# Rape attempt victim and rescuer jailed for killing attacker



## FearlessFreep (Jul 10, 2008)

In Thailand

from http://www.bangkokpost.com/100708_News/10Jul2008_news03.php



> A former Thai boxer who intervened to prevent a woman being raped has been jailed, along with the woman he saved, for accidentally killing the attacker.
> 
> The incident, on Aug 29, 2005, was viewed by the Criminal Court yesterday as an attempt to bludgeon a person to death.
> 
> ...


----------



## terryl965 (Jul 10, 2008)

This just goes to show you, we all have got to learn control even in the heat of an attack.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Jul 10, 2008)

There is at least some small comfort that my country is not the only one where the law is screwy.


----------



## shesulsa (Jul 10, 2008)

terryl965 said:


> This just goes to show you, we all have got to learn control even in the heat of an attack.


So very, very sad and yet ... so very, very true.  But that would take knowledge.


----------



## bowser666 (Jul 10, 2008)

It is sad, that people will only look at this and say , the slashes were excessive because the guy was beat down already.  What a load of crap IMO. Shoudl she have let him rape and then done it ?  Would that make it ok then ?  What is wrong with the world today ? So sad and pathetic.  I sure hope the next life isn't as messed up as this one.


----------



## MJS (Jul 10, 2008)

Its things like this, that make people not want to get involved.  This is why I'd rather call for help, rather than physically get involved.  Anyways....I don't think that the guy did anything excessive.  Says that he just kicked him.  As for her taking the knife to the attacker....in the 'heat of the moment' chances are she wasn't thinking, but....the court is probably looking at what she did as excessive.  There was no longer a threat, so I suppose it'd be no different if we were attacked here in the states, and after the threat is gone, we continue to kick and stomp the guy.


----------



## arnisador (Jul 10, 2008)

> The woman admitted she used a knife to slash the attacker's face several times after he collapsed due to a series of blows from Aswin.



This certainly sounds excessive, though I agree that she needs to be given much leeway for being "in the heat of the moment". Why the boxer was found guilty isn't clear to me!


----------



## MA-Caver (Jul 10, 2008)

shesulsa said:


> terryl965 said:
> 
> 
> > This just goes to show you, we all have got to learn control even in the heat of an attack.
> ...


Actually I think it would take heart more than knowledge. You can learn and learn everything you can but my belief is that our hearts determines the amount of control we govern ourselves with. 

This is Thailand. Laws are expected to be screwy compared to western views. After all it's legal to have a child prostitute over there, so being screwed up in matters of preventing a rape shouldn't be a surprise. 

And it did say "accidental murder/homicide" so at least they acknowledged that it wasn't intentional. I think that would be SOP here as well until the investigation & courts clear the matter up.


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jul 10, 2008)

In Texas she could claim she was still in fear for her life, or temporary insantiy. But in that country the laws might work very differently than here. Here I doubt any jury would convict her of murder. Assault maybe, but not murder.

Deaf


----------



## KenpoTex (Jul 10, 2008)

I hate hearing stories like this...AFAIC, the would-be rapist got exactly what he deserved.


----------



## chinto (Jul 10, 2008)

well just goes to show you the sheep like idea that you are supposed to just let them hurt you or some such stupidity is not just something only people in the US or UK some how have begin to believe. sad really.. but there you are. 

I do believe the old adage is more true. " If you Desire Peace, then Prepare for War!" for if you are not an easy victim, country, or individual, then they will go find some one else easier to attack.:tank::apv::armed::biggun:


----------



## sgtmac_46 (Jul 11, 2008)

Deaf Smith said:


> In Texas she could claim she was still in fear for her life, or temporary insantiy. But in that country the laws might work very differently than here. Here I doubt any jury would convict her of murder. Assault maybe, but not murder.
> 
> Deaf


 No reasonable jury would have convicted.  She wouldn't even have been prosecuted in Texas.

But we have to remember that in THAILAND, unlike the US, justice is administered by the state.....you don't GET a jury trial!  Your guilt or innocence is decided by a judge or a panel of judges.  It's a legalistic society.

