got some moral right to speak on the issue. But let's not fall out; I like you too much!
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 17:05:17 GMT
Read more: biglinmarshall.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=crimetalk&action=post&thread=5015&page=1#ixzz2F2xSUJ3wBut Donna, what about someone who submits only because she is terrified of the consequence if she doesn't? In the case above, putting up a fight might have cost the accuser her life, or at least caused serious injury: " Johnson made the comments in the case of a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver, beat her with a metal baton and made other violent threats before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes."I'm baffled as to why you think this man deserved to escape jail.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 19:19:17 GMT
Read more: biglinmarshall.proboards.com/index.cgi?board=crimetalk&action=post&thread=5015&page=1#ixzz2F2xSUJ3wBut Donna, what about someone who submits only because she is terrified of the consequence if she doesn't? In the case above, putting up a fight might have cost the accuser her life, or at least caused serious injury: " Johnson made the comments in the case of a man who threatened to mutilate the face and genitals of his ex-girlfriend with a heated screwdriver, beat her with a metal baton and made other violent threats before committing rape, forced oral copulation, and other crimes."I'm baffled as to why you think this man deserved to escape jail. Skylark, you've got no idea of the situation I was in when I was raped and believe me it was VERY nasty indeed. Once I came round after passing out from being drunk I found I was tied up and gagged. What he did to me from early Saturday morning to early Monday morning was a lot MORE than just threats. I don't exactly want to relive the experience on an open forum but I'll happily PM you the gory details if you like. Let's say I didn't just get threatened; I got physically, psychologically and emotionally tortured as well as raped orally, anally and vaginally a LOT over the course of that time. So I'm NOT someone talking out of a casual date rape that went a bit squiffy if you know what I mean. One of the reasons I didn't go and tell on him to the Old Bill was because I WAS scared what he might do if I done that. Especially as even though it was a right horror show there were also other sides to it that would have made ME look like a bad girl and so I decided that discretion was the better thing to do. On this specific case all the bloke actually DID was to make threats. He didn't actually beat her with a metal baton or the rest of the stuff which was all down to threats. But if you're sober and the bloke's threatening you with all that then you're pretty mad NOT to try and fight your way out of it or at least try and run. I know my attitude is going to offend a lot of people and I'm sorry for that. I DO know what it's like being a rape victim so it's not like I'm some cosy smug girl who's never been within spitting distance of the badlands.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 14, 2012 20:25:43 GMT
That' a sobering story Donna in more ways than one. Your lacking the confidence to report it makes me specially sad, because you may have been silly and drunk but you didn't ask for any of it.
But I would like to pick you up on this:
Maybe, maybe not. I might be petrified with fear, and do what he asked - unless I was confident that I'd a pretty good chance of escape.
But look at it from a different angle. Rape is sexual intercourse without consent. Consent given under threat of force is no consent. Therefore it was rape. So far as the sentence is concerned, the guy should not be treated as harshly as the man who carried out the threats - but letting him off jail because of it seems a step too far the other way.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2012 15:46:26 GMT
You don't have to have been a victim of rape to express a valid opinion on it.
According to the judge unless there was evidence of damage to the woman it wasn't rape , which is wrong. And anyway in this particular case she didn't report it until 18 days later so it may well have been the case that any bruising etc had gone.
It is not fair to critise someone for not fighting back if they have the chance. We are all different we may all react differently to situations, one rape is never the same as another one. It is over simplifying it to say that if a woman has the chance she should fight back. In some cases if a woman did that it would be a murder as well as a rape.
in my opinion of course.
|
|