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 ...
The best summation so far!
LOL, we’re all impressed by how big of an internet bow-hunting badass you are.
*rolls eyes*
Also, larn to google.
*rolls eyes*
It is a dreadful leap to sanction violent crimes against a class of individuals because one disagrees with the actions of the class that is assaulted.
I do believe you missed my point entirely, and I'm not very motivated to restate it in easier words for you. But here goes; if the accusations are true, they are criminals guilty of rape, she needs boatloads of help, legalizing prostitution would inevitably lead to these types of crimes being charged as something other than rape, that would be bad. Let me know if that makes me an islamo-fascist.
Somehow, I don’t think the Nuge would smile upon your opinion in this thread.
Even if prostitution was legal, rape is still rape.
Makes absolutely no difference, except to a few on this thread.
Perhaps not.
Miles I wasn’t directing that comment at you. I was directing it at people who might believe that rape might not be all that bad.
This is what the feminists have said since the 1960s or so, and it still doesn't make sense. Feminists say it because they don't want to face all the implications of sex. They're in denial about the existence of a male nature that is capable of sex and violence in the same package, and about the fact that women nevertheless like men. In fact, women are attracted to men who are powerful enough to commit violence if necessary—and to men who would desire them uncontrollably if not for a more powerful urge toward honor and kindness.
Rape is by definition sex. It's also an act of theft, of desecration. And in the most flagrant cases, it deserves hanging, in my opinion. Cross-culturally, death is a very common penalty for it.
But it's still sex. According to criminologists, rapists are the most psychologically normal members of any prison population. They're morally deficient, obviously, but typically, they're not especially angry at women, or even their victims. They typically commit rape as a crime of opportunity, like stealing a car—sometimes committing rape in the course of stealing a car. Violence is a means, for them, not the end. Most rape victims are young and relatively attractive. The horrifying thing is that rape is sexual—for the rapist.
Execute rapists, by all means. It will save souls and educate potential criminals about the dangers of overriding your moral sense. But we'll only bring confusion on ourselves by denying human nature.
A specious analogy, there was a crime committed here and that crime was robbery of a service just as the counterfeiter was robbed of a tangible.
That’s a pretty serious charge in itself and he could serve some very serious time.
This judge knows what she's doing...the truth is, rape carries less of a judicial penalty than robbery or conspiracy. They will be locked up for far longer on those, than if the plaintiff won on the rape charges. The judge is looking at what will keep them off the street longer. It is an odd, but just ruling.
Any way you want to analogize it, it was still a rape. A woman who sells sex can still be a victim of rape. It doesn’t get more simple than that.
So child rapists aren’t comming an act of violence either, according to your logic.
It’s just sex.
“McDonald’s can refuse you serveice if you do not have shoes on.”
That is an advertised and posted policy. I don’t believe Prostitutes generally restrict their customers on much of anything and they most certainly don’t post it.
Her colleagues disagree with her. And if she doesn't comply with the law, she will not be a judge much longer.
Maybe he’d do a bit more time, but being convicted of robbery doesn’t have the same life-ruining flavor of being a convicted sex offender.
Half the value of a rape conviction is generated when this douchebag has to go explain to his 350 lb neighbor Big McLargehuge that he will be moving in shortly.
Probably a shoplifting charge would be more appropriate.
LOL, do you have experience with it or something?
Here's my point: Those who would argue that prostitution should be legalized, or would argue that sex is not the immense act that it is, and that it has been traditionally considered to be, must also be of the opinion that rape is not so large an offense, either.
Fix'd
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.