Should be Beyonce's sister be impriosoned?

diveout · 13-05-2014 08:57AM

WhiteRoses wrote: »

My knowledge is far from trivial. You are saying he could potentially have renal failure and need surgery, I said there is no such evidence, so your point is irrelevant and a judge would not consider it in court.

I was speaking generally about such an assault, which you seem to think is not such a big deal.

And a judge might absolutely consider it in court, more importantly a jury would, especially if it comprises mothers of sons. If I were the DA, that's who I'd select for my jury.

mfceiling · 13-05-2014 08:57AM

Should we care?

Fecking on the news this morning - a story about nothing, about someone who has no relevance to our lives and which will affect our daily goings on today by approx 0%.

Maphisto · 13-05-2014 08:58AM

diveout wrote: »

No one said she did have sexual intent.

If you kick someone in their sexual organs, it will be considered a sexual assault in US jursdictions.

Sexual assault is any involuntary sexual act in which a person is threatened, coerced, or forced to engage against their will, or any sexual touching of a person who has not consented. This includes rape (such as forced vaginal, anal or oral penetration), groping, forced kissing, child sexual abuse, or the torture of the victim in a sexual manner.
In legal terms, sexual assault is a statutory offense in various jurisdictions, including United States, Canada, England and Wales, Ireland, and Scotland. The legal definition of the crime of sexual assault is determined by each jurisdiction. Specific legal jurisdictions and research often use highly technical or detailed definitions of the term. In some places, such as New South Wales, the crime of sexual assault has replaced the traditional crime of rape, and is being defined as non-consensual penetrative sex.

From Wikapedia

Karl Stein · 13-05-2014 08:58AM

'Steada treated,
We get tricked!

'steada kisses
We get kicked!

it's a hard knock life.

anncoates · 13-05-2014 08:58AM

At least we're really getting to the kernel of these world issues.

SusieBlue · 13-05-2014 09:01AM

diveout wrote: »

I was speaking generally about such an assault, which you seem to think is not such a big deal.

And a judge might absolutely consider it in court, more importantly a jury would, especially if it comprises mothers of sons. If I were the DA, that's who I'd select for my jury.

Please point out where I said it was no big deal? I disputed your choice of the word "violent", which I'm sure many would given the footage.

If he chooses to press charges for assault, more power to him, and rightfully so, because she did assault him.

However, she did NOT sexually assault him.

Also, I'm sure mothers of sons have far bigger fears for the children than them getting a kick in the balls. Jesus wept. :rolleyes:

iDave · 13-05-2014 09:09AM

Imprisoned?

How about we do it the old fashioned way. Charge her with assault, give her a fair trial and if convicted hand out a sentence based on the laws of that jurisdiction.

Czarcasm · 13-05-2014 09:12AM

Anyone else figure this was a set-up to get the Jay-Z lookalike some publicity?

The ol' "bad girl" image a la Rihanna? Beyoncé acting like butter wouldn't melt in the background so she doesn't tarnish her own carefully crafted image.

farmchoice · 13-05-2014 09:12AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteRoses View Post
You clearly have no legal knowledge because a judge would laugh that claim out of court. It is NOT reasonably forseeable that should a man be kicked in the balls, he will have renal failure and need re-constructive surgery. An absolute minute chance of it happening. A judge will not rule on something that MAY happen, or have potential to happen, it has to have actually occurred and I'm sure we'd all have heard by now if Jay-Z had backed up kidneys.

It isn't sexual assault because there was no sexual motive, the motive was to cause pain, (trespass to the person tort, and an assault) therefore you are clutching at straws claiming it to be sexual.

Also if you think those weak slaps and kicks were "violent" I suggest you read up some case files from the criminal court because I've seen a better fight from two pigeons fighting over a crust of bread. You are blowing this way out of proportion.

diveout wrote: »

I have plenty of legal knowledge on US jurisdictions my dear and you are very very wrong.

really i find that hard to believe. could you reference some case law where this was shown to be the judges position?

sorry i messed up posting that i ment to post the original post by whiteroses and your reply, i was not implying you do not have plenty of knoledge on the US legal system.

Holsten · 13-05-2014 09:12AM

Watching that attack no I don't think so.

Doesn't matter what Jay-Z did at all, attacking someone like hat is not on.

She's want some anger management classes. If she done it again I'd say yes. People who are that violent are a danger to others.

She is a danger to Jay-Z.

diveout · 13-05-2014 09:15AM

WhiteRoses wrote: »

Please point out where I said it was no big deal? I disputed your choice of the word "violent", which I'm sure many would given the footage.

If he chooses to press charges for assault, more power to him, and rightfully so, because she did assault him.

However, she did NOT sexually assault him.

Also, I'm sure mothers of sons have far bigger fears for the children than them getting a kick in the balls. Jesus wept. :rolleyes:

Oh gosh. In the US, due to the 'war on domestic violence' it is no longer a personal preference of the victim to decide whether or not to prosecute. It is up the state once the assault is reported.

The victim can try to talk to the prosecutor but that is where the power ends.

