Another Republican speaks out about rape...

Dirty Dog

MT Senior Moderator
Staff member
Lifetime Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 3, 2009
Messages
23,717
Reaction score
9,608
Location
Pueblo West, CO
Is there some secret school these people go to, in order to be so misinformed?

http://news.msn.com/us/judge-says-victims-body-can-prevent-rape

SANTA ANA, Calif. -- A Southern California judge is being publicly admonished for saying a rape victim "didn't put up a fight" during her assault and that if someone doesn't want sexual intercourse, the body "will not permit that to happen."
 
Is there some secret school these people go to, in order to be so misinformed?

http://news.msn.com/us/judge-says-victims-body-can-prevent-rape

DD, thank you for your outrage. please consider doing something concrete and practical to help
on this lingering horror, in your home community. I hope you will join in.
We desperately need your energy and your help.

The case occurred in 2008. Judge Johnson made his comments at the sentencing hearing for the convicted man
and came as the judge explained his sentence of only 6 years, instead of 16 possible years in prison

You understand that the legal requirement demanding visible proof of "deternined resistance"
was placed on (women and girl children) only victims of rape for decades - right?
(stipulated in statute across the country with slight variations in language among states)

No other violent felony statutes placed this hideous burden on victims, AFAIK

And rape statutes were gender specific (at the state level) until the last 30 years -
meaning only P in V assault was considered rape.
And FBI data collection parameters were not changed until this year. Y es, January 2012.

Meaning, horribly and sadly, that at the state level, no perpetrator could be arrested for
rape of an adult man or male child. (Other crimes could be charged).

Until people like me and thousands more fought like bloody hell for years , one state by one state,
nothing changed. There is extensive legal writing/commentary on the "requirement of resistance".

It is highly educational to read this body of writing and hearing the perspectives of those who once held these views.
But Judge Johnson is not remotely alone in his opinions, nor in application of his views to specific cases.

Here is the partial text of his comments:

Unbelievably, Johnson cited his time in the district attorney’s sexual assault unit when he lectured the prosecutor on why he was imposing a six-year sentence instead of the 16 requested. “I’ve seen sexual assault,” Johnson said from the bench. “I’ve seen women who have been ravaged and savaged whose vagina was shredded by the rape.
"I'm not a gynecologist, but I can tell you something," the judge said, according to documents released Thursday.
"If someone doesn't want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down.
The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case.
"That tells me that the victim in this case, although she wasn't necessarily willing, she didn't put up a fight," the judge said.
The judge, who has been on the Orange County Superior Court since 2000, also declared the rape "technical" and not "a real, live criminal case. "To treat this case like the rape cases that we all hear about is an insult to victims of rape," the judge said. "I think it's an insult. I think it trivializes a rape."

Here is what the woman was threatened with by the the assailant (her former boyfriend) - Please note, as in the great majority of cases _not a stranger_.

Metin Gurel, convicted of rape, forcible oral copulation, domestic battery, stalking and making threats against his former girlfriend.

The day he raped her, according to records, Gurel beat her with a metal baton, threatened to maim her face and vagina with a heated screwdriver, burn her face and hair with a lit cigarette lighter and shoot and kill her.

As we heard this year, Judge Johnsons' perspective is hardly isolated
I encounter those sharing his view- not as often as in the past but frequently enoughthat this brings no surprise,
only sadness and revived determination to bring them to an end.

with respect and appreciation for your post,

 
I'm curious as to what his being a republican has to do with this decision. I have seen outrages things said by all sorts of judges, things that boggle the mind. I remember one recently where the judge in England complemented the courage of a home invader. Judges do stupid things and need to be replaced.

http://uk.news.yahoo.com/pm-burglar...ghestRated&isNext=true&offset=20&pageNumber=1

He apparently told an offender who raided three homes in five days: "It takes a huge amount of courage, as far as I can see, for somebody to burgle somebody's house. I wouldn't have the nerve."
Handing the 26-year-old man a suspended 12-month term, the judge said: "I'm going to take a chance on you."
 
LOL Bill you are something else. If the judge was a Democrat would you still feel the same way? Or would you be posting link after link from Brieghtbart's site of the evil of Democratic judges?
 
Just noting a pattern of behavior for republicans. You're certainly doing a fine job of positioning yourselves as THE Party for the Ignorant and Mysoginistic.
 
