With what he told investigators I am very surprised he went to trial with it. It seems to me that he had zero shot at an acquittal.
Most adults understand that movies are not reality. Although there are some adults who commit crimes then blame “Hollywood”.
Yes, it sucks how when you travel to a foreign country you are subject to the laws of that country.
Apparently, he also misunderstood how likely a Western woman is to cry “rape”, and apparently he ignored the Miranda rights that were told to him when he was arrested (You know, the bit that starts “You have the right to remain silent…” and states that anything he says can and will be used against him in court)
^ You seem to be treating mandala’s comment as though it was an effort to excuse the man’s conduct. It clearly wasn’t, it was offered as an explanation of why the man may have acted so brazenly.
reportado
Damn right!
Who the hell does he think he is?
He’s not a swimmer nor a cardinal! He’s not even white!!!
Rough translation: “If the guilt and punishment are the document, then for such violence it is necessary to apply strict measures in order that the other non-Bian I wish to repeat it. Every personal abuse is a trauma to life. The rapist sees the victim suffer. But could it be for mutual desire?”
What the fuck is that supposed to mean?
All your base belong to us, confefe.
How babby formed? How girl get pregnant?
If a man digitally penetrated another man while the latter was intoxicated and asleep, I wonder if people would say the former should get off? And I wonder how his wife would feel if a strange man did it to her.
Look, he committed sexual assault. Plain and simple. And then tried to blame the victim.
Nine years and deportation is not excessive.
Triple ditto. Yes, life in prison would be complete overkill, even for a despicable prick such as he, but lucky for him that won’t happen.
From the linked story:
Really?! This is happening at 30,000 feet in an enclosed environment from which there is no escape in a situation where the perpetrator is completely surrounded by other passengers? I find that astounding.
According to our Italian Troll, “hey, maybe the sleeping woman was asking for it!”
If I were king, he’d pray for life in prison.
Isn’t everything we learn about sexual crimes perpetrated similarly astounding? That Bill Cosby drugged and raped scores of women over five decades? That Clark Gable was a rapist?
When are we going to stop being astounded by what kinds of things people can or try to get away with when you give them some kind of privileged position in society?
I agree that the guy is a rapist and deserves his sentence.
But I have a question about the trial.
The link says that the jury took 3 hours of deliberating , and that the trial lasted a full five days.
How did that happen?
(Yeah, I know…a trial is public, so there must be a transcript available somewhere. But even if I knew where to find it, I don’t think I want to read 5 days of legalese. Can somebody summarize it for me?)
The crime is one simple act—that he inserted his fingers into her.
I assume that the only evidence in this case are her word against his. Her claim is quite believable, and he apparently confessed to the police that he did it.
So if the facts are not in dispute, what did the lawyers talk about for five days?.
The link says that the defense lawyer tried to claim that the Indian guy did not understand American law. He thought he would be tortured by the police if he didn’t confess, using as evidence a certain Bollywood movie about the police in India. That seems to be like a pretty weird issue for an American courtroom to be considering,since the police had told him his Miranda rights. But even so–how does this trial last 5 days, and what issues were serious enough that the jury had to deliberate for hours?
I ain’t no lawyer, but isn’t a jury just supposed to decide issues of fact? And the facts here were not in dispute. Aren’t theoretical issues (–about whether a suspect’s statements to police are admissible in court) decided by the judge in chambers, not presented to the jury in court?
not that long ago in some states rape could get you the death penalty. And people were executed for rapes. Now the death penalty is pretty much restricted to murder.
I imagine that the lawyer was disputing that he understood his Miranda rights. I think it is part of the standard spiel (“Do you understand these rights as I have explained them to you?” or words to that affect), but if for instance his English was poor, then perhaps he agreed without understanding. That is something I imagine that the judge would consider.
He didn’t plead guilty - and that means the prosecution has to prove everything . From what he did with his fingers to whether she consented. And the prosecution has to put its entire case on - if they have only the victim testify, and he’s acquitted, they don’t get a do-over where the flight attendants and the police/FBI agents now testify. So at a minimum, figure the victim, at least one flight attendant and at least one police officer/ FBI agent. The defendant may not have testified, but I’m sure his wife did, and someone testified about that Bollywood movie .
And five days does not necessarily mean five 8 hour days. It’s not uncommon for a court to perform “housekeeping” on other matters before or after taking testimony in a trial , or for a trial to end early Monday because the next witness is not available until Tuesday.
That’s all stuff that happens pre-trial. The statement is either allowed or not. The judge decides. The jury doesn’t get to decide if the statement was unconstitutional.
That’s all valid. There is often a lot of dead space in between testimony.