A Nebraska judge ordered that the words "rape" "sexual assault" "sexual assault kit" "victim" and "assailant" from a court case dealing with the... er... non-consensual sex on an unconscious woman. The judge said that the offending words bias juries against the defendant apparently not realizing (or caring) that forcing the plaintiff to say that she "had sex" with the man who raped her will probably bias the jury against her. Now, regardless of your opinion on the case, is there agreement that this is an absurd precedent?
I actually kind of understand where the Judge is coming from. I don't think it actually justifies the conclusion, though. Ultimatley the jury is going to decide emotionally anyway, since that's all they have to go on in that case.
I can almost understand the word "rape" being avoided, but the other terms banned aren't as emotionally charged.
I think this is a pretty big nitpick, ultimately, the choice of words shouldn't have an impact, but of course, being human, the jury will be swayed in some slight way, so I don't see the problem in his decision. Also, I somehow doubt that the plaintiff would be forced to repeat those exact words.
I personally fully agree with this judge. Certain words being used can cause completely different views on a situation.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I will play what wins, not what is convenient. Personal preference is nothing, The win is all that matters. I will netdeck at every opportunity, but I will not let that stifle my creativity. Style points do not appear on tournament reports. A good deck with an incompetent pilot is nothing more than a dressed up match win. I will crush my opponent mercilessly, and expect no less from him. Victory is its own reward, The prize is just a bonus.
Legacy is dying
Isn't that a part of what a lawyer does? By presenting the sequence of events in such a way as to put it in the best light for their client, you increase your chances of winning the case. For this case, each lawyer could use the terms that bias the case in their favor.
It's a rape case. No matter how you phrase it, there's bound to be some bias against the defendant. That's the nature of rape cases. I can see him using the terms "alleged victim" and "alleged assailant", but at some point, this gets ridiculous. What are you supposed to call a sexual assault kit, a non-consensual sex with an unconscious person kit?
Criminalist: Well, I used a sexual assault kit - excuse me, a non-consensual sex with an unconscious person kit, and the result from the non-consensual sex with an unconscious person kit told me that the defendant had non-consensual sex with the plaintiff while she was unconscious.
A Nebraska judge ordered that the words "rape" "sexual assault" "sexual assault kit" "victim" and "assailant" from a court case dealing with the... er... non-consensual sex on an unconscious woman.
You do realize there isn't a sentence in here, right?
I'm still trying to figure out what you mean, but the greatest feat here is that every other respondent is somehow... responding.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Epic banner by Erasmus of æтђєг.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
Uh, even if there isn't a proper sentence there, it is fairly easy to figure out what the guy is saying. He is saying that a Nebraska judge ordered the following words are banned in a rape case: "rape" "sexual assault" "sexual assault kit" "victim" and "assailant." I'm fairly certian this makes sense to most people.
As for my opinion on this, I think it's ridiculous. Words are a lawyer's only weapon, and so they shouldn't be restricted in such a manner. It was a rape. Thems the facts. Use the word for it, that's why we have it. Meh, I guess there's nothing we can do, so my outrage serves no real purpose. Shame though, to see this. What's next, banning the words "armed robbery" and "assault" from a case about a criminal "relieving" a bank of excess cash?
I'm still trying to figure out what you mean, but the greatest feat here is that every other respondent is somehow... responding.
Have a look at the rest of the post. The rest of the paragraph makes it pretty clear, but it's really the two links at the bottom of the OP that clearly describe what's going on. Glad to see you're reading everything carefully.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
[The Crafters] | [Johnnies United]
My anecdotal evidence disagrees with yours! EXPLAIN THAT!
It assumes that the jury are idiots. The judge is claiming that they will not be able to figure out that her claiming that she was raped is not an actual conviction of the act. The nature of the trial is the rape incident. I don't understand how repeating the point of the trial would do anything but describe what the accusation is. It's like forcing the victim in a shooting case not to say they were shot.
You also have to consider that this is the Nebraska, bible belt. There are incidents in the bible of a woman being punished for being raped. The way we have been going lately, I would not be surprised if the judge him self was not slanted by his believes.
The judge said that the offending words bias juries against the defendant apparently not realizing (or caring) that forcing the plaintiff to say that she "had sex" with the man who raped her will probably bias the jury against her.
This is a good point, but they could say "the defendant had sex with her" and that would be a much more neutral way of saying things.. yet it will still give the jury the idea that it was "sex", and in the use of that term, it's generally assumed to be consensual.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Getting the last word does not mean that you win the argument.
Evidently, you are not familiar with the process of jury selection.
I am fully aware of jury selection. The judge can deny a juror if he is mentally unable to comprehend the trial. If he felt the jury couldn't handle it, he should have disallowed them from being selected. Treating the jury as if they were idiots, jeopardizes the trial.
Personaly I think it's silly. The reasoning is...faulty at best. Words are really nothing without inflection, and the infection in how I say "hello" can be entirely different from how I say "hello".