As a mother of a boy who had surgery twice followed by two consecutive kicks in the region by a small girl, I can tell you I take this very seriously. So save your sarcastic smilies and your trivialisation of assault for someone else.

cabledude · 13-05-2014 09:20AM

So what made the sister flip the lid like that.

She was probably defending Beyonce's honour. Jumping in for her sista and all.

So, what did Jay Z do to make the sister so upset? Did he try and have a lash at her himself. Or was he trying it on with some other chic and the sister got word of it and decided to give him a kick in the nads to teach him a lesson.

jay Z did was a bold boy. The way Beyonce stood off and let the sister attack tells a story. Most partners (male or female) will come to the rescue when the OH is threatened. Beyonce did nothing. She supported the attack. Why?

cletus van damme · 13-05-2014 09:30AM

who cares why or what beyone did?

If Jay Z had lashes out at beyonce or teh sister in the same manner - there would be outrage and no silly jokes about 100 problems etc...

we have sexual equality for a reason.
Lets see it in action.

oddly I read now the hotel are looking to sue the person who realised the video for invasion of privacy.
yes because that's more important than highlightly an attack on somebody.

Czarcasm · 13-05-2014 09:35AM

cletus van damme wrote: »

who cares why or what beyone did?

If Jay Z had lashes out at beyonce or teh sister in the same manner - there woudl be outrage and no silly jokes about 100 problems etc...

we have sexual equality for a reason.
Lets see it in action.

oddly I read now the hotel are looking to sue the person who realised the video for invasion of privacy.
yes because that's more important than highlightly an attack on somebody.

Who's "we" exactly?

humanji · 13-05-2014 09:37AM

cletus van damme wrote: »

who cares why or what beyone did?

If Jay Z had lashes out at beyonce or teh sister in the same manner - there woudl be outrage and no silly jokes about 100 problems etc...

we have sexual equality for a reason.
Lets see it in action.

oddly I read now the hotel are looking to sue the person who realised the video for invasion of privacy.
yes because that's more important than highlightly an attack on somebody.

This has nothing to do with equality unless you can prove that it would be different if a man was attacking.

As for the hotel wanting to sue someone, it makes perfect sense. They are not involved in what happened in the lift, so have no obligations there. But they do have an obligation to their customers. And if their customers know they have no privacy in the hotel, they won't go there, which will lose them a f*ck load of money.

As for sexual assault, wouldn't that also mean proven she intended to kick him in the nuts? Because from the footage she was flailing wildly and not trying to target any specific area.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock · 13-05-2014 09:39AM

So, let me get this straight....

A woman pnches her bf/husband/whatever, and AH instantly assumes that the abuse is sexual and it's attempted murder...?

Well done AH. Well done. Now sto preading the tabloids.

Maphisto · 13-05-2014 09:39AM

diveout wrote: »

Oh gosh. In the US, due to the 'war on domestic violence' it is no longer a personal preference of the victim to decide whether or not to prosecute. It is up the state once the assault is reported.

The victim can try to talk to the prosecutor but that is where the power ends.
.

Well if the victim won't co-operate and give statements or evidence in court, the case will be a difficult one - one I'd suggest that police would drop, whatever their grand policy statements.

As a mother of a boy who had surgery twice followed by two consecutive kicks in the region by a small girl, I can tell you I take this very seriously. So save your sarcastic smilies and your trivialisation of assault for someone else

I think the sarcastic smiles and the trivilisation was connected to your insistance that this was a sexual assault. You are not suggesting that these two assaults on your son were sexual assaults?

Czarcasm · 13-05-2014 09:44AM

humanji wrote: »

This has nothing to do with equality unless you can prove that it would be different if a man was attacking.

As for the hotel wanting to sue someone, it makes perfect sense. They are not involved in what happened in the lift, so have no obligations there. But they do have an obligation to their customers. And if their customers know they have no privacy in the hotel, they won't go there, which will lose them a f*ck load of money.

As for sexual assault, wouldn't that also mean proven she intended to kick him in the nuts? Because from the footage she was flailing wildly and not trying to target any specific area.

I thought when I saw you were the last poster that this would be locked and moved to the celebrity forum!

Princess Consuela Bananahammock wrote: »

So, let me get this straight....

A woman pnches her bf/husband/whatever, and AH instantly assumes that the abuse is sexual and it's attempted murder...?

Well done AH. Well done. Now sto preading the tabloids.

AH? No, it's Jay Z.

Swear we all think with the one mind around here!

diveout · 13-05-2014 09:44AM

Maphisto wrote: »

Well if the victim won't co-operate and give statements or evidence in court, the case will be a difficult one - one I'd suggest that police would drop, whatever their grand policy statements.

This case is a little more complicated because no one reported the incident - it was a leak. I don't know what the cops do in a case like this. Usually when it is reported, the victim obviously gives a statement. They have all sorts of laws for obstruction of justice etc, which can bend the arm to make someone talk if they want. But this is NYC, so probably would get nothing but disturbing the peace or something like that even if she took a machete to him.

Maphisto wrote: »

I think the sarcastic smiles and the trivilisation was connected to your insistance that this was a sexual assault.

