Skip to comments.Bar blasts judge for calling prostitute's rape 'robbery'(FEMALE JUDGE!!!!)
Posted on 11/01/2007 5:07:20 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
In a rare rebuke, the city's bar association condemned a judge who dismissed rape charges in the alleged gang rape of a prostitute and instead called it a theft of services.
The prostitute admitted going to a home on Sept. 20 to have paid sex with a customer but said she was instead gang-raped by four men, including the customer, while he fixed a gun on her.
Municipal Judge Teresa Carr Deni dropped the rape and sexual-assault charges at an Oct. 4 preliminary hearing, but upheld robbery, false imprisonment and conspiracy charges against Dominique Gindraw.
Deni has since heightened the furor in defending her decision to a newspaper.
''She consented and she didn't get paid,'' Deni told the Philadelphia Daily News. ''I thought it was a robbery.''
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
Well, how about if she and her john agreed to $100, and he only paid $50? Can she sue him? She's gotten herself into a situation too goofy for anyone else to competently referee. After all, if the law gets involved, what principle is it defending? The sanctity of contracts? There is no enforceable contract here, because prostitution is (in America) illegal. How about protection against illicit sexual congress itself? She's in the business, and solicits violations against legally sanctioned boundaries so routinely, it's not feasible for the state to police each one.
Briefly, she's toying with the idea of law, and given the shortness of life and the fact that more reasonable people have matters that merit the courts' attention, I don't see the state as obligated to join her game. If someone shot her, that would be another matter. But in this case, she should just be arrested for prostitution, period. I don't even see the "theft" argument.
The woman legitimately has remedies in this situation, but they are those within herself, such as reforming her life.
The same principle applies though. She agreed to a certain deal, but upon arrival the deal was changed. She would be as much a victim as the tractor repairman.
A few personal attacks to go along with your venom.
I am not the only poster on FreeRepublic that disagrees with you n00b. Crawl back to DU where you came from.
You apparently don't care much for the legal definition of rape. So, what's your personal, preferred definition of rape?
She ASKED FOR gang-rape and at gunpoint?!?
Some supposedly religious folk truly do relish punishing others they see as "lesser". They're neither good Christians, nor good Americans. They love using their faith and voice/vote to injure others so they can continue to sanctimoniously feel superior.
I can only hope that those who so adore meting out pain to others do not get their come-uppance someday.
(I recall a few stories about Christ and prostitues... but I missed the verses where he advocated for their gang rape, and told them that they got what they asked for.)
I know this may be hard for you to believe, but hookers are people too. Not a sub-group to use and throw away and have a second set of laws which apply to them, all things you would do if you could.
Rape isn’t based on subjective “distastefulness.” It’s an objective legal thing centering on consent. Otherwise, I daresay, a whole LOT of innocent men would be in trouble.
I am not a legal eagle, nor do I play one on TV and I didn't sleep at a Holiday Inn Express last night. However, there are people in prison for robbing dope dealers of their drugs and money. And if someone had a stash of marijuana in his house, and a guy broke in to steal it, he could go to prison for residential burglary.
Yeah, I’m from DU because I look at a GANG RAPE of a woman as being wrong. Give me a break.
At least many on DU have a heart, although their notions may be misplaced. I feel sorry for you, when you look at the GANG RAPE of a woman as nothing more than simple theft.
You simply don’t get it.
And probably never will.
Very well said.
“The same principle applies though.”
I don’t believe it does. The “deal” would not be something the repairman would ever conceive of offering up whereas the hooker would do so by definition.
Now if for example the prostitute would have been a “dancer” or “strip-o-gram” that do not routinely have sex with their clients in the course of their job and sex was “forced” it would indeed be rape as well.
PROTIP: It isn’t hard to tell when someone’s been gang raped.
Does that really matter?
Looking at the facts here, and if they are as the victim stated, she was the victim of a gang rape. There are other charges too. The involvement of a gun makes it an assault with a deadly weapon. There could be false imprisonment and kidnap also.
The principle here is that both would be victims of a sex crime, and it doesn’t matter what they were offering up for sale.
Yes, it would still in reality be rape. No question. In a legal context however, I believe it would be much easier for the defense to argue that only theft had occurred, since the victim voluntarily reduced the act of sex with her to a service to be purchased. The perpetrators then simply “stole the goods” without payment. Still wrong, still rape, but law and the courts don’t operate on a system of right and wrong. They only concern themselves with the law.
Th OP thought it mattered that the judge in the case was a woman. Did you read the headline?
But as is all too evident here, emotion and previously held ideas trump facts.
The fact that she is a prostitute means that she deserves what she got, or so goes the Stong Age thinking by many here.
“Rape isnt based on subjective distastefulness. Its an objective legal thing centering on consent.”
Agreed, but does anyone here honestly believe that consent would have been witheld if the money had been paid.