In the US, while we have laws.....any jury can choose to disregard those laws in the interest of 'justice' and find you 'not guilty'.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Jul 11, 2008)

While I think the would-be rapist got what he deserved, it was still excessive force. The woman escaped and ran for help. The attacker could have easily been restrained until authorities arrived vs. being beaten. If he couldn't be easily restrained then additional force is warranted and the pair would have had better defense for their own actions. 

The woman slashed his face several times after he collapsed. I can't see her really being "in fear for her life" at that point, angry, but not in fear for her life. But, it wasn't me, so who knows what she was really feeling. 

I'm not condoning the attackers actions, but it's a good example of what can happen if we don't maintain our heads in the heat of the moment (control, as Terry said). It's up to us to know the laws of our own country (and knowledge, per Geo).


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 11, 2008)

Thailand just gave rapist a free pass, basically. I guess their government endorses that sort of behavior towards women. 

Apalling, really. I would have preferred the rapist had lived and instead been castrated with a brick, but killing him runs a close second.

I suppose the concept of "Personal Responsibility" has flown out the window. IMHO, when you make a decision to do something, you freely accept the consequences of that action. This idea was all but overlooked in regards to the rapist, yet seriously overdone with concern to the victim and her rescuer. While the rescuer had an opportunity to decide to act, the victim did not. She reacted to an action; therefore, her decision was not made "freely". The rapist, on the other hand, acted freely. As far as I know, nobody held a gun to his head or kidnapped his family and threatened their lives if he didn't rape that poor girl. It's BS.


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jul 11, 2008)

Why are rape and murder considered different crimes?  Why is there petty theft and theft over $5000?  It's like" a certain amount of crime points gets you a certain amount of punishment points.  It's a stupid joke.  If someone is going as far as raping somebody they need an honest psych asessment to determine whether they deserve life imprisonment (80 years, not 25) with the option of voluntary death penalty or comitted to a treatment center for life.  You lose your temper and hit someone unprovoked (as in unthreatened by physical violence) you deserve 10 years first offense, second offense treat it as murder.  Out on good behavior?  That's not the deal.
Take theft.  There's a huge difference in stealing a loaf of bread to feed a family (which ought to bring the more important issue of why the family was starving in the first place to light) and pickpocketing, shoplifitng, stealing a car etc.
If someone's a ripoff artist why do they have degrees of theft.  Sure they have to look at the situation but it's the concept, not the action.  Justice isn't even attempted, it's just to placate those hurt.

There are lots of criminals who do the math "ya, it's worth 8 years, I'll be out in 3 or 4 on good behavior anyway."


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jul 11, 2008)

FearlessFreep said:


> In Thailand
> 
> from http://www.bangkokpost.com/100708_News/10Jul2008_news03.php


 Sounds bad


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 11, 2008)

> The judge ruled that Aruni acted out of anger and also fined her 100 baht for carrying a weapon in public without a valid reason.


 
Sounds like she had a pretty damn good reason to me!!


----------



## Deaf Smith (Jul 11, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> No reasonable jury would have convicted. She wouldn't even have been prosecuted in Texas.
> 
> In the US, while we have laws.....any jury can choose to disregard those laws in the interest of 'justice' and find you 'not guilty'.


 
And that is why, even with all the faults of the U.S.A., we are still the best country in the world. Sure our courts are slow but considing the rest of the world, it's light years ahead.

Deaf


----------



## ares (Jul 11, 2008)

In the state of Nebraska, a judge in one case told the woman that she could not use the word "rape" in court. It had to be sexual assault. Rape was too harsh of a word. Now I just don't get it, people who do these crimes are treated with kid gloves and the victims are made out to be the bad guy. Do I agree with the lady slashing the guy after he got taken out? No, but I don't blame her either. Why the boxer is in jail is over my head. Granted, he may kick harder and knows the spots to hurt someone, but he was just trying to help someone without using lethal force. Maybe this person had a weak chin. I see no fault in his actions.


----------



## Jade Tigress (Jul 12, 2008)

Em MacIntosh said:


> Why are rape and murder considered different crimes?



You're absolutely right. The thing is, rape is a form of *murder*. It kills women on the inside, and I believe the men who commit rape know that.


