Alleged Rapist Not Guilty Due To Tight Jeans

Submitted by: talleysgrrl 7 years ago in
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/worldnews/article-1270113/Youre-guilty-rape-Those-skinny-jeans-tight-remove-jury-rules.html

Oh, I-A-B, you"re going to love this jury"s rationale. Who else is pissed off and a little confused?
There are 184 comments:
Female 1
@ KRAYZEEGIRL
I can`t believe you would say that being raped was a lesson. It`s an act of assault and it should be treated as such. If a person says no (be they male or female) their partner has to respect that. Even if this woman was following the guy into his bedroom it did not mean she wanted to have sex with him. I know it`s what it comes off as, and I understand that, but maybe she didn`t want to go all the way or something of the sort. I think that if you make a clear sign that the other person has gone too far any previous assumptions they may have held need to be disregarded. No matter what you think a person wants, in the end they are the ones who know when is enough.
Also, I hang out with guys who are are several years older than I (I`m 17, they are 24 and 25). I see our relationship as healthy, platonic, and much more intellectual than any other of my groups of friends.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"so byebye to skinny jeans for me??"
Jeans are fine. It`s the false rape description that has to go.
0
Reply
Female 635
so byebye to skinny jeans for me??

:`[
0
Reply
Male 5,624
Narikotsu, I understand the context yet, am completely against KRAYZEEGIRL`s "Lion`s Den" defense but, I really would like a serious answer: How did he get the pants off?

0
Reply
Male 988
"I`m so infuriated right now, I can`t even speak. Because I`m vomiting fire."
This.
0
Reply
Female 447
There are people out there that follow women or sometimes men home and attack them with weapons and rape them. That is rape. When you accept an invitation into a persons home and than continue to follow them into their "bedroom" your dumb ass was asking for it. And as far as your friend getting raped narikotsu, i am sorry to hear that and both of you should take it as a lesson learned. There is no reason a 15 year girl should be hanging out with a 21 year old man, if that was the case.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Recon it was rape?"
Don`t know.

So, how did he get her pants off?
0
Reply
Male 60
Meh.....
0
Reply
Female 164
I`m so infuriated right now, I can`t even speak. Because I`m vomiting fire. My friend just got raped two weeks ago and that piece of poot who did it to her wasn`t punished. Hm, know what she was wearing? Skinny jeans and hoodie. He is 21, she is 15. Recon it was rape?
0
Reply
Male 4,680
Of course this IS the daily mail so take this story with a pinch of salt.

Or a cupful. Or a truckload.
0
Reply
Male 13
anyone else notice that the defense lawyer`s name was paul hogan? anyone else immediately start picturing crocodile dundee badgering the alleged rape victim on the stand?
0
Reply
Male 382
"The key is the `safe word` idea. My second GF and I used to play rough, hard and intense. She loved to be `raped` and to `rape` me. Anywhere, any time, any way was about how you`d describe it. We pretty soon worked out the safe word system so that it would stop instantly if the other wasn`t in the mood for once - and having tried it, I recommend every couple define one. No misunderstandings then."

Yea, my wife has on of thise... she says "get the ef off me..."
0
Reply
Female 1,682
This is hilarious. Seriously. Though, I have to admit that maybe he COULDN`T remove those jeans on his own. Have you ever worn/seen how tight those f*ckers are? Sometimes you have to struggle for like 5 minutes to get them off of someone...But whatever. Who the f*ck know.
0
Reply
Male 8,302
> Angilion
> that sort of thing needs very clear arrangement and agreement beforehand from everyone involved

The key is the `safe word` idea. My second GF and I used to play rough, hard and intense. She loved to be `raped` and to `rape` me. Anywhere, any time, any way was about how you`d describe it. We pretty soon worked out the safe word system so that it would stop instantly if the other wasn`t in the mood for once - and having tried it, I recommend every couple define one. No misunderstandings then.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"That relationship didn`t last long."

I`d have said: "It`s OK, Bud. Someday, you`ll find a completely different kind of confusion to coexist with..."
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Maybe TMI but that`s an actual event from my life, 1993. Still bugs me. Probably why I`m all over this today.[/quote]

I think I can one-up you with an even clearer mismatch between what`s said and what`s meant. Here`s one such actual event:

She`s stroking my genitals while rubbing hers against my hand...and saying `no` while doing it. Which excites her all the more. I pull away, she`s pissed off because I won`t carry on and I should know what she meant. Of course I knew what she meant - she was making it very clear - but that`s not the point. We may as well have been speaking different languages. Worse than that, really, because you can get some communication with different languages.

That relationship didn`t last long.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
Feeling violated after consenting to physical contact?

GG...
0
Reply
Female 33
O.O

Speaking on non-consensual acts...I`ll keep my hand to myself, I think. :)
0
Reply
Female 33
I wish I could upload a document on here. I have a really interesting editorial on the subject from the point of view of a man who recognizes several years after the fact that he coerced a woman into having sex with him. It`s really quite perfect for this topic.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Why don`t we shake on this debate and part on good terms. :D"
OK. *reaches out to shake, pulls Kiiro over and smacks her bum.*

GG...
0
Reply
Male 12,365
That`s the answer I was hoping for.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Alright, we`ve reached a good stopping place. Why don`t we shake on this debate and part on good terms. :D[/quote]

We`re generally in agreement, including tracing a lot of bad communication and harmful stereotyping crap back to Victorian days. I`d like to time travel back and walk around with a megaphone shouting at them for being full of poo. I`d just be thrown in a lunatic asylum and it would be pointless, but it`s how I feel. Although strictly speaking it isn`t entirely Victorian because some of it slopped over from a bit earlier, but `Victorian` is close enough.
0
Reply
Female 33
Hmm...these are interesting questions. I don`t really think there is one "right" way to feel. If the couple has a good relationship and the "violated" one explains to the other how she (or he I suppose :D) feels, I would expect the man to feel guilty, not because he did something wrong, but because in a mutually respectful and healthy relationship, neither partner wants to make the other feel pressured/violated/whatever. I guess I would expect him to feel bad or saddened that she felt that way. Maybe guilty is an incorrect term. And in a good relationship seek to fix and prevent such things from happening again. In a single one night stand...I`m not sure why the man would even find out. Though I think if he did, he might feel bad. Not necessarily guilty though.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"I`ve had women pissed off at me because they said no, meant yes"

"It`s too big! Ow, you`re hurting me, I can feel it in my stomach!... Why did you stop?"
"You told me I was hurting you."
"But, I liked it."
"THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU SAID."

Maybe TMI but that`s an actual event from my life, 1993. Still bugs me. Probably why I`m all over this today.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I also think it contributes to men sometimes thinking a sexual act is acceptable (and legally, maybe it is) but the woman feels violated.[/quote]

[quote]One person feels violated. Another feels they did nothing wrong. Does the fact that they disagree mean the first doesn`t have the right to feel that way? No.[/quote]

You`ve mentioned this kind of scenario several times. Each time, you`ve spoken of the legal aspect for the man and the personal aspect for the woman. Maybe that`s because of the context, so I`m asking for clarification:

In such a scenario, do you think the man should feel guilty? Or do you think that he also has the right to feel based on his perception of events? Also, how do you think other people should feel about him?
0
Reply
Female 33
You`re right, it definitely does go both way. And sideways too. Sometimes women assume that men are ready and willing for whatever sexual activity because men are "supposed" to be always fired up and read to go. It`s really just what society teaches us about sexuality that`s faulty-possibly in this case and many others.

I agree with you, if she lied about the pants, she may have lied about everything else. My stipulation is just that, even if she did lie, never said stop, and did initially consent, she might still feel violated for some reason. I really don`t know.

Alright, we`ve reached a good stopping place. Why don`t we shake on this debate and part on good terms. :D
0
Reply
Male 5,624
" if she lied, then he can`t be held legally responsible"
Yes, we are now. At lease, he >>shouldn`t<< be.

I`m saying: "If she lied about the pants then, she also lied about WHEN of IF she ever said NO. There is now no indication that she said STOP, either."
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I`m just saying, I think that affects how men and woman communicate today. I also think it contributes to men sometimes thinking a sexual act is acceptable (and legally, maybe it is) but the woman feels violated. [/quote]

It goes the other way too, right up to the most extreme difference between what`s said and what`s meant. Not saying anything clearly is a minor thing in comparison - I`ve had women pissed off at me because they said no, meant yes and expected me to go with what they meant rather than what they said. Sure, I knew what they meant. I can read body language well enough. But that`s not the point. Say no and you`re not getting any from me, full stop, end of story.

I`m not knocking BDSM scenes playing a pretended lack of consent, but that sort of thing needs very clear arrangement and agreement beforehand from everyone involved and it`s not my cup of tea.
0
Reply
Female 33
I feel like we`re saying the same thing. We both think, if we have all the facts and if she lied, then he can`t be held legally responsible. I`m just adding that doesn`t mean she made it all up completely. There is a chance that interpersonally, she feels violated, regardless of what the law says.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
" Doesn`t mean they don`t want to be together."
Does mean that the truth is that they don`t want the same thing from each other.
THAT is dangerous.

One or both of those people are not admitting that the other is not what they want.
She could totally be going to bars and meeting people with drum sets...
0
Reply
Female 33
No, that`s really not what I`m saying. I agree with you. Legally, he is not held responsible. I believe I`ve said that several times. But consider for a second life outside of the legal system. One person feels violated. Another feels they did nothing wrong. Does the fact that they disagree mean the first doesn`t have the right to feel that way? No.

That`s why I advocate for greater education in communication and "the grey areas." Because rape isn`t as simple as the laws and movies make it out to be.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...more complicated than the legal, did he rape her, yes or no..."
No it isn`t. It`s a RAPE trial. Guilty/Not Guilty.

You are talking about tossing a real human being into actual continuous danger for 20 years base on how she FEELS afterward.
THAT is dangerous.
0
Reply
Female 33
I`m just saying, I think that affects how men and woman communicate today. I also think it contributes to men sometimes thinking a sexual act is acceptable (and legally, maybe it is) but the woman feels violated.
0
Reply
Female 33
:( I really think you`re missing my point. The old VICTORIAN ideals...

Also, people sometimes date/marry and have different levels of sexual desire. Doesn`t mean they don`t want to be together.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"In marriage, woman were supposed to give in."
No, you aren`t. But if he wants it and you don`t, why be together? You will only frustrate and harm each other.

Been there, done that.
0
Reply
Female 33
Legally, yes. He did not sexually violate her if that is the case. Again, I only read the provided article, so I don`t know all the details. I just believe it is more complicated than the legal, did he rape her, yes or no. She may have lied about the specifics, but that doesn`t mean she didn`t FEEL violated for some reason.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Does that mean that there was absolutely no grain of truth? No."
The story, as it was reported, indicated that she denied consent so, without her saying
"we started and I change my mind"
+
having the jeans not support the story

seems to indicate that he did not wrong her with sexual conduct which is the whole point of the trial.
0
Reply
Female 33
I don`t think it`s completely the man`s fault if he believes implied consent, nor do I believe he`s legally at blame. But in a utopia, wouldn`t someone say, hey, is this okay with you? Do you like this? And if the other person didn`t say anything, the first might think, oh, maybe this isn`t okay. What can I do to make this good for everyone here?

I think it really goes back to the old victorian ideals of woman being the gatekeepers of male sexuality. Woman were supposed to say no, even if they wanted to. In marriage, woman were supposed to give in. Men were supposed to keep asking until the woman did just that. So there`s this idea that the woman`s not really saying no, she just think she has to.

I really think its just about educating people and society about these grey areas.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]What else does a jury have to go by? Once any part is shown to be perjury, why would you believe that the accusation itself is true?[/quote]

I think that kiiro_kitsun is making a distinction between a fair verdict and proven knowledge about what happened. Perjury on such a crucial point by the only prosecution witness would make a not guilty verdict the right one but it wouldn`t be proof that the whole testimony was a lie. It implies that it probably is, but it doesn`t prove it.

Which is why a rape accusation against a man is so serious. There`s no way he`ll be able to prove his innocence completely enough to avoid being harmed by it. A jury might well take their duty seriously enough to pass a not guilty verdict if he isn`t proven guilty, but that doesn`t mean anyone will think he`s innocent.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"the woman not saying yes but also not saying no, etc. leads to the woman feeling like she was raped while the man feels like he did nothing wrong."

I think someone once said: "He that remains silent implies consent."
Do you think it can be applied?
0
Reply
Female 33
I`m not going to argue with you about the validity of the data. It`s beside the point. If you want me to tell you where it was published and peer reviewed, I can find that for you. I AGREE with you. Would the reasonable jury throw out a case because the alleged victim lied. Yes. Does that mean that there was absolutely no grain of truth? No.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]But there is data to suggest that lying about being raped rarely happens.[/quote]

There might be data to suggest that people who do so rarely admit it, but that`s not the same thing at all.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"... ruling based SOLELY on pants seems silly...."
Not really because if she lied about the pants...
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]the studies found that many people believe rape myths, including that woman want to be raped and woman asked to be raped. [/quote]

Then I conclude that the studies are drawing incorrect conclusions, probably as a result of making the conclusions first and forcing interpretations to fit.

