Murphy101 Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 For sure that's what they're hoping - she'll go away and clam up and everyone [but her] can forget all about it. That may be true, but it also doesn't change that not every woman is going to want to dwell in this or make this their public cause. They have to do what what brings them healing first. That comes before the criminal or what other women want them to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
unsinkable Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 For sure that's what they're hoping - she'll go away and clam up and everyone [but her] can forget all about it. Are you related to the albeto that doesn't have a period at the end of her name? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 Are you related to the albeto that doesn't have a period at the end of her name? Yes, my account is lost in the ether. I'm waiting for a response from my emails to the admins. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 22, 2013 Share Posted July 22, 2013 That may be true, but it also doesn't change that not every woman is going to want to dwell in this or make this their public cause. They have to do what what brings them healing first. That comes before the criminal or what other women want them to do. That goes without saying. It's why Dubai's gamble is a smart one. The likelihood she'll hide from the public and this event fade into the recesses of history is great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 What a horrible system. She has to have witnesses (four, specifically not women), or a confession, or show bodily injury. Having had a gun to my head at one time in my life, I know a little about how one can be forced to do things without leaving a bruise or broken bone. Good god I hope she not only gets home safely, but makes the biggest international stink for the whole world to hear. The people in Dubai should be publicly and constantly shamed for their secondary assault on her, and hopefully before too long, will be too embarrassed to allow this kind of horror continue. Of course they should be shamed for every event like this they allow to happen, but that can't happen in countries where the law doesn't exist to support the woman. Since you responded to my post where I said 'I don't know that the US would take a case to court if they didn't have physical evidence and also didn't have complainant' referencing another post talking about filing DV charges without a complainant, let me ask, in what place pray tell would they prosecute a rape where the accused says they had consensual sex, the victim says she was raped but the physical evidence is inconclusive and does not show rape (likely because the poor woman was unconscious in this case and couldn't fight back, but this would be a problem even if she just was scared and didn't fight...in Islam, there is no obligation for a woman to fight back if she is scared or threatened with her life though perhaps Dubai misses this point), there are no witnesses so it essentially boils down to his word vs hers with no concrete evidence for either side and a victim who recanted and is no longer pursuing the case? And add to that the punishment upon a guilty verdict would be a death sentence. Because that is the specific instance I referred to in the post you quoted me on. I think you'd have trouble, under those specific parameters, finding a DA to prosecute the case here with all of those factors at play. The difficulty of he said, she said cases especially with the added fact that a lot of 'date' rapists tend to go unconvicted here because the public blames the victim alone are often reasons such cases are unsuccessful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marbel Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 The difficulty of he said, she said cases especially with the added fact that a lot of 'date' rapists tend to go unconvicted here because the public blames the victim alone are often reasons such cases are unsuccessful. Do "date" rapists tend to go unconvicted because people blame the victim or because there is insufficient evidence to convict? If it's just "he said, she said" with no other evidence, what can a jury or judge do? What should they do? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Do "date" rapists tend to go unconvicted because people blame the victim or because there is insufficient evidence to convict? If it's just "he said, she said" with no other evidence, what can a jury or judge do? What should they do? Well, it can be the lack of evidence and he said, she said situation but since I had mentioned that already in the post, I was referring more to cases where there is a good amount of physical evidence and the accused's defense is something like they had consensual, rough s*x and because there was some sort of interaction between them prior or drinking or something that others witnessed or she was perceived as being promiscuous, the victim blaming gives them an extra way to justify believing that type of story. Seems like this is a legitimate issue in our own justice system in the US, so I was pointing out that under the circumstances with no physical evidence and the word of 2 people against one another (moreso if the victim decided not to testify) and a death penalty attached, I highly doubt any country would've touched that with a 10 foot pole. Of course, Dubai never let it get that far but I just don't get acting like he would've been definitely convicted here either. They certainly wouldn't have arrested her (maybe for perjury though I doubt that) but I'm not sure if they would prosecute. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 She only withdrew her accusation after the state (?) pressed charges on her for drinking and fornication, right? It's not like she just changed her mind about her story, if that part is true, the perjury was commited under duress. Not that anything would make a difference now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Since you responded to my post where I said 'I don't know that the US would take a case to court if they didn't have physical evidence and also didn't have complainant' referencing another post talking about filing DV charges without a complainant, let me ask, in what place pray tell would they prosecute a rape where the accused says they had consensual sex, the victim says she was raped but the physical evidence is inconclusive and does not show rape (likely because the poor woman was unconscious in this case and couldn't fight back, but this would be a problem even if she just was scared and didn't fight... My comment was about the system that requires one of three rather difficult criteria to be considered credible as evidence in a crime: A confession (how often does that even happen?); Witnesses (why no women, what's wrong with a woman's testimony?); And evidence (which includes what, visible bruises, skin under the nails, ripped flesh? what counts here?). Without one of these three rather difficult criteria, the woman who cries "rape" automatically stands accused of a crime herself - behaving immorally. That system is, in my opinion, horrible. When I was robbed at gunpoint, at no time was I accused of immoral behavior (letting a man who was not my husband into the home). I cannot imagine the emotional trauma of not only being victimized and then blamed for being the victim, but punished as a perpetrator of a crime as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 What a horrible system. She has to have witnesses (four, specifically not women), or a confession, or show bodily injury. Having had a gun to my head at one time in my life, I know a little about how one can be forced to do things without leaving a bruise or broken bone. Good god I hope she not only gets home safely, but makes the biggest international stink for the whole world to hear. The people in Dubai should be publicly and constantly shamed for their secondary assault on her, and hopefully before too long, will be too embarrassed to allow this kind of horror continue. Of course they should be shamed for every event like this they allow to happen, but that can't happen in countries where the law doesn't exist to support the woman. Considering how many times the story changed depending on which article you read, I am not sure I believe that the whole "four male witnesses" etc. is accurate in this case either. Frankly I don't know what to believe. First she was sentenced for being raped. Then she was sentenced for crimes she actually admitted (for whatever reason). First it was a co-worker, then it was her boss. First the advice to recant came from her manager, then it came from her lawyer or some other lawyer or the cops or . . . ? Practically every important fact is either mysteriously left unsaid by some articles, or stated inconsistently from one day to the next. The rules of evidence may be another carelessly misstated "fact." The fact is that she recanted. Can't anyone understand that? It sounds like her employer talked her into doing this to save the employer's skin. I do believe she was raped, but I don't understand how we're blaming the justice system. In all the variously worded articles, I saw not one "fact" that indicated that the justice system made her recant her allegation. She went to the Powers that Be and told them she had violated their laws. Maybe she didn't realize that what she was admitting (consensual adultery) was illegal and punishable by incarceration. Maybe she didn't realize that saying "I was raped" and then saying "actually no, I wasn't raped" means she was admitting perjury. Maybe she didn't realize that going out and getting drunk that night was also illegal, and the toxicology report proved she did it. But that's the legal reality, whether she realized it or not. Although I could understand wanting to let her take back her "consensual" statement, doing that would only be step one toward trying the aggressor for rape. It would then go back to he said / she said. And now her credibility has been compromised because she changed her story. It's just a mess but it was not a mess created by the justice system. If your outrage is over the fact that it's illegal to commit adultery, drink without a license, or perjure yourself in a case that could lead to capital punishment, we'll have to agree to disagree. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 She already said they have more modern laws there, now, and that r..e charges can be brought and convicted with only the witness of the one woman. She said the misunderstanding in America is about a Shira law about business contracts that require four male witnesses. The four witnesses to r..e, she says, is misinformation about Shira law. (who knew?) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Do "date" rapists tend to go unconvicted because people blame the victim or because there is insufficient evidence to convict? If it's just "he said, she said" with no other evidence, what can a jury or judge do? What should they do? Legally the burden is on the accuser to prove the rape beyond a reasonable doubt. The accused does not have to prove anything. So I do believe that skews many cases in favor of the accused. That's what our justice system was designed to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Maybe she said whatever would get her out of the hellish situation. If my choice was between 16 months of imprisonment in a Middle Eastern country, or flop my hand on a stack of holy books and lie like a rug, my choice would be simple and there would be no regrets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 If your outrage is over the fact that it's illegal to commit adultery, drink without a license, or perjure yourself in a case that could lead to capital punishment, we'll have to agree to disagree. Don't mistake a lack of flattery for outrage. And no, for the record, I'm not addressing the issue of illegality of adultery, drinking without a license, or perjury, in Dubai or anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Don't mistake a lack of flattery for outrage. And no, for the record, I'm not addressing the issue of illegality of adultery, drinking without a license, or perjury, in Dubai or anywhere. Your comment at 7:33pm was much more than a "lack of flattery." You basically accused the people of Dubai of raping her all over again. You want the whole world to get together to shame the people of Dubai into . . . what? The man who raped her wasn't even from there. Now a boycott on the employer, I could understand. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 You want the whole world to get together to shame the people of Dubai into . . . what? Modifying their legal system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 If you think about it, a one-year jail term is pretty mild for an "adulterous" woman in traditional Muslim communities. I thought they didn't let you live if you did that. Though there is mercy for admitting it and repenting. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Modifying their legal system. Exactly what changes would have prevented this problem? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
albeto. Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 If you think about it, a one-year jail term is pretty mild for an "adulterous" woman in traditional Muslim communities. Right. That's the problem. When news makes international headlines because it reflects a horrendous event (imprisonment for accusation of rape), to say it's justified because it could be worse is problematic. Of course it could be worse, but the point is, it could be better, too. The thing is, being better doesn't take all that much effort. It requires updating a legal code to more rational and logical standards of justice, rather than adhering to subjective interpretations of religious belief. The courts of Dubai should feel ashamed because what they did reflects what they currently do, which is, in my opinion, shameful. Really shameful. The only way to inspire change is to be aware of the need of change. Sadly, sometimes outside public opinion is the only catalyst that works. That outside public opinion comes from people talking about what happened, and what's still happening. I really do hope this woman has the kind of support network waiting for her when she gets home so she can process all that's happened to her, and hopefully avoid it leading to further emotional trauma. However, I also hope existing networks that focus on women's safety do what they can in hopes of reducing the chance this happens to many other women. This never should have happened to her, but why not work at making her the last victim? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Right. That's the problem. When news makes international headlines because it reflects a horrendous event (imprisonment for accusation of rape), to say it's justified because it could be worse is problematic. Of course it could be worse, but the point is, it could be better, too. The thing is, being better doesn't take all that much effort. It requires updating a legal code to more rational and logical standards of justice, rather than adhering to subjective interpretations of religious belief. The courts of Dubai should feel ashamed because what they did reflects what they currently do, which is, in my opinion, shameful. Really shameful. The only way to inspire change is to be aware of the need of change. Sadly, sometimes outside public opinion is the only catalyst that works. That outside public opinion comes from people talking about what happened, and what's still happening. I really do hope this woman has the kind of support network waiting for her when she gets home so she can process all that's happened to her, and hopefully avoid it leading to further emotional trauma. However, I also hope existing networks that focus on women's safety do what they can in hopes of reducing the chance this happens to many other women. This never should have happened to her, but why not work at making her the last victim? But what specifically would you change that would have prevented this problem? She was not imprisoned for accusation of rape. Two of the three charges (perjury and adultery) were the direct result of her taking back the rape accusation and saying it was consensual sex. Again, we do not know what the legal outcome would have been if she had not recanted. The legal system never got a chance to fully prosecute the rape case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 The courts of Dubai should feel ashamed because what they did reflects what they currently do, which is, in my opinion, shameful. Really shameful. The only way to inspire change is to be aware of the need of change. Sadly, sometimes outside public opinion is the only catalyst that works. That outside public opinion comes from people talking about what happened, and what's still happening. "What they did" = ? What exactly did the courts of Dubai do that is shameful? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 "Again, we do not know what the legal outcome would have been if she had not recanted. The legal system never got a chance to fully prosecute the r..e case." Sharazad, that's a good question. Is it a mandatory death sentence for r..e? or is it that the sentence can be anything up to the death penalty. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 "What they did" = ? What exactly did the courts of Dubai do that is shameful? They have a reputation for being the Las Vegas of the Middle East, an image they sell. The pressed charges on a woman for a petty offence that they usually overlook when she pressed charges on the guy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 "Again, we do not know what the legal outcome would have been if she had not recanted. The legal system never got a chance to fully prosecute the rape case." Sharazad, that's a good question. Is it a mandatory death sentence for rape? or is it that the sentence can be anything up to the death penalty. Even if he wasn't found guilty of rape, that doesn't mean she would have been convicted of anything. "Not enough evidence to convict" does not equal "the complainant is a loose, lying lush." And maybe there were lesser crimes he could have been convicted of, such as battery, that might not have carried a death penalty, if there was doubt. Or a plea bargain, as often happens here. Or maybe he would have gone scot free, but even so, if she had stuck to her guns, maybe she would have as well. We just don't know. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shahrazad Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 "Again, we do not know what the legal outcome would have been if she had not recanted. The legal system never got a chance to fully prosecute the rape case." Sharazad, that's a good question. Is it a mandatory death sentence for rape? or is it that the sentence can be anything up to the death penalty. I don't know about the Emirates, I think they give either life imprisonment or the death sentence though I'm not sure if they can choose either or if, more likely, a person might be sentenced to death and then have his sentence commuted to life imprisonment. Islamically, a rape conviction (even if the person confessed of their own volition) is automatic death penalty though some have allowed exceptions for life imprisonment and lashes. Either decision would require a cash settlement paid to the victim in addition to serving out the punishment. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 They have a reputation for being the Las Vegas of the Middle East, an image they sell. The pressed charges on a woman for a petty offence that they usually overlook when she pressed charges on the guy. We don't know whether they charged her before or after she recanted, do we? That is significant IMO. I don't believe it's "petty" to falsely accuse someone of rape, not here in the USA, and certainly not in a country where rape means capital punishment. If the judge really believed she trumped up the charge (based on her statement recanting it), then I could understand prosecuting the other two "petty" charges as a further disincentive for people to make false rape accusations. But I don't know if that was the motivation or not. He also sentenced the guy though, legally, he was not guilty of anything besides drinking and adultery. (If you believed that guy's story then you'd probably be up in arms about that.) ETA: Maybe the rapist cross-claimed against her, saying I'm not guilty of rape, she's guilty of adultery. And then the justice system could perhaps throw out charges in both directions and see which stick. If that is the case (which we do not know!), then I could see how a woman would be afraid to report a rape. The same thing happens in the USA, except that the accuser would not get legally punished for adultery, so it isn't as much of a disincentive. But why on earth would someone recant a true rape charge *after* being counter-charged with adultery? That part doesn't make sense. You are charged with adultery and then say the sex was consensual? Very hard to buy that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Because, to them, it's black and white, either a coupling is fair game, or it wasn't... they don't have a long history of the concept of "dating", there wouldn't have been enough time to consider that in the dating or for icating scene that a woman might say yes, might say no... you have to wait and see. So they're backwards and don't know about date r..e because they haven't allowed "dating" that long; and yet they want to join the modern global community, the planetary human race, yet, without assimilating and loosing their cultural identity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 No, the petty part was Dubai charging the woman with drinking and fornicating, petty crimes the usually don't pursue charging people with, and they charged her with it because she tried to press charges for date r..e. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 No, the petty part was Dubai charging the woman with drinking and fornicating, petty crimes the usually don't pursue charging people with, and they charged her with it because she tried to press charges for date rape. Because she tried to press charges, or because she (allegedly) *falsely* accused someone on purpose? To me, it would be important to know which came first - her "admission" that it was consensual, or the adultery/alcohol charges. I didn't see that information anywhere, and I'm not willing to assume it one way or the other. If the admission came first, it makes no sense to say she was punished for reporting a rape. If the admission came second, I could see your point, but then how was the admission supposed to "make it all go away"? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I think they had to make the petty charges against her before she changed her story giving the appearance of possibly false allegations. The reason I think this is because the articles said the reason she changed her story is because someone told her, "say you lied and this will all go away". The articles disagree on who told her that, but agree that she was told that. The charges was the "all" that would "go away". So I think she was charged with petty violations and faced jail time before she changed her story. ETA: maybe "all go away" meant death penalty too, because that's an unexpected sentence for that crime, to women not from there ETA: well the sentence is not for that particular crime since date rape doesn't exist there, either rape or nothing, death sentence or not Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Because she tried to press charges, or because she (allegedly) *falsely* accused someone on purpose? To me, it would be important to know which came first - her "admission" that it was consensual, or the adultery/alcohol charges. I didn't see that information anywhere, and I'm not willing to assume it one way or the other. ....If the admission came second, I could see your point, but then how was the admission supposed to "make it all go away"? The articles did say that she was told that admitting it was consentual would make it all go away. The only point that wasn't clear was if the company told her that ridiculous lie or whether the company man was translating what the police said, which was if she admitted it was consentual it would all go away. The articles make it clear she was told that. One article says the company told her that lie. The other article says the company man said he was just translating what the policeman said for her. Both articles linked in this thread agree she was told that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 I think they had to make the petty charges against her before she changed her story giving the appearance of possibly false allegations. The reason I think this is because the articles said the reason she changed her story is because someone told her, "say you lied and this will all go away". The articles disagree on who told her that, but agree that she was told that. The charges was the "all" that would "go away". So I think she was charged with petty violations and faced jail time before she changed her story. Again the accuracy of the articles is in serious question, but here's how I read it. Her employer had a problem with one of its empoyees - married with children - allegedly raping a young woman employee. You can imagine the repercussions to the company and its older, married employee if the rape accusation stuck. The boss works with a company-paid lawyer to figure out what to do. The lawyer says that the only / best way to get out of it without a trial is to get the woman to recant. The manager speaks to the woman. The woman is under pressure because her boss does not want its employee to be convicted of rape. The woman's job, career, reputation, and possibly her safety are at stake. Who knows what all they said to her? And on top of that, the thought of having to go through a rape trial when there are so many ways they could attack her in court (just as they would in the USA). Maybe this was the first time she realized what a rape conviction would mean to the rapist (death), and maybe she thinks that's a bit much for what he did. So she's in a pickle, and then the manager tells her that recanting her story would be the best way to resolve the issue, to "make it all go away." All that could easily have happened without the involvement of the judge etc. In fact, it probably did. The problem is, the lawyer was working for the employer's interest, not the victim's. The young lady perhaps didn't pick up on that until it was too late. I mean, obviously recanting wasn't the way to make it all go away. What kind of lousy lawyer would give such advice if he had the woman's best interest at heart? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Ok. But what would the sleazy lawyer be promising would "go away" if the charges against the woman were not placed by Dubai before the sleazy lawyer asked her to recant her statement? Dubai still had to press petty charges against the victim before she recanted, even in this scenerio. Was she a saint and martyr that "reprocusions to the company" was he promised would go away? No. Especially if she's telling the media now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SKL Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Ok. But what would the sleazy lawyer be promising would "go away" if the charges against the woman were not placed by Dubai before the sleazy lawyer asked her to recant her statement? Dubai still had to press petty charges against the victim before she recanted, even in this scenerio. Was she a saint and martyr that "reprocusions to the company" was he promised would go away? No. Especially if she's telling the media now. I thought I provided a whole list of things that she would have wanted to "just go away" even if she wasn't charged with a crime. It has nothing to do with altruism when your boss calls a "you are deep in shit" conference. However, it is possible she was charged before that. I just don't know. The fact that she recanted was withheld from almost every article, which in itself seems to be intentionally misleading, so I'm sorry but my BS detector is beeping loudly. For that matter, she really didn't know who was saying what either, as apparently she does not understand Arabic. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Maybe the (unexpected) death penalty was the "all go away" part. If so, it's disturbing that the articles say she regrets changing her story. I still find it more likely "all" was all the charges against her and all the time she would have been locked up in jail. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 Well, it might be BS. There is a lot of anti-muslim pot-stirring in the internet today. My dad told me anybody can write and publish anything they'd like, even you, so don't believe everything you read. We were talking about books; this was before I was on the internet where it's obviously much easier to publish anything you like. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
La Texican Posted July 23, 2013 Share Posted July 23, 2013 and snopes dot com which exists to sniff out internet hoaxes has only barely started discussing this case, so it's not declared wether it's true or not yet http://message.snopes.com/showthread.php?p=1754240 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.