So Ms. Bowen, at what point did he have surprise buttsecks with you?

Continuing the downward trend of protecting the criminal, not the victim. They humiliate this woman and make her get up and tell everyone how this piece of shiat raped her, but she cant say the word rape because it sounds too harsh? WTF is happening to this country?

Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims. Political Correctness (a term invented by those on the left hand side of the political spectrum) will be the death of us all.

This is life (as opposed to an after school special) you are going to be offended by something at some point in time. There is a point where you have to step up and say something about it. There is also a point where you have to cry a river, build a bridge, smoke a cig, drink a beer and GET THE HELL OVER IT! everything has it's season. WELCOME TO EARTH!

The defendant repeatedly thrust his "member" into me, despite my pleas of mercy and my tears of defiance. The defendant continued to violate my person in the worst way imaginable - and I carry the emotional and physical scars to this day.

I guess the question I have to ask is are you allowed to use the words "murder" or "manslaughter" in a trial when someone has been killed?

Even though this particular example is pretty repulsive, is there a valid point behind attorneys and witnesses not being allowed to potentially shape a verdict by using the main words of a potential sentence? I think that's where the judge is coming from, even though it's pretty stupid imho. If you're not allowed to use the word rape, how do you file a charge of rape?

We can only hope that the defendant is found guilty and goes to prison. That way he can enjoy the sensation of telling the warden about the not-so-voluntary sexual intercourse he had with his room mate, Tyrone.

Most if not all big cities in America have been run by the left for decades. The school systems continue to get worse and worse. A large reason is the PC Bullshiat a couple of limp-wristed fairies decided to impose on all of us.

If the mutt is charged with rape or sexual assault, how can you be banned in court from using the legal term for what he's charged with.
Idiot judge needs to be "retroactively unappointed."

Yeah, I'm sure you'll be rooting for the woman the next time she randomly decides a couple months later that that consensual sex was actually rape. We can't let you have a fair trial, after all.

I understand 'innocent until proven guilty' but come on....

No, children, not rape. "Carnal knowledge of a female by force and without consent."

/Taught To Kill a Mockingbird too long . . . ch.14

P.S. - Atticus would not be proud.

euphonial: No, children, not rape. "Carnal knowledge of a female by force and without consent."

/Taught To Kill a Mockingbird too long . . . ch.14

good book but they need to edit out those boo radley filler scenes.

Yes, and everyone on the left is all for political correctness, because, like, such as, all Democrats are!! Duh!!.


Morons. That broad brush getting heavy for you yet??

Little One-Eyed Wench: We can only hope that the defendant is found guilty and goes to prison. That way he can enjoy the sensation of telling the warden about the not-so-voluntary sexual intercourse he had with his room mate, Tyrone.

Two rapes do make a right. Wait, no, not really.

geeze I can't keep up with all the PC crap...hope that woman gets her justice

lewismarktwo: Little One-Eyed Wench: We can only hope that the defendant is found guilty and goes to prison. That way he can enjoy the sensation of telling the warden about the not-so-voluntary sexual intercourse he had with his room mate, Tyrone.

Two rapes do make a right. Wait, no, not really.

No but 3 lefts do :-)..

/sorry, couldn't resist

If this is the case, then nobody accused of any criminal charge should be allowed to hear a witness in court say what happened. This is world class ridiculous.

Delawheredad: Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims. Political Correctness (a term invented by those on the left hand side of the political spectrum) will be the death of us all.

You're right. We should never look after the rights of the accused, because there has never been a case in the history of the planet where someone has been wrongly accused of a crime. We should allow witnesses to make accusatory statements and coerce the jury in anyway they see fit.
The defendant is not a criminal.....yet. He has not been convicted of a crime and therefore should not be treated as though he were already guilty of it.
Newsflash, people will lie to get their way.

Delawheredad: Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims. Political Correctness (a term invented by those on the left hand side of the political spectrum) will be the death of us all.

the term politically correct originally was used by righties as a strawman argument to discredit the left by attempting to associate this with communism.

50 years later, the right still attempts to associate the left with communism which is ok because it is so incredibly easy to associate the right with nazism.

/rather be a commie than a nazi
//am neither.
///you fail, by the way

"At what point were you turned into an unwilling sperm recipient?"

/thanks George

Political correctness and zero tolerance are the slippery slope of doom for a society.

/can she say he farked me against my will?

Little One-Eyed Wench: We can only hope that the defendant is found guilty and goes to prison. That way he can enjoy the sensation of telling the warden about the not-so-voluntary sexual intercourse he had with his room mate, Tyrone.

Not going to happen in this case. From TFA: "Prosecutors dismissed the case before a third trial because of the judge's orders on what words could be used and limits on evidence, including prior rape allegations against the defendant." The ruling by this mallet headed judge will force Tyrone to find another victim. Oops, almost violated the rules.

