Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Concerning Rape Case Ruling


Recommended Posts

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/07/21/myths-of-rape-should-be-dispelled-says-judge-in-mandi-gray-case.html

So essentially you have two people that are dating.

The girl texts the guy 'come drink and then we can have hot sex'.

The guy claims that he tried to break up with the girl, but then they have consolation sex.

The girl claims that they had sex that wasn't consensual.

He said vs she said. Text messages are the only other evidence.

Judge rules, while quoting feminist poetry, that the guy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Btw, the girl is a PhD student in gender studies and changed her research from Women in Prison to Rape due to this case.

...

...

...

This isn't a joke.



Good thing I'm an asexual virgin that doesn't drink.


VIDEO LINK

Edited by Michael Hardner
ADDED VIDEO LINK
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 68
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

What the hell is gender studies all about anyway? Is it a study one takes to be able to tell the difference between a man and a woman? I can tell anyone what the difference is. The chit that people ar

I thought it was a man hating course that you get a degree in and complain cause you can't find a job

Rule #1 of a breakup.

Don't have sex right afterwards.

Her text isn't really relevant. If I send a text asking someone to make me tea, then I get there and don't want it...They can't make me drink it.

His text a few days after the fact is probably why he was convicted. Something to the effect of, "Sorry, I got carried away...blah blah..."

Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2016/07/21/myths-of-rape-should-be-dispelled-says-judge-in-mandi-gray-case.html

So essentially you have two people that are dating.

The girl texts the guy 'come drink and then we can have hot sex'.

The guy claims that he tried to break up with the girl, but then they have consolation sex.

The girl claims that they had sex that wasn't consensual.

He said vs she said. Text messages are the only other evidence.

Judge rules, while quoting feminist poetry, that the guy is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

Btw, the girl is a PhD student in gender studies and changed her research from Women in Prison to Rape due to this case.

...

...

...

This isn't a joke.

Good thing I'm an asexual virgin that doesn't drink.

You cited his version, but not hers,

-1=e^ipi.

Why?

His:

The version Ururyar told from the witness stand was theyd gone home happily, hed broken up with her

Hers:

Her testimony, which Zuker ruled as the truth, was that he berated her on the way home, calling her an embarrassment and a slut until her self-esteem crumbled.

His:

and then theyd had consolation sex.

Hers:

Once he got there, he jammed his penis into her mouth and then raped her. She lay frozen in fear.

Why did you cite only his version,

-1=e^ipi?

No it certainly is not a "joke".

Rapists, pedophiles, nazis and other criminals can troll discussion boards.

Edited by jacee
Link to post
Share on other sites

We obviously don't have enough information to be sure of anything in this case, I think that the "concerning" part is just that, that a person was found guilty without any sort of proof or even evidence. All we know is that she asked for sex, they had sex and later she claimed rape - that's all we know. It also seems plausible that the judge had him guilty before even hearing a single word of testimony - this would also be concerning.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Zucker's decision to not grant bail has been overturned. And the language and reasons he used is being used to justify an appeal on bias.

The Superior Court judge seemed to be taking a dim view of Judge Zucker's behaviour.

“It certainly shocked me, I will say, that Justice Zuker felt fit to include all of the academic references he did and didn’t see fit to tell counsel. That’s a jaw dropper in my view,” Quigley said, adding he was concerned that Zuker had a “predisposed mind” that “may be a little too full” with opinions on battered women’s syndrome and memory fragmentation in victims of sexual abuse.

Quigley was concerned about some “very, very strong and argumentative exchanges with Ms. (Lisa) Bristow (Ururyar’s defence lawyer during the trial) in the course of that (bail) hearing. ”It’s a “different quality of exchange than I usually have. Maybe I’m too polite.” Quigley said.

http://news.nationalpost.com/toronto/york-phd-student-gets-bail-pending-appeal-of-high-profile-sexual-assault-conviction

Edited by Argus
Link to post
Share on other sites

We obviously don't have enough information to be sure of anything in this case,

True, and maybe you should have stopped there.

And we weren't in the courtroom.

However, I read that one piece of evidence was a text from him later apologizing for getting "carried away".

We don't have all the evidence. The judge did, and ruled his defense "a fabrication".

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to the idea of waiting until things go to trial to find out the truth. This case goes to trial and you still don't believe the outcome.

Your belief system has changed somewhat since the Jian Ghomeshi case.

Edited by Hal 9000
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any position on the guilt or innocence of this particular suspect.

But I REALLY HATE "he said / she said". In the absence of any hard evidence the judge or jury has to read tea leaves. This has resulted in a lot of innocent people going to prison, and a lot of guilty people being set free which further victimizes the victim.

Not saying there's anything we can do about it, but I just really really hate these cases.

