ATAR Notes: Forum
General Discussion => General Discussion Boards => News and Politics => Topic started by: ninwa on July 22, 2010, 12:04:10 pm
-
AN ARAB man has been jailed on a rape charge after an Israeli court ruled he had duped a Jewish woman into consensual sex by lying about his ethnicity.
The Jerusalem District Court sentenced Sabbar Kashur, 30, to 18 months behind bars on Monday, after finding that he had had sex with the woman by posing as a Jewish bachelor interested in a long-term relationship.
When the woman found out he was not a Jew, she filed a police complaint that led to charges of rape and indecent assault. In a plea deal, Kashur later agreed to the charge of rape by deception, the liberal Haaretz daily newspaper said.
http://www.news.com.au/world/arab-sabbar-kashur-found-guilty-of-rape-after-consensual-sex-with-jewish-woman/story-e6frfkyi-1225895349629#ixzz0uNAXxTsd
(note: under Australian law that would also probably be convicted as rape)
-
They should both be stoned for having sex out of marriage.
-
They should both be stoned for having sex out of marriage.
they arent in iran.
-
^^
It was humour.
Anyway, ninwa, you're the law student aren't you? What's the legal definition of/requirement for rape by deception in Australia?
-
wow I actually don't know which side to barrack for, they are both douchey
-
@Ninwa - how is this considered racism?
-
racist because the sex was consensual but as soon as she found out he wasn't jew all hell broke loose
-
Anyway, ninwa, you're the law student aren't you? What's the legal definition of/requirement for rape by deception in Australia?
Crim was a year ago so I'll let you know when I get home (am at work) but the test is something like if you lie about something which is fundamental to who you are (so lying about your occupation doesn't count but lying about your marital status does), and the person has sex with you on the basis of that lie, then it's rape.
@Ninwa - how is this considered racism?
Dunno, got it from the article.
Kashur, who is married and has two small children, called the verdict racist.
-
^^
It was humour.
I was just joking. sorry )=
-
Anyway, ninwa, you're the law student aren't you? What's the legal definition of/requirement for rape by deception in Australia?
Crim was a year ago so I'll let you know when I get home (am at work) but the test is something like if you lie about something which is fundamental to who you are (so lying about your occupation doesn't count but lying about your marital status does), and the person has sex with you on the basis of that lie, then it's rape.
Well according to that definition, it is most definitely rape.
The way I see it, it can be only be 'consensual' if the woman is in full possession of the facts. If she isn't, then she's incapable of making a true decision. It's just like how we say that 'consensual' sex with a minor is still illegal, because the child is not deemed capable of making a decision.
I certainly wouldn't call it racism, because the same law could apply even on a question that has nothing to do with race.
-
Am i the only one who sees this as utterly outrageous that rape is lessened to that of a lie? This is absolutely ridiculous. It's just a lie, people lie all the time, even in these circumstances to have sex with someone, it does not mean that she was 'raped', wow contacting the police because someone you slept with someone lied to you- woop big deal..
-
Technically both.
But not really. I don't think Australians would really understand the customs and ideologies in Israel so it really isn't for any of us to judge if it's racist or not. Indeed, in this society it is racist but it's not right to force upon your culture and values onto another country (just like the "racist" KFC commercial).
Plus, my Dad forbids me to go out with fob Asian girls in case they're out to get themselves free permanent residence. Is he racist?
-
Am i the only one who sees this as utterly outrageous that rape is lessened to that of a lie? This is absolutely ridiculous. It's just a lie, people lie all the time, even in these circumstances to have sex with someone, it does not mean that she was 'raped', wow contacting the police because someone you slept with someone lied to you- woop big deal..
I agree I think this is an abuse of the legal system in a way. It just doesn't seem right to me that it became 'rape' after she found out that he lied about his religion. But that is merely my opinion.
-
Plus, my Dad forbids me to go out with fob Asian girls in case they're out to get themselves free permanent residence. Is he racist?
yes
-
Anyway, ninwa, you're the law student aren't you? What's the legal definition of/requirement for rape by deception in Australia?
Crim was a year ago so I'll let you know when I get home (am at work) but the test is something like if you lie about something which is fundamental to who you are (so lying about your occupation doesn't count but lying about your marital status does), and the person has sex with you on the basis of that lie, then it's rape.
Well according to that definition, it is most definitely rape.
The way I see it, it can be only be 'consensual' if the woman is in full possession of the facts. If she isn't, then she's incapable of making a true decision. It's just like how we say that 'consensual' sex with a minor is still illegal, because the child is not deemed capable of making a decision.
I certainly wouldn't call it racism, because the same law could apply even on a question that has nothing to do with race.
So has a woman raped me if she wears makeup, high heels and a padded bra? I think that the law makes sense in a few cases e.g. pretending to be your identical twin in order to sleep with your sisters husband, but this is a case of blatant racism.
-
Anyway, ninwa, you're the law student aren't you? What's the legal definition of/requirement for rape by deception in Australia?
Crim was a year ago so I'll let you know when I get home (am at work) but the test is something like if you lie about something which is fundamental to who you are (so lying about your occupation doesn't count but lying about your marital status does), and the person has sex with you on the basis of that lie, then it's rape.
Well according to that definition, it is most definitely rape.
The way I see it, it can be only be 'consensual' if the woman is in full possession of the facts. If she isn't, then she's incapable of making a true decision. It's just like how we say that 'consensual' sex with a minor is still illegal, because the child is not deemed capable of making a decision.
I certainly wouldn't call it racism, because the same law could apply even on a question that has nothing to do with race.
So has a woman raped me if she wears makeup, high heels and a padded bra? I think that the law makes sense in a few cases e.g. pretending to be your identical twin in order to sleep with your sisters husband, but this is a case of blatant racism.
In that case clearly it should be classified as fraud, and if taken to court or whatever needs to occur, it should not be considered rape in the slightest.
And in this article: since she did actually consent- she wasn't forced to have sex with him by use of violence/threatening, he just used a few words, claiming to be of a different religion. So, yes completely racist to go to jail just for being of a different religion.
I'm hoping one day the world will become more accepting, especially of something as silly as religion. Sigh..
-
To her, that was a hugely significant factor. For whatever reason. I have to say that although I can't see myself ever being in a similar position, if I was, it would be a big deal to me too.
If you have a law of 'rape by deception', which Israel does (and in that article it mentions the law being applied previously in a situation that had nothing to do with race/religion) then you have to have a court that decides its application. The court, who are in full possession of the facts (and you and I are not) have decided that this lie is significant enough to warrant a conviction for rape by deception.
To Darlok, you said yourself you can see some situations in which this law would be valid. In your example of the make-up and padded bra, you would be fully entitiled to take your complaint to the police. The police/court system would then decide if your claim is valid under the law of the country. In this particular case, the court, having seen the evidence and knowing the exact details of the law (again, you and I do not) have decided that the law has been broken.
-
^ hmm Even though I will completely disagree with any opinion in favour of this being rape, it is easy for me to be ignorant as if this really is a law in Israel, my thoughts are pretty much meaningless..
I'm always puzzled by the bizarre laws of other countries, like this, and how the death penalty applies for drug use in some places, etc. Guess i will never understand how some people can think like that.. oh well
-
Well ninwa says there is a similar law in Australia, which would probably have resulted in a similar outcome...
-
Yes, this law exists in Australia, in slightly different forms in each jurisdiction but basically the same (I think from memory one state doesn't have it. So tired cbf reading law notes atm).
I don't think it's a bizarre law. Sexual crime is a sensitive area and the law tends to err on the side of over-protective rather than under.
In this case I'm lead to believe that she would not have had sex with him if he were not Jewish, and I'm also assuming he knew that (why else would he lie about it?)
Maybe it is racist. In fact now that I think about it, it IS rather racist. But it is her prerogative to choose not to sleep with people of a certain race, and her consent is not worth any less because of it.
I would not sleep with a woman, I suppose that makes me sexist, but it doesn't change the validity of my consent.
Rape = lack of consent. Not lack of consent except-when-she-should-have-known-better-to-trust-someone-online-and-done-a-background-check.
Quote from my contracts lecturer: "idiots have rights too!"
-
Oops my bad they didn't meet online. She's still an idiot for trusting a stranger on something she obviously considers very important
-
^ so ninwa, if you were tricked into believing someone is a boy and slept with them willingly, then later found it was a girl, would you contact the police as being 'raped' and hope they get sent to jail for 18 months?
this is worse than the religion one, but how cruel to do this here! wouldn't you feel terrible?
-
^ so ninwa, if you were tricked into believing someone is a boy and slept with them willingly, then later found it was a girl, would you contact the police as being 'raped' and hope they get sent to jail for 18 months?
I think there's going to be a fairly major stumbling block between being tricked and sleeping with her...
-
Yeah I can't see how that's possible? Unless you are speaking of someone who has had a sex change, in which case the person is legally and physically/hormonally male, therefore I wouldn't have a problem with it.
-
^ ahah some hypothetical situation.
-
lmao I seriously can't even imagine that happening so I wouldn't have a clue what I'd do in that situation. I probably wouldn't press charges though. Mostly because it wouldn't bother me that much (I only brought it up by way of analogy) and definitely not worth the money/time it would take to put it through court / deal with the inevitable media around it etc.
I'd be pissed but I think I'd just chalk it down to (hilarious) experience.
-
According to Dershowitz, this law is heavily supported by those on the left, as an advancement of human rights, and Jewish Israelis have been prosecuted with this legislation in the past - erasing all doubt regarding whether this law is racist. Of course not!