THis is what s/he said:
"Also, I'm sure mothers of sons have far bigger fears for the children than them getting a kick in the balls. Jesus wept. [sarcastic smiley]"

DarkJager · 13-05-2014 09:44AM

I don't know how he restrained himself enough not to hit her, he would have been well within his rights to bust her jaw after that.

Cazzoenorme · 13-05-2014 09:44AM

farmchoice wrote: »

Quote:
Originally Posted by WhiteRoses View Post
You clearly have no legal knowledge because a judge would laugh that claim out of court. It is NOT reasonably forseeable that should a man be kicked in the balls, he will have renal failure and need re-constructive surgery. An absolute minute chance of it happening. A judge will not rule on something that MAY happen, or have potential to happen, it has to have actually occurred and I'm sure we'd all have heard by now if Jay-Z had backed up kidneys.

It isn't sexual assault because there was no sexual motive, the motive was to cause pain, (trespass to the person tort, and an assault) therefore you are clutching at straws claiming it to be sexual.

Also if you think those weak slaps and kicks were "violent" I suggest you read up some case files from the criminal court because I've seen a better fight from two pigeons fighting over a crust of bread. You are blowing this way out of proportion.

really i find that hard to believe. could you reference some case law where this was shown to be the judges position?

sorry i messed up posting that i ment to post the original post by whiteroses and your reply, i was not implying you do not have plenty of knoledge on the US legal system.

There was a motive to assault sexual organs, therefore it's sexual assault

Merkin · 13-05-2014 09:46AM

Beyoncé, for all her talk of keeping it real etc, is as fake as a Taiwanese tooth fairy. The way she stood there just fixing her dress and not even engaging in it all says a lot. She's either media savvy as hell and knew there could possibly be CCTV in the lift and her image comes above all else or she's just got ice running through her veins. I wonder what it was about....

SusieBlue · 13-05-2014 09:47AM

diveout wrote: »

This case is a little more complicated because no one reported the incident - it was a leak. I don't know what the cops do in a case like this. Usually when it is reported, the victim obviously gives a statement. They have all sorts of laws for obstruction of justice etc, which can bend the arm to make someone talk if they want. But this is NYC, so probably would get nothing but disturbing the peace or something like that even if she took a machete to him.

THis is what s/he said:
"Also, I'm sure mothers of sons have far bigger fears for the children than them getting a kick in the balls. Jesus wept. [sarcastic smiley]"

And I stand by what I said. I am also a mother and this is not a high concern on my list. I understand you feel differently, and rightly so, because of the suffering your son endured. I am sorry for what you both went through but I don't take it back. My child getting a whack in the genitals has never been high on my list of concerns.

py2006 · 13-05-2014 09:48AM

One rule for one gender and one rule for another...

If Jay-Z smacked, kicked and spat at a female he would not be free to walk the streets this morning and there would be all sorts of serious ramifications.

py2006 · 13-05-2014 09:49AM

WhiteRoses wrote: »

My child getting a whack in the genitals has never been high on my list of concerns.

But it would be if it happened!

SusieBlue · 13-05-2014 09:49AM

Cazzoenorme wrote: »

There was a motive to assault sexual organs, therefore it's sexual assault

That is not the definition of sexual assault. The motive was clearly to inflict pain, not to sexually abuse him.

Cazzoenorme · 13-05-2014 09:49AM

WhiteRoses wrote: »

And I stand by what I said. I am also a mother and this is not a high concern on my list. I understand you feel differently, and rightly so, because of the suffering your son endured. I am sorry for what you both went through but I don't take it back. My child getting a whack in the genitals has never been high on my list of concerns.

Great, fantastic, it's still sexual assault.

diveout · 13-05-2014 09:49AM

WhiteRoses wrote: »

And I stand by what I said. I am also a mother and this is not a high concern on my list. I understand you feel differently, and rightly so, because of the suffering your son endured. I am sorry for what you both went through but I don't take it back. My child getting a whack in the genitals has never been high on my list of concerns.

Well it will be one day. One day when he is lounging around naked with swollen purple testicles and you have to take him in for a urology scan.

And even if it isn't your worry, don't assume it isn't a worthwhile one or scoff at people who talk this assault seriously.

Im sure if someone kicked you in the vagina you wouldn't be so flippant.

dark crystal · 13-05-2014 09:50AM

Merkin wrote: »

Beyoncé, for all her talk of keeping it real etc, is as fake as a Taiwanese tooth fairy. The way she stood there just fixing her dress and not even engaging in it all says a lot. She's either media savvy as hell and knew there could possibly be CCTV in the lift and her image comes above all else or she's just got ice running through her veins. I wonder what it was about....

Yeah, it was so weird how she just stood there without even attempting to break up the fight and then emerged from the lift all serene with a Miss America smile plastered on her face.

upstairs for coffee · 13-05-2014 09:50AM

DarkJager wrote: »

I don't know how he restrained himself enough not to hit her, he would have been well within his rights to bust her jaw after that.

Good lord.

Should be Beyonce's sister be impriosoned?

Comments