RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected?

RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Lucylastic -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 8:16:54 AM)
Could very well be

DesideriScuri -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 10:57:25 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri Actually, what is being done should ultimately make a difference in the long run. I totally agree with you The guy isn't getting off. There will be another trial. Yes there will, Yes, she will have to suffer through it all again. As horrible as that may be for her, she'll have her however minutes of fame if/when this guy gets retried, once again found guilty, minutes of fame?? really? have you ever been thru a rape trial?? in any form? Already the court of "public opinion" has questioned wether she should have known it wasnt her boyfriend. and that she is crying wolf... that she shouldnt have been drunk, etc etc... minutes of shame and being questioned as being at fault? yes...He already said that she didnt actuallly consent, he didnt even try to claim such, just that she "responded". Now, thats just from what we have been told, Im well aware there may be more to the story, but the "minutes of fame" is my only WTF moment with your post and having the abysmal law that caused the overturning repealed, deleted, or whatever the term is for deep-6-ing it. Heres hoping its before the re trial Then again, if the jury convicted him solely on the law's definition of rape including having sex with a sleeping person, then the guilty plea will be reaffirmed and it would pass the appeals court.The fact that the lawyer went so far to claim it as being the reason for the appeal(and won) tells me that hes not too worried about that. So once again, I agree with you, but for the one "wtf "moment. Admittedly, a poor choice of words. Yes, she will, once again, have to go through a rape trial (no, I haven't been through on, or sat through one, but I can definitely imagine it not being the sort of thing that is enjoyable). The "moments of fame" comment was that there would likely be an historic footnote with her name on it. She will be linked to the improvement of law in CA, like a "Megan's Law" or "Caylee's Law." That was my meaning behind the "moments of fame" comment. I was not impugning her or anything like that. I do not think she brought suit to get the proverbial "15 minutes of fame."

Lucylastic -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:07:39 AM)
Thankyou for the clarification:)

DesideriScuri -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:12:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic Thankyou for the clarification:) Thank you for being open-minded enough to allow me the opportunity for clarification.

BamaD -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:14:57 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Lucy, considering the individual in question's past attacks on various posters, I would venture to say that anyone that holds such extreme viewpoints on so many subjects, and the tendency for those individuals to imply that specific posters, such as yourself, are nothing more than hypocrites, I would say that such individuals suffer a peculiar medical condition that is characterized by a 50% reduction in IQ every time they have a bowel movement. Note to mods, I did not refer to any poster by name, or in direct attack. nice to see someone else has the same evaluation of the posters condition as to the thread subject unless there is something about this case we don't know, and I mean something big this is an abomination even if they do convict again

Lucylastic -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:16:15 AM)
Shhhhhhhhh,dont let that get out!!!!!!!!!! ; )

BamaD -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:17:56 AM)
may I say how nice it is to see civil discorse on such an emotional subject of course what kind of monster would think rape is cool

naughtynick81 -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 12:28:38 PM)
http://imgur.com/PcRHQ

Aylee -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 1:33:46 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD may I say how nice it is to see civil discorse on such an emotional subject of course what kind of monster would think rape is cool Ummm. . . I think that you answered your own question. Only a monster would think that rape is cool.

BamaD -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 1:56:32 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD may I say how nice it is to see civil discorse on such an emotional subject of course what kind of monster would think rape is cool Ummm. . . I think that you answered your own question. Only a monster would think that rape is cool. it was a retorical question which of course answered itself

Politesub53 -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 4:35:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: naughtynick81 Just pointing out the same standards you apply on me. [:D] No, your just being a mysogynist wanker as per normal. How about addressing the actual point ? Lucy, I think if the law allows this, it should be changed. It is a disgrace this can happen in a modern society.

Aylee -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 5:28:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: TheHeretic quote: ORIGINAL: naughtynick81 I wonder what Lucy is doing about it. I don't think answering your curiousity is real high on Lucy's priority list, Naughtynick. I could be wrong, of course, but that's the impression I got. [8D] Lucy: [grabs Nick] Shut up! Will you shut up?! Nick: Ah, now we see the violence inherent in the system! Lucy: [shakes Nick] Shut up! Nick: Oh! Come and see the violence inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed! Lucy: Bloody Virgin! Nick: Ooh, what a giveaway!

jlf1961 -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 5:44:26 PM)
I have been following this thread for some time. Personally I think they should release this individual on bail and someone should supply the victim with a Barrett 50 rifle with a scope, a box of ammo and his address, and some god fearing individual should teach her the art of a sniper.

BamaD -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 8:30:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have been following this thread for some time. Personally I think they should release this individual on bail and someone should supply the victim with a Barrett 50 rifle with a scope, a box of ammo and his address, and some god fearing individual should teach her the art of a sniper. and of course a pre signed pardon transferrable in case she wants someone else to pull the trigger

BamaD -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 8:36:20 PM)
on the other hand he could star in the first episode of the running man

jlf1961 -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 8:42:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have been following this thread for some time. Personally I think they should release this individual on bail and someone should supply the victim with a Barrett 50 rifle with a scope, a box of ammo and his address, and some god fearing individual should teach her the art of a sniper. and of course a pre signed pardon transferrable in case she wants someone else to pull the trigger I have my own opinions on how these animals should be dealt with, but if I suggest something as radical as allowing them to be hunted by victims, families of victims or concerned citizens, I might get in trouble. Clearly if they exhibit the behavior of a sexual predator, they cannot be human.

PeonForHer -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 9:08:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have been following this thread for some time. Personally I think they should release this individual on bail and someone should supply the victim with a Barrett 50 rifle with a scope, a box of ammo and his address, and some god fearing individual should teach her the art of a sniper. Come on. Lucy and Nick could still one day be friends, no?

tazzygirl -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 10:36:33 PM)
lol.. why dont you ask her, Peon. I adore Lucy, and even I wont ask her that question.

graceadieu -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/4/2013 11:20:49 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mons It is okay for many couples to do this it is only that I would not care for it, drinking, sleeping and sex do not mix well! Yeah, you have to be careful with that. Sex with a sleeping or severely intoxicated partner is something you have to discuss ahead of time and find out whether it's okay or not (either as a one-time or ongoing thing). Doing it by surprise, without consent, like the guy in this case, is rape. And impersonating someone's partner so you can trick them into having sex that they otherwise wouldn't want? Also rape. Hopefully this law will be changed as a result of this case.

jlf1961 -> RE: Overturned Rape Conviction, Unmarried Women not protected? (1/5/2013 12:26:04 AM)
I have said what I think should be allowed to happen. But then due to what happened to a close friend, I am not the proper individual to make suggestions as to what should or should not be done. I have one opinion on the punishment of the person committing the crime. If my suggestion were to be used for these predators, then I would gladly take the job of teaching the victims the various techniques used by snipers and how to get either a clean kill shot, or one with the intention of causing a great deal of pain without the benefit of the target going into shock before he dies.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125