LadiesBladewing
Posts: 944
Joined: 8/31/2005 Status: offline
|
Those are -exactly- the laws that I have an issue with, along with practices that are not "policy" but are pretty much standardized...like telling a jury to disregard any contracts, written and signed copies of service rules, and agreements to consent to edge-play practices performed in clearly consentual conditions, with or without the "victim" having pressed charges. In the case that I was an expert witness for, the "victim" claimed that she had been imprisoned for 3 years against her will, forbidden even to go to the grocery store without her boyfriend with her. She claimed that she was consistently beaten against her will and raped by the man and even by one of his friends. I'd known the couple as a pastoral counselor for 4 years (before they were even active in the lifestyle, since I knew them because of mutual spiritual organization involvement first), and they were well known in the local BDSM community... a "model" couple in the local lifestyle scene, with the lady often being a "model" for demonstrations. She had pictures of the "public beatings" from these demonstrations as evidence, and the jury was allowed to see them without bench comment, but they were told to IGNORE any comments from the accused's lawyer that included reference to the woman's "slave contract" or "consent agreements" and other "alleged consent-obtaining materials". Also, these items, as well as tape recorded "verbal" agreements and video agreements that were used to obtain consent for many of the public demonstrations were disallowed as evidence by bench edict. This included a SIGNED rules sheet that -required- the slave to handle routine things like shopping (and turning in the receipts to her Owner), personal care (including a bi-weekly session at a spa and daily trips to the gym to maintain her figure and health), attendance without supervision at local slave-group meetings, -and- a monthly "night-out" with friends at her former job WITHOUT her Master's direct supervision or attendance, which was in DIRECT contradiction to the charges. This was an act of spite on the woman's part, since she'd hooked up with someone else and didn't have the nerve to ask for release, since there was no "release clause" in her contract. The fact that the ruling was a 7 year sentance for kidnapping and battery blew all of our minds, though I suppose we shouldn't have been too terribly surprised. The only thing that saved him from a rape conviction was that she'd apparently sent a letter to a vanilla friend about the "great sex" she was having with this guy, and how she was even able to have sex with other people while she was with him. However, the bench completely discounted this letter as having ANY relationship to the kidnapping and battery charges, even though she was -clearly- happy, in the letter, with being with the guy!!! I also have to say that I was -really- glad that I'd told my ex-husband (we were separated at the time) about my proclivities and the groups I was involved with years before this, since my legal name at the time was publically listed by the media as one of the "experts" testifying. (I changed my name after my divorce, to the name that I was writing fiction under). I think he would have been...startled...if I hadn't said something up front. *chuckles* Lady Zephyr quote:
ORIGINAL: night101owl It sounds like (and I may be wrong) you're referring to mandatory arrest laws, where the person who was hit does not need to "press charges", because the hitter will be arrested and prosecuted regardless. A lot of people who are advocates for domestic violence victims find these laws problematic as well, because they take away the abuse victim's autonomy in a situation where ze most needs it, and because they may escalate dangerous situations. Mandatory arrest laws are just bad policy, through and through.
< Message edited by LadiesBladewing -- 10/7/2005 12:42:23 PM >
|