Easy 11 Grand Girls!

[Jacques]

Well you did the right thing in the first part, but that second part is fucking low. I suggest that you withdraw your Huffers comment and apologise also.

[colonel]

What I meant was that the debate and shall we say, 'energetic' commentary of your website, Jacques, would allow Mike to debate his vile idea with vigour against your collected 'liberals'.

BTW Jacques, when do I get a withdrawal and apology from the Huffers for describing me as someone who would have supported or not prevented the building of concentration camps?

[phoenix love]

i dont know where to begin with responding to this bulls***

i hope you dont seriously believe you truely believe what you have writtern

maybe an idot had hacked into your account?






http://www.adultwork.com/phoenix+love

[Jacques]

colonel wrote:

> BTW Jacques, when do I get a withdrawal and apology from the
> Huffers for describing me as someone who would have supported
> or not prevented the building of concentration camps?

Both have been done and publicly for all to see, now how about you do the same thing and apologise and withdraw your comment?

[eroticartist]

A Criteria of Rape.
By Mike Freeman.

Rape is not a sexual crime but a crime of violence against women and it is violence per se that makes it a crime. The most serious rapes involve the murder of the victim and then there is a descending scale of violence until we reach the stage that because of the lack of violence a rape has not been committed or it is contentious and enough doubt remains to for the jury to find the accused not guilty.
We already have laws against violence that are adequate to deal with anyone who forces a women to have sex against her will. Firstly we have psychological violence, or the threat of violence which would bring in a guilty verdict and so on because the rapist is guilty of assault. Secondly we have actual bodily harm where the criminal inflicts some bodily harm upon the victim in order to rape the victim and his would include the use of drugs. Thirdly we have grievous bodily harm were the rapist inflicts some permanent injury upon the victim which can include torture or mutilation. Lastly we have cases where the rapist kills the victim and here again the laws against violence can be used and if the rapist kills by accident then it is manslaughter and if with malice and aforethought it is murder.
When sentencing a convicted rapist the length of the sentence should be calculated by the degree of violence the rapist inflicted on the victim with the longest sentence being life imprisonment until death.
The above criteria would stop all the equivocation and defence counsels attempting to suggest to the jury that a woman could not be raped for example because she was of low virtue, was drunk, a prostitute or a porno star or had dressed in a provocative manner and of course a woman?s sexual history has no relevance in deciding whether or not a woman has been the victim of a rapist. In removing all the sexual factors from the case and simply deciding the degree of violence the jury would simply decide if violence from assault upwards had been used by the man accused of rape, and if violence had been used then a verdict of guilt would result, and conversely if none had been used, then he would be found not guilty.
Moreover of course there are other factors involved including the age of the victim and indeed the most heinous cases of rape are against children and the rapists of children should attract a much longer sentence as should rape of the weak, aged or the physically or mentally challenged.
Contemporary governments have sort to make it easier for juries to convict men of rape and as the police have to apply the new criteria they are duty bound to charge those who would have charged with rape in the recent past. This is a waste of police time because most intelligent people know that rape is a crime of violence and juries will continue to acquit if they believe that no violence was used.
In deciding compensation there should be no standard compensation of ?11000 but the sum awarded should relate directly to the degree of violence used against the woman and when a woman has been tortured or mutilated or suffered psychological damage the sum should be much higher. No, all rapes are not the same and some are much more serious than others, including the rape torture, mutilation and the worst the murder of women or children.

[Stewie_McGriffin]

I note with some dismay that the original poster has not either come forward to apologise or explain his despicable and disgusting views.

[eroticartist]

Contemporary governments have sort to make it easier for juries to convict men of rape and as the police have to apply the new criteria they are duty bound to charge those who would have charged with rape in the recent past.

Sorry for the typing error! The above should of course be: Contemporary governments have sort to make it easier for juries to convict men of rape and as the police have to apply the new criteria they are duty bound to charge those who would not have been charged with rape in the recent past.
Mike Freeman.

[colonel]

Stop digging, Mike. Just stop it now. You are bang out of order.

[colonel]

I've noticed the partial and grudging apology from WZR, Jacques; so I am happy to withdraw my comments.

I might consider joining the Huffers if you stop allowing remarks such as the ones you have now withdrawn to be printed in the first place.

Jacques- when will you have real Moderation on your site? What year?

[Jacques]

The Sexual Offences Act 2003 defines rape as:

Rape (section 1)

The elements of rape are:

1. A intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis;
2. B does not consent to the penetration, and
3. A does not reasonably believe that B consents.

Penetration of the mouth is included.

Rape is still a crime of basic intent, and drunkenness is no defence.


Doesn't appear to need or be violent. Mike you should be ashamed of what you have posted