woman sent to prison for "sexual assault" for misrepresenting her gender

I see what you are saying. But I think we should , or have to , draw the line somewhere.

The law can't always anticipate exactly where all those lines are. So it's up to the authorities and the jury to interpret some of it...

What this woman did was bad and dishonest, no matter how you slice it.

 

I see what you are saying. But the perpetrator inculcated a fantasy into the victim. This was definitely emotion abuse, if nothing else.

 

Right. We agree. We need a dept of what is and is not a rape lie.

 

Or we can just leave it up to a prosecutor and a jury.

I know you don't like that since not everything illegal is clearly defined in law.

 

Not prison time. We have a worse incarceration rate than China. We are doing justice, wrong.

 

I thought she should just be sentenced to 6 months.

 

For tricking someone into sex? I have several candidates for prison time, due to my condition in the 90s.

 

Well, they're probably all going to have to answer in the afterlife.

 

In other words…. Trans… she pretended to be another gender. Same thing. And it’s a great argument. She literally raped this person.

 

So did the burger flipper claiming he was a judge.

 

it's not rape if she had consensual sex over and over for years with her lover

 

I understand your view on this. But I disagree. She was being manipulated and she didn't know critical facts, and she would never have consented to that sex if she knew (or had known).

I will concede this is a very strange case, but it has implications for many other situations.

It's highly unusual for a woman to be manipulated like this over such a long period of time.
But whether that time period is long or short, over 2 years, or a single night, it is still the same.

Progressive feminists will tell you that just because the woman seemed to consent during sex does not necessarily mean she was consenting.
I actually disagree with that notion, but they are right about it in situations like this.

 

Yes. She didn’t know he was a married lawyer with Van Gogh abilities, which is totally rape.

 

The issue of gender (and including fundamental identity) is a little bit bigger than career profession and artistic ability, wouldn't you say?

I get the point you are trying to make, but you are trying to draw an analogy between two things that are on opposite ends of a spectrum.

Yes, there is a similarity that exists, but they are also very different.

 

And the prosecutor? And two different juries?


But I agree with you the judge made a very wrong decision and is responsible.
Unfortunately in the legal system the judge is the only one who has input into the length of the sentence. (I complained about it in this thread: Do you think there should be an intermediate verdict available to the jury? ) The jury should have convicted, and felt they were just following the law and logical consistency, finding the defendant guilty of all three counts, but the judge should have exercised discretion and issued a prison sentence far lower than the normal level for those criminal counts.

It just goes to show that the justice process is not always fair, and there are some inherent issues in it.

If I, as a member of the jury, believe the accused should be punished, but believe the accused may likely be punished far more than they deserve if I vote guilty, should I still vote guilty? That is the dilemma.

 

Woman sent to prison for "sexual assault" for misrepresenting her gender​

~ That will teach her/him .. !

 

Now I'm no woman myself but I have it on pretty good authority that a woman knows a real penis from a strap-on

 

I can't tell if that's sarcastic.

 

Two different juries disagreed with you.

The judge sent the actual strap-on in question into the jury deliberation room.

So presumably the female jurors were feeling it while they were making up their minds.

 

Was the ostensible victim here a virgin?

 

No, but she probably had very little experience and was practically so.

We've already discussed these points repeatedly in this thread so far.

 

Yup. My entire point. She knew. A woman knows she knew.

 

He had no idea she didn't catch fresh fish when she served him canned tuna. He had no idea !!!! Fraud, it was, fraud, I tells ya; t'was fraud!!!

'Cept, everyone but idiots can tell canned tuna from the real thing.

 

Okay, but just for the sake of hypothetical argument, suppose she didn't know.

Suppose the perpetrator was a criminal mastermind who was so good at manipulating her emotions and tricking her.
She certainly went to elaborate lengths to perpetrate this deception. It was well thought out.

I don't think even Agathe Christie could have envisioned something like this.

 

Funny… a judge agreed while you did not. Says something here more so about you