The Perfect Slargos Topic

[Viking]

If she was truly incapable of consent, and it was obvious, why do you even need the victim?

The identity of the victim is not an essential element of the offense of sexual assault.

I'm not sure how things work in a Norwegian court, but I'd think that without the testimony of the victim, unless the rapist knocked her unconscious from behind or something, there would be reasonable doubt that there was no consent.

Why wouldn't video be sufficient evidence?

[Slargos]

A local robber walked into a store and apparently his mask started itching, so he pulled it up and looked straight into the security camera.

Charges were dropped because he was wearing gloves so there was no physical evidence, and the defense successfully argued that "it could've been someone dressed up to look like him".

Go figure.

In this CSI day and age, photo evidence just doesn't cut it any more.

[Martinus]

Could it be the case of consent to charge? For example, in Polish law, the victim must consent to the perp being charged with rape (with obvious exceptions, like the victim being dead or a minor or disabled). This is not a standard private prosecution - once the consent is given, this becomes a public charge and the consent cannot be withdrawn. However, they can't prosecute against the victim's wishes as this is considered an issue of privacy/intimacy.

[Viking]

Could it be the case of consent to charge? For example, in Polish law, the victim must consent to the perp being charged with rape (with obvious exceptions, like the victim being dead or a minor or disabled). This is not a standard private prosecution - once the consent is given, this becomes a public charge and the consent cannot be withdrawn. However, they can't prosecute against the victim's wishes as this is considered an issue of privacy/intimacy.

So rape isn't a crime against society in general in poland? (and what is the correct term for that?)

[Slargos]

Could it be the case of consent to charge? For example, in Polish law, the victim must consent to the perp being charged with rape (with obvious exceptions, like the victim being dead or a minor or disabled). This is not a standard private prosecution - once the consent is given, this becomes a public charge and the consent cannot be withdrawn. However, they can't prosecute against the victim's wishes as this is considered an issue of privacy/intimacy.

So rape isn't a crime against society in general in poland? (and what is the correct term for that?)

Surprise-sex.

[Martinus]

It is. But the decision was taken to balance it against the interests/psychological wellbeing of the victim and give the latter a (limited) priority. To be honest I can see the argument going either way - it's a classic case of conflicting interests.

[Martinus]

And for the record, a rape tape with no victim testimony could be just roleplaying.

[Slargos]

It is. But the decision was taken to balance it against the interests/psychological wellbeing of the victim and give the latter a (limited) priority. To be honest I can see the argument going either way - it's a classic case of conflicting interests.

I really don't see how. Rapists are notorious recidivists and protecting the short-term sensibilities of the victim must clearly be suborindated to seeing justice done and preventing more people from suffering.

[Slargos]

And for the record, a rape tape with no victim testimony could be just roleplaying.

Ok. That actually got me going.

Well done.

Now I'm going to go find a faggot to kick the shit out of, and claim it's one of those artsy snuff films. Totally legit roleplaying.

[Viking]

So, nobody is saying that without a victims report rape isn't a crime, but rather, practically, the perpetrator gets off.. ehhh.. lets try again..., the perpetrator will not be found guilty without the victim declaring in court that the sex was against he will.

But, can't this case (with an unknown victim) be treated as if the victim was deceased (e.g. as if the victim had died of unrelated or natural causes between the crime and the trial such as a traffic accident or suicide), an din that case couldn't the prosecution still be brought?

[Viking]

http://translate.google.com/translate?js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&layout=2&eotf=1&sl=no&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dagbladet.no%2F2011%2F07%2F19%2Fnyheter%2Fvoldtekt%2Finnenriks%2Fovergrep%2Fpolitiet%2F17354669%2F

The rapist has been released. The victim still hasn't revealed herself, she was apparently massively drunk. The worst bit is that the guards at the parliament observed the rape over their CCTV and did NOT intervene.

White Guards followed rape directly on video
Did not set in when an applicant (15) raped a woman in white stairs.

