Rape ‘em While They’re Drunk

2nd December 2007

Rape ‘em While They’re Drunk

posted in Society by themaiden |

Then they can’t testify.

On the second day of a five-day trial Philip Andrews, defending, said that the 14-year-old’s account of events could not be relied upon because she had been drinking heavily.

Cross examining the alleged victim he said: “Your memory of the events could clearly be at fault because of your drinking.

“You weren’t sure what happened because you were groggy.”

Rape Victim Was Too Groggy To Remember Attack (from This Is Lancashire)

This has got to be one of the most cracked defenses I’ve ever seen and the people voicing it ought to be ashamed, if not constrained and tested for neurological disease before being allowed back into the general population. Someone capable of taking this stance is frankly dangerous.

From Abyss2Hope: “The problem with this assertion is that it means that the defense was providing a backhanded acknowledgment that the defendant knew she was groggy past the point of being able to give legal consent and he didn’t think she would be able to remember what happened.”

Yeah, god-damned right. This ‘defense’ is an automatic guilty in my book. If the girl was too drunk to know what was going on as the defense claims, then she was also too drunk to consent to what was going on. Guilty. Trial over.

How drunk was she?

The 14-year-old was so drunk that she had vomited in a car, in a toilet and in her Blackpool hotel bedroom before she was allegedly attacked by 39-year-old Ajmal Mohammed, the court was told.

Rape Victim Was Too Groggy To Remember Attack (from This Is Lancashire)

Whiskey and vodka do that a person.

Honestly, if he’d given her a roofie or GHB would anyone take this defense seriously? “Oh, well she’d consumed a date rape drug therefore she can’t testify to her own rape.” There is a reason that alcohol has been called the world’s most popular date rape drug.

Apparently, though, she was not too drunk to say ‘No’. Twice.

The girl told the court: “I was really drunk and fell asleep fully clothed. I don’t know how long I was sleep but I woke up and Ash was on top of me, raping me.

“It was the pain that woke me. I told him to get off which he did.

“I was crying my eyes out but I got rid of him. After I fell asleep again and when I woke up he was on top of me again. I told him to get off me. I was shouting at him to get away from me.

Cricketer ‘raped girl, 14′

Oh, but we can’t trust her story ’cause she was drunk. Sorry. I forgot about that.

And while I’m thinking about it, I don’t want to hear anything about how stupid she was. Yeah, she was stupid but stupid does not mean “go ahead and rape me with impunity” and it does not mean “I am a bag of flesh. I’m not human. Jerk off inside me”.

Popularity: 2%

Love the post? Hate it? Please let me know. Leave a comment and spread the word: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.

This entry was posted on Sunday, December 2nd, 2007 at 9:28 am and is filed under Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

1 On December 3rd, 2007, the chaplain said:

Don’tcha know that women and girls are always to blame when they’re raped? They should have known better than to get drunk, they should have known better than to dress like that, they should have known better than to go anywhere with that guy, etc., etc., etc. /snark

Since when did it become permissible for a 14-year-old give legal consent to sex, especially with a 39-year-old dirtbag?

I think a defense like this one (you were to drunk to know what was going on) should be illegal. Why it isn’t is beyond me. But, then again, I’m just a woman who should know better than…

2 On December 3rd, 2007, Aaron said:

I think that the evidence in this case is clear, as long as the article hasn’t totally distorted the facts, and this guy should do some serious time. That being said, I do not believe we should eliminate the possibility of a defense calling a witness’ or alleged victims’ memory into question on the basis of them being drunk. It should be immaterial if it is a rape case or any other. We should be more worried about finding out what actually happened and not the tactics of the defense. I am not saying that we should throw out the testimony of everyone that was not sober, but it is a legitimate concern in many cases. We have judges and juries to decide if a defense strategy is sound in a particular case. I believe it is unsound in this particular one. That does not mean we should eliminate it from all cases. If the judge or jury found this man not guilty because of this line of reasoning I would have a problem with that. That problem would be with the judge or jury though not with the defense. Defense attorneys are ethically obligated to provide the best possible defense for their clients. I don’t think this one has much of a chance, and this is just the defense grasping at straws. I see it as a good sign that he will most likely be convicted if this is the best they can come up with. In other cases calling into question someone’s memory based on sobriety might be warranted. The point is we need to make our decision s on a case by case basis and not make sweeping generalities. I know rape is an emotional subject, but you should still use sound logic when looking at it.

3 On December 4th, 2007, Wolfie said:

You are studiously avoiding the bear in the room.

Having spent almost a year back-packing around Asia/ME some years ago I’ll share my observation that there is sound reason why women cover themselves and have to go everywhere with a chaperone. Indian tribal law permits the offended family to kill the perpetrator without recourse, this seems to keep the men on the strait and narrow out of simple fear or recrimination.

Now colliding with a culture which allows its children to get utterly inebriated and go out this is an accident waiting to happen and I suspect we will be seeing a lot more of it in the future unless someone takes a firm stand, one way or the other.

Middle-aged man + 14 yo girl is statutory rape, end of story.

4 On December 5th, 2007, themaiden said:

Wolfie,

A firm stand on what? A firm stand in which direction?

5 On December 6th, 2007, Wolfie said:

Well that’s the million-dollar question! Either we must insist that our new-comers conform to and respect our values and laws or we will be conforming to their laws and values. At the moment everyone’s avoiding the issue and hiding behind empty phrases such as “multi-culturalism” or casting fatuous accusations of racism.

6 On December 12th, 2007, Me said:

Yeah, I don’t think men see anything wrong with raping women while they’re drunk.
It’s easier that way, they can’t control their bodies, so why not rape em? They’re there after all.
And then, all of a sudden, you’re the slut.
Ah yes, it was my fault I was raped after all. Never mind I was passing out, and I was saying no and stop.
It’s always the woman’s fault. They’re just a bag of flesh. Apparently.
I hate men. I’m never having sex ever again.

7 On March 2nd, 2008, Mel said:

I understand this childs anquish completely….noone will believe you if you were drunk when you were raped…this is drilled into our heads that because we were ’stupid’ enough to get THAT intoxicated, then surely we ‘deserve’ whatever we get,right? I was raped in a similar manner just a few months ago….i was 36..NOT some underage child….oh,im sorry…age dont matter, right? I was drunk, so therefore it was ‘deserved’ right?

8 On March 2nd, 2008, themaiden said:

Mel,

I’m sorry.

9 On March 2nd, 2008, Huey55 said:

Maiden,

I think some people are reading just the headline and not the article.

Me and Mel,

Nobody here is arguing that women who are drunk should be raped. You do not loose your rights when you become intoxicated. If a man rapes someone the man should be brought to justice regardles if the person was drunk or not. All men do not act in this way or condone this behavior. Individuals should be judged on their actions, not on their gender.

10 On March 3rd, 2008, themaiden said:

Huey55,

I don’t think that’s it. I think there is some sarcasm on Me and Mel’s parts– bitter, pain fueled sarcasm. But the ‘drunk so its OK to rape ‘em’ bit isn’t something they’ve made up. It may not be legal, but it is common. What is worse is that the legal defense in this case would, if successful, legalize the behavior for most practical purposes.