Easy 11 Grand Girls!

[Sam Slater]

[quote]If anyone raped a member of my family I would kill them and I just think that you have misunderstood my posts.[/quote]

Are you using 'kill' in a 'figure of speech' kinda way, or do you mean it literally?

And do you mean your definition of rape, or the law's?

[eroticartist]

Robches,

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.

Robches wrote:
Or even:

Contemporary governments have sought to make it easier for juries to convict men of rape.

I tend to agree. The police are no longer allowed to use their common sense to judge the validity of a complaint, they have to treat everything the same, whether it's someone like the Cambridge Rapist, who wore a leather mask with "Rapist" written on it, or a couple who have sex, and the next day the girl decides she was somehow forced into it because she was too drunk to resist. It's bullshit cases such as this which have resulted in the conviction for rape being about 7%. That's a sure sign that juries do not buy it, and that the system for bringing these cases to court is not working, but of course the government do not see it like that, and would prefer to tinker with the rules to try and get more convictions. We are not in the 19th century any more, girls go out, get drunk and have sex all the time. The fact that the morning after they may feel a bit cheap about it does not justify charging a man with rape unless there is some sort of proof that he forced her to have sex. Without that, it's just his word against hers, and juries, quite rightly in my opinion, refuse to convict.


I see that I made more than one typing error and repeated it! Thank you for your intelligent observation. It seems as all the other loud mouth slanderers on this forum are ignoring what I have written and do not want to debate it but simply to attack me. I wonder why they don't attack you too?
Mike Freeman.

[eroticartist]

Honi soit qui mal y pense.
Mike Freeman.

[Keni]

Mike,

I think you will find that Robches is agreeing with the way that 'contemporary government' processes all rape cases with the same brush and how this could possibly be seen as unnecessary and how the 7% conviction rate is testament to that.

However I don't see him suggesting to "scrap all sexual crimes and judge men on the amount of violence they commit against a woman" - Mike Freeman.

I also notice that you again failed to address the subject that has caught everyone's attention and the reason why you are under the spot light.

Keni

[eroticartist]

Keni,
Robches wrote,

"The fact that the morning after they may feel a bit cheap about it does not justify charging a man with rape unless there is some sort of proof that he forced her to have sex. Without that, it's just his word against hers, and juries, quite rightly in my opinion, refuse to convict."

He does not say scrap all sexual crimes but he did say "judge men on the amount of violence they commit against a woman"

In my opinion rape is a crime of violence.

Mike Freeman.

[Keni]

eroticartist wrote:

> Keni,
> Robches wrote,
>
> "The fact that the morning after they may feel a bit cheap
> about it does not justify charging a man with rape unless there
> is some sort of proof that he forced her to have sex. Without
> that, it's just his word against hers, and juries, quite
> rightly in my opinion, refuse to convict."
>
> He does not say scrap all sexual crimes but he did say "judge
> men on the amount of violence they commit against a woman"
>
> In my opinion rape is a crime of violence.
>
> Mike Freeman.
>


Ok, fine.

I apologies for interpreting your opening post in the way that I did.... what must I have been thinking?

..surely I should have know better!

I did not and still do not understand your method of portraying your point. Perhaps I am just another moron? However, I agree rape is rape and it is a violent crime with no parallel. How YOU define rape and how I define rape will hopefully marry up at some point but for now I am at least settled in the sense that you DO have moral standing and a grasp of reality.

Once again, apologies for not understanding your view point, perhaps everyone else did and I didnt? Well for that I shall eat my words and swallow hard.

Regards,

Keni

[eroticartist]

Keni,
You are such a gentleman.
Most of the people who attacked me did understand my point but chose not to.
Mike.

[Sam Slater]

[quote]The answer is to scrap all sexual crimes and judge men on the amount of violence they commit against a woman.[/quote]

Under the above circumstances a man would get a leaner sentence for rape where there was no violence, than a man who gave a woman a black eye.

You could rape someone using a threat of violence, or via drugs without using actual violence, Mike, so you've either not thought it through properly, or you want certain 'loopholes' in the law for men to exploit.

[Keni]

eroticartist wrote:

> Keni,
> You are such a gentleman.
> Most of the people who attacked me did understand my point but
> chose not to.
> Mike.
>

Like I said Mike, I still don't understand your method of portraying your opinion. You cant imagine how many times I have read the opening post and in particular the final sentance and tried to figure it out or come to see a positive interpretation of it.

Please do me a favour and perhaps re-write your intention with this thread and you 'answer' to the problem so that we, no so that I can understand where your coming from.

Like I said I have strong opinions on the subject matter and I would find it interesting to hear about how you feel about it and how you feel the system is failing or under serving the innocent?

Many thanks in advance and once again, "what must I have been thinking?", "surely I should have known better", It's Mike Freeman

Keni