Easy 11 Grand Girls!

[Robches]

eroticartist wrote:

> 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.

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.

[Keni]

I am astounded and completely balled over by this thread!

Yes I read your response Mike, regardless of all the crap you spewed about this that and the other. What remains to be clarified is your meaning in your original post. More specifically the final sentance, and I quote,

"The answer is to scrap all sexual crimes and judge men on the amount of violence they commit against a woman - Mike Freeman"

Cutting the political crap you have tried to mask your response with, it still seems that you do not think you are wrong in your statement and that to me is utterly shocking!

I am not an educated man Mike, no lawyer nor judge, I doubt I would ever even get the chance to sit on a jury. I don't know the in's and out's of what the laws defines a case of RAPE as and to me this is not the MOST important issue here in this thread. Mainly because I don't think you or many of us here are qualified enough to know exactly and in which 'individual' cases these guidelines your talking about apply. So I don't want to delve further into the complicated issue of the law.

To me it is simpler to read this post,

>Author: Jacques
>Date: 08-17-08 10:29
>
>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.

However and trust me I am DEAD serious about this and I want a response. The issue that is upsetting me the most right now is your out look, not the law. The law is the law and as civilians we must abide by it and hope that it serves and protects the innocent.

My problem is your mentality. I have met you Mike, weird, threatening, devious or dangerous are not any words that would come to mind to describe you from my initial assessment. However if I am to be completely honest I would have to say that I thought that you were a very unorthodox director and generally a harmless chav with an very over imaginative imagination. Liberal with the truth some would say.

I now question my own judgement of character however. I always give respect where respect is due but right now, unless you explain to me fully your true opinion on this matter then I disregard any association with you. I do not care how many years you have 'hung on' at 'directing' or 'producing' in this business, a person who believes your statements is in my opinion scum.

Your opinion is your own, however I do remind you that as an adult movie director you are disturbingly close to beautiful young women. Many of whom have first hand knowledge of what you are disregarding with such flair. Many of whom are dealing with their own demons about the acceptance of what has happen to them and many of whom who are not mentally strong enough and are naive enough to be destroyed by your comments and twisted outlook.

I would seriously worry about the safety of any model on your set if this really is the case and I for one will go out of my way to make sure that I warn off as many models as possible.

Keni

[Keni]

Further to my request I would like to throw this out there for you to consider,

Question.

In your opinion, if a brand new girl turns up to your set. She agrees to work, she signs a model release, she is wearing provocative clothes that you give her, she teases and turns on you and your actor under your direction, she strips naked and makes sexually suggestive actions under your direction. Then moments before penetration she changes her mind and wants out. She decides that porn is not for her and she says NO she does NOT want to have sex.

What then do you do? What then is acceptable in your opinion? I am asking not only about your actions but more so you internal thought process. I wonder if the model was naive, easily impressionable, nervous or weak minded what the outcome would be? Would you have the models physical and mental welfare as your priority?

All these questions are valid and actually I do not want the answers as I can already predict your response. I would just like you to think about it to yourself and be honest with yourself as to whether or not your opinions are compatible with this industry, or society in general?

[Jacques]

Keni if you or anyone for that matter wants to know the ins and outs of the law than take a look at the CPS guidelines

Secondly you use the word 'disturbing', and yes Mike's view is disturbing but more disturbing is the silence from everybody else.

[Keni]

Thanks for the link Jacques, anyways I am confident that my moral standing will let me know the difference between right and wrong waaay before I ever need to consult it!

I am in total agreement with you on the silence, it is shocking. I cant think of any other words.

I even know will never name anyone but I know a few of models who have actually worked for mike and would have been sickened if he had aired this opinion to their face.

I dont know what to say anymore... I even removed my smiley from my sig as it just dosent seem appropriate. Well neither is this thread, i usually come here to post on positive subjects, enjoy the works of our girls, try to promote and network myself.

Not to find myself wound up, angry and worried about certain characters in the biz and their dangerous opinions but i cant help but question it.

There is no way i could remain silent at such a outrageous, no.. two outrageous posts from the same guy in a the matter of a few short hours!?

I am even wondering if this is some wind up or sick joke or he is just guilt ridden and showing the world his true colors? I dont know man, I just want him to prove me wrong.

And by all means, prove me wrong and i will gladly eat my words and stand up and admit i am a paranoid protective freak for even suggesting that your thoughts are out of line!!

Over to your 'eroticartist',

Keni

[Jacques]

Oh you haven't seen the worst of it Keni. Let's just say Mike has a history on O/T.

Not sure if the thread is still in the archive but it makes this one look as cute as 1000 kittens and a box full of baby pandas. I kid you not.

[Sam Slater]

Nah.....Mike's worst posts on that thread were deleted; the one with the link to a kind of blog site where men were talking about......well, I'd rather not bring it up again, but it really didn't sit well with me, and just innocently clicking that link really made me feel uneasy about how 'I' sat with the law of our land.

[eroticartist]

Keni,

Re: Easy 11 Grand Girls!
Author: eroticartist
Date: 08-17-08 09:56

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.

[eroticartist]

Keni,
If anyone raped a member of my family I would kill them and I just think that you have misunderstood my posts.
I do know the law as it is practised today and have tried to explain how I think that it could be made fairer.
Mike Freeman.