It`s impossible to want to be raped - it`s an obvious contradiction. In order for that conclusion to really be a reflection of what many people think, it would be necessary for many people to have absolutely no idea what the word "rape" means. That`s rather unlikely and if it was true it that would make their opinions on rape as meaningless as a dog`s opinions on quantum theory.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"... lying on your testimony is bad. It looks bad for her, it looks good for him. Does that necessarily mean she wasn`t raped?"
What else does a jury have to go by? Once any part is shown to be perjury, why would you believe that the accusation itself is true?
0
Reply
Female 33
I do not believe that woman are better than men, or above lying. But there is data to suggest that lying about being raped rarely happens. More often than not, confusion about consenting, the woman not saying yes but also not saying no, etc. leads to the woman feeling like she was raped while the man feels like he did nothing wrong. Should the man be legally prosecuted for this? Personally, I think no. But does this mean that what he did wasn`t wrong? Not necessarily. Did the woman also contribute to this wrong? Yes.

Society as a whole needs to clarify sexual consent. We need to empower woman so that they can speak clearly about what they want sexually and educate men on the differences in communication.

Anyway, in this case, yes, ruling based SOLELY on pants seems silly. Obviously there was more to it. Are we all against rape? Yes. All that really matters.
0
Reply
Female 33
Woah, Angilion, slow down. I actually agree with you on many of your points. In a legal context, lying on your testimony is bad. It looks bad for her, it looks good for him. Does that necessarily mean she wasn`t raped? No. Does that necessarily mean he should be prosecuted? No. It`s the difference between legal consequences and what actually happened. You make MANY good points, and I`m not disagreeing with you. I`m also not disagreeing with the other side. I`m just saying, we can`t know.

Sorry, should have clarified on the data...the studies found that many people believe rape myths, including that woman want to be raped and woman asked to be raped.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"How would they know?"
I can`t say how they did.

It was reported:
"The Sydney jury sent a note to the judge during the trial asking for more information about `how exactly Nick took off her jeans`.
The note from a jury member added: `I doubt those kind of jeans can be removed without any sort of collaboration.`"

This impresses me, as an observer, thar this jury member thought the jeans were snug.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...too much variation from victim to victim..."
I mean
"I was picked up while wandering" (shock)
"I went home and cried in the shower" (explains lack of kit)
vs
"I went to the mall and bought a hotdog and balloon then called my mom and talked about HSN..." (shows that the events were not traumatic)
vs
"Two weeks later, while talking about how my cooch was sore for two days, my friend convinced me go and" (friend did what??!!)
vs
"I called a rape center after my [husband/boyfriend] DISCOVERED I left the with..." (indicates shame)

0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]When rendering the conclusion, the jury indicated that the jeans WERE a tight fit. [/quote]

How would they know?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Why would that be mentioned by the defense? Wouldn`t the prosecution want to mention the baggy skinny jeans in order to prove that they could be removed easily by the accused?[/quote]

Yes, I got the sides the wrong way around.

Note to self: Take more care when posting at 6 in the morning. It`s a ridiculous time to get up.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...They might fit her quite loosely..."
When rendering the conclusion, the jury indicated that the jeans WERE a tight fit.

0
Reply
Female 45
Why would that be mentioned by the defense? Wouldn`t the prosecution want to mention the baggy skinny jeans in order to prove that they could be removed easily by the accused?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Ang, in arguing that point, I would want to know what she did after in order to establish if the person behaved like a person that feels victimized.
In this, I am leaning toward anecdotal more than empirical, I know.[/quote]

I disagree because there`s too much variation from victim to victim in response to any assault.

You can say that people tend to respond in certain ways, but you can`t apply that tendency to any individual.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]ok..so he could very easily have basically told her to sit still while he tore her pants off or he would kill her...its not that complicated. That would not cause her to help..but it would also prevent her from interfering in fear of her life. How hard is this to understand people?[/quote]

So you`re arguing that she lied about a crucial part of her testimony and concluding that means she must be telling the truth.

Obviously, that argument contradicts itself.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
It`s also worth pointing out that this is a story in the Daily Mail. So it`s either an extremely sensationalised spin on a small part of what actually happened or it`s entirely fictional.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I have a counter-argument, although the fact that it wasn`t mentioned by the defence counsel implies that it doesn`t apply in this case for some reason.

The woman in question weighs 6st 6lbs. She must be very small indeed. So small that it`s strongly implied that she`s very thin. Even if she`s under 5 feet tall, she must be very thin to only weigh 6st 6lbs. So are skinny jeans actually "skinny" for her? They might fit her quite loosely.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Kiro brings up four scholarly authors who have come to the same conclusions and that`s not as good as you never having heard it said before.[/quote]

Wrong again. They referred to four authors who came to a different conclusion.

[quote]concluded that belief in rape myths in part of a larger belief structure that includes gender-role stereotypes, sexual conservatism, and acceptance of interpersonal violence[/quote]

is not "women who wear the wrong type of clothes are asking to be raped".

Then there is the question of prevalance. If such an attitude was as commonplace as some people claim, it would be impossible to live for 40 years and never hear it stated or written.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Obviously it takes two people to put on/take off skinny jeans! I have my maid help me every time I need to take a poo.[/quote]

Funny use of reductio ad absurdum, but it fails as a counter-argument because the argument you`re taking to an absurd conclusion *was never made*. No-one has even suggested that a person cannot take off a pair of skinny jeans that they`re wearing.

[quote]Even if she did take them off herself, that doesn`t mean consent.[/quote]

But it does mean she was lying about a crucial part of her testimony. That`s important in a trial.
0
Reply
Female 45
I guess there are more than four...My bad.
0
Reply
Female 45
Yep. You`re only in support of empirical evidence when it suits you and only in support of anecdotal evidence when it suits you. Kiro brings up four scholarly authors who have come to the same conclusions and that`s not as good as you never having heard it said before. Obviously, one should ascertain that because you have never heard it, it isn`t true, because you and your experiences corner the market on reality, right?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Also it is very good to mention that during traumatic events..our memories aren`t exactly 100% accurate, and many of the details will be lost.[/quote]

We`re not talking about a detail here. We`re talking about an absolutely crucial aspect of the entire case - consent.

Carrying your argument to that extent would make all witness testimony useless, which would mean that this case would never even have got to court because there wouldn`t have been any evidence of anything.
0
Reply
Female 45
Angilion, a1butcher said if women wore skirts, the problem would be solved (tongue in cheek, I`m guessing). I replied that he might have a point, and took the tongue in cheek one step further by claiming that if all women would just wear skirts, stay indoors and bar all entrances and exits, the rapists would be safe at last. I even went so far as to spell out that I was kidding. Then, I said wait a minute...Weren`t women also flamed for wearing skirts in sexual assault cases not too long ago? I was joking about the damned if you do damned if you don`t implication of clothing in rape cases. It`s been brought up in this thread.

I didn`t bother until now, since I hate repeating myself, but I thought I would make it absolutely clear.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]She could be lying about the pants. Does that necessarily mean she wasn`t raped? She could have changed her mind.[/quote]

She said that she did not change her mind. So your possible scenario relies on her lying about changing her mind.