Maybe in cases where it really IS just "he said / she said", and there's no other evidence, the court should be allowed to compel a polygraph test. Polygraph tests are not perfectly accurate, but I think you would get more accurate outcomes, then having people make an arbitrary decision on which person is telling the truth based on their reputation or how believable their story seems. Sometimes people with bad reputations, or far fetched sounding stories REALLY ARE telling the truth.

I really hope this was the right verdict.

Edited by dre
Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't have any position on the guilt or innocence of this particular suspect.

But I REALLY HATE "he said / she said". In the absence of any hard evidence the judge or jury has to read tea leaves. This has resulted in a lot of innocent people going to prison, and a lot of guilty people being set free which further victimizes the victim.

Not saying there's anything we can do about it, but I just really really hate these cases.

Maybe in cases where it really IS just "he said / she said", and there's no other evidence, the court should be allowed to compel a polygraph test. Polygraph tests are not perfectly accurate, but I think you would get more accurate outcomes, then having people make an arbitrary decision on which person is telling the truth based on their reputation or how believable their story seems. Sometimes people with bad reputations, or far fetched sounding stories REALLY ARE telling the truth.

I really hope this was the right verdict.

Think about it:

He said he broke up with her, then they had consensual "consolation" sex.

If that's true, why did he text her later apologizing for 'getting carried away'?

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Meh, if he texted about getting carried away, I can see why the judge would infer rape. The judge has to make a logical conclusion. He is dealing with a highly educated man who is unlikely to just flat out admit the crime. These type of cases are the hardest cases because they are he said/she said and no other evidence. They are not "violent rapes" that involve a beating, ripping off of clothes etc. The suspected rapist has a reason to be at the house because of the relation between the victim and victimizer. Often the victim doesn't resist at all in these cases. So there is no real physical or forensic evidence in these cases. These cases come entirely down to words, and any word you use that suggest you did anything wrong will be used against you. If he had said/text nothing, I doubt it would have gone to trial. Or if he had texted great sex, lets do it again some time and it was really good, then he would not be in this situation. The carried away text suggest he went too far, crossed a line and he knew it. I'd sure hate to convict someone of such a serious crime off just words with no physical evidence but he sunk his own ship and has no one to blame but himself. It is an entirely reasonable inference for a judge to draw that there was no consent from the carried away statement.

Anyways, the real problem in these cases is alcohol, they seem present in almost all these cases of rape.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to the idea of waiting until things go to trial to find out the truth. This case goes to trial and you still don't believe the outcome.

I'll remember this post the next time you go on a tirade about the guilt of a police officer involved in the shooting of a black guy before it goes to trial.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Think about it:

He said he broke up with her, then they had consensual "consolation" sex.

If that's true, why did he text her later apologizing for 'getting carried away'?

.

How does "carried away" get interpreted in your head as, "Hey I'm sorry I raped you."?

This to me is "Nazi" mentality because it presumes women and men are distinct entities who think differently and that require distinct laws for and against specific arbitrary ideals of those empowered to create such SEGREGATION laws!

And this goes for all the others here who are blind to the lack of information that should have suggested this case get thrown out.

It's frustrating because I USED to believe in what I thought 'feminism' meant: to get equal treatment as a HUMAN in light of some standard to discriminate against women. I am totally disillusioned by the contemporary hatred that is literally coming from those presenting themselves as alleviating abuses BY abusing. And the lack of logic to recognize this is absurd.

You want to stop abuses AND find equality? Then become a "humanist", or an "Earthling", and treat problems in their appropriate logical non-cultural classifications.

If you look at some problem based on a logical concern, like, for instance, "those incarcerated in jails" to determine the causes, the cult-centered/segregationists look at the largest plurality of those imprisoned and say, "look, a larger percentage of X-race is incarcerated...there MUST be discrimination!" This is NOT how to rationally look at the problem because it is ALWAYS inevitable that there MUST be some percentage of some ethnic/cultural identity being represented in such cases.

While it may be, and likely, certain prejudices involved, such stereotyping is often coming from ALL people, including those being targeted/victimized. You could always find some other opposing plural culture (a sub-majority, that is) or ethnicity within the same population of some problem area who are also being equally abused. For the prison example, 90% may represent all males, for instance. So perhaps we should begin creating laws that target women more so that they can be 'fairly represented' in the incarcerated group by either convicting more women (arbitrarily as to meet the quota) or to release enough men until the populations are 50/50.

Obviously, to deal with such a problem MUST require not finding balanced 'vengeance' type justices because these only amplify the segregation between the ethnic/cultural/sexual divisions. For the prison example, instead of looking at the ethnic imbalance, look at the logical class, "poverty".

Isn't THIS precisely the better logical link to associate with as a causative factor to incarceration than cultural stereotypes? You don't cure 'bad' stereotypes by FORCING 'good' ones.....you STOP STEREOTYPING all together!