(Dagbladet): Right in front of Parliament, while the capital seethed with life, was a Norwegian woman in her 20-years raped at 0230 o'clock Sunday morning. A 15-year north-african are charged in the case.

The woman was raped in front of the main entrance to Parliament, right in the center of Oslo, while the capital seethed with life. Surveillance pictures show several partygoers bygjester that goes right past, without intervention.

Some stops and laughs. At least one should have filmed it all with a mobile camera. No one did anything to stop the assault.

While Parliament's security guards followed the drama on video only a few yards away, was the almost unconscious woman forced rough sex with the 15-year-old asylum seeker.

Intoxicated
Not even security guards intervened. Now the girl soaking away.

- It's very open there, and at the time there were many people who have gone through. More smiled and laughed and thought it was all voluntary, but it was not, said police attorney Paal-Fredrik Hjort Kraby by violence and sexual section of the Oslo Police District told Dagbladet.

- The woman was very drunk, almost unconscious and completely unable to take care of themselves.

Police believe they have found the right culprit - 15-year-old asylum seeker from North Africa. But left with a big problem in the investigation: the lack of a victim.

Can collapse
- We call her and witnesses who were in the area to sign up. We do what we can to get in touch with her, and believes there is plenty of witnesses who have not signed up, says Kraby.

If the woman does not arise, the police have no case, he explains.

The suspect was released yesterday, despite the fact that the police believe that the indictment was bolstered by his explanation.

- We have interrogated him and a witness that we saw as most important. We want to interrogate the victim, but she has not wanted to make himself known. Then we can no longer keep him, and believes there is no destruction of evidence or the recurrence risk. He has otherwise flawlessly record, says Kraby.

Zoomed in
He believes there is some evasion danger since 15-year-old is an asylum seeker, but he believes by taking the age into consideration that there was no reason to keep him imprisoned.

Police most important evidence that the 15-year-old is the right person and that it is actually a rape is video from security center at the Parliament.

Kraby can not quantify how many people passed by without doing anything, since the security staff at Parliament controlled surveillance camera from a thumbnail image to zoom in on what happened.

- Surveillance camera was controlled by security staff, but no guards broke into. They kept an eye on the perpetrator of the video, went out when he was about to leave and could point him out to our people, he said.

Pål-Fredrik Hjort Kraby confirms that it will be necessary to examine the security guards.

Agurktid
- I can confirm that our people have helped with the video to the police regarding this incident. My section is always at work, but we are primarily there to ensure national meeting in Norway, said Parliament's security manager Gerrit Løberg to Dagbladet.

- We assisted in a way that made the perpetrator was taken, he said further.

- If you have intervened, when you discovered this?

- No, when a crime occurs, contact the police. As I understand it, they were quickly on site.

When Dagbladet asks for a meeting about safety peoples behavior, answers Gerrit Loberg:

- No. We have much to do today. But I understand that you want to turn this big, and that it is agurktid.

[DGuller]

Now the girl soaking away.

[Viking]

Now the girl soaking away.

"søkk borte" is the phrase that gets badly translated, it means completely gone.

[Barrister]

If she was truly incapable of consent, and it was obvious, why do you even need the victim?

The identity of the victim is not an essential element of the offense of sexual assault.

I'm not sure how things work in a Norwegian court, but I'd think that without the testimony of the victim, unless the rapist knocked her unconscious from behind or something, there would be reasonable doubt that there was no consent.

That's why I said "if she was truly incapable of consent".

As a matter of law we do not require evidence from a victim.  Now practically speaking sometimes there is essential evidence that we need that we can only get from the victim, but that depends on the specific case.

[Barrister]

Could it be the case of consent to charge? For example, in Polish law, the victim must consent to the perp being charged with rape (with obvious exceptions, like the victim being dead or a minor or disabled). This is not a standard private prosecution - once the consent is given, this becomes a public charge and the consent cannot be withdrawn. However, they can't prosecute against the victim's wishes as this is considered an issue of privacy/intimacy.

I dunno anything about Norwegian law, so I suppose it could be.

Under Canadian law though, the only consent necessary to proceed with a charge is my own.