Rape, assault, sexual assault, and victim are the most accurate terms to describe who was involved without using names and what happened between them. And since in order to punish a criminal, the case needs to be as accurate as possible, banning these words only muddies up the case.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The difference between MTG and science is that one has people dressed up in silly clothes, using words you can't understand and doing potentially quite dangerous stuff while the other has people dressed up in silly clothes, using words you can't understand and doing potentially quite dangerous stuff while playing cards."
My Decks: WAnglesW WUBRGThe BroodGRBUW WUGAllymillGUW
A Nebraska judge ordered that the words "rape" "sexual assault" "sexual assault kit" "victim" and "assailant" from a court case dealing with the... er... non-consensual sex on an unconscious woman. The judge said that the offending words bias juries against the defendant
"Generally, consent is considered invalid if it is obtained from someone who is:
Under any kind of duress (force, violence, blackmail, etc.)
Judgmentally impaired or incapacitated by alcohol or drugs (legal or otherwise)
Mentally impaired whether by illness or developmental disablity
Below the age of consent defined in that jurisdiction"
this is the definition from wikipedia, which I agree with. The judge is full of something, and it isn't happiness.
A Nebraska judge ordered that the words "rape" "sexual assault" "sexual assault kit" "victim" and "assailant" from a court case dealing with the... er... non-consensual sex on an unconscious woman. The judge said that the offending words bias juries against the defendant apparently not realizing (or caring) that forcing the plaintiff to say that she "had sex" with the man who raped her will probably bias the jury against her. Now, regardless of your opinion on the case, is there agreement that this is an absurd precedent?
Well, I think it's a silly ruling, but in our modern society, where being even "a person of interest" implies guilt, I'm not really surprised by it. This seems to not set a precedent so much a follow one. It is what our political-correctness-obsessed culture demands, no?
Anyway, I doubt it would bias the jury much against the...um...allegedly injured party. Presumably the prosecuting attorney can clarify that the sex act was not mutually desired.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--the Chaos Turtle "Uncommonly Smooth."
Banner by Tidwell
Avatar jazzed up by Zoobamaphooza
These numbers are BAD: 4 8 15 16 23 42
These numbers are GOOD: 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
These numbers are OLD: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 wicked-zen.blogspot.com
Er, no. Rape cases have the lowest conviction rate of any crime - 5.6% in the UK, around 8% in the US. Most rape cases don't even get taken to trial, due to the difficulty of proving that consent wasn't given. If there's not an aggravated assault attached, it's nearly impossible.
that and much of the rape that happens, male or female, never gets reported in the first place, not in a legal sense anyway. They may talk about it with family or friends eventually, but never take it to court or whatnot.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"The difference between MTG and science is that one has people dressed up in silly clothes, using words you can't understand and doing potentially quite dangerous stuff while the other has people dressed up in silly clothes, using words you can't understand and doing potentially quite dangerous stuff while playing cards."
My Decks: WAnglesW WUBRGThe BroodGRBUW WUGAllymillGUW
Don't rape cases generally land in favor of the female, due to juries are being so emotional?
When I don't have an impending wedding, I'll look up the stats on this, but I believe the answer is "no." I'm pretty sure that most rape cases are thrown out of court for "lack of evidence" (e.g., hospital visit, 911 call, etc.). Also, many individuals (and so we might imagine many juries) seem to blame women for "asking for it" with risque clothing etc.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
:symtap:, sacrifice White Privilege: Destroy economic injustice.
In a "sexual assualt case", the prosecution is accusing the defendant of undertaking sexual activity on an unwilling person - known as rape. The terminology does not affect the jury's response to such a case, as the whole point of the case is that it is ALLEGATIONS of the aforementioned activity. Why the judge should assume that the use of the word rape makes such a significant impact and significantly alters the likelihood of the defendant being prosecuted I cannot imagine. It simply does not make sense, as the prosecution is there to accuse them of rape, and changing the wording does not affect the importance of the case. This is an absurd move.
Playing:
Standard:
:symwb:Hand In Hand
Extended
Elf Combo
:symgw::symub::symbr:TEPS :symug::symrw:
"Land, Rite of Flame, Rite of Flame, Seething Song, Giant Solifuge, in for 4 on turn one"
"Ok. You take a mana burn"
Upon seeing planeswalkers, MmmCesium had this to say:
I think abandoning the term "rape" is very helpful. The term has little agreed upon legal definition. We run into cases with consensual sex with a minor, and to me, that just undermines the point of the term "rape". Still, many people agree with the terms usage in cases with consesual sex with a minor. I think we need to either to clean up the term (and there are a lot of scenarios which are quite strange) or we need to abandon the term altogether. Using the technical phrase is less biased and takes a lot of pressure off the jury who have to figure out what rape exactly means.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
http://tinyurl.com/ytznkf
http://www.slate.com/id/2168758
I can almost understand the word "rape" being avoided, but the other terms banned aren't as emotionally charged.
