No Jail Time For Rapist Because Victim Wanted To Party

[Saya]

A convicted rapist will not go to jail because a Manitoba judge says the victim sent signals that “sex was in the air” through her suggestive attire and promiscuous conduct on the night of the attack.

Kenneth Rhodes was given a two-year conditional sentence last week that allows him to remain free in the community in a decision likely to trigger strong debate.

The Crown wanted at least three years behind bars.

Queen’s Bench Justice Robert Dewar called Rhodes a “clumsy Don Juan” who may have misunderstood what the victim wanted when he forced intercourse along a darkened highway outside Thompson, Man., in 2006.

Rhodes and a friend met the 26-year-old woman and her girlfriend earlier that night outside of a bar under what the judge called “inviting circumstances.” Judge Dewar specifically noted the women were wearing tube tops with no bra, high heels and plenty of makeup.

“They made their intentions publicly known that they wanted to party,” said the judge. He noted the women spoke of going swimming in a nearby lake that night “notwithstanding the fact neither of them had a bathing suit.”

The foursome left the parking lot and headed into the woods, court was told. Rhodes began making sexual advances toward the victim, who initially rejected him but later returned his kisses. Rhodes then forced himself upon the woman once they were alone.

Rhodes pleaded not guilty at the trial on the basis he thought the woman had consented. Judge Dewar rejected his defence — but said aspects of it can now be considered on sentencing.

“This is a different case than one where there is no perceived invitation,” he said. “This is a case of misunderstood signals and inconsiderate behaviour.”

Judge Dewar said he didn’t want to be seen as blaming the victim, but that all of the factors surrounding the case must be viewed to assess “moral blameworthiness.”

“I’m sure whatever signals were sent that sex was in the air were unintentional,” he said.

The Crown was seeking at least three years in prison for Rhodes, who has no prior criminal record and works for the City of Thompson. They cited numerous precedents from the Manitoba Court of Appeal suggesting the “starting point” for a major sexual assault involving intercourse is a prison sentence.

“This sentencing will raise a number of issues relating to public confidence in the sentencing process,” Crown attorney Sheila Seesahai told court.

She said the victim was at the mercy of her much larger attacker and his “repugnant and reprehensible” conduct.

Defence lawyer Derek Coggan told court it’s clear alcohol was a factor for both his client and the victim in terms of their ability to make good judgments.

“She had a very different understanding of what was in the accused’s mind than he did,” Mr. Coggan said.

He said Rhodes never threatened the woman, didn’t have a weapon and was simply “insensitive to the fact (she) was not a willing participant.”

Judge Dewar said the case was not “typical” of ones the courts often see and shouldn’t be viewed as a precedent.

“There is a different quality to this case than many sexual assaults,” he said. “Not all guilty people are morally culpable to the same level. This difference is not to be reflected in conviction. It can be reflected in sentencing. Protection of society is not advanced one iota by putting Mr. Rhodes in jail.”

Rhodes will be under a 24-hour curfew for the first year of his conditional sentence, with exceptions to allow him to work and attend to medical appointments. His name will also be placed on the national sex-offender registry.

Rhodes was also ordered by the judge to write a letter of apology to his victim.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/02...nted-to-party/

Its bad that part of me wants to just count our blessings that he was convicted at all, isn't it?

Just so we're clear, he was convicted, that the victim gave no consent is a total non issue. What he's saying is that this **** isn't so bad because she was dressed a certain way and consented to kissing. Its also disgusting that he says this isn't a typical case, when many cases that go unreported do so because people think "well, I agreed to ____, I was wearing ______, I was doing ____, so no one is going to believe me that I didn't consent to sex."

ETA: The victim spoke out and is very unhappy with the sentence: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bre...116904078.html

[KissMeDeadly]

Well, I might be cruicified for this, but...

Honestly, You invite a guy to go into the woods and skinny dip with you.

You make out with him. You and him are (presumably) naked, I may be wrong on this, and if I am, then you may disregard my entire argument.

Usually when I'm laying down, and slopping spit with a naked chick, I kind of assume that she must want sex.

Is that wrong? That must be wrong.

