• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

U.S. judge says victims' bodies can prevent rape

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."
Click to expand...

Huh, I just, well, I don't....

What?
 
I know a woman who sat on a jury in a rape trial that returned a unanimous not guilty verdict because the woman did not put up any resistance and there was no sign of trauma in the rape exam done a few days after the encounter.
 
I've only got two ideas about what's going on here.

1. Judge Derek is two aliens in a symbiotic relationship: one is the brain, the other the body, and on his planet if the body comes into peril and the Brain is unable to control the situation the Body will have some A.I. mechanism that will literally...shut it down, and he thinks all humans are built the same way.
2. Actually, there is no second option. Option 1 is the only one that makes sense.

My favorite quote?

"I'm not a gynecologist..."
Click to expand...

No way!
 
Last edited:
I guess he is the poster boy for Judaical activism.
 
The dude is spot on.

How many rapes do you think Rosanne Barr's body could repel?
 
While technically, the term government is badly used here because the judges don't govern anything, it is indeed valid that there are many idiots in governing and the judicial branch. Proof that having an education and decency won't get you a good job, but rather being lucky enough and end up being a judge, will.

Anyway, on the topic of rape. I am personally in favor of castration for people who are repeat sexual offenders. Or at least sterilization.

On that note, I was also under the impression that all police suggestions in case someone does get raped is to not put up a fight in order to increase their chances of survival and not make it more horrible than it already is.

Well. That is what I was under the impression. I may be wrong, but yeah... so the judge is a moron no matter how you slice the cake.
 
Worse than "unfortunate". This kook can send people to prison or have them executed. Judges have a lot of power.


Objective-J said:
unfortunately just one of many bat**** insane people we have in this country, this is even more unfortunate that he is a judge.
Click to expand...
 
specklebang said:
Worse than "unfortunate". This kook can send people to prison or have them executed. Judges have a lot of power.
Click to expand...

well i def agree it needs a better word, scary, crazy


but sadly im not "surprised"
 
Is it me or do we see more and more of this kind of public stupidity? I know this election was pretty disgusting, filled with hatred and lies. But what''s this guys excuse? Why does nonsense like this pop out of their mouths? Sure, its just one idiot in this case but the environment that allows this doesn't seem at all right to me.


Objective-J said:
well i def agree it needs a better word, scary, crazy


but sadly im not "surprised"
Click to expand...
 
specklebang said:
Is it me or do we see more and more of this kind of public stupidity? I know this election was pretty disgusting, filled with hatred and lies. But what''s this guys excuse? Why does nonsense like this pop out of their mouths? Sure, its just one idiot in this case but the environment that allows this doesn't seem at all right to me.
Click to expand...

yes we definitely SEE/HEAR it more but i dont think that its wrose or getting worse, the coverage of it has just gone up and ways to access that coverage are endless

i do agree though, HOW does this happen? HOW does this guy go under the radar?
 
specklebang said:
Here we go again. We are governed by idiots. Just imagine getting this ding-bat as your Judge.

U.S. judge says victims' bodies can prevent rape
Click to expand...
I hope by admonished they mean fired and the educational institution that gave him a degree has come and taken it back.

It just goes to support my idea there needs to be a long involved test for any government official that wants to go further than clerk.I wonder if i could kick that judge in the nuts and get away with it by saying if he really did not want to be kicked in the nuts his nuts would have crawled inside his body for protection?
 
This is utterly abhorrent. This judge should be censured and disbarred. What a dispicably vile and misogynistic "opinion" to be issued with the force of the law behind him. According to him, a woman with a gun to her head who submits to violation rather than being shot to death has not really been raped. Only if she fights to the death, and has her genitalia "shredded" is she really a rape victim.

How many woman-hating, biologically-challenged judges are there actually out there, setting rapists free while blaming their victims for basically not being dead? This disgusts me to the point of nausea. :2mad:
 
And the beat goes on and the beat goes on.


OMG sex education in schools burn the books and the bastards that teach it. Ahhhhhhhh
 
This reminded me of a story from about ten years ago regarding a rapist who was let off because his victim wore jeans, the rationale being that jeans are so difficult to take off that it can only be done by a woman who does so of her own volition. So I googled the keywords, only to be horrified by stories from multiple places in the world where this defense was not only used, but worked.

From South Korea:

Rape Charge Called Into Question Over Jeans

Is a woman whose jeans were found neatly folded by a bed likely to have been the victim of an attempted rape? A dispute is rising over a court ruling saying she could not have been since it is difficult for denims to be taken off by someone other than the wearer.
Click to expand...

From Australia:

You're not guilty of rape: Those skinny jeans were too tight to remove by yourself, jury rules | Mail Online

A man was acquitted of rape today after a jury agreed his victim could not have been sexually assaulted while wearing skinny jeans.

Nicholas Gonzales, 23, told a court in Australia that sex with the 24-year-old woman was consensual, despite her claim he had ripped off her size six skinny jeans before the attack.
Click to expand...

From Italy:

Lodi News-Sentinel - Google News Archive Search

Appeals court finds rape of jeans-wearing women impossible.
Click to expand...

From Wales:

Rape of woman in skinny jeans 'not possible'

CAN a woman wearing skinny jeans be raped? Or are they so tight they can be taken off only with her consent?

These are some of the questions a jury asked before acquitting a Sydney man of sexual assault.
Click to expand...

All modern industrial democracies. We've still got a long ways to go.
 
vendur said:
The dude is spot on.

How many rapes do you think Rosanne Barr's body could repel?
Click to expand...

If the guy has eyes that work, all of them.
 
Ray410 said:
Hillary Clinton
Click to expand...

Hillary Clinton - SecState for Barack Obama - Employed Kal Penn during his 2008 campaign - Was in Deck the Halls with Jackie Burroughs - Was in Cavedweller with Kevin Bacon.

Wait, what were we doing?
 
I realize that this is not applicable. My concern is the mentality behind the statement. A Judge should NOT be a fool with other people's lives in his hands.


Aderleth said:
As the article points out (or references, at least), this judge's views are not merely outdated, they're explicitly rejected as a matter of law in California, and have been for at least 30 years.
Click to expand...
 
specklebang said:
I realize that this is not applicable. My concern is the mentality behind the statement. A Judge should NOT be a fool with other people's lives in his hands.
Click to expand...

I agree. I was coming from the perspective of "not only is this an awful, and wildly innacurate sentiment, but the judge - by bringing it up in court - is actually rejecting the legal framework he's bound to enforce."
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom