Jump to content

Arab guilty of rape after consensual sex with Jew


Eurytus

Recommended Posts

men have been lying to get into women's pants since the beginning of time, i don't see how this is any different.

Then this is surely grounds for a good old-fashioned pogrom into the Palestinian territories, Helen style, no?

Men have been doing a lot of things "to get into women's pants" since the beginning of time. I'm not sure why we should care about precedent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a guy pretended to be his brother to sleep with the brother's girlfriend

That case was screwed up beyond all recognition of justice. The guy climbed into the woman's bed - which she shared with her live-in boyfriend - and proceeded to have sex with her under the pretense that he was her boyfriend. The state law specifically requires force in order for crimes to be persecuted under the rape laws, a loophole which many people and legislators are working to correct.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think in this particular case that there is something fishy about her claims, but as a general rule I think lying to someone to get them to have sex with you, while perhaps not rape (though it's certainly bit informed consent, is it?), is morally objectional no matter your gender or ethnicity. It's only slightly better than getting someone intoxicated for the same purpose, it's a low vile act and not worthy of a gentleman.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Then this is surely grounds for a good old-fashioned pogrom into the Palestinian territories, Helen style, no?

Men have been doing a lot of things "to get into women's pants" since the beginning of time. I'm not sure why we should care about precedent.

A rape conviction seems bizarre, but I remember something in the news awhile back about moslems suing McDonald's for using pork fat to make their fries, and then lying about it. Ingesting fat in violation of religious scruples due to fraud may compare to ingesting, uh, other substances in violation of other beliefs.

Maybe the solution is a civil rather than criminal action?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, the entire situation is almost comically controversial. I mean, it has it all: Rape (and the definition thereof) race (and racism) and to top it off the entire israeli-palestinian conflict.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, the entire situation is almost comically controversial. I mean, it has it all: Rape (and the definition thereof) race (and racism) and to top it off the entire israeli-palestinian conflict.

However, I've only heard about this here, Its not made the hourly news and I haven't heard it talked about. Its not that its smooth sailing, because its gotten kicked up to the supreme court, but its not so much controversial by local standards as it is Wednesday.

Seriously, its entirely likely that she is a racist, but the law in this case isn't, and I find this much more interesting as a feminist question and will not touch the race thing with a pole (she said). I'm also wary, however clear cut the case seems, of immediately labeling a woman coming forward with a rape accusation as a racist slut and assuming whatever the guy said must be true.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I've only heard about this here, Its not made the hourly news and I haven't heard it talked about. Its not that its smooth sailing, because its gotten kicked up to the supreme court, but its not so much controversial by local standards as it is Wednesday.

Seriously, its entirely likely that she is a racist, but the law in this case isn't, and I find this much more interesting as a feminist question and will not touch the race thing with a pole (she said). I'm also wary, however clear cut the case seems, of immediately labeling a woman coming forward with a rape accusation as a racist slut and assuming whatever the guy said must be true.

Well she originally alleged, under oath, that is was brutal non-consensual sex and then had to backtrack. So it seems pretty clear that he honestness is in quesiton from the get-go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However, I've only heard about this here, Its not made the hourly news and I haven't heard it talked about. Its not that its smooth sailing, because its gotten kicked up to the supreme court, but its not so much controversial by local standards as it is Wednesday.

Seriously, its entirely likely that she is a racist, but the law in this case isn't, and I find this much more interesting as a feminist question and will not touch the race thing with a pole (she said). I'm also wary, however clear cut the case seems, of immediately labeling a woman coming forward with a rape accusation as a racist slut and assuming whatever the guy said must be true.

I could understand a person being a member of a religion that only permits intercourse or marriage between persons of that religion. Doesn't islam require that? There may be some orthodox jews who believe the same, and probably some Christians as well. I could understand how a person who was intentionally deceived in violation of that might feel raped. But if you're going to convict on that basis, then the ban on religious fraud for sex or marriage needs to be spelled out expressly. If not, then I think this guy was fucked. Twice.

On the other hand, a reasonable corrolary would be if someone lied about being married, because that could horribly offend someone's religious/ethical scruples as well. So should that be "rape" too?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On the other hand, a reasonable corrolary would be if someone lied about being married, because that could horribly offend someone's religious/ethical scruples as well. So should that be "rape" too?

Well it was here as far back as 1957 (from Michael, cited above, at [34]):

The issue of consent induced by fraud was considered by the High Court in Papadimitropoulos v The Queen [1957] HCA 74; (1957) 98 CLR 249. In that case the appellant deceived the complainant, who could speak no English, into believing that the two of them had been married in the course of a visit to a registry office. In that belief, she had sexual intercourse with the appellant. After a few days he left her and did not return. She discovered that there had not been a marriage ceremony. The appellant was charged with rape. The trial judge directed the jury that, if the complainant had acquiesced to sexual intercourse only upon the basis that she was married to the appellant and that belief had been brought about by the appellant's deliberate misrepresentation to her, made with the intention of persuading her to consent, then there would be no consent at all. The appellant was convicted.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could understand a person being a member of a religion that only permits intercourse or marriage between persons of that religion. Doesn't islam require that? There may be some orthodox jews who believe the same, and probably some Christians as well. I could understand how a person who was intentionally deceived in violation of that might feel raped. But if you're going to convict on that basis, then the ban on religious fraud for sex or marriage needs to be spelled out expressly. If not, then I think this guy was fucked. Twice.