Unless she outright said, "No, get off me, I don't want to have sex with you", or struggled, or something, just *something* to let the guy know she really didn't want sex, then, well, I agree with the judge.

I have never, before engaging in sex, actually asked, "Would you like to have sex with me?"

This just seems like one of those times when the girl was upset with herself and wanted a way out.

Now, keep in mine, I wasn't there, and the article didn't really go into detail, so I may easily be wrong and this may be legit r@pe, but that's just my two cents.

I'm gonna start getting signed written consent forms from now on when I get lucky enough to have a one night stand.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

Well, I might be cruicified for this, but...

Honestly, You invite a guy to go into the woods and skinny dip with you.

You make out with him. You and him are (presumably) naked, I may be wrong on this, and if I am, then you may disregard my entire argument.

Usually when I'm laying down, and slopping spit with a naked chick, I kind of assume that she must want sex.

Is that wrong? That must be wrong.

That is wrong. I have made out with men without wanting to sleep with them, and I haven't been *****, because most people seem to be down with the idea that if you consent to one thing, you don't consent to everything. You can agree to give a blow job, doesn't mean its okay when someone forces you to have sex.

Unless she outright said, "No, get off me, I don't want to have sex with you", or struggled, or something, just *something* to let the guy know she really didn't want sex, then, well, I agree with the judge.

She did say no, and its no contest that consent was not given.

I have never, before engaging in sex, actually asked, "Would you like to have sex with me?"

This just seems like one of those times when the girl was upset with herself and wanted a way out.

Now, keep in mine, I wasn't there, and the article didn't really go into detail, so I may easily be wrong and this may be legit r@pe, but that's just my two cents.

I'm gonna start getting signed written consent forms from now on when I get lucky enough to have a one night stand.

He was convicted of "legit ****". This is not a contest. What he is saying that since she consented to skinny dipping and kissing, it meant that he was rightfully confused.

You may not have explicitly asked "do you want to have sex?" But consent isn't necessarily verbal, and may I say that you're walking a dangerous line if you just assume consent. If a person is not willing, and communicating that verbally and physically, pushing you away, saying no, I hope its clear to you that consent is not given.

Silence isn't consent, No isn't consent.

And if you read the second article, she has a scar from when he got violent with her, its not a "oh she's upset with herself" situation. Why would you even assume that, especially in a case where he is convicted? The false accusation rate for r@pe is no larger than any other crime.

[Mr.Doobie]

Holy shit this judge is a disgusting human being.

It makes me sick that a man who obviously thinks women can be "asking for it" is not fit to be a judge.

Originally Posted by KissMeDeadly

Well, I might be cruicified for this, but...

Honestly, You invite a guy to go into the woods and skinny dip with you.

You make out with him. You and him are (presumably) naked, I may be wrong on this, and if I am, then you may disregard my entire argument.

Usually when I'm laying down, and slopping spit with a naked chick, I kind of assume that she must want sex.

Is that wrong? That must be wrong.

Yes, it is wrong. #1 we have no clue how this went down.

#2 No matter what you do with a guy, that never guarantees him sex and it is never an excuse to **** somebody.

Unless she outright said, "No, get off me, I don't want to have sex with you", or struggled, or something, just *something* to let the guy know she really didn't want sex, then, well, I agree with the judge.

But we don't know if she said "no". We have no clue what she said.

Not only that, but it's not just "no" that means "no". You don't have sex with somebody unless the explicitly say "yes".

A lot of people think that if a girl doesn't answer at all, that means it's ok to have sex with her. Some also think that if a girl is so intoxicated that she can't respond, this means it's ok. It's not.

This just seems like one of those times when the girl was upset with herself and wanted a way out.

You mean one of those close to non-existent times?

Now, keep in mine, I wasn't there, and the article didn't really go into detail, so I may easily be wrong and this may be legit r@pe, but that's just my two cents.

I'm gonna start getting signed written consent forms from now on when I get lucky enough to have a one night stand.

