Posted on 06/19/2007 8:45:29 AM PDT by george76
Tory Bowen says she knows what happened to her ...
But she won’t be able tell her story to jurors... because a judge’s order bars witnesses from using words like “rape” and “sexual assault” in the trial of Pamir Safi, who is accused of sexually assaulting Bowen.
In my mind, what happened to me was rape,” said Bowen, 24. “I want the freedom to be able to point in court and say, ‘That man raped me.’”
Last month, Lancaster County District Judge Jeffre Cheuvront denied a motion by prosecutors that would have prohibited Safi’s attorneys from using words like “sex” and “intercourse” when describing the encounter between Safi and Bowen.
The Lancaster County Attorney’s Office had argued the words would imply Bowen consented to have sex.
Cheuvront also has sustained an earlier motion by defense attorneys barring the words “rape” and “sexual assault kit.”
In Bowen’s opinion, Cheuvront’s ruling means she will have to lie on the witness stand.
“The word ‘sex’ implies consent,” she said. “I never once would describe (what happened) as sex. He’s making me commit perjury.”
“I have a problem (with a judge) directing a witness, not the government, to say certain words. It impugns their candor, their credibility.”
Most of all, Murphy said, Bowen won’t be able to explain to jurors why she’s using clinical words — or, worse, words that imply consent — when she describes the encounter with Safi.
“Jurors will go back to their room and say, ‘She didn’t feel it was harmful. After all, she called it sex,’” Murphy said.
“It’s like saying to a robbery victim, ‘You can’t say you were robbed, because that’s a legal judgement. You can only say you gave your stuff to the defendant,’” she said. “That’s absurd.”
(Excerpt) Read more at journalstar.com ...
So what did happen?
there is more to this case...
There’s ways around it.
Safi and Bowen were strangers to each other when they met at a downtown Lincoln bar the night of Oct. 30, 2004. According to testimony from the first trial, the two had drinks and then left together after the bar closed at 1 a.m.
Bowen told an investigator the following day she could not remember most of the previous evening and that she did not willingly accompany Safi, according to a Lincoln Police report from November 2004.
She told the investigator she could only recall waking up in a strange apartment with an unknown man who was “having sexual intercourse with her.”
Now I ‘get it’.
I wish I could take a stick to the judge. Then later, I wish the police would refuse to allow the jolly jurist to describe himself getting sticked as “an attack” in their report. He could only describe it as “an encounter [with a stick]” or a “chance meeting [with a stick]”.
I wonder where the feminist groups are. Shouldn’t they be protesting this idiot judge’s ruling?
I have also begun to wonder if Mr. Safi is a practitioner of the ROP?
Deconstruction of the language - and the failure to have a national language - will destroy this country.
Judge “Jeffre”! Puhleeze!
” He raped her. “
This judge seems to have been studying the vocabulary of bill clinton.
More uncovered meat ?
Did he? There has already been one hung jury.
Woman picks up a man in a bar, leaves willingly, goes to his home, and then claims ‘rape’?
I’d say its he said she said....and she should have known better. Not saying it wasn’t ‘rape’ as defined, just that this is going to be almost impossible to prove beyond a reasonable doubt.
I don’t see anything remotely construed as physical abuse, like bruises being referenced. Or scratches on either one of them.
Appeal the findings and order on the defense motion...
Put the lib judge on notice...
Just guessing : He could have used a date rape drug...
or she is a ...?
just another example of how our judicial system has gone wrong. last night on o’reilly they were talking of a judge that gave a convicted rapist probation because he felt that he was depressed when he committed the crimes. people better wake up soon before it is too late, or is it to late already?
‘Just guessing : He could have used a date rape drug...’
Or she was buying her own drinks.....
‘or she is a ...?’
I won’t speculate. I just know if you pick a man up, go to his house, and then claim to ‘wake up to find him having sex’ with you....well, why did you go home with him, again?
Now, if a date rape drug is detected, I think that absolves her to a large degree. But if she's simply drinking too much, blacking out, and winding up in bed with a stranger ... well ...
Yep, I agree with Paglia.
If a date rape drug was present, that would have come out in the first trial. I also suspect the judge wouldn’t have insisted on these stringent rules of what can be stated, and what can’t.
Why doesn’t censorship apply? A government agent is restricting her speech.
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.