If you have two witnesses with conflicting stories about what happened and you know that one of them is lying about a crucial point, it is reasonable to conclude that their version of events is less likely to be true.

[quote]She COULD be making it up completely, but I doubt that.[/quote]

Why?

Serious question. I think that some people lie sometimes for a variety of reasons. I think that isn`t an unreasonable thing to believe.

You`ve no problem thinking that some men are bad enough to rape. Why do you think it`s so unlikely that some women are bad enough to lie? Are women so much better than men?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
kiiro_kitsun:

You would have a point if anyone had said in this trial or in this thread that women who wear the "wrong" kind of clothing are asking to be raped. *That* is what depthofcuz said and it is not true. Simple as that.

In fact, in all my life I have never heard or read anyone say that. I`ve read some people imply it as part of their religion, but they`re villified for it and treated as nutjobs. The sort of people who think immodestly dressed women cause earthquakes.
0
Reply
Male 185
There is actually a famous case where the same verdict was reached. It sparked international denim day where you wear denim in solidarity with victims of sexual assault.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"up to his room to "play drums" she knew what she was getting into, she deserved it."
No one deserves to be raped.
The pants have to do with the question of consent which she denied.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"She could be lying about the pants. Does that necessarily mean she wasn`t raped?"
It`s fairly important in establishing or deflecting doubt in her testimony.

"He was giving me a nice ass ramming but..."
vs
"I was discussing his triplet method when, all-of-a-sudden..."
She indicated NO consent. After then, any point that can show that she did consent...
0
Reply
Male 773
Now I know, only to rape the ladies wearing skinny jeans. FOOLPROOF!
0
Reply
Female 33
Ugh, character limit. Interpersonal violence. Also, there WERE a few comments which basically said, she went up to his room to "play drums" she knew what she was getting into, she deserved it. So Depth`s point was in response to that.

Angilion, I`m not saying you don`t have a valid point. I just think that was a comment that wasn`t well thought out. Obviously, NONE of us KNOW what happened. She could be lying about the pants. Does that necessarily mean she wasn`t raped? She could have changed her mind. She COULD be making it up completely, but I doubt that. Rape, coercion, shame...its not that black and white.
0
Reply
Female 33
"That`s the issue in this case. No-one other than depthofcuz is talking about women "asking for it" by wearing the "wrong" clothing, and that`s just depthofcuz making stuff up to suit an agenda again."

Not usually one to get involved with debates- I`m fully aware that everyone believes what they want to believe and it`s highly unlikely that debating will convince anyone who already has an opinion. But this comment really bothered me...depth isn`t "making up" that many people believe women who dress a certain way deserve to be raped to fit her opinion. MANY studies have been done in this. Let me quote my human sexuality textbook- Brady, Chrisler, Hosdale, & Osowieki, 19991, Kalof & Wade, 1995, Quackenbush, 1991, Reilly, 1992- all these scholars did research which concluded that belief in rape myths in part of a larger belief structure that includes gender-role stereotypes, sexual conservatism, and acceptance of interpersonal viole
0
Reply
Male 5,624
Any prosecutor worth 20 cents is going to pop out the rape kit and scar pictures FIRST THING.

0
Reply
Male 5,624
"i cant imagine a scenario where a guy gives up on his rape attempt cause the jeans were just too hard"
"wow, remind me not to wear my skinny jeans downtown anymore"
Actually, to me, "difficulty in removing an outfit" seems like a deterrent to for the typical "grab and drag her into the bushes" kind of guy.

"...our memories aren`t exactly 100% accurate..."
We`re not talking about "what brand cymbals were on the drums." We`re talking about a pretty big deal in the sequence: "Did you remove your pants or did he?" She said HE did >>while he was on top of her.<<

I`m not saying he didn`t but, I`d like to see the sequence demonstrated because in order for them to get to the point where the pants are an issue, BODY SCARS and THE CONDITION OF THE JEANS ARE BEING ARE NOT BEING DISCUSSED.
This leads me to think and ask "were there scars and where is the rape kit?" Any pro
0
Reply
Male 2,748
im on the fence with this one... but i do think that instead of rape, sexual assault could be charged... or molestation. but im pretty sure you can`t "rip off" a pair of skinny jeans with out help... plus, you`d be laying down and thrashing. that would make it even harder. but i do disagree with false accusation of rape, thats just cruel and 9 time out of 10 ruins peoples lives.
0
Reply
Female 45
Thanks, Lemon. I truly appreciate that.
0
Reply
Female 1,441
I suppose this is a really useless comment but I completely agree with Depth. Well said on everything.
0
Reply
Female 1,190
wow, remind me not to wear my skinny jeans downtown anymore :S
0
Reply
Female 3,562
While I obviously disapprove of rape, I also disapprove of courts concluding an occurrence of rape simply because a woman accused a man of it. Really, if there is no evidence of consent or not, it`s impossible to decide which way justice should go.
0
Reply
Male 17
Also it is very good to mention that during traumatic events..our memories aren`t exactly 100% accurate, and many of the details will be lost.
0
Reply
Male 285
i cant imagine a scenario where a guy gives up on his rape attempt cause the jeans were just too hard to take off. pants are made to come off and go on so how can they use this as a defense. Its not like once you put them on they`re there for life.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"he tore her pants off or he would kill her..."
She never said he did anything of the sort.
Don`t you think that would be important to mention?
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Even if she did take them off herself, that doesn`t mean consent."
I take it that you are into going into strange men`s bedrooms and removing your pants while he is present.
In bringing up the pants, they are testing if >>she lied<< when saying she had not consented not that the pants, alone had anything to do with consent.
0
Reply
Male 17
ok..so he could very easily have basically told her to sit still while he tore her pants off or he would kill her...its not that complicated. That would not cause her to help..but it would also prevent her from interfering in fear of her life. How hard is this to understand people?
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Obviously it takes two people to..."
Not two people. Can >>someone else<< get your damned jeans off without you helping without scratching you and without tearing the jeans?

0
Reply
Female 248
Obviously it takes two people to put on/take off skinny jeans! I have my maid help me every time I need to take a poo.

Even if she did take them off herself, that doesn`t mean consent.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
Ang, in arguing that point, I would want to know what she did after in order to establish if the person behaved like a person that feels victimized.
In this, I am leaning toward anecdotal more than empirical, I know.

The thing we me is: I`ve been a few places in this world and one thing I`ve noticed at that no matter where you go, people are about the same.

So, I find it hard to believe that there were enough idiots in one place at one time to become a jury and not ask similar if not the same questions as myself.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]And "correct" it`s not rape if she helped him to enter her.
At most, you can argue brutality.[/quote]

I can, and do, argue that it can be rape because consent in this context is an ongoing thing, not a one-shot deal.

Which is why requiring signed contracts couldn`t work, even though it might seem a way for men to protect themselves.

Although if you`re referring specifically to this trial, it is true that she can`t be telling the truth if she helped him take her jeans off.