Like I said, as long as you get an explicit "yes" you'll probably be fine. Everyone likes to believe that there are all these armies of women out there that will have sex with you, than try to get your poor, defenseless self thrown in jail for **** because either they're evil bitches, or they want to cover up the fact that they had sex with someone. This is a lie.

You may not have explicitly asked "do you want to have sex?" But consent isn't necessarily verbal, and may I say that you're walking a dangerous line if you just assume consent.

This.

[Saya]

Its infuriating that in a case where the law agrees it was rrape, this judge agrees it was ****, the first post makes the assumption that she was just feeling guilty and it wasn't rrape. Its precisely these kinds of attitudes that contribute to rrape culture.

[Despanan]

Man, if you're convicted of **** you should be freaking sent to jail.

Though, honestly, accidental **** is something that worried me back in college

I saw this really crappy PSA play about a girl who was ***** by a guy by accident: they had had sex before, he was kissing her, she said no...he stopped then she kissed him because she felt bad, they started making out, and then she "froze in fear" and the guy proceeded to **** her without realizing it.

Not a normal situation of course, but man did it scare me...not off sex mind you, I was just certain I was uncomfortablely communicative with my various partners:

"I hearafter referred to as "the driller" shall now proceed to engage in sexual intercourse with you, hearafter referred to as "The fur-burger" until such time as we are both satisfied, or I am satisfied first...do you find these terms acceptable? Sign here here and here.

[JJ_Spade]

I Did A Paper On This For One Of My Classes A Few Semesters Ago. Here Are The Statistics....

According to Cease, statistics show that 1.3 women are ***** a minute, 683,280 rapes a year, and one in three Women will be *****. Only 16% of rapes are reported to the police, and that America has the highest rate of **** in the entire world (Cease).


I Agree With Probably Most Of The Women In The World When I Say This, But It's Not What You Wear. The Is No Such Thing As "Sex In The Air." To Me That Seems Like Its Just Giving Other Attackers The Green Light Just So They Can Say "Well, I Thought It Was In The Air." I Say Bullshit!

[KissMeDeadly]

After reading the second article, I retract my previous statement. From what I understood, this is how it went down

Girl invites guy to skinny dip
Girl makes out with guy while naked
Guy engages in intercourse
Girl screams ****

However, I now see that there was violence involved, and that she did let him know that she was not consenting.

I was mistaken.

However, I'm still writin' up contracts.

[Saya]

Originally Posted by Despanan

Man, if you're convicted of **** you should be freaking sent to jail.

Though, honestly, accidental **** is something that worried me back in college

I saw this really crappy PSA play about a girl who was ***** by a guy by accident: they had had sex before, he was kissing her, she said no...he stopped then she kissed him because she felt bad, they started making out, and then she "froze in fear" and the guy proceeded to **** her without realizing it.

Not a normal situation of course, but man did it scare me...not off sex mind you, I was just certain I was uncomfortablely communicative with my various partners:

"I hearafter referred to as "the driller" shall now proceed to engage in sexual intercourse with you, hearafter referred to as "The fur-burger" until such time as we are both satisfied, or I am satisfied first...do you find these terms acceptable? Sign here here and here.

Thats not accidental ****, there was a "No", and then she froze and didn't consent. Silence is not consent. What a shitty PSA.

I get what you're saying, but its a ridiculous fear. Seriously, do none of you ask your partners, "Does this feel good/Do you like that?" "What would you like me to do?" There are sexy ways to get consent! Is it normal to have sex with a person who isn't speaking or moving, obviously not into it, just lying there and taking it?

What you said was still infuriating, KMD, and we can now assume you're a lousy lay.

[Alan]

I completely understand KissMeDeadly, but you just made me think that the idea that there can be a misunderstanding of consent only works if the guy is ok that there's no communication (or movement for that matter) during sex.

[Saya]

Pretty much what I'm trying to say. And if you do that, you're settling for some really bad sex, and sex for sex's sake. If you value your pleasure and your partner's pleasure, there's little room for miscommunication.

[ape descendant]

There's a lady who invented an "anti-****" device... not sure what to think about it, myself... but hell.. use what works.