DubyaHater:
You're right. We should never look after the rights of the accused, because there has never been a case in the history of the planet where someone has been wrongly accused of a crime. We should allow witnesses to make accusatory statements and coerce the jury in anyway they see fit.
The defendant is not a criminal.....yet. He has not been convicted of a crime and therefore should not be treated as though he were already guilty of it.
Newsflash, people will lie to get their way.

Well put. Also, I don't hesitate to remind everyone that us libtards have only appointed 38% of currently serving Federal judges. But, alas, where "Liberal Activist Judges" are concerned reality doesn't enter in.

ShotgunLobotomy: Continuing the downward trend of protecting the criminal, not the victim. They humiliate this woman and make her get up and tell everyone how this piece of shiat raped her, but she cant say the word rape because it sounds too harsh? WTF is happening to this country?

I just want to point out that the accused has not been convicted. Which is, I suppose, the point that the judge is making. Lots of people have been wrongly convicted and I'm sure that a fair number of those convictions have been based on the emotional testimony of the victim. While I don't want to sound harsh towards her on this, that sort of emotion is more appropriate for the impact statement after conviction.

I can kind of see the judge's point of view here. People are too uptight about sex in this country, and a jury of average Americans hearing "he raped me" are very likely to hate the accused and find him guilty regardless of any evidence. If we're all assuming that the actual criminal is on trial then yes it's asinine that we're trying to protect his feelings by not mentioning his crime, but the judge's job is to make sure it's a fair trial just in case the guy is actually innocent.

Delawheredad: Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims. Political Correctness (a term invented by those on the left hand side of the political spectrum) will be the death of us all.

so then why is it that the right gets all offended when i tell them the skyfairy doesnt exist? that i shouldnt be persecuting their beliefs? that it should be represented as 'science' in school?

/the coin, it has two sides

As it seems....

Politically correct term for liberal: progressive.

Politically correct term for conservative: neocon.

Come-on....liberals seem to have a double standard when whining about political correct speech.

FTFA: In Jackson County, Senior Judge Gene Martin recently issued a similar order for the trial of a Kansas City man charged with raping a teenager in 2000. Despite the semantic restrictions, the Jackson County jury last week found Ray Slaughter guilty of forcible rape and two counts of forcible sodomy.

Well, at least in that particular case, structuring the courtroom discourse away from "rape" didn't seem to affect the verdict. A person's got to be able to say what happened to him/her, though. There must be a way to do that which doesn't load the jury with inflammatory subtext and respects the fact that the defendant is innocent until proven guilty.

DubyaHater and re-elect Jimmy Carter.

Do either of you two actually think this would be happening if this case was being heard by let's say Justice Roberts?

Political Correctness was in fact a term coined by the left. I know that it is used by the right as a truncheon but it most assuredly is NOT a right wing straw man.

This guy can still get a fair trial if the words rape are used. I was on a jury of an accused drug dealer. The terms "illegal drugs" and the actual drug were named plenty of times during the trial. We acquitted based on the lack of evidence

Did either of you ever serve on a jury? I've been on two, one Federal one State. One conviction one acquital

An anyone who wants to re-elect Jimmy Carter fails more than a skydiver without a parachute. Worst president EVER. He makes Bush look like FDR.

camelclub: Politically correct term for liberal: progressive...Politically correct term for conservative: neocon.

I hate to asplode your brain. but actually, progressives are just a subset of liberal politics. For example, neoliberals (new window) are not progressives. Perhaps in high school you studied the Progressive Movement? (new window) Not all conservatives are neoconservatives. There are paleoconservatives as well. And others. Some who claim to be conservatives are actually Reactionaries, not Conservatives at all.

Delawheredad: Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims.

Alleged criminals.
Unless you actually believe that all people on trial for crimes are guilty.

Wouldn't that be easy?
But then that's how many conservatives look at the world; As however it takes to make it easy to understand.

spqr_ca: ShotgunLobotomy: Continuing the downward trend of protecting the criminal, not the victim.

I just want to point out that the accused has not been convicted. Which is, I suppose, the point that the judge is making.

Please. This is a rape case. If he wasn't guilty, he'd have never been accused! We shouldn't even need a trial. Women never lie about this stuff. Evar.

Delawheredad: Political Correctness was in fact a term coined by the left. I know that it is used by the right as a truncheon but it most assuredly is NOT a right wing straw man.

The term means exactly what the person using it wants it to mean, and nothing else. It has lost all actual meaning in the last 20 years, and is idiotic even on its face. If something was actually "politically correct," then it would be accepted mainstream wisdom, accepted by most/all politicians on different sides of the aisle.