That`s the issue in this case. No-one other than depthofcuz is talking about women "asking for it" by wearing the "wrong" clothing, and that`s just depthofcuz making stuff up to suit an agenda again.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...set up a situation where a man would attempt to rape another woman under the same conditions..."
And that is what the jury asked. "Show us how the pants came off."

"or coerced her into taking them off"
Where was there coercion mentioned? She said HE took them off.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...just pointing out how careful women are expected to be..."
Depth, the jury just did not buy the idea of her not being a willing participant given the SUM of nights events.

From there, is her changing her mind after starting worth intentional putting a person into a place of constant danger for 20 years?
0
Reply
Male 426
that makes me mad.
0
Reply
Female 45
Yes. If someone is comfortable with their accused before he rapes her, how does that discredit her complaint? Rapists don`t walk around with rape flair indicating to all potential victims that they rape women and should therefore, be avoided or treated with discomfort.
0
Reply
Female 45
The pants probably came off like all pants come off. If he raped her, he either took them off, or coerced her into taking them off. According to her, he took them off.

How can this be proven beyond a reasonable doubt? The only way you could do this would be to set up a situation where a man would attempt to rape another woman under the same conditions. This would be unethical to do and WOULD NEVER HAPPEN. Also, the defense attorney would poke holes in that simulation because it was not the exact same situation. The prosecution was over a barrel because of these factors, it seems.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...and since everyone knows Pon Farr..."
My favorite scene from Star Trek Enterprise:
T`Pol (creeping toward the doctor): "I`M HUNGRY!!!"
Doctor (easing away): "I can get you something from the galley..."
T`Pol (deamon voice): "I`m NOT TALKING ABOUT FOOD!!"
Doctor (fearful, meakish): "Ohh, Dear!!!"
0
Reply
Female 45
I see. Well, I can`t speak for any men or any other women, really, but as a woman, it certainly sucks to think that you don`t have a right to refuse sex with someone, even someone you`re in a serious relationship with. I brought up the contract thing to point out the ridiculousness of rape trials where women`s behaviour (or clothing worn) is said to imply consent or act as evidence to her making the story up. I wasn`t serious, just pointing out how careful women are expected to be, as I see it.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"don`t think it`s tangential to point out that drinking, accompanying someone back to their house or to their bedroom does not imply sex"
It doesn`t. It points out to the jury that she was not under duress or at least was comfortable in the presence of the accused.

The pants have to do with the sex. How did the pants come off?
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"...whether she made him sign a contract..."
"Watch a movie called "Cherry 2000."
I warn you in advance, it`s absolutely terrible but, in the context of this debate, you will probably enjoy it now."

In the film, people brought lawyers to dates and
signed contracts before having drinks. One of the two main characters is a guy who has given up on the hassle "how to tell which no is NO" and hires the Melanie Griffith (not Meg Ryan) to locate a sex android model named "Cherry 2000" as in "porn is cheaper than dating."
0
Reply
Female 45
I don`t think it`s tangential to point out that drinking, accompanying someone back to their house or to their bedroom does not imply sex. If she said no...All other factors besides her failure to give consent and his refusal to abide by that should fade from focus. Again, this is in the case where she did not consent and he went ahead.

I`m displaying my ignorance here, but I`ve never seen that movie. Can you elaborate on why you brought it up? I`m curious.
0
Reply
Male 8,302
He was a foreigner anyway, so all he had to do was claim Vulcan ancestry and say the Pon Farr was on him, and since everyone knows Pon Farr can`t be resisted without dying... she was actually saving his life by being raped!

What? It makes as much sense as this verdict.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
Depth, you`re on a tangent.
If she helped then, it`s fairly difficult to say that he received a "No that meant NO," isn`t it?

It`s not drinking or being in the room that makes the difference.
It`s
Witnessed drinking TOGETHER
+
Witnessed leaving TOGETHER
+
Went to his house
+
Went into his room
+
No clear explanation on how/why her pants were off.

Must be because while he was banging up a storm on the drums, the room became really warm, eh?
Or "That was some hella` drum beats! Knocked by nickers clear out the window!"

Mechanically, prove the guy can get the denim jeans off without her help. It`s a valid question.
0
Reply
Female 295
OMG Major -face palm-
0
Reply
Female 45
CodeJockey. No, I don`t think we are talking about the same thing.

A guy who stalks a woman and lures her into a trap (a rape trap, is what you mean I guess...) And a guy who refuses to stop mid-sex act are still raping the woman. The mid-sex guy is just a little more "normal" and his behaviour is a little bit more socially acceptable.

It`s funny how the "No means No" campaign has been around for ages, yet people STILL think no means yes, or at least maybe...depending on what the woman was wearing, whether she drank, whether she made him sign a contract stating that he won`t rape her...
0
Reply
Male 5,624
One of those guys needs a sensitivity lesson from a more experienced bachelor, the other is dangerous and needs to be removed from society.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"Canada the law clearly states that consent can be revoked at any point during the act"
"and she says stop DURING the act"
We are close to talking about the same thing.

It may be the coverage but, to me thinking of this and the other case from the same area, it APPEARS that in Australia, THERE IS NOT CLEAR LANGUAGE ADDRESSING REVOCATION OF CONSENT leaving it up to prosecutor and defender to argue the point as if it were a civil case.

From there, I`d like to see a You-Tube video or the like of a 95lb beanpole laying UNDER a 185lb guy, having her undersized jeans removed without her help, by the same guy, without tearing the jeans or injuring her.

The difference is:
"He was nice enough for her to start but it wasn`t pleasurable for her."
or
"He stalked her and lured into a trap."
One of those guys needs a sensitivity lesson from a more experienced bachelor, the other is dangerous and needs to be re
0
Reply
Male 1,162
Yeah, its difficult enough to remove normal jeans. You`re not removing those tight things while she`s fighting back.
0
Reply
Female 1,441
I can not believe that if a woman goes up to a man`s room to do something seemingly innocent then there is an automatic sexual implication. Is it really that ludicrous to assume that she DID actually just want to see his drum set?

Even if there WAS a sexual implication but she changed her mind, it`s still rape.

People who hold that view just sicken me. Especially women. You should all be ashamed of yourselves.
0
Reply
Female 45
Agreed, pui.

I think the OP was a little too hopeful posting this article.
0
Reply
Female 45
I totally disagree with the fact that consent to sex is "proven" by a person going into the bedroom of another`s. If I go to a male friend`s house to play XBox or see his pet rock collection and he rapes me, how is that my fault? I consented to play XBox, not to get down and dirty.

It seems that the focus is continuously put on what the women did or didn`t do or should/should not have done, but we don`t really focus on the shoulds of the other party as much.

Should a woman be paranoid about every male friend?. Maybe, but that would totally suck and ensure that men and women could not have platonic friendships the same way heterosexual people of the same sex do. Also, wouldn`t that be discriminatory and prejudiced against men?