They frequently deny rape, and other mysoginistic activity, especially when their favorite pro-abortion politicians are concerned, Bill Clinton, the dymamic duo Ted Kennedy and Chris dodd, and not to mention all the libs who still support the child rapist Roman Polanski, Whoopi Goldberg who said it wasn't rape, rape, or the other ones who fall over themselves to work with woody allen, so please, when it comes to treating women badly, the democrats shouldn't speak too loudly...

These wonderful actors, directors and producers who excuse child rape because polanski is talented...

http://www.indiewire.com/article/over_100_in_film_community_sign_polanski_petition#!

AFP is reporting that a grand assembly of filmmakers, actors and producers from around the world have signed a petition urging the release of director Roman Polanski, who was arrested Sunday in Switzerland on a warrant for a 1977 underage sex case in the United States. Woody Allen, Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, Martin Scorcese, David Lynch, Wong Kar Wai, Harmony Korine, Stephen Frears, Alexander Payne, Michael Mann, Wim Wenders, Tilda Swinton, Julian Schnabel, and Pedro Almodovar are among the 100 and counting film industry figures who have signed the petition, coordinated from France by the SACD, an organization which represents performance and visual artists.
"We demand the immediate release of Roman Polanski," urges the petition. "Film-makers in France, in Europe, in the United States and around the world are dismayed by this decision... It seems inadmissible to them that an international cultural event, paying homage to one of the greatest contemporary film-makers, is used by police to apprehend him."
The following is the SACD petition, followed by a list of names of people who had signed it as of tonight. For a more extensive detailing of Polanski's arrest and potential extradition to the United States, check out indieWIRE'scoverage from earlier today.

underage sex case in the United States.

Funny how the article defines the rape of a 13 year old girl. So now you have actors, directors, producers and journalists defining child rape as "underage sex." Yeah...the left is full of righteous people...

Democrats deny all kinds of biology, especially when it comes to babies in the womb...or out of the womb as the case may be. Let's not forget, it was the current democrat President, while a senator in my state voted 3 times against the "Born Alive Infant Protection Act," which required abortion doctors to give aid to babies who survived the abortion and were outside the womb. According to basic biology, at that point, breathing on their own, clear of the womb, and no longer an "unviable tissue mass," the democrat senator voted against rendering aid to that infant. Sooo...again...let's here how the high ground is held by the dems....
 
Last edited:
Is there some secret school these people go to, in order to be so misinformed?

http://news.msn.com/us/judge-says-victims-body-can-prevent-rape

The glib response would be Sunday school. But the flip side to the conservative concept of 'personal responsibility' is victim blaming. If something bad happens, it can only be the victims fault - they had the responsibility to not let it happen, no matter who else was involved. Stack with this the demonization of women as sexual temptresses, and you have a formula for excusing rape as the woman's fault, no matter how insane it looks.
 
The glib response would be Sunday school. But the flip side to the conservative concept of 'personal responsibility' is victim blaming. If something bad happens, it can only be the victims fault - they had the responsibility to not let it happen, no matter who else was involved. Stack with this the demonization of women as sexual temptresses, and you have a formula for excusing rape as the woman's fault, no matter how insane it looks.

Sounds just like the Arab and other countries where the woman is punished for rape often by being executed.
 
Sounds just like the Arab and other countries where the woman is punished for rape often by being executed.

And I draw ire of the guys when I say Western guys are not so different from those Middle Eastern guys they hate so much....
 
Does not shock me I've seen and heard judges say some stupid crap. I once saw a judge ask the audience in the court if we thought the guy was guilty or not. He actually asked for a show of hands and counted.
I was also told by a different judge that police officers can't be assaulted its part of our job we just need to accept it.
 
And I draw ire of the guys when I say Western guys are not so different from those Middle Eastern guys they hate so much....

We've only been thinking of women as humans instead of property for a few centuries at most - and change takes centuries to propagate through entire civilizations. There will always be those that call for the return to the older, crueler ways, particularly those who percieve benefit from them, regardless as to if the benefit is real.
 
We've only been thinking of women as humans instead of property for a few centuries at most - and change takes centuries to propagate through entire civilizations. There will always be those that call for the return to the older, crueler ways, particularly those who percieve benefit from them, regardless as to if the benefit is real.

Decades, Love, decades, not centuries.
 
Decades, Love, decades, not centuries.

You sounded proper English then just like wot I do!

Sadly this is the case, it is only decades since women started being treated as humans, even that could be described as generous.
 
You sounded proper English then just like wot I do!

Sadly this is the case, it is only decades since women started being treated as humans, even that could be described as generous.

you are rubbing off on me! ;)
 
Back
Top