A judge at a pre-trial rape hearing said the plaintiff couldn't use the word "rape...?!?

Question

I immediately saw how that would be a little difficult, dontcha' think???

Answer 1

Well, how would you like to be used all the time in such a derogatory manner? I am from the iowa chapter of "the liberation army ", (a wonderful club) and we are utterly against using Rape's name in such a terrible manner. Millions of poor citizens called rape are pounded to dust in our courtrooms every year. Murder I tell you, and we are here to stop it, please send your donations to the address below and thank you for supporting the liberation of a valid word of the english language which has been oppressed for centuries>

Answer 2

That's insane! Why do they worry about protecting the defendant (alleged rapist) more than the victim (who was friggin raped)?!?! Just more evidence that the legal system doesn't always make sense. Quite frankly in certain circumstances I'm pro-vigilante-ism. If someone attacked me or someone I loved, I'd get medieval on his a$$! Too many criminals get away with too much. The punishment should fit the crime. An eye for an eye...

But here's another problem, believe it or not, there are females who will lie about abuse to get a male in trouble. It's horrible and tends to make law enforcement agencies a little...cautious. It does a horrible injustice not only to the alleged attacker but to all the women who actually have been raped and now have to be looked at with skepticism by law enforcement agencies. It is because of such false allegations that they may have created rulings such as not being able to say the word "rape" in a pre-trial hearing because it paints the accused as a rapist. However, if the female is to give her account of what happened, what on earth is she supposed to say that wouldn't be incriminating?!

Answer 3

The purpose of a pretrial hearing is to establish that a crime has been committed. All the plaintiff has to do is use the legal description of a rape to establish that one has been committed. Once that has been done then the crime can be referred to as a rape. The judge is an jackass that is going by the letter of the law. Any other judge would have given it a pass with the word "alleged".

Answer 4

I think the Duke University situation has made many leery of the entire procedure for trying and getting a conviction in rape cases. Fortunately there are substitutes for the word which leave no doubt about what is being charged.
Abuse
Defilement
Depredation
Forcible Violation
Molestation
Sexual Assault

Just to name a few.

Answer 5

okay.. that is very interesting.. but my guess is because of the fact that it is a pre-trial hearing that the word shouldn't be used as it has not yet been determined whether or not there was really a rape involved. by stating that word there would be an immediate influencing of all the supposed un-biased parties involved in the hearing. thats my gues but my opinoin is that it is just a crock of ****!

Answer 6

that happened in the state I live in. What midwest values that judge has!!!!
What an idiot that judge is.

Edit:
In regards to Sophist, she wasn't even allowed to use the legal jargon or terminology in reference to rape. She was pretty much gagged.

Answer 7

I think this is ridiculous. Rape is crime, plain and simple as that. Either you're accusing someone of committing that crime or you're not. As far as I know, there is no such crime as "non-consensual sex", or any other form of "rape-light".

Answer 8

To he!! with being so PC and call it what is it RAPE. That judge should have been thrown off the bench!!!!!!

Answer 9

Well, that judge is getting a reaming in the media, so he's getting his. Guaranteed he loses his next election.
At least the media is beginning to hold our judges accountable. No one else is doing it.

Answer 10

the victim is on trial..that's our wacky justice system..but their only human they make mistakes