It`s true. Consent cannot be revoked after the fact. I was responding to CodeJockey`s claim that if a man and a woman are having sex and she says stop DURING the act, and he continues, then it is not rape.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
... yep, my prediction was correct :\
0
Reply
Male 497
"Uh, in Canada the law clearly states that consent can be revoked at any point during the act. If the person who is asked or told to stop continues, the person is held responsible under the Criminal Code. I can`t say the same is true for Australia, though. If it isn`t, then that`s truly chilling."

but you cant revoke consent after the fact in any country, which is what it sounds like here.

she went upstairs to so he could play his drum? either she is completely retarded or completely lying about what happened.
0
Reply
Female 525
Also she claims that he lay on top of her and she `struggled for a while` then she was raped. NO WHERE does she say "Yes, I removed my jeans but changed my mind during intercourse and asked him to stop but he proceeded anyhow".
So anyone saying "She could`ve changed her mind!" is right but that means she was lying about her story.
0
Reply
Female 525
Sounds like a case of dumb girl agrees to consensual sex, is embarrassed about it afterwards and/or wants attention, throws in a rape suit. I mean, they go up to his bedroom to `look at his drums`. Yah. Right. I`m a girl and it screams bullpoo to me.
0
Reply
Female 45
The defense did bring it up. Defense attorney Paul Hogan (I`m assuming not the Crocodile Dundee Paul Hogan, unless he`s embarked on a very lucrative career)during cross-examination of the complainant asked her if it was hard to get her jeans off without any assistance. He also said "I`m suggesting it`s difficult for skinny jeans to be taken off by someone else unless the wearer`s assisting, collaborating, consenting."

The quote is at the end of the article.
0
Reply
Male 25,417
Wow, thats interesting!
0
Reply
Female 45
Uh, in Canada the law clearly states that consent can be revoked at any point during the act. If the person who is asked or told to stop continues, the person is held responsible under the Criminal Code. I can`t say the same is true for Australia, though. If it isn`t, then that`s truly chilling.
0
Reply
Male 2,056
wow. another reason why i`m not moving to australia
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"he carries on after that point."
Matter of wording.

I wish I could find a few. From the same area, not long ago, there was the case of both being drunken, going to a hotel across the street, she started then passed out and reawakened while he was still going, not knowing where she was.
Another "not guilty" if I`m not mistaken.

Glad I don`t drink or do skinny chicks.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
depthofcuz, the defense did not bring this up, the jury did.

And "correct" it`s not rape if she helped him to enter her.
At most, you can argue brutality.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Her changing her mind about if she like it/him is not him raping her.[/quote]

Not at that instant, no. But it becomes rape if (a) he knows she has changed her mind and (b) he carries on after that point.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, your arrogance is evident in your persistent claims that you corner the market on perceiving "reality," as if it is a single objectively perceived entity. [/quote]

The procedure of a trial is quite clearly defined. It is therefore possible to objectively check your original claim against reality. It doesn`t match. At best, it`s hyperbole to promote a political agenda.

You claimed that she was tried in a criminal court and found guilty. If that was true, she would have been sentenced to something. Jail time, a fine, community service...doesn`t matter.

So, what was she sentenced to after (according to you) being tried and convicted in a court of law?

She wasn`t sentenced to anything, because she wasn`t on trial.
0
Reply
Female 1,677
"Stop! I said STOP!!!... RAPE! RAPE!"

Her changing her mind about if she like it/him is not him raping her."

If he didn`t stop after she screamed `stop` twice (in your example), that is rape.
0
Reply
Female 45
Codejockey, I`m confused. Are you saying that if a person tells the other person to stop mid-coitus, and the other person keeps going, that it isn`t rape?
0
Reply
Female 45
I fully admit I have a biased view of the world...As does everyone. I do try to look at things from other angles, though...Even when my bullpoo detector goes through the roof.
0
Reply
Female 45
Angilion, your arrogance is evident in your persistent claims that you corner the market on perceiving "reality," as if it is a single objectively perceived entity. Obviously, there are several ways to view and interpret the world and events that take place in the world...I think this case, and this forum, speak to that multiplicity of perceptions/perspectives. You assert that reality is objective and can only be perceived one certain way...Your way. That, I find arrogant.

The use of the "skinny jeans" is an excuse. That`s what defense attorneys do. They find anything that will poke a hole in the Crown/State`s case...That`s their job. How is it ludicrous to assume this is happening here? Sexual assault cases always boil down to questions of consent. Consent is hard to prove and even harder to disprove. Therefore, the accuser`s credibility (including sexual history and clothing) are used to invoke reasonable doubt. How is stating this silly?
0
Reply
Male 1,351
I sense a biased jury...though (don`t hurt me) we can`t rule out that she is calling rape for revenge. Hopefully we can believe there were other, less print-worthy circumstances which were included in the verdict (like the story leading up to it).
0
Reply
Male 5,624
So, having had the displeasure of trying to do a 100lb chick who`s eyes were bigger than her landing pad, to me, it sounds like a case of:
"Hmm. He`s cute, I`m hot. Let`s get these jeans off. Mmm, that`s good!... Hey, don`t poke so deeply!... Hey, what is that, a telephone pole??!! Ouch! Stop! I said STOP!!!... RAPE! RAPE!"

Her changing her mind about if she like it/him is not him raping her.
0
Reply
Male 5,624
"That`s pretty damn retarded. I don`t need any help removing my skinny jeans."
Issa, not her removing her own jeans.

The correct response would be to show the scars and demonstrate the motion of the jeans being removed by someone else.

The jury asked for an explanation on how he got her jeans off of her without her help if he was supposed to be
-laying on top, pinning her down
-without tearing the jeans
-without injuring her

I think it`s astute and I would have liked to hear/see that demonstration.
I don`t think Australia is so backward that they don`t have rape kits to use in medical testimony.
The pants were just the last straw.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]`jeans cannot be compared to any type of chastity belt.`[/quote]

An aside:

That comment might be an accurate reference to the historical reality of chastity belts. The only pre-Victorian reference to chastity belts is to iron underwear worn by some women as protection against rape while travelling. Attacks by outlaws were a genuine risk when travelling between cities, so it is plausible.
0
Reply
Male 527
The #[email protected]!? Well, this confirms the last person you want on your jury is a sane, intelligent, thoughtful person.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]That`s fine. The point still stands, whether you read it or not, as does your arrogance.[/quote]

You start of with a ludicrous and provably wrong claim because you think your thoughts are more important than reality...and you accuse me of being arrogant? That`s even sillier than your claim.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Not going to say she asked for it, but she did go out for drinks, back to his apartment and THEN to his bedroom. Then she cries rape? Sorry that seems a little suspicious to me. [/quote]

It doesn`t to me. Not just that by itself.
0
Reply
Female 1,677
Stphn: You suck at life.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]On a side note how much is 6.6 stone?[/quote]

For an adult, very little. 1st = 14lbs, so 6st 6 is 90lbs or about 41Kg. I`d say that`s more what you`d expect for a girl of about 10 or 11. My mother is a very short, lightly built woman in decent shape and she weighs about 8st.
0
Reply
Female 275
`jeans cannot be compared to any type of chastity belt.`
0
Reply
Female 45
She weighed about 95 lbs.
0
Reply
Female 2,352
That`s pretty damn retarded. I don`t need any help removing my skinny jeans.

