Almost Everybody Poops:
Good to hear she came out okay.  Not sure when you dated her but for me it was in highschool/college.  I can actually remember similar instances about the "magical powers" stuff, just completely off the wall nonsense that you kinda had to roll with at the time.

/kinda found it sexy at the time.
//now, i be a bit smarter...

College, and I thought it was sexy, too -- granted, she was incredibly damned hot, and given I'm incredibly damned not, part of the reason we were together was likely the dynamic we had.

But, I learned that the 'ole maxims of:

"Don't stick your dick in crazy."
"You can't save everyone."

Exist because they contain a whole, whole lot of wisdom.

Damned adults and their knowing things I should have listened to in my early twenties.

As I learned while learning about the Amanda Todd case, the real cause of these types of suicides is slut-shaming. What kind of sick society calls a rape victim a slut? One which still views sex as something only bad girls enjoy.
Interesting article on it here: http://fakepretty.com/2012/10/on-the-posthumous-slut-shaming-of-amand a -todd/

MBK: That's what rape culture is about, when you blame the victim for being a victim instead of blaming the violators of raping.

F*ck you.

In view of the content of the first of those sentences, how appropriate do you think it was to use a metaphor of sexual assault in the second. That, friend, is your rape culture, right there.

slayer199: Nice job investigating RCMP.  They had photographic evidence...but somehow the RCMP couldn't prosecute these farks.

I have not seen the photograph and I do not wish to see the photograph, but is it not possible that a photograph might show an offence without clearly identifying the offender? Furthermore, a photograph might show that a particular act took place, but not whether it was consensual, leaving the case as one person's word against another. In most rape trials, I gather, it's consent that's at issue, not the act itself.

namatad: Can we STOP CALLING IT ALLEGED?
It was not an alleged rape. it was a RAPE.
She reported that she was raped to the police.
Period.

The people who raped her would best be called unconvicted rapists.
By calling it alleged, we continue to blame the victim apply the legal standards which have defined civilisation for centuries.

It's unfortunate, but even in rape we can't allow the word of one person to circumvent due process. Calling people "unconvicted rapists" solely on another person's word is a very, very slippery slope.

There isn't a hint of victim blaming to this.

Having worked amongst rape / DV victims and their prosecutors, I can say that in the US, prosecutors hate rape or DV cases.  Hate them.  They'll do everything they can to find an excuse to not bring the trial to court.  Most I've spoken to won't even risk going to court unless they are absolutely sure of a conviction, which in the case of a rape or domestic violence is practically never guaranteed.  Society tells women to report rapes to anyone who will listen but the court system says (and rightly so if conviction numbers are an indication) "Yeah, despite all of this really incriminating evidence and your obvious distress, there probably isn't enough to sway a jury".  Because a few people on that jury, doesn't matter the gender or proclivities of the jurists, are thinking "what did that person do to get themselves raped?".  Prosecutors are judged by convictions, after all.

As bad as it is for women, it's worse for men.

Maybe Canadian lawyers and judges and juries are just as sucky as their American counterparts.

Gyrfalcon: If you're underage, you cannot consent. If you're underage, you cannot consent. Oh, and if you're underage, you cannot consent. But in case there was any question, there are other laws that say if you're underage, you cannot consent.

Does that apply to underage boys as well?

namatad: Can we STOP CALLING IT ALLEGED?
It was not an alleged rape. it was a RAPE.
She reported that she was raped to the police.
Period.

The people who raped her would best be called unconvicted rapists.
By calling it alleged, we continue to blame the victim.

The reason they call it alleged is because the scum was never convicted. They weren't even tried. It's messed up, but "alleged" is always used by media so they can't get sued.

SpikeStrip: [thisthreadi *punches self*

Why do you keep punching yourself?

Lsherm: A photo is an instant in time, so even if it showed her having sex with someone, it's possible there wasn't any way to deduce consent or not from it. Since it sounds like the attackers were also underage, that further complicates matters.

She was drunk, and there are pictures of her throwing up, so she couldn't consent. Plus she was underage, so she couldn't consent. Plus the attackers took and distributed pictures, both of which are illegal. The police really messed this one up, either through stupidity or lack of sympathy.

doglover: My theory is this girl had a history of mental issues, was thus tolerated not welcomed, got assaulted while drunk because nobody cared(2 photos of drunk not assault), and was shamed into leaving, mental issues lead to suicide in new town.

Did you just post that getting assaulted while drunk is not getting assaulted? The fact that she was drunk automatically makes it assault.

This is supported by totally healthy people don't usually an hero even when traumatized, friends don't let rapists keep teeth, and even Canadian cops are good enough to arrest you with photos of rape in your phone. All anecdotal, but that's been my experience in life this far.

The bolded part isn't necessarily true. Ever heard of rape culture?

You are Borg: I just got home from work and on my drive home I listened to an interview with the mother about everything that happened from day one. I can't even begin to imagine how she feels, or how her daughter felt. Ugh, breaks my heart, especially hearing that only a few of her friends supported her, the rest of them jumped on the slut train.

That was an unfortunate way to phrase that.

ZoSo_the_Crowe: FTA: "Rape culture"

Hoo boy there's a great trolling buzzword.

Go be stupid somewhere else.

BarkingUnicorn: WTF did LE do wrong? Do you seriously expect them to waterboard confessions out of four boys just because a girl accused them?

No, but they could have investigated. The attackers are guilty of at least three different crimes here, and the police did nothing.

Popcorn Johnny: Sorry, you don't convict someone of rape based on the word of one person and a photo or two.

Please tell me you're not a lawyer....

BarkingUnicorn: Lady Indica: How droll, all the guys I have labeled as rape defenders are here on this thread, and I can see they're defending as others quote 'em.

Glad I tagged 'em correctly.

There's a difference  between defending rape and defending due process of law.

Due process? I thought that we had to act on emotions. If one life could be spared by passing ludicrously ineffective laws; we should pass those laws.

/ I agree; we say suspect or the accused until they are proved to be guilty, then we can stick a fork in 'em all we want

orbister: namatad: Can we STOP CALLING IT ALLEGED?
It was not an alleged rape. it was a RAPE.
She reported that she was raped to the police.
Period.

The people who raped her would best be called unconvicted rapists.
By calling it alleged, we continue to blame the victim apply the legal standards which have defined civilisation for centuries.

It's unfortunate, but even in rape we can't allow the word of one person to circumvent due process. Calling people "unconvicted rapists" solely on another person's word is a very, very slippery slope.

There isn't a hint of victim blaming to this.

Clearly calling people unconvicted anything doesn't make sense.  In that case, all people who report a rape would be "unconvicted false report filers."

FitzShivering: Almost Everybody Poops:
Good to hear she came out okay.  Not sure when you dated her but for me it was in highschool/college.  I can actually remember similar instances about the "magical powers" stuff, just completely off the wall nonsense that you kinda had to roll with at the time.

/kinda found it sexy at the time.
//now, i be a bit smarter...

College, and I thought it was sexy, too -- granted, she was incredibly damned hot, and given I'm incredibly damned not, part of the reason we were together was likely the dynamic we had.

But, I learned that the 'ole maxims of:

"Don't stick your dick in crazy."
"You can't save everyone."

Exist because they contain a whole, whole lot of wisdom.

Damned adults and their knowing things I should have listened to in my early twenties.

That pretty much sums up my relationships with her.  I thought I could fix her, and she cheated on me with a meth-addict (thus becoming one herself).  Fun times!

Almost Everybody Poops: FitzShivering: Almost Everybody Poops:
Good to hear she came out okay.  Not sure when you dated her but for me it was in highschool/college.  I can actually remember similar instances about the "magical powers" stuff, just completely off the wall nonsense that you kinda had to roll with at the time.

/kinda found it sexy at the time.
//now, i be a bit smarter...

College, and I thought it was sexy, too -- granted, she was incredibly damned hot, and given I'm incredibly damned not, part of the reason we were together was likely the dynamic we had.

But, I learned that the 'ole maxims of:

"Don't stick your dick in crazy."
"You can't save everyone."

Exist because they contain a whole, whole lot of wisdom.

Damned adults and their knowing things I should have listened to in my early twenties.

That pretty much sums up my relationships with her.  I thought I could fix her, and she cheated on me with a meth-addict (thus becoming one herself).  Fun times!

Um.  We may have been dating the same girl.  That or you are her and you are farking with me.  :P

Did I get in before someone claims that....

THE MEN

ARE

THE REAL

VICTIMS

HERE

...?

Abacus9: She was drunk, and there are pictures of her throwing up, so she couldn't consent. Plus she was underage, so she couldn't consent.

I wonder how easy it would be to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the drunkenness came before the sex?

You are Borg: I just got home from work and on my drive home I listened to an interview with the mother about everything that happened from day one.  I can't even begin to imagine how she feels, or how her daughter felt. Ugh, breaks my heart, especially hearing that only a few of her friends supported her, the rest of them jumped on the slut train.

And who would be in a better position to make the "slut" vs "non-slut" call? Her friends that actually knew her or a pitchfork wielding internet mob?

msupf: Popcorn Johnny: Sorry, you don't convict someone of rape based on the word of one person and a photo or two.

so, if presented with the picture of a girl obviously inebriated or impaired, possibly displaying pain, being sexually violated, and testimony from that girl that it was not consensual, you'd immediately call bullshiat on her?

Dumbass

Have you even SEEN college porn these days?  You just described most dorm room videos.

BarkingUnicorn: There's the "age of consent" thing to consider in this case.  Then there's the "Romeo & Juliet" thing to consider:  it's not statutory rape if it's "young love" and both parties ages are within some arbitrary number of years of each other.  Then there's Canadian law to consider, and I have no clue what it is.

Google suggests that the age of consent in Canada is 16, with an exemption for 14 and 15 year olds. So if she and the person with whom she had sex were both 15, age of consent would not appear to be an issue, though consent would.

However ... a young woman in great distress has killed herself. Whatever the law, whatever the actions, whoever the actors, that distress was real, and terribly, terribly sad.

Abacus9: No, but they could have investigated. The attackers are guilty of at least three different crimes here, and the police did nothing.

Look, there's a lot of this going on in this thread. You have no clue what the police did or did not do. It's possible they dropped the ball. It's also possible that there wasn't enough evidence to arrest anyone. Nobody here has seen the pictures. Nobody here has even seen a first-hand account of the events.

Given what little we do know, it seems extremely likely this girl was raped. We do know she was bullied afterwards. We know very little else.

But not one person in this thread knows how the cops handled the investigation, or how they reached their conclusions regarding arrest and prosecution. Anyone presuming they did something wrong, just because nobody with peripheral responsibility for this girl's death has been arrested, is spouting off purely from emotion.

As justified as those emotions may be, they are probably not a valid basis for prosecution under Canadian sexual crime laws.

The biggest problem here is the bullies, who made a bad situation worse on purpose and out of spite. If you need somewhere to direct your anger, try focusing on them.

Hanged.

Sweaty Dynamite: You are Borg: I just got home from work and on my drive home I listened to an interview with the mother about everything that happened from day one.  I can't even begin to imagine how she feels, or how her daughter felt. Ugh, breaks my heart, especially hearing that only a few of her friends supported her, the rest of them jumped on the slut train.

And who would be in a better position to make the "slut" vs "non-slut" call? Her friends that actually knew her or a pitchfork wielding internet mob?

At any rate Rehtaeh Parsons lived and died as a floozy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=cmHETvyk6eA#

Who Needs Rape Culture?

I don't like the "too drunk to make a choice" line of prosicution. It sounds to much like the morning after "wtf did I do?" Fix ... if a rational choice can't be made while drunk could the defense use this as well? How about a drunken theft? Or can you make a legal descision if really really tired? No means no and yes means no if I change my mind later. That being said I feel for the young lady and our teenage years are a hell of a crucible and no one escapes unscathed.

NewportBarGuy: I hope the assholes die of ass cancer, slowly.

Passing pictures of her being raped around is a felony, her suicide should invoke the felony murder rule.

orbister: Abacus9: She was drunk, and there are pictures of her throwing up, so she couldn't consent. Plus she was underage, so she couldn't consent.

I wonder how easy it would be to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the drunkenness came before the sex?

Pretty easy these days, unless the pictures were taken with an old-fashioned Polaroid camera, which I doubt.

I'd like to know what some people would regard as sufficient evidence before you'd accept a girl's claim of being raped?

In general there is not going to be a room full of witnesses, video recordings or the like. It mostly only ever comes down to her word vs his. Judging by some of the responses here, her word carries less value than that of the alleged rapist/s.

cornfedokie: I don't like the "too drunk to make a choice" line of prosicution. It sounds to much like the morning after "wtf did I do?" Fix ... if a rational choice can't be made while drunk could the defense use this as well? How about a drunken theft?

A drunken theft is different because you may be drunk but it's during the commission of a crime, which there is no excuse for. In the case of rape, the victim isn't committing a crime.

My sympathies go out to her family.

doglover: You think bullying in a western school is bad, try the bullying you get when you have to spend all day every day in the same classroom with the same kids for three years.

Make it five years, and you've described my elementary school experience.

right on fark mods...

another thread full of of misogynist hate you are either too lazy to deal with or too  stupid to understand.

rather than wade through more bullshiat to point out single instances, i'll let the brain trust that is the FARKMOD ELITE BACK PATTING CLUB MEMBERS .TM try and wade through...

good luck dumbasses.

Nidiot: I'd like to know what some people would regard as sufficient evidence before you'd accept a girl's claim of being raped?

Most of Fark's pro-rape contingent wouldn't accept it if the guy held a national press conference to announce that he can't get it up unless there's rape involved. They don't believe that there's even such a thing as rape (and are trolls - mostly the troll thing, really).

Nidiot: It mostly only ever comes down to her word vs his.

I accuse you of raping a goat. How much evidence should I have to present before someone takes my word over yours over your alleged guilt?

/  Innocent until proven guilty, not guilty until proven innocent.
//  As for how much evidence, beyond reasonable doubt is the standard.

Abacus9: cornfedokie: I don't like the "too drunk to make a choice" line of prosicution. It sounds to much like the morning after "wtf did I do?" Fix ... if a rational choice can't be made while drunk could the defense use this as well? How about a drunken theft?

A drunken theft is different because you may be drunk but it's during the commission of a crime, which there is no excuse for. In the case of rape, the victim isn't committing a crime.

Never once said the victim was committing a crime but my question is better put this way. If the prosicution can claim the lady was not able to make a rational choice. So despite her not saying no it was still rape. Could the defense use the accused's drunken state to claim they could not rationally take her state into account if she never made a detering statement?

doglover: Back in the day, the initial RCMP investigation would have been 4 homicides of teenage boys and no one would have seen anything.

You mean the same "day" in which a "good Christian" society regularly humiliated women for being raped?  Hell, those boys would've been even bigger heroes.

Nidiot: It mostly only ever comes down to her word vs his. Judging by some of the responses here, her word carries less value than that of the alleged rapist/s.

Why should it carry more? How do you decide in general whose word in a court of law is going to be worth more than someone else's?

It's a fundamental principle of Scots law that corroboration is needed, and cases of one person's word against another's can't proceed. Corroboration, by the way, can be forensic, photographs or other evidence; it doesn't have to be another witness.

As a father of two little girls, I can say without a doubt, that if this was my little girl, I would be in jail now. And all four of those boys would be maimed for life. Death would be too easy for these monsters.

What would be hard would be figuring out how to live without their cock and balls.

I'm not being an ITG here. If someone put my daughter through what these monsters did, then God help them, because they would not get any mercy from me.

Fluorescent Testicle: Most of Fark's pro-rape contingent

Please give me a few instances of anyone saying on Fark that they think rape is a good thing. "You're gonna get raped" fantasies over sexual violence in prison don't count.

cornfedokie: Abacus9: cornfedokie: I don't like the "too drunk to make a choice" line of prosicution. It sounds to much like the morning after "wtf did I do?" Fix ... if a rational choice can't be made while drunk could the defense use this as well? How about a drunken theft?

A drunken theft is different because you may be drunk but it's during the commission of a crime, which there is no excuse for. In the case of rape, the victim isn't committing a crime.

Never once said the victim was committing a crime but my question is better put this way. If the prosicution can claim the lady was not able to make a rational choice. So despite her not saying no it was still rape. Could the defense use the accused's drunken state to claim they could not rationally take her state into account if she never made a detering statement?

This would be fine if the default were yes.  But it's not.  The default is no, and she doesn't need to say it.  Hell, the victim would have a far better case to say that her "Yes" wouldn't count because she was drunk.

cornfedokie: Abacus9: cornfedokie: I don't like the "too drunk to make a choice" line of prosicution. It sounds to much like the morning after "wtf did I do?" Fix ... if a rational choice can't be made while drunk could the defense use this as well? How about a drunken theft?

A drunken theft is different because you may be drunk but it's during the commission of a crime, which there is no excuse for. In the case of rape, the victim isn't committing a crime.

Never once said the victim was committing a crime but my question is better put this way. If the prosicution can claim the lady was not able to make a rational choice. So despite her not saying no it was still rape. Could the defense use the accused's drunken state to claim they could not rationally take her state into account if she never made a detering statement?

If the other party is drunk then they can't consent. That said... Canada's laws don't look like they cover the 'intoxicated and can't consent' side of it.

Canada's Criminal Code has no specific "rape" provision. Instead, it defines assault and provides for a specific punishment for "sexual assault". In defining "assault", the Code includes physical contact and threats. The provision reads:

266(3) For the purposes of this section, no consent is obtained where the complainant submits or does not resist by reason of

(a) the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(b) threats or fear of the application of force to the complainant or to a person other than the complainant;

(c) fraud; or

(d) the exercise of authority.

Consent gets even more complicated when alcohol and drugs are involved in that it becomes a question of whether the victim had the capacity to consent. Again, the court will look at the totality of the evidence and decide.

So it's possible the prosecutor went with the safe option and tried to not argue on the basis of her being intoxicated as a form of non-consent.

/Hope the people who did it die in a fire, however.