[Renatus]

Originally Posted by ape descendant

There's a lady who invented an "anti-****" device... not sure what to think about it, myself... but hell.. use what works.

The link doesn't lead to anything about it but I know what you're talking about.

One thing about it that concerns me is what if something shifts around or breaks and you end up with a jagged bit of metal inside your cunt? Not exactly the best place to get a sharp object stuck in, especially if it really digs in. Many of the places where this would find high use in are poor, so I would think some women would reuse the same ones over and over again, and I doubt they are capable of handling extended usage. Just look at all the problems non sharp objects that surgeons leave behind in people sometimes cause.

[Solumina]

Originally Posted by Saya

And if you do that, you're settling for some really bad sex, and sex for sex's sake. If you value your pleasure and your partner's pleasure, there's little room for miscommunication.

This is so very true. Honestly if there isn't any positive feedback then why proceed? A lack of enthusiasm from a partner would completely ruin my mood.

[JJ_Spade]

Originally Posted by Solumina

This is so very true. Honestly if there isn't any positive feedback then why proceed? A lack of enthusiasm from a partner would completely ruin my mood.

Exactly Right. I'm Somewhat Of A Negative Person And If I Felt That The Guy Wasn't Into It, Then I Would Wonder What I Did Wrong. I Don't Think I Would Keep Trying After Feeling Like I'm Unwanted. I Guess All Of Us Women Should Worry About Every Guy Down The Street And If He Feels That "Sex Is In The Air." Ha, Maybe We Should Start Wearing Chastity Belts.

[ape descendant]

Originally Posted by Renatus

The link doesn't lead to anything about it but I know what you're talking about.

One thing about it that concerns me is what if something shifts around or breaks and you end up with a jagged bit of metal inside your cunt? Not exactly the best place to get a sharp object stuck in, especially if it really digs in. Many of the places where this would find high use in are poor, so I would think some women would reuse the same ones over and over again, and I doubt they are capable of handling extended usage. Just look at all the problems non sharp objects that surgeons leave behind in people sometimes cause.

...wow, I'm brilliant... Here's a different link

[JJ_Spade]

Originally Posted by mycheapgolf

Cheap golf clubs

Is This A Joke? What Kind Of Person In Their Right Mind Would Post This In A Serious Thread Such As This? Here Let Me Hold One Of Them...*Whack*...Get The Fuck Out Of Here!

[Saya]

Its a spam bot. Whenever you see something like that, just ignore it and report it as spam, and the admin will delete it.

[JJ_Spade]

Originally Posted by Saya

Its a spam bot. Whenever you see something like that, just ignore it and report it as spam, and the admin will delete it.

Ok, How Do I Report It As Spam?

[Saya]

On the bottom left corner of every post you'll see a grey button with an ! exclamation mark. Press that and you'll be taken to a new page that will ask you why you're reporting, just say "spam"

[JJ_Spade]

Originally Posted by Saya

On the bottom left corner of every post you'll see a grey button with an ! exclamation mark. Press that and you'll be taken to a new page that will ask you why you're reporting, just say "spam"

K Thanks, Will Do.

[Saya]

Just an update, the judge has been limited to a smaller case load and is no longer allowed to preside over sexual assault cases. Apparently, last summer he got into shit for acquitting a man who assaulted a little girl, but I can't find much more info.

http://cnews.canoe.ca/CNEWS/Crime/20.../17418356.html

Protesters are trying to get him fired. Also, apparently the Crown is contemplating appealing the sentence so the man will receive jail time, which I didn't know we could do. I really need to learn more about Canadian criminal law. The government also lodged a complaint, so he might get fired.

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/bre...117223298.html

[Saya]

I found more info. Last year he found a man not guilty of ****** a little girl because the little girl didn't put enough effort in avoiding him, apparently.

http://winnipeg.ctv.ca/servlet/an/lo...b=WinnipegHome

Why wasn't he investigated after that case?

[Solumina]

He dismissed the case because the victim didn't act logically, because of course sexually abused kids never fail to act logically. Shit like this makes me feel sick. I wonder if there are any other cases he has mishandled.

[MissCheyenne]

That's disgusting. Plain disgusting.