On the other hand, a reasonable corrolary would be if someone lied about being married, because that could horribly offend someone's religious/ethical scruples as well. So should that be "rape" too?

Somehow I suspect Islam and Orthodox Judaism dont have much public opinion on the finer subtelties of premarital quickies.

As far as I can tell, if a woman were to come to the Jerusalem district court with an allegation of rape because a man who she thought to be single turned out to be married, then yes, than that would count.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't have time to read the whole thread, but from a quick scan of the haaretz article (hebrew) - in Israeli precedent - yes. (case of a guy who pretended to be someone of importance at the ministry of the interior and promised dubious ministry-of-interior related favours and was charged with rape, another of someone who pretended to be a neurologist. (businessman schmisnessman. Doctors, beuracrats and jews is what works here, apparently.)

Seriously, its entirely likely that she is a racist, but the law in this case isn't

So they were following establish legal precedents. But whether or not the ruling is or is not institutionalized racism isn't resolved yet .............. did those men also received the same term of punishment as this Arab man?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So they were following establish legal precedents. But whether or not the ruling is or is not institutionalized racism isn't resolved yet .............. did those men also received the same term of punishment as this Arab man?

Didn't mention, though one of the defences calims for kicking it up to the supreme court is that the conviction of only 18 months, which is apparently very light for a rape, suggests the court knew the case wasn't cut and dried.

A couple of other articles quote the ruling - there the story is that they met on the street, he told her he was a single guy (hes married) looking for a long term relashionship, invited her to some office building, they had sex in the elevator*, then he did 'further lews acts' to her and then left the building, leaving her naked on the top floor.

*I am relieved to know this, because otherwise I keep wondering what office building you can just step into and find a corner to fuck in in this city, and keep arriving at the conclusion that the building where the company I work for in headquartered would do the trick - the Clal building.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Didn't mention, though one of the defences calims for kicking it up to the supreme court is that the conviction of only 18 months, which is apparently very light for a rape, suggests the court knew the case wasn't cut and dried.

A couple of other articles quote the ruling - there the story is that they met on the street, he told her he was a single guy (hes married) looking for a long term relashionship, invited her to some office building, they had sex in the elevator*, then he did 'further lews acts' to her and then left the building, leaving her naked on the top floor.

*I am relieved to know this, because otherwise I keep wondering what office building you can just step into and find a corner to fuck in in this city, and keep arriving at the conclusion that the building where the company I work for in headquartered would do the trick - the Clal building.

I'm curious as to when she found out he was an Arab and not a Jew. Did he say "oh and by the way...." when he was leaving the scene?

Or did she, after having falsely accused him of a brutal rape (as per the story) have to fall back on something else, after which realizing he was not a Jew she threw this semi-racist Arab thing in there.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm curious as to when she found out he was an Arab and not a Jew. Did he say "oh and by the way...." when he was leaving the scene?

Or did she, after having falsely accused him of a brutal rape (as per the story) have to fall back on something else, after which realizing he was not a Jew she threw this semi-racist Arab thing in there.

The ruling dosen't actually mention that, that I've noticed: the issue was that he presented himself as someone available for a long term relashionship, (single, looking for commitment) when in fact he wasn't. (married, lying to her to get her to take her clothes off in an elevator and leaving immediately) The ethnic business is just icing on the cake, relevant mostly in as much as jewish/arab relashionships here are rare and difficult, whether one likes that or not, so its even more unlikely he meant what he said. Assuming thats what happened. Which we will never know for sure, like in many, many rape cases. I am not impressed by the willingness to ignore the perspective of a woman who calls rape and brand her a racist slut for the chance to point at how racisgt Israel is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The ruling dosen't actually mention that, that I've noticed: the issue was that he presented himself as someone available for a long term relashionship, (single, looking for commitment) when in fact he wasn't. (married, lying to her to get her to take her clothes off in an elevator and leaving immediately) The ethnic business is just icing on the cake, relevant mostly in as much as jewish/arab relashionships here are rare and difficult, whether one likes that or not, so its even more unlikely he meant what he said. Assuming thats what happened. Which we will never know for sure, like in many, many rape cases. I am not impressed by the willingness to ignore the perspective of a woman who calls rape and brand her a racist slut for the chance to point at how racisgt Israel is.

I find her whole story somewhat implausible to be frank. Looking for a long term relationship and immediately going off to have sex in an elevator seem like odd bedfellows to me.

Added to which you have the fact that she has already falsely accused him of brutal non-consenual sex. When he original charge does not stack up in the slightest to allow her to try a second tangent of claiming he misrepresented himself and for that to be classed as rape is way off imo.

Given the false charge she already tried it looks more and more like a case of someone who was subsequently embarassed by their actions and so tried to shift the "blame" onto the other party. Originally by making a false rape allegation.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as the theoretical notion of deception goes, I would say that it is sleazy, but not rape (with the exception of spousal impersonation, though I have no idea how someone could pull that off). As far as this specific case goes, I would say it is almost certainly racism.

Mission Impossible II style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...