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=falseAccording 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