If a prostitute chooses to lower themselves to the level of selling sex as a commodity and the dispensation of it as a business endeavor then it should be legally treated as such.
Assault probably, armed robbery, likely, kidnapping, possibly,but rape NO.
since at some point they will offer their services for money.... More realistically at ANY point.... I dont believe there are many hookers out their that wont negotiate a price given the opportunity."
So you know that how? Was there a survey in Time maazine, then? Maybe you're basisng your insights on movies? How would you know?
I didn’t punish the woman.
If I saw her laying bleeding in the road, I would certainly offer my services, call the police and ambulance. If I witnessed the crime, I would stand in court and testify. Hopefully I could inspire her to change her life. This is all I could possibly do in Christ.
Indeed the thinking of many here is probably identical to most men in Riyadh.
I think you intended this for somebody else. I’m on your side. I’m defending the right of the prostitute-— and of every man, woman, boy, girl, and sentient life form -— not to be raped.
No Red, you act like you are the only one who can have an opinion. You called me names and questioned my intelligence, you are a n00b who has threatened to quit coming to FR unless we all agree with you.
Why are you here?
I never said “I know” I said “I believe” and it’s what’s known as an educated guess.
Any other rationale would be possible but highly counterintuitive.
I believe she consented when she agreed to a price and appeared at the man’s home ready to engage in sex. She made herself a commodity to be bought and sold.
There is no general, blanket presumption of consent. Even a married woman, who has an ongoing legally-recognized sexual relationship with her busband, can prosecute for rape if she can prove force, threat of force, or explicit coercion (overriding her right to consent or refuse.) Hard to prove perhaps, rarely leading to conviction perhaps, but she still has standing to bring the charges.
And you spelled n00b with zeros. OMG how 1337.
Why are you posting over and over how you don’t think you can rape a prostitute? This seems to be really important to you.
Sheesh, this is more asinine than those retarded “black people aren’t as smart as us white people lol” threads that have been trashing up the place.
Re: You called me names and questioned my intelligence,
I also question the intelligence of those who believe in honor killings.
Or supporters of the Hudood Ordinance.
Or supporters of stonings.
Sadly, your opinion lines up with those opinions very closely, so do not be surprised to hear people question your intelligence.
A crime is still a crime no matter who the recipient is. Say a drug user shows up for a fix and instead gets pummeled close to the light at the end of the tunnel... was a crime perpetrated or was it not?
Again, I believe the distinction in busineess practcie is the key element of the argument.
If the repairman had on his list of services: blades sharpened $25, BJs $50 and someone came into his business and forced the repairman into a free BJ at gunpoint that would be armed robbery not rape.
As a business person one can’t offer a service at reasonable compensation to the general public and then pick and choose who may and may not be served.
She consented to a GANG RAPE with a gun held to her head?
You must have read a different story.
Re: As a business person one cant offer a service at reasonable compensation to the general public and then pick and choose who may and may not be served.
Of course they can.
McDonald’s can refuse you serveice if you do not have shoes on.
The law doesnt't recognize sexual intercourse as a commodity in the jurisdiction in which the crime was committed. If she chooses to sell other things that the law doesn't recognize as commodities-- say she offers to sell her children and somebody takes her children without paying--- should that be treated as theft? Or kidnapping?
That's not to say she should be held innocent in such a case. If a woman attempts to contract to sell her children, she can be prosecuted for that. If a woman solicits for prostitution, she should be prosecuted for solicitation. And the men, in this case, prosecuted for rape.
These people give FR a bad name.
I don’t support any of those things. Never even heard of Hudood....you are free to question my intelligence if it makes you “feel” better.
Actuaally it would be sending her to jail for prostitution.
You may not support the Hudood Ordinance, but your thinking lies not very far from that type of thinking.
You would fit in very well in Saudi Arabia.
You cannot have sex while you are being GANG RAPED. One act obviates the other.
Excellent observations. I am firmly against legalizing prostitution, because it devalues both men and women. It also devalues children, as it denies the natural, possible outcome of the act.
Ok, since you are defining prostitution as a business, I'll take it further.
There is a thug who uses a gun to rob people. One day he is walking down the street and someone points a gun at him and robs him. So, since he is a robber, he can't be the victim of a robbery.
Another guy is a counterfeiter. One day he sells something he owns, and someone gives him counterfeit money. But because he is a counterfeiter, he cannot be a victim of counterfeiting.
A guy steals cars and sells them cheap. One day his own car is stolen. But he can't be a victim of car theft because he steals cars.
Re: . Those who have decided that prostitution is a fine career that should be legalized, and who have decided that meaningless sex is possible, cannot at the same time consider rape to be all that bad
Rape is an extreme act of violence, not of sex.
There is heck of alot of ignorance on this thread.