seattlechiquita
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2011
- Messages
- 5,791
- Reaction score
- 257
This is fkd up. REALLY fkd up.
GA - Rape conviction overturned - Woman with Down syndrome didn't ACT like a VICTIM
- Thread starter MsFacetious
- Start date
Hoping a re-trial will unfkd it up with a better understanding of the individuals involved, not a generalization of a non-expert's thoughts or understanding.
A little info is apparently a dangerous thing - this event seems to back that old adage up (a judge's partial training or understanding of a particular disability).
glamourkitty1922
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 2,168
- Reaction score
- 6,681
I read the trial and I can't see where there was enough evidence to call it rape. The girl repeatedly recanted her story, the chair incident couldn't have happened because the wittness saw the two right after the sound of the falling chair.
There was also the strange story that she said he raped her around 10 in the morning, but he had left for work long before that.
It also looks like there were wittnesses who testified she had made false claims before.
I can see what he meant when he said the couple didn't act like rapist and victim.
Our courts run on evidence, and I don't see the evidence in this case.
There was also the strange story that she said he raped her around 10 in the morning, but he had left for work long before that.
It also looks like there were wittnesses who testified she had made false claims before.
I can see what he meant when he said the couple didn't act like rapist and victim.
Our courts run on evidence, and I don't see the evidence in this case.
MsFacetious
What a Kerfuffle...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 21,624
- Reaction score
- 33,022
The judge is NOT questioning the evidence.
That would be an entirely different matter and much less repulsive.
If the judge had said "I don't believe there is enough evidence" I wouldn't have even started a thread.
http://us.cnn.com/2014/03/11/opinion/perry-rape-disabled-georgia/?iref=obnetwork
But the judge, acting as he says in his decision, as the 13th juror, saw things differently.
McFadden writes that although "the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction," he offers a long list of confusing aspects in the testimony, which he boils down to, "At no time prior to her outcry on the 19th (the next day), did (she) behave like a victim. Nor did Mr. Dumas behave like someone who had recently perpetrated a series of violent crimes against her."
That would be an entirely different matter and much less repulsive.
If the judge had said "I don't believe there is enough evidence" I wouldn't have even started a thread.
http://us.cnn.com/2014/03/11/opinion/perry-rape-disabled-georgia/?iref=obnetwork
But the judge, acting as he says in his decision, as the 13th juror, saw things differently.
McFadden writes that although "the evidence is sufficient to sustain the conviction," he offers a long list of confusing aspects in the testimony, which he boils down to, "At no time prior to her outcry on the 19th (the next day), did (she) behave like a victim. Nor did Mr. Dumas behave like someone who had recently perpetrated a series of violent crimes against her."
glamourkitty1922
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2012
- Messages
- 2,168
- Reaction score
- 6,681
This statement from page 2 of the linked article outlining the case causes me concern -
'At 11:30 Ms Prince, who had gone out to the porch to smoke, heard a crash coming from the computer room. She testified that she went in to investigate as quickly as she could upon hearing the crash ...'
How quickly was that exactly? What was the exact testimony? I was expecting to read 'right away' or 'immediately' or 'I rushed right in'. Pretty vague imo. Makes me not believe her, especially that she 'put x to bed' shortly after. X functions as an adult according to those around her - who puts an adult to bed?
This case brings back memories. I worked in a county recreational program for adults and children with mental retardation, and I'm really concerned with declaring adults children. Adults with mild mental retardation aren't children - they're adults and should be able to consent to sex if they want. Obviously, you can't have care takers taking advantage of them, and forceable sex should be treated as it is with any person - it's a felony.
It's a conundrum of trying to give adults with mental retardation the rights that adults with average intelligence enjoy. It was a major effort in our overnight campouts or all day events to keep adults with mental retardation from having sex with each other. is that right? Should they be able to consent? I think so.
So to me, this kind of rests on whether she gave consent or not.
On the other hand, I wouldn't have Mr. Dumas in my house ever.
It's a conundrum of trying to give adults with mental retardation the rights that adults with average intelligence enjoy. It was a major effort in our overnight campouts or all day events to keep adults with mental retardation from having sex with each other. is that right? Should they be able to consent? I think so.
So to me, this kind of rests on whether she gave consent or not.
On the other hand, I wouldn't have Mr. Dumas in my house ever.
Mr Dumas did not seem to have a romantic relationship with x prior to this night, or an ongoing relationship that could have led to a romantic relationship. It's not outlined in the case summary.
His denial at sexual contact with x that night then testing showing different is a problem for him imo. What was his point? Why did the judge agree the evidence was there for a conviction of rape in the first place?
His denial at sexual contact with x that night then testing showing different is a problem for him imo. What was his point? Why did the judge agree the evidence was there for a conviction of rape in the first place?
I don't know. There is clearly evidence of sexual contact between the two.
I'm just really concerned with the rights of the disabled, and concerned that they not be treated as children who can't consent to sex if they seem to have capacity to do so. Reading through the descriptions of her, I would think she has capacity to consent.
If that's what happened.
MsFacetious
What a Kerfuffle...
- Joined
- Jun 2, 2010
- Messages
- 21,624
- Reaction score
- 33,022
And Dave Hingsburger agrees with you... I am a huge fan of his.
http://davehingsburger.blogspot.com/
I'm just not sure that is even an issue in this case.
If the jury found enough to convict... and the judge doesn't dispute the EVIDENCE... that's an issue.
So if the judge decided that Scott Peterson didn't act like a guilty man, he just overturns the conviction?
If a judge decides that Jodi Arias didn't act guilty, that judge can just reverse her conviction?
That's scary... and without disputing the EVIDENCE itself I find it scary the judge has that power. :twocents: