Killer Rapist Tarnish Victim's Reputation

Montcalm · Post by **Montcalm** » 2004-10-20 10:19pm

My Arm Fell On Her Neck

The Cleric · Post by **The Cleric** » 2004-10-21 12:04am

What the fuck? Fry that dumb fuck.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2004-10-21 12:06am

Typical, sadly very typical...

Frank Hipper · Post by **Frank Hipper** » 2004-10-21 12:14am

The Yosemite Bear wrote:Typical, sadly very typical...

Yes, and very sickening.

Cowardly piece of shit. Every time I hear about something like this it infuriates me, it really does. This scum deprived that woman of her future, after raping her, probably ruined the lives of her loved ones, and he has the unmitigated gall to lie in his defense.
The only possible course of action for him should be suicide.
Preferably suicide by coprophagy.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2004-10-21 12:25am

eww

I remember in Brownmiller's Men, Women and Rape. It's the primary defense of Rapists. The woman is at fault, for tempting them. Usually common with folks who take religion much too seriously. In Brownmiller a gang of youths re-inacted "A Clockwork Orange" and claimed that their victim had been at fault. The infamous Central Park Preppy Murder, The murder my dad was the foreman for (see "the river's edge" for the movie version, I still can't watch that movie)

Post by **RogueIce** » 2004-10-21 12:34am

How did he tarnish her reputation (aside from the rape-murder itself, I guess)? By saying it was consensual? Or did I miss something?

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-10-21 12:48am

RogueIce wrote:How did he tarnish her reputation (aside from the rape-murder itself, I guess)? By saying it was consensual? Or did I miss something?

Who cares? The guy deserves to be raped and murdered regardless.

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2004-10-21 12:49am

like I have said before, is there anyway we can alter US law so that all rapists and child molesters have to serve their sentance in the middle east?

SyntaxVorlon · Post by **SyntaxVorlon** » 2004-10-21 01:02am

Makes me incalculatably sad.

Post by **RogueIce** » 2004-10-21 01:19am

Darth Wong wrote:
RogueIce wrote:How did he tarnish her reputation (aside from the rape-murder itself, I guess)? By saying it was consensual? Or did I miss something?
Who cares? The guy deserves to be raped and murdered regardless.

Just curious. Rapists deserve the worst, but going through and screwing with their reputation? That's just sadistic.

Typhonis 1 · Post by **Typhonis 1** » 2004-10-21 02:11am

I prefer the system used by a Federal judge named Lynch....

Stark · Post by **Stark** » 2004-10-21 05:34am

The Yosemite Bear wrote:I remember in Brownmiller's Men, Women and Rape. It's the primary defense of Rapists. The woman is at fault, for tempting them. Usually common with folks who take religion much too seriously. In Brownmiller a gang of youths re-inacted "A Clockwork Orange" and claimed that their victim had been at fault. The infamous Central Park Preppy Murder, The murder my dad was the foreman for (see "the river's edge" for the movie version, I still can't watch that movie)

Sounds like the muslim 'we force women to dress in sacks because otherwise they'd be tempting us to rape them. And it'd be their fault, because all rape is because women tempt men into raping them; the men have no responibility' attitude.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-10-21 05:56am

The Yosemite Bear wrote:like I have said before, is there anyway we can alter US law so that all rapists and child molesters have to serve their sentance in the middle east?

Many places in the middle east have an even worse view on these crimes than this scum. That it is the womans fault is law in many places over there and even if it isn't embarassed relatives are quite likely to kill the victim to preserve their honor. As for child molestation, Muhammed married a 9 year old IIRC, not a good precedent.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2004-10-21 06:25am

Darth Wong wrote:
RogueIce wrote:How did he tarnish her reputation (aside from the rape-murder itself, I guess)? By saying it was consensual? Or did I miss something?
Who cares? The guy deserves to be raped and murdered regardless.

If you can prove he is lying.

I'm not saying I beleive him, but he hasn't tarnished any reputation, neither has he blamed her for anything.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-10-21 08:29am

InnerBrat wrote:If you can prove he is lying.

Oh, I'm sure that will be done in due time. Since Canada doesn't have the death penalty, I'm sure putting him General Population will have the deserved result. Even criminals have standards, after all...

I'm not saying I beleive him, but he hasn't tarnished any reputation, neither has he blamed her for anything.

The problem is this represents the nasty court tactic typical in the defence of rapists over here in which the accused says "she's a slut and she wanted it!", albeit usually in a slightly veiled form (though it boils down to that). It's basically a character slur--thus the "tarnished reputation"--to take advantage of situations where the physical evidence might be spun to show no violence can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Of course, his use of it just proves how stupid he is, considering it's not just rape but murder. The end result will probably be the Jury responding even more negatively than usual for basically being expected to be complete idiots. Now, mind, Jurors usually are complete idiots, but being told you're one is offensive even when you are one, and claiming "Err, we were having consensual sex in my car in a deserted wooden area when I slipped and my arm broke her neck" is basically a very technical way of calling someone an idiot.

tharkûn · Post by **tharkûn** » 2004-10-21 12:31pm

As for child molestation, Muhammed married a 9 year old IIRC, not a good precedent.

No the great prophet married a six year old; she was nine when they consumated the marriage. Even more disturbing, according to some hadithes he had wet dreams about Ayesha before he asked for her hand in marriage ... mind you he was 51 when he married her.

CJvR · Post by **CJvR** » 2004-10-21 01:17pm

tharkûn wrote:No the great prophet married a six year old; she was nine when they consumated the marriage. Even more disturbing, according to some hadithes he had wet dreams about Ayesha before he asked for her hand in marriage ... mind you he was 51 when he married her.

Gah! Thats even worse.

The Duchess of Zeon · Post by **The Duchess of Zeon** » 2004-10-21 11:01pm

tharkûn wrote: No the great prophet married a six year old; she was nine when they consumated the marriage. Even more disturbing, according to some hadithes he had wet dreams about Ayesha before he asked for her hand in marriage ... mind you he was 51 when he married her.

In fairness, puberty can start normally in girls as early as age eight, and adulthood is often measured in women in many cultures by the start of their menstrual cycle. That does not, of course, excuse the mental development factor, but his action was by no means unusual for the time and culture.

Post by **weemadando** » 2004-10-21 11:39pm

I have to say that I would have no remorse strangling a man like this with my own hands.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2004-10-22 04:29am

The Duchess of Zeon wrote: The problem is this represents the nasty court tactic typical in the defence of rapists over here in which the accused says "she's a slut and she wanted it!", albeit usually in a slightly veiled form (though it boils down to that). It's basically a character slur--thus the "tarnished reputation"--to take advantage of situations where the physical evidence might be spun to show no violence can be proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Claiming the sex was consensual (which lets face it is the only defence most rapists have), is NOT saying that the victim is a slut. Nor is it tarnishing her reputation. It's not a horrible thing to consent to sex.

To claim that using consent as a defence is tarnishing the reputation just exaberates things for the victim. One of the reasons rape is seen as such an unacceptable crimes, and one of the reasons that some rapists commit it, is because there is STILL a myth pervading society somehow that a woman who has sex is a bad person.

Violence surrounding the attack aside, (such as murder in this case) the effect on the victim is all societal. She's surrounded by people telling her she doesn't have to be ashamed and that she isn't a slut etc etc, which strongly suggests that if she had consented she would have been a slut.

This not only makes the PTSD suffered by the victim that much worse because she's continually being told how awful she should be feeling, but it encourages false accusations by women who don't want to be considered sluts.

This is all general, of course, and not pertaining to this case per sey, as the poor girl was murdered, but claiming consent is in no way tarnishing her reputation, because there is nothing wrong with having sex.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-22 04:44am

InnerBrat wrote: To claim that using consent as a defence is tarnishing the reputation just exaberates things for the victim. One of the reasons rape is seen as such an unacceptable crimes, and one of the reasons that some rapists commit it, is because there is STILL a myth pervading society somehow that a woman who has sex is a bad person.

rapists rape because they think that women having sex are bad persons?

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2004-10-22 05:10am

salm wrote:
InnerBrat wrote: To claim that using consent as a defence is tarnishing the reputation just exaberates things for the victim. One of the reasons rape is seen as such an unacceptable crimes, and one of the reasons that some rapists commit it, is because there is STILL a myth pervading society somehow that a woman who has sex is a bad person.
rapists rape because they think that women having sex are bad persons?

No, some rapists rape because they think that women are sluts, and they've been conditioned to think that being a 'lsut' is a bad thing, so they hate them.

Don't simplify the issue.

Bob the Gunslinger · Post by **Bob the Gunslinger** » 2004-10-22 05:14am

Innerbrat, there are actual other injuries caused by rape, including nerve injuries that can prevent women from enjoying sex fully for the rest of their lives, infections from STDs or other diseases and damage to the womb which results in infertility. Granted, these are rare, but there is also the risk of an unwanted pregnancy, which is not insignificant. And let's not forget that women (especially those who are in a monogomous relationship) and are raped (not by their SO) often feel a terrible loss of control over their lives and a loss of intimacy with their partners. They feel violated. I think that's much worse than the societal innuendo about her being a "potential slut".

But for the rapist to claim that she was asking for it is to push responsibility on the victim. It tarnishes women who claim to be raped because it says "She couldn't help herself. She wanted it. And now she's a manipulative flake who will send me to prison because she regrets her decision." That is the tarnishing, although not in this case (here I think it just adds insult to injury). It's saying that she's irresponsible and malicious.

InnerBrat · Post by **InnerBrat** » 2004-10-22 05:28am

Bob the Gunslinger wrote:Innerbrat, there are actual other injuries caused by rape, including nerve injuries that can prevent women from enjoying sex fully for the rest of their lives, infections from STDs or other diseases and damage to the womb which results in infertility. Granted, these are rare, but there is also the risk of an unwanted pregnancy, which is not insignificant.

These are also associated with consentual sex.

And let's not forget that women (especially those who are in a monogomous relationship) and are raped (not by their SO) often feel a terrible loss of control over their lives and a loss of intimacy with their partners. They feel violated. I think that's much worse than the societal innuendo about her being a "potential slut".

Sorry, I left out emotional and psychological effects. But these are still exasperated by being surrounded by people telling you you should feel violated and that you've lost control blah blah blah..

But for the rapist to claim that she was asking for it is to push responsibility on the victim. It tarnishes women who claim to be raped because it says "She couldn't help herself. She wanted it. And now she's a manipulative flake who will send me to prison because she regrets her decision." That is the tarnishing, although not in this case (here I think it just adds insult to injury). It's saying that she's irresponsible and malicious.

It's the only defense most rapists have, and where the is a false accusation, it's often more or less true.
In a case where the woman can't give a statement, like this one, to claim consent is in no way tarnishing her repuation because she has never claimed rape.
Where she has claimed rape, where the case boils down to her word against his, then one of them has to be lying. You can either claim the woman you had sex with is lying (thus 'tarnishing her reputation' if you must), or admit you are a scum sucking rapist bastard. What are most men likely to do?

Either way, merely claiming she consented to sex with you is not tarnishing her repuations.

salm · Post by **salm** » 2004-10-22 05:29am

InnerBrat wrote:
Don't simplify the issue.

i´m not. that was an honest question. hell do i know what messed up stuff goes on in the heads of rapists.