The ISSUE of 'rape' is NOT about men against women because women are at equal fault for creating the causes as men are for cultural distinctions. The problem should center on the facts, not 'reading' through the eyes of it as a 'feminist', because you are an actual equal 'pig' as those men who abuse for falsely stereotyping something that ALL MEN are. So to me, such supporters of this vengeful 'feminism' are rapists themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I really hope this was the right verdict.

It couldn't be any more clear that the court did not get it right. She had no evidence of any kind, whereas he had her written invitation for sex.

It's patently insane that anyone could ever be found guilty on any charge just because someone said they did something, especially when the physical evidence clearly points in the opposite direction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to criminal charges needing to be proven "beyond a reasonable doubt"? If we toss this fundamental principle of our justice system out, there will be dark times ahead indeed.

It'll save court time (and money) if we just believe the woman is telling the truth and the man is clearly lying - I mean, a woman would never lie. So, no need to bother with trials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It couldn't be any more clear that the court did not get it right. She had no evidence of any kind, whereas he had her written invitation for sex.

Sure, and according to the judge there was a text written by Mr. Ururyar ("I am sorry things went as they did. I shouldn't have said and done some of the things I did. I was upset and felt wronged by you but that does not excuse my own mistakes.") that is pretty damning and seems to be an influence on the decision.

Oh, I don't know.

Maybe it would be a good idea to read the ruling and then discuss it: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2016/2016oncj448/2016oncj448.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, and according to the judge there was a text written by Mr. Ururyar ("I am sorry things went as they did. I shouldn't have said and done some of the things I did. I was upset and felt wronged by you but that does not excuse my own mistakes.") that is pretty damning and seems to be an influence on the decision.

Oh, I don't know.

Maybe it would be a good idea to read the ruling and then discuss it: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2016/2016oncj448/2016oncj448.html

I skimmed through it just now, obviously not gonna read the whole thing in detail, but it seems clear that the decision was primarily based on the judge's interpretation of the conflicting testimony of the two parties, with no convincing physical evidence. The text you mention is certainly not evidence that a rape occurred... members of relationships send messages to each other apologizing for something or other all the time without rape being involved. The defendant could have been referring to something he said or did that he regretted that was any of a million actions besides rape. Given this, it seems obvious that the allegation was not proven beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if it seems that the plaintiff's position was more likely to be closer to true than the defendant's position, criminal cases are supposed to be decided based on the standard of "beyond a reasonable doubt" rather than the "balance of the probabilities" as in civil cases.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Something to the effect of, "Sorry, I got carried away...blah blah..."

That could mean a number of different things though.

The way I see it, the guy isn't innocent beyond reasonable doubt, but he's not guilty beyond reasonable doubt either.

Link to post
Share on other sites

"You cited his version, but not hers,
-1=e^ipi.
Why?
"

I provided a brief 1 sentence summary for both of them and provided a link. I'm not going to rewrite everything, that is what the link is for.

That video was brutal. 'SJW's think he can't rape because he's a minority'. WTF??

Are you referring to the comments?

The judge did, and ruled his defense "a fabrication".

And judges can be biased and make wrong decisions.

Maybe in cases where it really IS just "he said / she said", and there's no other evidence, the court should be allowed to compel a polygraph test. Polygraph tests are not perfectly accurate, but I think you would get more accurate outcomes, then having people make an arbitrary decision on which person is telling the truth based on their reputation or how believable their story seems. Sometimes people with bad reputations, or far fetched sounding stories REALLY ARE telling the truth.

That's not that bad of an idea.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure, and according to the judge there was a text written by Mr. Ururyar ("I am sorry things went as they did. I shouldn't have said and done some of the things I did. I was upset and felt wronged by you but that does not excuse my own mistakes.") that is pretty damning and seems to be an influence on the decision.

Oh, I don't know.

Maybe it would be a good idea to read the ruling and then discuss it: http://www.canlii.org/en/on/oncj/doc/2016/2016oncj448/2016oncj448.html

Why is it alright to read into that quote as though it was communicating something extremely specific. Are you a mind reader?

AND, if it is alright to 'read into' what one implies but not what one ACTUALLY said, then should this not also apply to those who use language that another interprets suggests an invitation for sex too? You know, like those who might say she was dressed to suggest sexual interest?

Link to post
Share on other sites

What's really interesting is that the girl has a pretty strong incentive to lie about being raped in this case.

1. Get back at her boyfriend for breaking up with her.

2. Advance her career. She lives in Toronto and does gender studies in 2016. Essentially the entire field is a victim culture where the more of a victim you can claim to be the greater your ability to move ahead academically. Now she can do her PhD in rape, appear on various news stories / talk shows about how she was a rape victim and how the justice system needs to change more to listen and believe women more, she'll be more likely to get a professor position to teach and research gender studies, etc.

Two birds with 1 stone.

Or maybe she's telling the truth. I don't know.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Announcements




×
×
  • Create New...