----------



## exile (Jul 12, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> No reasonable jury would have convicted.  She wouldn't even have been prosecuted in Texas.



I'd _like_ to think that this was true... but if you look at some of the idiotic civil judgments that have been recorded, such as the successful lawsuit against McDonald's over the burn case involving coffee served not just at industry standards, but at a temperature comparable to those produced by _home_ coffee machines, you gotta wonder. And while I can't lay my hands on the judgment, I've run across at least one case of a successful negligence suit by a would-be thief injured in an an attempted house burglary. These incidents were both _jury_ decisions, btw.

I agree that in places such as Singapore, China and other countries where there is, in effect, no independent judiciary system, your odds of getting justice are a lot lower (and probably tied more closely to your class status and annual income, though the phrase, 'how much justice can you afford?', is one that often comes up in (North) American contexts as well). And we have a crucial appeals court system which adds an important check-and-balance mechanism _within_ the judicial system. But any given jury, on any given day, can go haywire. Just go through the Horror Stories forum archives to see some choice examples of U.S. jury decisions from Hell...


----------



## celtic_crippler (Jul 12, 2008)

It's a nice, romantic idea to think that some folks can be reformed if we just show them kindness and understanding....

But the reality is that some people are more of a hinderence to civilization than not and the best thing we could do for them and us is to put them down. 

It costs billions of tax payer dollars to house, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for rapists, murderers, and child molesters....while a decent bullet only costs about $0.75.  Do the math. I'd prefer that money be spent to help a less fortunate kid get a college education and actually contribute something to society or go to help pay the medical bills for a family that can't afford insurance. 

May sound harsh, but that's my $0.02.


----------



## Guardian (Jul 13, 2008)

sgtmac_46 said:


> No reasonable jury would have convicted. She wouldn't even have been prosecuted in Texas.
> 
> But we have to remember that in THAILAND, unlike the US, justice is administered by the state.....you don't GET a jury trial! Your guilt or innocence is decided by a judge or a panel of judges. It's a legalistic society.
> 
> In the US, while we have laws.....any jury can choose to disregard those laws in the interest of 'justice' and find you 'not guilty'.


 
Exactly, it would have went to a Grand Jury and been no billed easily in my view if it even got that far here in Texas.


----------



## zDom (Jul 14, 2008)

celtic_crippler said:


> It costs billions of tax payer dollars to house, feed, clothe, and provide medical care for rapists, murderers, and child molesters....while a decent bullet only costs about $0.75.



On one hand, I agree very much with you.

But on the OTHER hand, how many times have we seen recently people cleared of a crime (rape, murder, etc.) by DNA evidence after serving 20 years in prison?


"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer" (William Blackstone)

"It is better [one hundred] guilty Persons should escape than that one innocent Person should suffer" (Ben Franklin)

The twelfth-century legal theorist Maimonides argued that executing an accused criminal on anything less than absolute certainty would progressively lead to convictions merely "according to the judge's caprice"  and and that "it is better and more satisfactory to acquit a thousand guilty persons than to put a single innocent one to death." (from Wikipedia)

And, finally, just for perspective:

"I'd rather let a thousand guilty men go free than chase after them." &#8212; Chief Wiggum


----------



## Touch Of Death (Jul 14, 2008)

ares said:


> In the state of Nebraska, a judge in one case told the woman that she could not use the word "rape" in court. It had to be sexual assault. Rape was too harsh of a word. Now I just don't get it, people who do these crimes are treated with kid gloves and the victims are made out to be the bad guy. Do I agree with the lady slashing the guy after he got taken out? No, but I don't blame her either. Why the boxer is in jail is over my head. Granted, he may kick harder and knows the spots to hurt someone, but he was just trying to help someone without using lethal force. Maybe this person had a weak chin. I see no fault in his actions.


He should have stopped her. He was responsible for that guy's safty once he took his conciousness.
Sean


----------



## Em MacIntosh (Jul 16, 2008)

Touch Of Death said:


> He should have stopped her. He was responsible for that guy's safty once he took his conciousness.
> Sean


I agree as far as the scenario is described but I wasn't there, woman with knife in shock...hmm...


----------

