Court Requires That A Disabled Rape Victim Prove That She Resisted Her Attacker

[Danielle Ni Dhighe]

Court Requires That A Disabled Rape Victim Prove That She Resisted Her Attacker (http://www.classwarfareexists.com/court-requires-that-a-disabled-rape-victim-prove-that-she-resisted-her-attacker/)

This is a horrible ruling.

[Prometeo liberado]

I guarantee you that if the rapist was black, forget about, hung by sundown.
This without a doubt a case where the woman is raped not once but twice.

[Workers-Control-Over-Prod]

Court Requires That A Disabled Rape Victim Prove That She Resisted Her Attacker (http://www.classwarfareexists.com/court-requires-that-a-disabled-rape-victim-prove-that-she-resisted-her-attacker/)

This is a horrible ruling.

Yesterday the Tunisian case, today the USA case... it seems like a bad joke.

[Dennis the 'Bloody Peasant']

Yesterday the Tunisian case, today the USA case... it seems like a bad joke.

It seems hatred of women remains a cross-culture, international cause.

Really sickening.

[Quail]

This is hugely depressing. I don't even have the words to adequately describe how much this disgusts me. The absence of "no" is not a "yes" and is never a "yes," but this woman was not capable of giving consent so how the fuck can the guy not have assaulted her?

[Igor]

fuck this world.

[doesn't even make sense]

And this happened in fucking Connecticut.

[cynicles]

AAAAAAAAHH*pulls hair out*

This is so frustrating, now all I can think about is beating these justices with a baseball bat bloody. There are so many dimensions of fucked up about this.

[GoddessCleoLover]

Outrageous decision. The victim might well have been too intimidated to manifest physical resistance. The larger point is that the onus ought not be upon her to prove resistance. The jury apparently convicted the rapist by finding that she did not consent and they were in a better position to evaluate the facts than a panel of appellate judges.