Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Girl allegedly raped on Brazilian Big Brother

1…6791112…21

Comments

  • #242
    Potential-Monke
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 14,562 ✭✭✭✭Potential-Monke


    Millicent wrote: »
    Are you seriously suggesting that men cannot help themselves? Thankfully, most of the men I know can still "control" themselves, even when drink- or testosterone-fuelled.

    I don't think he's suggesting that, i think he's saying that wearing slutty clothes and getting comatose drunk could be inviting to potential rapists. It does not excuse the rapist, nor does it constitute an invitation to rape.

    I've stayed out of this so far because i didn't think i'd be able to get my point across without making it sound like i'm slut-naming, or whatever it's called. I think, along with My_Left_Leg, are trying to say that care should be taken by women to not put themselves in situations where the unlikely occurence of a rapist is nearby. It's like (but is not) an invitation.

    I've absolutely no problems with women wearing what they want, or drinking as much as they want. And they have every right to. And i place absolutely no blame on the victim of rape, as they deserve no blame.

    As for the statistics for rape convictions, it is one of the hardest convictions to get. Unless there is early intervention after the actual act of rape, there is very little chance of getting a conviction. Most of it will be down to DNA evidence, swabs taken soon (within 24-36 hours) after the act are near necessary. I could go into more detail, but it might not be the best place/time.

    And to the guy that done it, he will get what's coming, there's more than enough evidence to convict him, imo (without seeing the video, don't think i could watch it).


  • #243
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Bullseye1 wrote: »
    I have not watched the video neither do I intend to, is it conclusive?

    I watched the video. There's nothing conclusive about it whatsoever, in fact you can't even see if there was any sex involved. While it would appear that there was some form of sexual activity going on, there's nothing more than some movement under a duvet & some moans and groans from the woman.


  • #244
    Dyr
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 23,246 ✭✭✭✭Dyr


    Millicent wrote: »
    The hard part of rape cases are that they are notoriously so hard to prove. In another report I read, it was revealed that sexual history questioning was still allowed in around 70 per cent of cases. This questioning has been banned in many places, for very good reason. It's prejudicial and has no bearing on a case but still seeks to paint the victim as a "good time girl" who likely invited a sexual encounter.

    Of course its bloody prejudicial, thats why a defence team would use it, it could have a massive bearing on the case, depending on the circumstances :confused:


  • #245
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Millicent wrote: »
    I believe the figures for total rape cases came from the Dublin Rape Crisis Centre. They would have the research based on calls, visits and scholastic studies and research, IIRC.

    The hard part of rape cases are that they are notoriously so hard to prove. In another report I read, it was revealed that sexual history questioning was still allowed in around 70 per cent of cases. This questioning has been banned in many places, for very good reason. It's prejudicial and has no bearing on a case but still seeks to paint the victim as a "good time girl" who likely invited a sexual encounter.

    thats ridiculous, so if someone has a certain amount of partners and got raped, ah sure she was mad for it anyway? thats outright victim blaming.


  • #246
    languagenerd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,201 ✭✭✭languagenerd


    dj jarvis wrote: »
    well 99% of ACCUSED have to be PROVEN - and your assuming all allegations are true , not all rape allegations are true


    but the flip side should also be applicable - false claims made should also carry a heavy sentence becasue the damage done could be enormous , but in reality these people not only are trying to destroy some ones lives but take away from real victims of these dreadful crimes

    See my other post on page 15 of this thread.

    No, I'm not assuming they're all true, but I just don't think that 99% of them are false.

    And I totally agree with you btw. It only takes that one lie to ruin someone's life, because even if they're found innocent, some people will still say "Oh they're definitely guilty, they just silenced the victim" or whatever.


  • Advertisement
  • #247
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Potential Monkee wrote:
    And to the guy that done it, he will get what's coming, there's more than enough evidence to convict him, imo (without seeing the video, don't think i could watch it).

    What "evidence" ?


  • #248
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Potential-Monke wrote: »
    I don't think he's suggesting that, i think he's saying that wearing slutty clothes and getting comatose drunk could be inviting to potential rapists. It does not excuse the rapist, nor does it constitute an invitation to rape.

    He is.

    My_left_leg wrote: »
    if all men could control themselves, then we would not be having this discussion.:rolleyes:


  • #249
    starbelgrade
    Closed Accounts Posts: 20,739 ✭✭✭✭starbelgrade


    Millicent wrote: »
    If the Independent is reading this, I am available for work! :pac: (Seriously, it's what my degree is in!)

    Well, you'd definitely make a decent writer. Hope it all goes well for you - as Borat would say, "I wish you great success". ;)


  • #250
    amacachi
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23,315 ✭✭✭✭amacachi


    Dudess wrote: »
    It's a discussion about rape in general, spurred on by this incident.

    Which incident? Internet Chinese whispers?


