right?
And you’re saying it’s a strawman (That little guy’s ears have to be burning the way his name gets thrown around this joint) to say this becasue “Nobody has suggested that balls-on-mouth is equal to/the same as penetrative rape.” I have to ask, have you read this whole thread? No, seriously? I am a little tired of the “no one has said” game, but I guess I can play one more round.
dropzone said:
and do I need to re-quote Otto 's big “if” to arrive at the conclusion that it was first degree sexual assault (i.e on par with “penetrative rape”)?
Then we can agree to disagree on what is “sexual.”
WHY OH WHY didn’t I follow the family trade and become a lawyer? Put me in front of any jury (excepting perhaps one full of college jocks) with this case and no matter what Clintonesque legalistic nitpicking (yes, Bricker, you are being directly compared with Bill Clinton) the defense came up with to deny this was first degree sodomy under the laws of the state of Kentucky I would wipe the floor with them. Most people would want to lynch the perpetrator.
Even putting aside all problems of proof, like the videotape jury panels aren’t just composed of right-thinking individuals like oneself, and the ones that were right thinking individuals who much like oneself saw the matter clearly and knew what needed to be done, e.g. lynching, would get struck. Juries are, much like internet message boards, composed of people whose opinions are all over the place, some of which are completely wrong and fucked up.
It would have to be some videotape. Reverse angle, super slo-mo. This would be like the replay on a Brian Johnson touchdown. They guy will never stadn trial or be arrested or even accused, most liekly. That doesn’t change what he did (assuming the story wasn’t a fiction created for AC’s personal gratification).
By the way, I’m not calling anyone here’s opinion “completely fucked up,” just pointing out that jury panel memebers sometimes have opinions that are very, very different from one’s own.
And those opinions differ from mine how, exactly? Er, I mean, I’d be banking on the entire jury being that way; they would be easier to sway with my inflammatory rhetoric.
This is topic that is hard to talk about, since emotions run high. I think there has been some talking at cross purposes.
This is exactly my point. If this isn’t a crime of a sexual nature (and I think that it is-we do not display our sex organs publicly as a matter of course), then I would hope that it would fit some damned law somewhere-if only indecent exposure or the like. I honestly don’t care felony vs misdemeanor, just want some check on this barbaric behavior, of a kind that would make the asshole think twice about doing it again.
From my POV, what was said (until this page) was essentially, “nope, no case here, and how silly to think that there is one.”–at least in tone, if not in words. This is why I can’t stand talking to lawyers-you want to look at the situation and plan the strategy, I (and others, most likely) just wanted to see this guy held accountable. Same goal, different approachs. Yeah, I get it that it’s natural to respond that way, if one is an attorney. But the rest of the world doesn’t respond that way to shit like this. I can’t (and don’t) blame the lawyers here for going automatically into lawyer mode–but I do think that it’s a bit unreasonable to think that everyone is going to be in that mode from the get go. pravnik made some excellent points, as did Jodi, which helped me understand things a bit better. I am still taken aback at the Byzantine reasoning needed to even build a case (in some places) for shit like this. It would seem to be straightforward, but isn’t.
Are you missing a word there? Or do you mean to say that you are NOT suggesting that this teabagging was a criminal incident etc? Or should there be a “not” after that “was”?
At the risk of beating a dead horse, again I will say that this is NOT rape, nor did I ever think it was. Apparently some think that rape is about sexual gratification, which it is not-it is about hurting and humiliating the victim, and the acting out of hostilities. Teabagging appears to be about hurting and humiliating the victim as well–TO A MUCH LESSER EXTENT, WHICH IS WHY IT IS NOT TREATED THE SAME AS RAPE. Nor should it be. But IMO, it SHOULD be treated as some kind of sexual assault. I use the caps, just to prevent more lecturing from whole bean. But my point is that the intents are similiar. Similiar-not identical.
My position is actually aligned with sarahfeena and vinylturnip’s.
I don’t see how the woman being unconcious is really relevant. I imagine that if a morgue employee was to be found teabagging corpses, that he would be charged with something. Apparently he wouldn’t be convicted of shit–although he might, Americans being much more squeamish about death than they are to violence.
All I can tell you is you have no real experience at either picking a jury or presenting a case to a jury, and your idea that this is a slam-dunk for the prosecution is sadly misplaced.
The people in this thread that HAVE picked juries and tried cases to juries are all telling you something different. Why do you believe your imagined outcome, informed only by your guesswork, to be a more solid conclusion that the outcome predicted by people that have done it?
Upon thinking about this further, I think one of the things that bothers me the most is not just that this one asshole did such a pathetically repulsive thing, but that other guys there thought it was hilarious and just let it happen. As I said, I don’t know if it’s something that’s against the law or prosecutable…I think I would personally consider it some kind of sexual battery, as eleanorigby says. But even if the other guys there didn’t think it was bad enough to call the cops on the guy who did it, it’s a real shame they couldn’t be counted on to say, “dude, knock it off, that’s really not cool,” and physically restrain the guy if they had to. I would like to think, were I ever in a situation that this girl was in, that SOMEONE there would be grown up enough to take some kind of a stand, you know? It seems like there was no sense of this action being right and wrong, but more of an attitude that whatever these guys found amusing was ok. Very, very sad commentary on society, IMO.
I did not see that. My apologies. I will say that it is not enough to say “well, this isn’t going to win in court”–if you all have specialized knowledge, then share it at the same time you say it can’t be won. To paint with a broad brush again–lawyers tend to see the holes in a possible case and dwell on those, the rest of us (ok, me) want to know what CAN be done–not what can’t be. It’s kind of like my dealings with very unstable patients–the family usually doesn’t want to know it’s hopeless, they want to know what can be done. ONCE they see that we are doing all we can, THEN they are ready to entertain the notion that not much can be done. Does that help? I really dont’ want to spend too much time on this–the thread is too interesting to swerve off into these side issues. Anyway, no harm, no foul–and sorry I said I am contemptous of all of you (just some of you… ). sarahfeena --exactly. If this were my daughter or my son (who if either should do such a thing or witness and not speak up I would be heartily ashamed of), I would hope that there was someone there to well, be HUMAN.
Well, guesswork, assuming prosecution under the appropriate law (which is quite clear), some evidence besides the statement of a drunk, and confidence in my own ability to paint this in the least favorable light.
Unfortunately, weaseling and hiding ones head in the sand like an ostrich are VERY human traits.
I won’t lecture, just quote my first post to this thread
At every turn, I have condemned this conduct. I have said I thought it was criminal (battery is a codified crime pretty much everywhere).
I am not as patient as others here when I see very smart people repeat the same statements after having been explained time and again why what they are saying is either: 1) not contested; or 2) not legally correct (which is important when you’re talking about crimes).
But as my coda, let me just say:
This tea-bagging dude is an asshole, as are those who watched;
This tea-bagging dude commited what I am sure is a punishable criminal offense in his jurisdiction;
I don’t think this tea-bagging dude would be convicted of a sexual assault of any stripe most places and personally I don’t think the crime he committed was sexual (but we can differ in opinion on that)
I think (hope?) very very few of us can label this anything close to “acceptable” or “condoned” behavior, regardless of how we think that it is/is not or should be/not be a sex crime. How can one believe that this is harmless? Is “harm” necessarily equivalent for all persons? If a woman found herself in this situation (which is a whole OTHER matter…), and found out about it either then or later can she necessarily control the degree to which she feels sexually violated- or at all violated? I would feel violated. Most woman I know would feel violated. I hope that the reason no one expressed their disgust with this pervert was not because they condoned it, but because they didn’t have the, um… balls to stand up to him.
And since the point is not even to come to a consensus, but just to discuss our thoughts, I am wondering a few things.
If the girl was awake and he held her down to do this (assuming she continues to be an unwilling participant), in what ways does it change matters? There is no actual physical alteration to any of the possibly sexual behavior itself, the only thing that changes is she is being held down, which is not at all sexual in nature. I have a feeling a lot of people who lean to the “not a sexual crime” side might drift. And does “asleep” have to equal “awake and not consenting”? Do we have to assume it always does, because you have no way of knowing?
How are we sure that he was not sexually motivated and/or doing this out of some kind of gratification? A lot of people get off on a lot of weird shit. We have no idea if he was “turned on” or not. I imagine that must be an incredibly difficult thing to prove or disprove. How can you go on someone’s say-so that they’re not turned on by something?
All asleep/awake and drunk/sober mess aside, what does it say about the nature of our genders that, (if the behavior is not previously agreed to), women feel violated when a man shoves his genitalia in her face and men think “Hell yeah!” when a woman shoves hers in his? Am I the only person saddened and disturbed by this?
and having strong opinions on aesthetics , I am certain I am capable of the next Ars Poetica, and I’ve run the block, so I know I have the next four minute mile in me . . . .
Like when my car gets egged. Or , please don’t key my car. there is a difference I think.
Can we rule out the possibility that the drunken girl doesn’t like getting teabagged? After all if MM decided to rub her snatch over my unconcious lips, I’m not going to sue her. Well assuming I’m not married. my wife would definitely take offence. But its my body isn’t it ? But yeah if a guy dropped his balls into my mouth, even Justin Tamberlane, I’d resurrect the death penalty.
Who are we as a society to judge ? This girl was not physically compromised.
).