Many moons ago I started a hypothetical thread wherein someone was accused of rape and saved by his security system having accidentally recorded the sex. The accidental recording was roundly condemned.
Well, truth is stranger than fiction: the Daily Mail reports that two men have just been vindicated after being falsely accused of raping a woman because one of the men recorded it all.
It seems to me that now any casual sex is going to be recorded for the safety of men.
And, of course, the false accuser is still granted anonymity.
All three of them are guilty of extra-marital sex and the woman is additionally guilty of making a false accusation, all serious crimes in the UAE. It seems like the police have simply exercised discretion and told all three to just leave the country.
Honestly, I don’t know what happened. I know what the men say happened. I know what the Dubai authorities say happened. Dubai authorities. This is a country where women are regularly arrested when they are raped.
I hope that no one was falsely accused. I’m glad that all are free to go about their business. I’m afraid I can’t take that newspaper account as being proof of anything.
If you think that men will be safer from false accusations of rape if they record sexual encounters, then, as long as all parties consent to that, by all means. Record away.
So, could you explain the point you’re trying to make here? Consensual recording is presumably uncontroversial, two people can do what they choose. Are you arguing that false accusation of rape is such a widespread problem in society that it should be legal to record your sexual activity without the knowledge or consent of your sexual partner?
It’s not a question of the political spectrum, it’s a question of actual journalism versus sensationalism.
You have accepted the story at face value, which strongly suggests you believe what the Daily Mail feeds you.
The actual facts don’t seem to be of concern. My WAG is that you didn’t even to a cursory googling of the news to get a more nuanced view in your rush to post what you think is vindication.
It’s just an open and shut case because the Daily Mail printed it, right?
The woman in question was apparently intoxicated; which would mean in British law that she would not be regarded as being able to provide consent.
Dubai does not have that provision for obvious reasons. They don’t care if the woman is completely drunk.
In the UK, this would not have been a “false accusation.”
See, homework isn’t actually that difficult to do, but it wouldn’t fit your narrative.
So yes. By all means, if you want to rape a married woman in Dubai, feel free to record it and you will likely not face any consequences. Happy?
Oh, and here’s a cite discussion intoxicated women not considered capable of providing consent under British law. I’m sure you will appreciate the source.
That’s a very stupid and bigoted statement. The briefest of searches would reveal that the story is also reported in other UK tabloids like the Sun, the Metro, and the Mirror. And the Toronto Star. And Widnes World.
I don’t believe or disbelieve a story from any one source; I try to read widely, remember? Look into a mirror and see the real source of your problem.