Personal preference is nothing, The win is all that matters.
I will netdeck at every opportunity, but I will not let that stifle my creativity.
Style points do not appear on tournament reports.
A good deck with an incompetent pilot is nothing more than a dressed up match win.
I will crush my opponent mercilessly, and expect no less from him.
Victory is its own reward, The prize is just a bonus.
Legacy is dying
Criminalist: Well, I used a sexual assault kit - excuse me, a non-consensual sex with an unconscious person kit, and the result from the non-consensual sex with an unconscious person kit told me that the defendant had non-consensual sex with the plaintiff while she was unconscious.
Brilliant.
Experiments Series: #5 (Courtly Intrigue Mafia) | #4 (Drunken Tracker) | #3 (Big Red Button) - coming soon | #2 (Pope Mafia) | #1 (Iso's Inflammable Mafia)
Mini Games: MTGS Mafia Redux II (Invitational, Evil Mirror Universe) | Unreal City
Old Games (bad): The Greenwood Affair | Blood Moon Mafia
You do realize there isn't a sentence in here, right?
I'm still trying to figure out what you mean, but the greatest feat here is that every other respondent is somehow... responding.
Awesome avatar provided by Krashbot @ [Epic Graphics].
As for my opinion on this, I think it's ridiculous. Words are a lawyer's only weapon, and so they shouldn't be restricted in such a manner. It was a rape. Thems the facts. Use the word for it, that's why we have it. Meh, I guess there's nothing we can do, so my outrage serves no real purpose. Shame though, to see this. What's next, banning the words "armed robbery" and "assault" from a case about a criminal "relieving" a bank of excess cash?
Radha, Heir to Keld, Vorel of the Hull Clade, Kemba, Kha Regent, Vela the Night-Clad, Kozilek, Butcher of Truth, Barrin, Master Wizard, Slobad, Goblin Tinkerer, Patron of the Orochi, Oloro, Ageless Ascetic, Thraximundar, Roon of the Hidden Realm, Prossh, Skyraider of Kher, Marath, Will of the Wild, Teneb, the Harvester
If you did this, tell me and I'll credit you!
Have a look at the rest of the post. The rest of the paragraph makes it pretty clear, but it's really the two links at the bottom of the OP that clearly describe what's going on. Glad to see you're reading everything carefully.
You also have to consider that this is the Nebraska, bible belt. There are incidents in the bible of a woman being punished for being raped. The way we have been going lately, I would not be surprised if the judge him self was not slanted by his believes.
Evidently, you are not familiar with the process of jury selection.
This is a good point, but they could say "the defendant had sex with her" and that would be a much more neutral way of saying things.. yet it will still give the jury the idea that it was "sex", and in the use of that term, it's generally assumed to be consensual.
I am fully aware of jury selection. The judge can deny a juror if he is mentally unable to comprehend the trial. If he felt the jury couldn't handle it, he should have disallowed them from being selected. Treating the jury as if they were idiots, jeopardizes the trial.
Rape, assault, sexual assault, and victim are the most accurate terms to describe who was involved without using names and what happened between them. And since in order to punish a criminal, the case needs to be as accurate as possible, banning these words only muddies up the case.
WAnglesW
WUBRGThe BroodGRBUW
WUGAllymillGUW
"Generally, consent is considered invalid if it is obtained from someone who is:
Well, I think it's a silly ruling, but in our modern society, where being even "a person of interest" implies guilt, I'm not really surprised by it. This seems to not set a precedent so much a follow one. It is what our political-correctness-obsessed culture demands, no?
Anyway, I doubt it would bias the jury much against the...um...allegedly injured party. Presumably the prosecuting attorney can clarify that the sex act was not mutually desired.
"Uncommonly Smooth."
Banner by Tidwell
Avatar jazzed up by Zoobamaphooza
These numbers are BAD: 4 8 15 16 23 42
These numbers are GOOD: 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
These numbers are OLD: 09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0
wicked-zen.blogspot.com
that and much of the rape that happens, male or female, never gets reported in the first place, not in a legal sense anyway. They may talk about it with family or friends eventually, but never take it to court or whatnot.
WAnglesW
WUBRGThe BroodGRBUW
WUGAllymillGUW
This is true. I was asked about outrageous settlements in lawsuits. I brought up an example. I was removed right away.
When I don't have an impending wedding, I'll look up the stats on this, but I believe the answer is "no." I'm pretty sure that most rape cases are thrown out of court for "lack of evidence" (e.g., hospital visit, 911 call, etc.). Also, many individuals (and so we might imagine many juries) seem to blame women for "asking for it" with risque clothing etc.
Necro Warning
Standard:
:symwb:Hand In Hand
Extended
Elf Combo
:symgw::symub::symbr:TEPS :symug::symrw:
"Land, Rite of Flame, Rite of Flame, Seething Song, Giant Solifuge, in for 4 on turn one"
"Ok. You take a mana burn"
Upon seeing planeswalkers, MmmCesium had this to say: