A friend of mine sent me this via email today
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/8455161.stm
QuoteFive men have been cleared of raping a woman after it emerged she had spoken online about group sex fantasies.
The 24-year-old from Liverpool claimed she was raped after visiting one of the men at his home in Bolton, after making contact on the internet.
But the trial at Preston Crown Court collapsed when computer evidence was produced showing her entertaining the prospect of group sex.
Judge Robert Brown ordered the jury to return not guilty verdicts.
Prosecutor Michael Leeming told a jury the case involved allegations of rape and conspiracy to rape at a house in Great Lever, Bolton, on 19 June.
:x
As my friend commented
QuoteIn other words, if a woman admits to having sexual fantasies, she asked for it. If she is forced to undergo elements of those sexual fantasies as part of a violent assault, her rapists and attackers committed no crime, because she had no 'credibility', no 'morals'. Apparently, it is impossible to rape a woman with no 'morals', where male recalcitrants get to be the judge of what is and is not moral. Apparently, when a woman admits to having 'entertained the notion' of being sexually experimental, that's a green light for men to rape her. And they have the gall to call feminists the cocking thought police.
:vom:
:vom:
:kingmeh:
:vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom: :vom:
Quote
Judge Robert Brown ordered the jury to return not guilty verdicts.
Is that just a figure of speech or did the judge just say "fuck you plebs, I'm making the decision here"
I thought it was the jury's job to decide for themselves?
Other than making sure there's no filth about when I'm at-it I really never had much interest in teh law.
I am less bothered by the judge's actions than by the prosecutor's. If the prosecution pulled the case and offered no evidence then I am not sure what grounds there would be for an appeal. We would need to see the evidence to be able to make a judgement - pretty much like a jury really . . .
PS Isn't it a good job that she didn't have rape/murder fantasies then they could have got away with . . . I know, you get it
eta punctuation
Afterthought:-
does this mean that courts will uphold the rights of people to have their sexual fantasies acted-out . . .
hmmm that could be a pretty slippery slope . . .
Considering the implications of this, I am never going to Bolton.
Right, because when the day comes, that one of us gets his head bashed in by agents of the Machine, we were asking for it long time ago, because we have "fantasies of how government works".
:crankey: :lord: :lord: :lord: :facepalm:
Fantasy =/= "Do this to me at any time whatsoever, and I will be OK with it."
Arrgh. I hate the world now. It usually takes until 9AM.
7:15am here. :|
Jesus fuck! You think the world can't get any more fucked up. And then, well, it goes ahead and does get more fucked up. Where do I get off?
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 14, 2010, 01:41:12 PM
Jesus fuck! You think the world can't get any more fucked up. And then, well, it goes ahead and does get more fucked up. Where do I get off?
Apparently, in Bolton. Whether you want to or not.
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 14, 2010, 01:41:12 PM
Jesus fuck! You think the world can't get any more fucked up. And then, well, it goes ahead and does get more fucked up. Where do I get off?
Personally I don't. I tend to think I'm incapable of imagining how fucked up the world can get :horrormirth:
Quote from: LMNO on January 14, 2010, 01:42:05 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 14, 2010, 01:41:12 PM
Jesus fuck! You think the world can't get any more fucked up. And then, well, it goes ahead and does get more fucked up. Where do I get off?
Apparently, in Bolton. Whether you want to or not.
There seems to be some universal law that anything or anyone named Bolton is immensely awful and wretched.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 14, 2010, 01:43:30 PM
Quote from: Rev. What's-His-Name? on January 14, 2010, 01:41:12 PM
Jesus fuck! You think the world can't get any more fucked up. And then, well, it goes ahead and does get more fucked up. Where do I get off?
Personally I don't. I tend to think I'm incapable of imagining how fucked up the world can get :horrormirth:
Yeah, I think that is probably the unfortunate, yet correct motorcycle.
Quote from: P3nT4gR4m on January 14, 2010, 11:14:25 AM
Quote
Judge Robert Brown ordered the jury to return not guilty verdicts.
Is that just a figure of speech or did the judge just say "fuck you plebs, I'm making the decision here"
I thought it was the jury's job to decide for themselves?
Other than making sure there's no filth about when I'm at-it I really never had much interest in teh law.
I wondered about that myself, actually. I'm going to go Google in a bit and see what I can find out.
:vom:
However, I think it will depend heavily on these chat logs. If they say "I love to fantasize about rape" then :vom: :vom:
If they say "Hey, let me come over to your house and we can have a big orgy with strangers" then I can see why the case fell apart. IN another article on the topic:
QuoteHe said: "It is right to say that there is material in the chatlogs from the complainant who is prepared to entertain ideas of group sex with strangers, where to use her words 'her morals go out of the window'.
"This material does paint a wholly different light as far as this case is concerned. We take the view that it would not be appropriate to offer any evidence."
He said he was particularly concerned about one chatlog entry which referred to her prepared to have intercourse with six men from Ireland who wanted to travel to the woman's home.
In another entry, she candidly admitted she was not comfortable engaging in group sex with men she knew but was perfectly happy to indulge with strangers.
http://www.theboltonnews.co.uk/news/4847224.Five_men_from_Bolton_cleared_of_gang_raping_a_woman/
So I think the reason the Prosecutor dropped the case was probably because he felt the jury would look at these chat logs and have reasonable doubt that she was 'unwilling'.
If she was raped, that's horrible and the men should be stripped, tied to the back of a car and given a free ride around town... They still have cobblestones in Liverpool right?
If she jumped into an orgy with strangers/fantasy rape and then wanted to stop halfway through... it would be very hard to get a conviction and a prosecutor's office isn't gonna spend the money on a case if they don't think they'll win.
As an aside... she can't have an orgy with her friends, but she can with total strangers? What kind of fucked up BiP Brick got tossed at her head? If your "morals go out the window" around strangers then you don't have morals, just social conventions when you're around your friends.
:horrormirth:
Why would a woman who had just had a treasured fantasy fulfilled choose to accuse the men who made her dreams come true of rape . . . ?
eta And do NEVAR forget the safeword
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRGH!
shitfuckasspissballscuntdickcheesesantorumscrotumpastryinamotherfuckingblender
It's times like this that I briefly slip into a Rorschach-like mentality and feel like going vigilante. But that wouldn't help anybody.
So.....
I have fantasized about a horde of amazons running me down for genetic material.
I have just discussed it on the internet.
Precedent says someone cannot be found guilty for doing so now.
(R, poking Murphy's Law with wishful thinking since 1989)
Please refer to Monty Python's Meaning of Life, Chapter VII, first vignette.
(It wasn't until '98 that performing "Every sperm is Sacred" as improv musical in the school corridors occured to us.)
I was referring more to the "Amazons chasing you for genetic material" bit.
You know, someone with some half decent hacking skills could make it look like those men had fantasies about being raped by pitbulls.......
I hate people.
Quote from: BabylonHoruv on January 14, 2010, 09:19:14 PM
You know, someone with some half decent hacking skills could make it look like those men had fantasies about being raped by pitbulls.......
ITT BabylonHoruv invents the ultimate troll :evil:
Quote from: MMIX on January 15, 2010, 12:58:32 AM
Quote from: Felix on January 14, 2010, 10:47:19 PM
I hate people.
won't stop them fucking you . .
I hate people with tools. Using my bare hands would get tiring.
Quote from: Cain on January 14, 2010, 10:48:14 AM
A friend of mine sent me this via email today
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/manchester/8455161.stm
QuoteFive men have been cleared of raping a woman after it emerged she had spoken online about group sex fantasies.
The 24-year-old from Liverpool claimed she was raped after visiting one of the men at his home in Bolton, after making contact on the internet.
But the trial at Preston Crown Court collapsed when computer evidence was produced showing her entertaining the prospect of group sex.
Judge Robert Brown ordered the jury to return not guilty verdicts.
Prosecutor Michael Leeming told a jury the case involved allegations of rape and conspiracy to rape at a house in Great Lever, Bolton, on 19 June.
:x
As my friend commented
QuoteIn other words, if a woman admits to having sexual fantasies, she asked for it. If she is forced to undergo elements of those sexual fantasies as part of a violent assault, her rapists and attackers committed no crime, because she had no 'credibility', no 'morals'. Apparently, it is impossible to rape a woman with no 'morals', where male recalcitrants get to be the judge of what is and is not moral. Apparently, when a woman admits to having 'entertained the notion' of being sexually experimental, that's a green light for men to rape her. And they have the gall to call feminists the cocking thought police.
-- Even in portuguese, I can't say how this disgust me.
Asco.
Yeah, it's about as bad as people get.
humans suck
Wow, I just read this thread, right nao....
I would say the issue lies with tacit consent, but this is where Western Philosophy and basic Social Contract theory fail to keep up with the depravity of modern civilization.