On a side note how much is 6.6 stone?
0
Reply
Female 434
Not going to say she asked for it, but she did go out for drinks, back to his apartment and THEN to his bedroom. Then she cries rape? Sorry that seems a little suspicious to me.
0
Reply
Female 45
Wait a minute...Wasn`t it a common belief before that a woman wearing a skirt was asking for it?

What are we supposed to wear, then, an iron lung?
0
Reply
Female 45
Vilem...No worries. Like I said, sexual assault court cases are complicated.

a1...You might be onto something there. Maybe if women wore skirts, didn`t leave their homes and barred all entrances and exits, the rapists would be safe at last! (Kidding, obviously)
0
Reply
Male 372
Depth: YUP sorry i think i was wrong. I remembered something about this from a course i took a few years back but i think it was just in some special case. Trying to figure it out now. Soon as i hit post reply i was like "waiiiit.....damnit" haha.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Bet that skanky bitch has caused a few earthquakes in her time.
0
Reply
Male 4,807
Why can`t more women wear skirts... Then its an open and shut case.

Man guilty on all counts.
0
Reply
Female 45
Vilem, that is not my experience of the criminal justice system in Canada, though it is complicated. The Crown must prove the sexual assault occurred, which involves sexual activity where no consent was given (through force, threat of force, etc.) The defense must argue that consent was given or implied through the behaviour of the alleged victim. In this case, I guess they argued that consent was implied because she must have helped him remove her pants.

Out of curiosity, why would you say that the onus would be solely on the defendant when that`s not the way criminal courts run? I`m not being inflammatory...just curious.
0
Reply
Male 372
Depth: The onus is actually on the defendant to prove consent was there, not on the woman to prove that it was not.
0
Reply
Female 45
That`s fine. The point still stands, whether you read it or not, as does your arrogance.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The point here is that an article of clothing is being used as an excuse to put this woman on trial instead of the alleged perpetrator.[/quote]

Thanks for starting with that. It makes it clear that you`re not talking about reality and therefore I can ignore the rest of your post.

Which is a shame if you had a point somewhere in it. But that isn`t likely.
0
Reply
Female 45
Angilion, guilt in the case of rape is notoriously difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. This is because to prove rape, you must prove a lack of consent. It is very difficult, and most of the time impossible, to prove a negative or the absence of something. It is much easier to prove the existence of something. I`m not denying presumption of innocence, but like most generalized approaches, the way the criminal justice system handles sexual assault is a travesty.

Also, many of you assume that in order to prove rape there must be injury, vaginal tearing, etc. This is not true. Many women say no and are either threatened or otherwise coerced into complying. THIS IS STILL RAPE. It`s not just a physical threat, it is also psychological and is also upheld by the fact that women assume they will not be believed.
0
Reply
Male 730
South Korea`s got Seoul
0
Reply
Female 45
I knew I wasn`t going to like the comments on here. Why did I do this to myself?

The point here is that an article of clothing is being used as an excuse to put this woman on trial instead of the alleged perpetrator. I don`t know the whole story, but the comments here are pretty ridiculous with regards to the whole "cry rape" poo. Most rapes go unreported to police because women know that they will be the ones on trial and things as trivial as what clothing you wore will be used against you (case in point). False rape allegations, while they do exist, are rare (at least in Canada).

I find it interesting that so many men rush to defend a person accused of rape but don`t really seem to have much compassion for victims...Depressing, but not surprising.
0
Reply
Male 914
@ScottSerious you`re weird.
0
Reply
Male 914
I love how people are saying "The jury got it wrong" when they have absolutely no idea what happened that day. They probably have no idea what evidence there was (if any) that the guy committed rape.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]What starts as consensual stops being consensual when she says no. She may have wanted to have certain sex acts performed on her that require her being out of the jeans, and helped take them off to get them done. But she might not have wanted sex, and when he forced himself on her, it was rape.

I don`t know that this is what happened, but just the fact that he couldn`t have gotten the jeans off by himself without her helping does not prove he didn`t rape her.[/quote]

You are presuming guilt and requiring that the defendant prove their innocence. That makes you self-consistent - if you presume guilt then you should rqeuire the defendant to prove their innocence or be convicted.

Are you sure that you want the law to function that way instead of requiring the prosecution to prove the defendant guilty?

Can you *prove* yourself innocent of all crimes ever committed anywhere near where you were at the time?

Of course not. So under your sy
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The point was made in the juror`s note:

The note from a jury member added: `I doubt those kind of jeans can be removed without any sort of collaboration.`[/quote]

The juror was doubting that the jeans could be removed by a person not wearing them without at least some collaboration by the person wearing them.

That`s not the same as a person wearing them not being able to take them off themselves.

Someone posted arguing that the second point wasn`t true. I replied saying that it wasn`t the same as the first point (which was what the juror had written), therefore their counter-argument was answering a point that hadn`t been made.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Valid point
0
Reply
Male 183
Well, in jury cases, if you have reasonable doubt about guilt, you cannot return a guilty verdict. This would play to the reasonable doubt where something like a skirt or baggy trousers wouldn`t.

I served on a jury in a case of familial indecent assault - basically an estranged father accused of assaulting his recently reunited daughter. Apart from one man refusing to believe that this sort of thing could *ever* happen, and so didn`t, most of us thought something had happened. However, because a certain bit of evidence allowed for interpretation, and hence prevented us from deciding beyond reasonable doubt, we had to find him no guilty - even though we were sure *something* wrong had happened.
0
Reply
Male 5,314
are none of you going to acknowledge the 6.6 stone thing. it`s weird! c`mon.
0
Reply
Female 356
I own a pair of skinny jeans...the are kinda loose on my. I don`t even unbutton them when I go the the bathroom...just pull them down.
0
Reply
Male 17,512
Interesting how far `If it doesn`t fit, You must acquit` has come.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]No-one was claiming that the jeans are impossible to remove (obviously), so your question is answering a point that wasn`t made.[/quote]
The point was made in the juror`s note:

[quote]The note from a jury member added: `I doubt those kind of jeans can be removed without any sort of collaboration.`[/quote]

Also - sneaky Daily Mail, adding an advert in at the end when I copy-paste your text.
0
Reply
Female 77
Disgusting
0
Reply
Male 496
@omgzelda

