No its the reality of life

get paralytic outdoors on your own and bad things can and will happen

If anything the supposed grey area of consent under the influence of alcohol should be a warning against anyone trying to take advantage of drunk girls/men, not an excuse for what turned out to be rape to have just been "well I didn't know she didn't want it!"

So the guy wasn't responsible for raping her then, she was responsible for giving him the opportunity? I don't get what you're saying here at all, are you saying he deserved the lighter sentence because she was drunk?

I am saying neither

what are you saying then?

Women have to be more responsible about drinking and putting themselves in harms way. That said, you're not allowed to beat or murder someone when they're drunk so I don't see why it should be okay to rape them.

you haven't met Lucas

I get your point.We should all take personal responsibility for our own safety.
However that does'nt diminish the responsibility of the person who committed the crime.They have a responsibility to not commit crimes too.
So really the responsibility lies with both parties realistically.In a perfect world we would be able to get as pissed as we like or let our kids play out unsupervised without worry of devastating things happening.Unfortunately it's not a perfect world.
So in short it is stupid to get so pissed you end up unconscious but that doesn't take away any responsibility from the rapist who should face the full wrath of the law.

I made my (now deleted and infracted) Mccann comment not to troll but to make a comparison

2 situations that needed a perp for them to go very wrong

Both situations that were dangerous

1. leaving small children unattended and out of earshot
2. getting so drunk you pas out outside


Bur both situations that 9999/10000 or more happen all over the world and nowt happens

But introduce a perp and it goes very wrong

Both cases do not excuse the perp or the fact the danger was created

I see a parallel and i think its valid, hence why I made it, and not to troll..

Dark. He sounds like my kind of guy...

Neglecting your children is, in itself against the law though............getting drunk is not, that's the huge difference

While I fully back Niamh on this... I also believe some women put themselves into vulnerable positions by allowing themselves to get so drunk they can't defend themselves. You have to take responsibility for your own safety. That doesn't mean it's okay to rape a drunk woman, it means that there are men out there who would take advantage of you and you need to guard against it.

what the maccans did was not breaking the law or neglect in their eyes, that is just a matter of opinion

Absolutely but the point you made earlier is very relevant too, men drinking too much also can put themselves into vulnerable positions and may end up robbed or beaten up or even raped too but you rarely here anyone trying to apportion any of the blame on victims in those cases

They actually were, in fact the Portuguese police have said that they would have been arrested for neglect had they been Portuguese, the only reason they weren't is because they thought it was normal practice in Britain to leave your babies alone.which I'm sure is not the case for any decent parent. Anyway how you can compare abandoning your babies to someone getting too drunk is bizarre imo

and lets not turn this thread into another McCann one, we already have a few of those floating around and we always end up in circles

It really isn't, that's offloading responsibility for someone elses actions onto an innocent.

Great point, just women I guess that are accused of making life easy for abusers :sigh:

Women generally are more vulnerable to attack than men, the statistics show that. And while men are robbed and raped, it's usually women and in a lot of cases, had the woman taken more care of her own personal safety, ie, not been drunk and incapable, it might have turned out differently. Rape is a dreadful, disgusting crime and there are some horrible people in the world... so look after yourself and if you MUST get paralytic, make sure you're with some trustworthy mates.

:laugh::clap1::clap1::clap1: So true Niamh - those old twin Tibb pillars of Deja Vu and Futility. :hee:

What do you suggest? Chaperones.. 2 drink maximum.. anti spiking spray ( not sure if exists) .. chastity belts..tasers..burqas?

So now it's come out that he may only serve 3/6 months AND he's been placed into a protection unit of the prison incase prisoners attack or rape him. But where was the girls protection?

I'd suggest not walking around alone at night especially when drunk - however, that's good advice for anyone, especially young / Uni age people. Lone young men are actually more likely to be "opportunity" mugged for things like wallets and smartphones than girls. There are plenty of rough guys around, not actually specifically out to rob people, who will chance their luck at grabbing an iPhone from a lone teenage lad but would find it unthinkable to attack a female.

I think there's a tendency to have the snap judgement of "oh no victim blaming!" when suggesting that people can do things to minimise risk... But it's really not that at all. It's not about saying it's anyone's fault, or that any attacker isn't abhorrent scum... It's just about accepting that these people DO exist, there ARE risks on a night out, and there simply always will be.

There appears to be the presumption that all victims are wandering around waiting to be raped...
Heard of a roofie?
Read all the leading questions asked of the victim in her letter? No let's not make snap judgements.

Totally agree, as per ;)

No one is saying it would never happen, it's not about making snap judgements either, it's not about judgement at all... It's about taking precautions to reduce risk. Same as safety features in cars... Power steering, ABS, etc... They reduce the risk of anything bad happening, but bad things will still happen despite that. That doesn't mean you should just remove all of those safety features.

E.g. With being drugged - it's much less likely to end badly if people stay with friends and look out for each other. Not impossible, people lose track of each other, people are attacked by those who were the very ones they were trusting, etc, but it still makes it less likely and so is still good advice. No blaming, no judgement, just an effort for everyone to be safer.

Right so using your car analogy if you are driving a car without ABS or power steering and someone deliberately drives their car repeatedly into your cars back end is it your fault?

No but I've repeatedly and specifically said it's not about fault or blame, it's about minimising risk. In a perfect world there wouldn't be scumbags out to attack or take advantage of vulnerable people. Sadly, as you know, we don't live in a perfect world... We live in a ****ty one where these people exist, and are always going to exist. When they prey on someone, they are the only person at fault. They are the only person to blame. But what does that really matter to the victim when it's already happened?

One of the main reasons for having safety features on a car is because there are idiots on the road, and it doesn't matter how safe YOU are, if YOU do everything right... Someone else's actions can end in disaster, through no fault of your own.

You are less likely to be sexually assaulted if you go out in a group, and everyone watches out for each other and makes sure no one gets left behind. Can it still happen? Yes. But it's far less likely. Is it right or fair that people have to stick together in groups to be safe? Nope! It's crappy. To reiterate: the world is ****.

Stanford rape case judge removed from new sexual assault case

Not sure about this. Agree the judges sentencing was way to lenient but to recuse judges because of cases they have already tried could be bit of a slippery slope.

He got off with a pitiful sentence to start with. But the arrogant twat is apparently appealing even that

http://uk.businessinsider.com/brock-...iction-2017-12
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/wo...-a8090006.html

Doesn't want to be on the sex offenders register. Boo ****ing hoo.

This appeal could mean a decent sentence is finally given. So lets hope eh...

Could really do without seeing his smug face all over my ****ing facebook feed again.

This case angers me so much. I almost feel irrational when discussing it. That poor girl. And now hes still ****ing at it as god forbid there are any lasting consequences for him. I genuinely hope he gets the retrial like he wants, and gets a decent judge this time who gives him the sentence he deserved in the first place.

I second that.:fist:

I could in no way ever have any sort of respect for tbis creature
But I would despise it a little less if he just held his hands up and said "sorry I made an awful mistake" and took that already extremely short sentence he was beyond lucky to be given

But he's constantly trying to make out like he's a victim in this and appealing his case despite what he was given is just infuriating
He clearly has zero respect at all for th girl or her family - not that id expect him to though

Jfc. What is he even thinking. Kinda difficult to believe he's 100% in the head.

Let's hope the jury isn't full of '**** happens' people :/