  • #251
    midlandsmissus
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,838 ✭✭✭midlandsmissus


    The comments on the front page are pretty shocking, and just sad really :(. It's one step forward and two steps backwards in this society sometimes.


  • Advertisement
  • #252
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Bambi wrote: »
    Of course its bloody prejudicial, thats why a defence team would use it, it could have a massive bearing on the case, depending on the circumstances :confused:

    Do you understand what prejudicial means? How do you think questioning a girl on whether she was a virgin, how many partners she has had, does she enjoy sex, how long has she been sexually active etc. etc. have any bearing on a rape case?


  • #253
    Johro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,705 ✭✭✭Johro


    krudler wrote: »
    suggesting drunk women "ask for it" is as stupid as suggesting all drunk men are potential rapists.

    I havent watched the video of this but if its a case where the guy just climbed into bed with her and had his way with a passed out girl, thats clearly rape. those stats about rape convictions can be about cases where its a grey area, two people go to bed together and one or both of them have no clear memory of giving consent, thats an allged rape where one persons version is possibly different to what actually happened.
    in a lot of those cases consent lines become blurred if both people have had a lot to drink, yes the blame always lies with the rapist, but if a guy has drunken sex with a girl and she's too drunk to remember giving consent and he's too drunk to remember consent even being an issue then it becomes a bit more complicated.
    Exactly. The point is he was in control, she wasn't, and he took advantage of that. Why she wasn't in control should not be the issue here.


  • #254
    My_left_leg
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 160 ✭✭My_left_leg


    it does not surprise me that only a tiny percentage of these cases ever make it to court. let alone conviction.

    i only ever drink with people i trust 100%.
    life has taught me to do otherwise is foolish.
    to get drunk/comatose with people you hardly know is beyond stupidity, it's totally irresponsible.

    you are in effect surrendering yourself to the kindness (or otherwise) of strangers.

    Good nite!


  • #255
    staker
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,677 ✭✭✭staker


    dj jarvis wrote: »
    well 99% of ACCUSED have to be PROVEN - and your assuming all allegations are true , not all rape allegations are true

    far from it judging by a garda i knew who worked in a north Dublin garda station said they used to take bets on how many rape alligations would turn out to be total fabrications , dark i know, but he said they used to get so many historical drunk women wanting to get back at husbands / boy friends

    my view is a rapist should get the full brunt of the law that can be allowed - no light sentences - if its proven in court - you deserve it - end of

    but the flip side should also be applicable - false claims made should also carry a heavy sentence becasue the damage done could be enormous , but in reality these people not only are trying to destroy some ones lives but take away from real victims of these dreadful crimes

    as for this case in brazil - have not seen the video and wont be watching
    as for the crass comments on this thread all i can say is im saddened

    Agree whole-heartedly, but it's not that black and white.
    I had an innocent friend banged up in jail for 8 months because of a false claim of rape-it took an appeal in the courts to deliver a not guilty verdict as it was hers vs his word at rial.
    She had a change of heart one night 6 months later and told her husband the truth, he disclosed this to the courts.
    What happens if she keeps schtum?


  • #256
    Bullseye1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    I don't see how you could pass judgement on someone based on what is said on a forum without at least watching the video. That sounds like a kangaroo court.

    Has the woman even reported a crime had taken place. There maybe he lesser crime of sexual assault? Anyway it's all speculation at this stage.


  • #257
    Johro
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,705 ✭✭✭Johro


    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Yeah - you see that first part ? The bit with the NEVER in capitals and the word "remotely" ? Could it be any clearer ?
    You forgot the 'but...'.


  • #258
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    staker wrote: »
    Agree whole-heartedly, but it's not that black and white.
    I had an innocent friend banged up in jail for 8 months because of a false claim of rape-it took an appeal in the courts to deliver a not guilty verdict as it was hers vs his word at rial.
    She had a change of heart one night 6 months later and told her husband the truth, he disclosed this to the courts.
    What happens if she keeps schtum?

    People like that (woman) do a massive disservice to rape victims. I find people who cry rape reprehensible.


  • #259
    Pissmire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 73 ✭✭Pissmire


    languagenerd wrote: »
    Sometimes, just sometimes, there are things that can't be described. That's why the word "ineffable" exists.


    I know that false allegations are made - and I think that those are terrible, because it only takes one lie to ruin someone's life too, there'll always be people who say "Oh, they definitely did it" even if they're proved innocent - but you can't seriously believe that 99% of people accused of rape are wrongly accused, can you?

    I would at least hope for 10-15%. Even though that evidently is gonna sound crazy to you.

    No 10-15% doesn't sound crazy, but I can't agree with it because I have no idea. And no I don't believe that 99% of accused are innocent. It would be a terrible thing too if any of the 1% were innocent. It happens.