Yeah but you kind of need to read the whole case report to get the gist. So basically she filed a rape report with no damage around her vaginal area, with no bruising or the marks of a typical rape. His DNA was present however so a rape charge was pursued before a jury as it would have been thrown out due to lack of evidence by a bench. He said it was consensual, his word vs hers but obviously people hear "rape" and jump to the conclusion of "bastard" right. I have personal experience of being accused of rape after I took this church girl home after a mates party. We had sex, she claimed rape to protect her dignity (also her first time on the piss) but it got dropped thankfully when I gave them the used condom as evidence, along with some video lol. My point is that it`s not always the guys fault. Some girls are screwed and need to get the attention or feel used and want revenge etc etc. It`s just not cricket.
0
Reply
Male 115
It sounds to me like she felt pressured into it but that is in no way similar to rape.
It is bloody hard to get skinny jeans off my girlfriend wears them all the time and she always has to take them off for me!
This sounds to me like another woman pulling the rape card because she wanted to screw an ex lover over.
Its a far cry from someone being raped on the street: they were in her bedroom on her bed...
i find it hard to believe no consent was given to be honest!
0
Reply
Male 3,327
What starts as consensual stops being consensual when she says no. She may have wanted to have certain sex acts performed on her that require her being out of the jeans, and helped take them off to get them done. But she might not have wanted sex, and when he forced himself on her, it was rape.

I don`t know that this is what happened, but just the fact that he couldn`t have gotten the jeans off by himself without her helping does not prove he didn`t rape her.
0
Reply
Male 496
@OmgZelda

I kind of missed the point alot so :P Basically no, this is a case of Australian common sense. In aus, if they know someone is pulling a fast one they dont arse about and play with the law. They make a decision, and it might be a bit transparrent (like this one) but the end result is the same. Its not a legal precedent, they are just using it to get a young woman (thats crying because shes a slapper and wont admit it) out of the courts asap to stop wasting state funds. They don`t rooster about over there, and they don`t care what the world reads into it. If you remember a while back they turned down a doctor because his son had downs syndrome and thus it would cost more to pay for his care and have a doctor than it would to not have a doctor if you get me, so they said no to him emigrating. They are black and white, no bureaucracy bollocks over there! Its why im going when i can :P
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]but couldn`t you argue the same for any piece of clothing?[/quote]

No, because not all items of clothing are long tubes of relatively thick, stiff material (i.e. resistant to folding or rolling) very tightly fitted to a long, complexly curved part of the body including several large joints.

So while it is more difficult to, for example, take a loose cotton shirt off someone who isn`t co-operating than someone who is, it still isn`t particularly difficult to do.
0
Reply
Male 496
@omgzelda

Yeah but you kind of need to read the whole case report to get the gist. So basically she filed a rape report with no damage around her vaginal area, with no bruising or the marks of a typical rape. His DNA was present however so a rape charge was pursued before a jury as it would have been thrown out due to lack of evidence by a bench. He said it was consensual, his word vs hers but obviously people hear "rape" and jump to the conclusion of "bastard" right. I have personal experience of being accused of rape after I took this church girl home after a mates party. We had sex, she claimed rape to protect her dignity (also her first time on the piss) but it got dropped thankfully when I gave them the used condom as evidence, along with some video lol. My point is that it`s not always the guys fault. Some girls are screwed and need to get the attention or feel used and want revenge etc etc. It`s just not cricket.
0
Reply
Male 1,929
Awful lot of assumption that the man is guilty knocking around. As there usually is in rape cases. It was probably her word against his, and as a man he needed a shread of evidence to show that he`s not guilty or he would have been convicted by default.

Not just ranting by the way: friend of an aquaintance is on trail in a case like that.
0
Reply
Male 5,314
here i was, sitting, wondering, "how much does 42 kilograms weigh in stone." i read the article, and wattayouknow, it is 6.6 stone. i`m happy.
0
Reply
Male 1,266
I wonder if Levi will jump on this as a marketing issue... "Buy skinny jeans or you`ll get raped"... freaking stupid jury... I`d have suggested that they come in wearing skinny jeans and then throw them each in a room with their own rapists...
0
Reply
Male 4,012
That`s one hell of a lawyer
0
Reply
Female 3,574
but couldn`t you argue the same for any piece of clothing?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Don`t worry, this won`t happen to you.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion, why would they be any harder for someone else to take off?[/quote]

Because when you take your own clothes off, you are actively helping yourself do so. You`re not just using your hand to take off your jeans - you`re also using your legs and hips. Taking your own jeans off and taking someone else`s jeans off are not exactly the same thing. That`s the idea I was arguing against - that they are the same thing.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
Yeah, I would like to know the whole story, too.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
I see two pertinent questions for this issue in general:

i) Is is possible to remove these jeans without the collaboration of the wearer?
ii) Does the collaboration of the wearer necessarily indicate consent?

(i) would need to be tested, but I`d bet good money on the answer being "sometimes yes, sometimes no, depending on many factors".

(ii) No. Collaboration doesn`t prove consent.

In a specific case, with circumstances specific that that particular case, it might be partially relevant to establishing reasonable doubt. To judge that, I`d need to be on that particular jury. But I`d take a *lot* of convincing.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
Angilion, why would they be any harder for someone else to take off? If they fit properly, skinny jeans are not any harder to remove than any other pair of pants.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]And how do they suppose women take them off normally?[/quote]

No-one was claiming that the jeans are impossible to remove (obviously), so your question is answering a point that wasn`t made.
0
Reply
Male 1,023
Well that`s just messed up. I smell ramifacations
0
Reply
Female 4,376
Well that is a bit of a sticky situation. I mean i`m sure there have been instances of girlsl ying about rape when really they just don`t want to be labeled as a slut for having sex. Actually I know that for a fact as I know someone IRL who did that. However that doesn`t mean the girl did that in this case and it`s possible that the guy could have ripped her jeans off.
0
Reply
Female 1,593
This is ludicrous. So now every man who rapes a woman wearing skinny jeans is going to be acquitted because it`s impossible to remove the article of clothing without help?

My boyfriend has never had any trouble ripping my skinny jeans off. Just sayin`.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
"pissed off and a little confused" is what the Daily Mail exists for. The whole paper is very well written to create anger and confusion. At best, they report doctored versions of parts of some aspects of the truth. It`s a propaganda machine dedicated to generating anger and confusion and thus suppressing thought.

Anything is tainted by connection with the Daily Mail. Anyone who refers to a story from it as part of their argument undermines their own argument.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
almightybob1, it apparently takes 2-3 hours and a lot of grease to get them on and off.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
... I have a feeling I am going to hate the comments on this post.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
And how do they suppose women take them off normally?
0
Reply
Female 359
Link: Alleged Rapist Not Guilty Due To Tight Jeans [Rate Link] - Oh, I-A-B, you`re going to love this jury`s rationale. Who else is pissed off and a little confused?
0
Reply