Radical leftists, who support the expansion of rape law to cover obtaining sex by fraud, rail against Israel when Israel actually enacts such a law and applies it. An Israeli court sentenced a married Arab man to several months in prison for having sex with a woman after claiming that he was an unmarried Jew interested in marrying her. The Israeli courts had previously applied this law to Jewish men who had perpetrated comparable frauds. Though I personally think these sex-fraud law are seriously misguided (except in extreme cases such as lying about AIDS), I find it hypocritical in the extreme for radical leftists, who generally favor such laws, to use them as a club against the Jewish state and only the Jewish state.
http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/dershowitz/entry/moonbats_against_israel_posted_by
-
Well well well...
It may interest all of you to read this article: http://www.haaretz.co.il/hasite/spages/1187907.html
For those who can't read Hebrew, a full translation is available here: http://www.mideastyouth.com/2010/09/05/israel-rape-by-deception-turns-out-to-be-brutal-rape-of-a-vulnerable-and-abused-woman/
It seems to me like many of you owe the Israeli justice system an apology, and that I was right when I said that none of us were in full possession of the facts, and therefore shouldn't judge.
Yet another case of foreign media misreporting a story to make Israel look bad...
-
It seems to me like many of you owe the Israeli justice system an apology, and that I was right when I said that none of us were in full possession of the facts, and therefore shouldn't judge.
Yes, you actually did make a judgment by concluding that it was rape despite also not being in possession of all the facts.
No need to be a hypocrite just because your guess ended up being right.
-
Yet another case of foreign media misreporting a story to make Israel look bad...
Yes that was their motivation. Not the fact that they didn't know it was (alleged) rape and re-reported a story that was also published by Israeli media outlets...
-
Foreign media making Israel look bad? Mainstream western media supports Israel bro. And what the other two said
-
Foreign media making Israel look bad? Mainstream western media supports Israel bro. And what the other two said
Oh really? Provide evidence.
-
Okay. Perhaps western was a bad choice of a word. Let's say US.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jun/04/gaza-flotilla-activists-autopsy-results
I'm sure we are all familiar with the flotilla activists. According to their autopsies, they were brutally executed, not 'fired upon in defence'. This is quite groundbreaking news so I did a search on New York Times, the biggest and most famous newspaper in the US. Only mention I could find was this "The Anatolia news agency reported that an autopsy showed that Mr. Dogan had been shot at close range, once in the chest and four times in the head". To top it off, it was in a mere blog post.
But you can see why that occurs. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_and_the_United_Nations
The US has been extremely protective of Israel, constantly shielding them from criticisms from the UN and Geneva. "Persistent use of its veto power to prevent the Security Council from issuing resolutions protesting actions by the Israeli military has frequently isolated the U.S. from the other four members of the Security Council"
So considering the amount of atrocities committed, I would say the media has been quite kind to them. And yeah, racism is bad and something
Edit: Just saw this, http://bigjournalism.com/robmiller/2010/09/07/the-decline-and-fall-of-time-magazine-this-weeks-anti-semitic-cover/
So I guess you could argue the opposite
-
Also, Yitzi, from the blog you yourself linked to:
This July, Israeli and world media enthusiastically covered
Why only target western media?
You're guilty of the very thing you accuse "western" media of supposedly doing.
-
And could you clarify what you meant by your statement? Are you calling me bias for calling them bias? Note that I also detracted the word "western".
Edit: Found the link, it appears we were referring to two entirely different things so I apologise for the off-topic posts. I'll post a response to your comment soon. You may ignore my last post and if need be, I'll gladly delete them
Since we're on this topic, can someone help clear up a number of stuff?
Aside from the victim's rather graphic and detailed testimonial, I'm having quite a bit of trouble searching for physical evidence to support her testimony as well as the defence's case.(Found the defence's testimony, apparently she was soliciting sex)
Why did the prosecution settle for a lesser sentence? If her story was that terrifying, why would anyone settle with anything less than rape?
Why did the police arrest him for a "fight with a security guard"?
Why was the trial conducted behind closed doors? (I believe that only occurs when a minor occurs but a law student may correct me on this)
I won't accuse any party here for racism or being biased but there are a number of unanswered questions that should have been addressed instead of being brushed aside. Funny thing, everyone was up in arms when Stern Hu's trial was behind closed doors
Now off with the tin foil hat, and on to my personal opinion.
"It is terrible, but the law says very clearly that if someone has sexual intercourse using deception about his identity to conduct the act, it can be considered rape," said Leah Samael, a lawyer specializing in civil rights and human rights cases.
http://edition.cnn.com/2010/WORLD/meast/07/21/israel.rape.by.deception/index.html#fbid=ofQPLMkX_Bm&wom=false
According to this, the verdict was fair as deception was an agreed fact between the parties. I still stand behind the fact that the procedure was poorly conducted and not criticised enough. I don't even understand why this is world news tbh
-
Cianyx... I agree with you... that post was addressed to Yitzi... my bad.
-
Thread has gone off-topic - start new thread if you wish to discuss the media and Israel further.
Locked