  • #260
    Bullseye1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    Millicent wrote: »
    Do you understand what prejudicial means? How do you think questioning a girl on whether she was a virgin, how many partners she has had, does she enjoy sex, how long has she been sexually active etc. etc. have any bearing on a rape case?

    I agree it should not have any bearing on any case. I'm not familiar with the law in regard to statutory rape when two minors are involved (say a boy and girl both 15). I've read on here somewhere but have not confirmed that the boy would be charged with rape. Is this the case and why?


  • #261
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    My_left_leg wrote: »
    it does not surprise me that only a tiny percentage of these cases ever make it to court. let alone conviction.

    i only ever drink with people i trust 100%.
    life has taught me to do otherwise is foolish.
    to get drunk/comatose with people you hardly know is beyond stupidity, it's totally irresponsible.

    you are in effect surrendering yourself to the kindness (or otherwise) of strangers.

    Good nite!

    Yeah, nothing bad will ever happen to you if you make sure to drink with the right people. :rolleyes: Oh wait...


  • Advertisement
  • #262
    Liam Byrne
    Closed Accounts Posts: 18,163 ✭✭✭✭Liam Byrne


    Johro wrote: »
    Liam Byrne wrote: »
    Yeah - you see that first part ? The bit with the NEVER in capitals and the word "remotely" ? Could it be any clearer ?
    You forgot the 'but...'.

    Just quit it. You're wrong and appear to be looking for an argument.

    You claimed that I was putting some of the blame on the victim which I never did.

    Now, you have a choice - admit that was misrepresentation and a made-up claim on your part, or get reported for the third time in the one thread for labouring the point despite being repeatedly corrected.

    It's your call because I have better things to do than repeatedly correct you.


  • #263
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Johro wrote: »
    Exactly. The point is he was in control, she wasn't, and he took advantage of that. Why she wasn't in control should not be the issue here.

    I didnt say it was in this case, she was asleep in a bed and the guy arrived in and did whatever it was that happened. I'm talking about cases where both people are too drunk to remember consent being an issue, hell I've had drunk sex, as have a lot of grown adults, luckily its never been a case where consent or lack thereof has ever been an issue but it'd make you wonder.


  • #264
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Bullseye1 wrote: »
    I agree it should not have any bearing on any case. I'm not familiar with the law in regard to statutory rape when two minors are involved (say a boy and girl both 15). I've read on here somewhere but have not confirmed that the boy would be charged with rape. Is this the case and why?

    It is the case here and it's a ridiculous law (nicknamed the Romeo and Juliet law). Apparently, the girl is the innocent who needs protecting in the eyes of the law, and the lad is a sex-hungry criminal. Absolutely horrible law.


  • #265
    Pissmire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 73 ✭✭Pissmire


    Millicent wrote: »
    So go start a thread on those things and leave those of us who do care to read and react in this thread.

    So we have a conflict of opinion and you want to shut me up?


  • #266
    krudler
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,788 ✭✭✭✭krudler


    Millicent wrote: »
    It is the case here and it's a ridiculous law (nicknamed the Romeo and Juliet law). Apparently, the girl is the innocent who needs protecting in the eyes of the law, and the lad is a sex-hungry criminal. Absolutely horrible law.

    doesnt the guy wind up on the sex offenders register as well but the girl doesnt? or is that something else


  • #267
    Dudess
    Closed Accounts Posts: 37,214 ✭✭✭✭Dudess


    My_left_leg wrote: »
    i only ever drink with people i trust 100%.
    Well you SAY that anyway...


  • #268
    Millicent
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,559 ✭✭✭Millicent


    Pissmire wrote: »
    So we have a conflict of opinion and you want to shut me up?

    There's no conflict of interest here. You have said you have no sympathy for the woman here and have no interest in the case. I asked why you wouldn't go start a thread on something you do have an interest in, seeing as you're going to such pains to stress what you find interesting or worth discussing.


  • #269
    Pissmire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 73 ✭✭Pissmire


    Sardonicat wrote: »
    Don't you like Jodie either?


    Yeah, Jodie's fine.


  • #270
    Pissmire
    Closed Accounts Posts: 73 ✭✭Pissmire


    Dudess wrote: »
    It's a discussion about rape in general, spurred on by this incident.

    Just my response to a question. It'd be rude not to answer.


  • Advertisement
  • #271
    languagenerd
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,201 ✭✭✭languagenerd


    Millicent wrote: »
    It is the case here and it's a ridiculous law (nicknamed the Romeo and Juliet law). Apparently, the girl is the innocent who needs protecting in the eyes of the law, and the lad is a sex-hungry criminal. Absolutely horrible law.

    I read somewhere years ago that the original idea was that a young pregnant girl would be too afraid to seek medical help if she thought she'd be arrested for it.

    It doesn't make any sense for the boy to be charged though, if both of them are the same age and both consented (even though legally, neither can) - but charge neither or charge both! (preferably neither)


Advertisement