ShotgunLobotomy: Continuing the downward trend of protecting the criminal, not the victim. They humiliate this woman and make her get up and tell everyone how this piece of shiat raped her, but she cant say the word rape because it sounds too harsh? WTF is happening to this country?

yes, because we know that every accused person is a criminal, so it's ridiculous to try to ensure they get a fair trial. "Rape" is a legal conclusion that the defendant's actions meet the statutory definition for that crime. As a fact witness, the accuser cannot make that conclusion, she can only testify as to what she personally experienced.

Banning the word is akin to limiting the number of gory photographs of a crime scene the prosecution can use. At some point their sole purpose is to inflame the jury, to make them more likely to convict based on a desire to see someone punished for the crime, not based on the evidence that the defendant did it.

Delawheredad: I was on a jury of an accused drug dealer.

And yet you think all alleged criminals are actual criminals? Someone was really stupid to let you on a jury. You should have been premptorally challenged on your ass out the back door...perhaps you lied about your views to get on the jury?

I hope this judge finds himself very swiftly kicked off the bench. Sexual assault is the proper terminology for the crime for which the defendant was accused, and convicted. You don't want to call him a rapist? Fine, but at least use the farking proper terminology and allow the victim and prosecution to do so, if for the only reason that the jury can accurately understand the crime.

Saying that "juries are smart enough to figure it out" is bullshiat. Juries are made up of farking people, and people in groups can make some of the most asinine decisions known to man. Add a little intimidation by a member or two, a few hours of frustration, you can wind up with a completely unfair and idiotic verdict.

You're worried that he may not receive a proper trial and you don't want to infringe on his rights? Great, but don't infringe the the victim's rights either, she has as much right to see justice done as this arsehole. Allow the prosecution and the defense to present the evidence properly, and don't allow your personal prejudices to get in the way, judge.

Delawheredad

PROTIP: no one cares

0Icky0: Delawheredad: Thank you very much all you liberal judges and organizations that have decided that the rights of criminals are more important than the rights of victims.

Alleged criminals.
Unless you actually believe that all people on trial for crimes are guilty.

Wouldn't that be easy?
But then that's how many conservatives look at the world; As however it takes to make it easy to understand.

no no. If one of their guys like a Ken Lay goes to trial he's totally innocent despite any amount of "fact" or "evidence." Only the people they don't like are guilty if they go to trial.

It's like I keep saying, so many women in the US are suffraging because of old laws implemented by chauvinist men. Let's start a movement freeing women of their suffraging.

Nemo's Brother: Most if not all big cities in America have been run by the left for decades. The school systems continue to get worse and worse. A large reason is the PC Bullshiat a couple of limp-wristed fairies decided to impose on all of us.

You know, I know quite a few "limp-wristed fairies" who would agree that PC is getting out of hand.

It's a damn good idea to make people not go around calling black people "darky" or "n*gg*r" or "spear-chucker", but it's way too far to assume any violent crime by a white man against a black man is a hate crime. It's also a damn good idea to make sure that gay kids aren't getting beaten up at school based on their preference, but I'm not going to make everyone march in the gay pride parade.

MAYORBOB: If this is the case, then nobody accused of any criminal charge should be allowed to hear a witness in court say what happened. This is world class ridiculous.

there is a huge evidentiary difference between a witness saying

1) "he raped me" whereupon you have no idea what she means maybe she believes he "raped her with his eyes" or "cyber-raped" her

2) "He penetrated me with his penis", "and Did you consent to this?" "no"

same basic testimony, but one is appropriate the other is biasing.

Didn't RTFA, but why not the whole legal system?

"So, did you know the deceased..."
"Ahem."
"Excuse me. Did you know this now metabolically challenged individual..."
"Still too negative."
"Are you acquainted with this entropically enabled person?"

Judge is an idiot. Need to get O'Reilly on this.

camelclub: Political correctness and zero tolerance are the slippery slope of doom for a society.

agreed

Magorn: MAYORBOB: If this is the case, then nobody accused of any criminal charge should be allowed to hear a witness in court say what happened. This is world class ridiculous.

there is a huge evidentiary difference between a witness saying

1) "he raped me" whereupon you have no idea what she means maybe she believes he "raped her with his eyes" or "cyber-raped" her

2) "He penetrated me with his penis", "and Did you consent to this?" "no"

same basic testimony, but one is appropriate the other is biasing.

"sexually raped" is just as descriptive without bias.

This issue with "can't say rape" will hopefully end up in a court as a first amendment issue....because this is just freakin retarded.

tony41454: Judge is an idiot. Need to get O'Reilly on this.

Yeah. From what I hear he's an expert on imposing himself sexually on chicks who aren't interested.

tony41454: Judge is an idiot. Need to get O'Reilly on this.

You're a very funny man.