Slargos, as a noted expert on the Jewish people, what are your thoughts on this case? :hmm:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42206797/ns/world_news-mideastn_africa/
QuoteEx-Israeli president gets 7 years in rape case
Despite his conviction, Moshe Katsav denies charges he twice raped an aide
updated 12 minutes ago 2011-03-22T08:03:32
TEL AVIV, Israel — An Israeli court sentenced former Israeli President Moshe Katsav to seven years in prison on Tuesday for rape and other sexual offenses.
Katsav, convicted in December, has denied charges he twice raped an aide when he was tourism minister in 1998, and molested or sexually harassed two other women who worked for him during his 2000-2007 term as president.
He had faced up to 16 years in prison.
Intense public pressure forced him to resign two weeks before his term ended.
The case has made history in Israe
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
Katsav, convicted in December, has denied charges he twice raped an aide when he was tourism minister in 1998,
Two separate occasions? You would think after the first time the aide would find somewhere else to work. :hmm:
I think that they're simply throwing the dogs a bone.
"Ooooooooooooh lookshe at ushe, we throwsh the dogsh a booon"
Shouldn't that be "Israeli ex-President"? Unless he suddenly stopped being an Israeli.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 03:41:03 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
Katsav, convicted in December, has denied charges he twice raped an aide when he was tourism minister in 1998,
Two separate occasions? You would think after the first time the aide would find somewhere else to work. :hmm:
You are a retard.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
The case has made history in Israe
:huh:
Were the reporter's services: no longer needed? :menace:
Quote from: Caliga on March 22, 2011, 05:28:23 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
The case has made history in Israe
:huh:
Were the reporter's services: no longer needed? :menace:
Perhaps he meant Camargue?
Quote from: Martinus on March 22, 2011, 05:24:16 AM
Shouldn't that be "Israeli ex-President"? Unless he suddenly stopped being an Israeli.
You're right.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 03:41:03 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
Katsav, convicted in December, has denied charges he twice raped an aide when he was tourism minister in 1998,
Two separate occasions? You would think after the first time the aide would find somewhere else to work. :hmm:
You're right. And she was probably wearing a revealing outfit as well. :P
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 06:34:39 AM
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
I was joking. :hug:
Hmmm.... was it rape rape? Somebody call rape rape expert Whoopi please and ask. :bowler:
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 06:34:39 AM
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
I hope you are trolling. Seriously. Rape in professional relationships does not need to involve physical coercion. And the reason why it doesn't is that the victim actually needs her job and as a result can be succesfully coerced/blackmailed into sex without violence (or threats of violence) being involved - so that explains why she doesn't quit her job immediately after being raped. I thought this is a pretty obvious and universally known fact - that's why I called you a retard - because this seems so blatantly obvious to me. :huh:
I expect he told the aide that he was an Arab :huh:
Quote from: Caliga on March 22, 2011, 05:28:23 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 22, 2011, 03:34:15 AM
The case has made history in Israe
:huh:
Were the reporter's services: no longer needed? :menace:
Maybe he suffered a heart attack while writing it.
I bet Putin doesn't envy him so much now.
It came to me that perhaps a lot of these flame-fests could be avoided if we simply invented new terms to describe and differentiate violent assault-rape and the more insidious coercion-rape. :hmm:
[Palestinetard]When will the Israeli nation get sentenced for its rape of Palestine?[/Palestinetard]
Quote from: Habbaku on March 22, 2011, 02:18:16 PM
[Palestinetard]When will the Israeli nation get sentenced for its rape of Palestine?[/Palestinetard]
Was it a rape-rape, or did she simply regret it afterwards? :hmm:
Quote from: Martinus on March 22, 2011, 07:31:28 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 06:34:39 AM
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
I hope you are trolling. Seriously. Rape in professional relationships does not need to involve physical coercion. And the reason why it doesn't is that the victim actually needs her job and as a result can be succesfully coerced/blackmailed into sex without violence (or threats of violence) being involved - so that explains why she doesn't quit her job immediately after being raped. I thought this is a pretty obvious and universally known fact - that's why I called you a retard - because this seems so blatantly obvious to me. :huh:
That's not rape, that's sexual harassment.
Quote from: dps on March 22, 2011, 02:20:59 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 22, 2011, 07:31:28 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 06:34:39 AM
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
I hope you are trolling. Seriously. Rape in professional relationships does not need to involve physical coercion. And the reason why it doesn't is that the victim actually needs her job and as a result can be succesfully coerced/blackmailed into sex without violence (or threats of violence) being involved - so that explains why she doesn't quit her job immediately after being raped. I thought this is a pretty obvious and universally known fact - that's why I called you a retard - because this seems so blatantly obvious to me. :huh:
That's not rape, that's sexual harassment.
It is rape (or rather, sexual assault).
Take, for example, R v Matheson (1999) 134 CCC (3d) 289 (Ont C.A.):
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/1999/1999canlii3719/1999canlii3719.html
A doctor was convicted of sexual assault on two patients of his, on the basis that consent was only obtained by his exercise of authority.
in the old days it was called a womans way of getting ahead (and a bosses way of getting head ba-dum pa)
Quote from: dps on March 22, 2011, 02:20:59 PM
Quote from: Martinus on March 22, 2011, 07:31:28 AM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 22, 2011, 06:34:39 AM
So you and Marty would be willing to spend several hours of your day with somebody who had raped you? I just can't fathom that. Obviously most people don't quit jobs as readily as I do, but still...
I hope you are trolling. Seriously. Rape in professional relationships does not need to involve physical coercion. And the reason why it doesn't is that the victim actually needs her job and as a result can be succesfully coerced/blackmailed into sex without violence (or threats of violence) being involved - so that explains why she doesn't quit her job immediately after being raped. I thought this is a pretty obvious and universally known fact - that's why I called you a retard - because this seems so blatantly obvious to me. :huh:
That's not rape, that's sexual harassment.
As BB said you are wrong. Sexual harassment would be just a boss making a proposal to an underling. If you coerce someone, through your power in the organization, to have sex for you or e.g. they will get fired, that's rape (or a rape "equivalent", in the same way a statutory "rape" is not actually a rape but is considered to be just as bad).
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2011, 02:30:25 PM
It is rape (or rather, sexual assault).
Take, for example, R v Matheson (1999) 134 CCC (3d) 289 (Ont C.A.):
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/1999/1999canlii3719/1999canlii3719.html
A doctor was convicted of sexual assault on two patients of his, on the basis that consent was only obtained by his exercise of authority.
Dude was a shrink. Using Jedi mind tricks to lay pipe is like slipping a roofy. Nothing like the Israeli case.
Heh, seems like Israel is not the place to push the line in terms of sexual misbehaviour.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 22, 2011, 05:42:11 PM
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2011, 02:30:25 PM
It is rape (or rather, sexual assault).
Take, for example, R v Matheson (1999) 134 CCC (3d) 289 (Ont C.A.):
http://www.canlii.org/en/on/onca/doc/1999/1999canlii3719/1999canlii3719.html
A doctor was convicted of sexual assault on two patients of his, on the basis that consent was only obtained by his exercise of authority.
Dude was a shrink. Using Jedi mind tricks to lay pipe is like slipping a roofy. Nothing like the Israeli case.
Meh - perhaps.
But I'll just cite s. 273.1(2)(d) of the Criminal Code which says "No consent is obtained, for the purposes of sections 271, 272, and 273 [sexual assault, sexual assault CBH, or aggravated sexual assault] where... the accused induces the complainant to engage in the activity by abusing a position of trust, power or authority".
Your boss telling you 'sleep with me or I'll fire you' is sexual assault.
Like Clinton? :)
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 22, 2011, 05:58:12 PM
Like Clinton? :)
Well Lewinsky never said she didn't want to engage in sex, so no, not like Clinton. :)
But if in a couple years she does complain, then it's sexual assault, right? :)
More seriously, I've never heard this kind of thing called sexual assault in the US and would be very surprised if I ever did. I suppose the rest of you are free to call it whatever you want.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 22, 2011, 06:14:03 PM
But if in a couple years she does complain, then it's sexual assault, right? :)
More seriously, I've never heard this kind of thing called sexual assault in the US and would be very surprised if I ever did. I suppose the rest of you are free to call it whatever you want.
I expect the opposite. We'll have to wait and see what the US lawtalkers say.
Do note it isn't as simple as any sex with your boss being sexual assault. There has to be an "abuse of a position of power" which is a factual finding for the trier of fact.
Quote from: Barrister on March 22, 2011, 06:16:55 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 22, 2011, 06:14:03 PM
But if in a couple years she does complain, then it's sexual assault, right? :)
More seriously, I've never heard this kind of thing called sexual assault in the US and would be very surprised if I ever did. I suppose the rest of you are free to call it whatever you want.
I expect the opposite. We'll have to wait and see what the US lawtalkers say.
Do note it isn't as simple as any sex with your boss being sexual assault. There has to be an "abuse of a position of power" which is a factual finding for the trier of fact.
The thing is, in the US, sexual harassment law specifically covers that as sexual harassment. Now, the law on sexual harassment in the workplace comes under federal labor law, while law on rape and sexual assault comes under state criminal law, but one would think that Congress wouldn't include the boss abusing his position to get sex from his employees as sexual harassment if states had generally already included it as sexual assault. But as always with US law, you have at least 50 potentially widely differing state laws to consider.
Law-talkers aren't any better suited than the rest of us to pass judgment on what words mean in the English language, but only with how they're used in a courtroom.
Lawyers aren't suited for much of anything. Laws must be abolished.