![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
neadodsJust when it looked like it was going to be a nice day, my office mate finds this:
Cop sees a man beat a woman. Police arrest man for domestic abuse. Woman does not show up at trial. Does the judge wonder about fear? Flight? Witness intimidation? Nope. "The state is stepping into the shoes of the victim when she obviously doesn't care," the judge said Oct. 3 before acquitting Michael Antonio Webb of second-degree assault. "It's that big brother mentality of the state."
The judge said without the victim's testimony, he couldn't be sure she didn't want to be beaten.
He couldn't be sure that she didn't want to be beaten. That has to be repeated. Without her testimony, he had to assume that she wanted to be beaten. Because there are sado-masochists out there, y'know.
Seriously, that's what the judge cited. "[S]adomasochists sometimes like to get beat up."
In public? In front of a non-consenting cop?
I've been in the kinky community for a long time without finding anyone who thinks that's hot, as opposed to "the most stupid-ass way of getting arrested EVER."
But because there's something like a .000000001% chance that the cop interrupted a consensual public sado-masochistic scene, the guy - the 6+ foot-guy - who pounds a woman in front of a cop (for the crime of being late picking him up) is acquitted.
The judge (a recently benched Republican, natch) continues to insist that the state has to prove that the victim wasn't consenting. And that he's not a complete asshole either: "I'm probably as against domestic violence as anybody, when the case is proven."
Gotta love the "probably" in that sentence!
At least one person in this mess has his head screwed on right, though: "It's not like there is a rule saying you can't get a conviction without the victim's testimony," [Andrew D. Levy, an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland School of Law] said, noting judges infer murder victims didn't want to die all the time.
That's local. At the federal level, of course, we've got the new the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs [which is, among other things, in charge of national family planning (low-cost birth control to poor women)] who thinks that making people provide contraceptives is not about choice. It's not about health care. It's about making everyone collaborators with the culture of death ... fertility is not a disease."
No, but it's damned inconvenient when you don't want to be fertile while still doing certain activities that are safe, sane, consensual and - I can't believe how often I have to remind people of this - legal.
Silly women out there having sex! Apparently we're supposed to work out our adult ya-yas getting our faces caved in instead. THAT'll be just peachyfine, and you don't even need contraceptives!
Cop sees a man beat a woman. Police arrest man for domestic abuse. Woman does not show up at trial. Does the judge wonder about fear? Flight? Witness intimidation? Nope. "The state is stepping into the shoes of the victim when she obviously doesn't care," the judge said Oct. 3 before acquitting Michael Antonio Webb of second-degree assault. "It's that big brother mentality of the state."
The judge said without the victim's testimony, he couldn't be sure she didn't want to be beaten.
He couldn't be sure that she didn't want to be beaten. That has to be repeated. Without her testimony, he had to assume that she wanted to be beaten. Because there are sado-masochists out there, y'know.
Seriously, that's what the judge cited. "[S]adomasochists sometimes like to get beat up."
In public? In front of a non-consenting cop?
I've been in the kinky community for a long time without finding anyone who thinks that's hot, as opposed to "the most stupid-ass way of getting arrested EVER."
But because there's something like a .000000001% chance that the cop interrupted a consensual public sado-masochistic scene, the guy - the 6+ foot-guy - who pounds a woman in front of a cop (for the crime of being late picking him up) is acquitted.
The judge (a recently benched Republican, natch) continues to insist that the state has to prove that the victim wasn't consenting. And that he's not a complete asshole either: "I'm probably as against domestic violence as anybody, when the case is proven."
Gotta love the "probably" in that sentence!
At least one person in this mess has his head screwed on right, though: "It's not like there is a rule saying you can't get a conviction without the victim's testimony," [Andrew D. Levy, an adjunct professor at the University of Maryland School of Law] said, noting judges infer murder victims didn't want to die all the time.
That's local. At the federal level, of course, we've got the new the Acting Deputy Assistant Secretary for Population Affairs [which is, among other things, in charge of national family planning (low-cost birth control to poor women)] who thinks that making people provide contraceptives is not about choice. It's not about health care. It's about making everyone collaborators with the culture of death ... fertility is not a disease."
No, but it's damned inconvenient when you don't want to be fertile while still doing certain activities that are safe, sane, consensual and - I can't believe how often I have to remind people of this - legal.
Silly women out there having sex! Apparently we're supposed to work out our adult ya-yas getting our faces caved in instead. THAT'll be just peachyfine, and you don't even need contraceptives!
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 04:19 pm (UTC)Judges infer murder victims didn't want to die all the time.
Yeah, but how do they KNOW....?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 04:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 05:00 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 05:11 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 05:44 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 06:46 pm (UTC)Is there any way to get him kicked off the bench for extreme idiocy?
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 07:02 pm (UTC)Not a typo. Set. Her. On. Fire.
He went out the door protesting all the way that it was a clerical error about the restraining order, and they were misinterpreting what was written in his own handwriting on it.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 07:12 pm (UTC)*checks it again*
It is 2007, right?
*shudder*
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 07:41 pm (UTC)It's 2007, and we're still not citizens. We can vote - but we're not citizens.
no subject
Date: 2007-10-19 11:10 pm (UTC)