Posted on 11/01/2007 5:07:20 AM PDT by Red in Blue PA
In a rare rebuke, the city's bar association condemned a judge who dismissed rape charges in the alleged gang rape of a prostitute and instead called it a theft of services.
The prostitute admitted going to a home on Sept. 20 to have paid sex with a customer but said she was instead gang-raped by four men, including the customer, while he fixed a gun on her.
Municipal Judge Teresa Carr Deni dropped the rape and sexual-assault charges at an Oct. 4 preliminary hearing, but upheld robbery, false imprisonment and conspiracy charges against Dominique Gindraw.
Deni has since heightened the furor in defending her decision to a newspaper.
''She consented and she didn't get paid,'' Deni told the Philadelphia Daily News. ''I thought it was a robbery.''
(Excerpt) Read more at mcall.com ...
I meant permanently taken off the bench, not disbarred.
I think the judge was right on....and I’m a woman. The prostitute showed up already consenting to sex, she didn’t get her money....robbery, possible armed robbery. But I understand that “props” such as ropes, knives and handuffs are used during the act of prostituting, so even the gun probably isn’t that unusual.
Some judges are nothing more than criminals in robes.
“a theft of services.”
She doesn’t have much respect for prostitutes, does she?
When I saw the headline, I thought the angle was going to be that the prostitute did not get paid, so she claimed rape. The judge was a little more cynical even than I was.
I don’t know what to say.
The woman consented to sex with one person. And even then it can still be rape if that one person starts pulling out toys she doesn’t want used and says “no”.
I am not a lawyer but can see this much.
Amazing how people here seem to love the rule of law, but not for certain people such as prostitutes.
And sad too.
So which of the perps did she agree to have sex with? By your own recogning, he should only be charged with armed robbery.
That’s a pretty serious charge in itself and he could serve some very serious time.
there ya go, this should be called what it is, quit the boo hoo hoo PC crap
So gang rape is not really a crime?
Nice to hear that from someone who has Chist in their tagline.
Gang rape is boo hoo PC crap?
I might just give up on FR if this is the only type of ratiocination here.
Interesting question really. I can see both sides but tend to agree with the judge.
A prostitute would likely have sex with anyone if the price was right as it’s the nature of the business.
I could see how an assault charge could also be levied if the act was physically injurious in any way.
It should be robbery for the customer, but rape charges for the other men to whom she did not consent.
Was the victim white? Because we all know what would have happened if she were a black single mother sex worker set upon by a group of men at a party. Or, maybe the Duke ‘rape’ fiasco has made people question all rape claims, (even valid ones) by sex workers.
So a woman does not have the right to say 'no.' A lot of convicted rapists like your reasoning.
If you read the article the prostitute actually agreed to have sex with at least one other man, and waited for him to get there. Kinda takes the “gang” out of it.
I pray that she learned her lesson, I pray that the perps will learn their lesson while they serve their sentence in jail too.
My tagline should raise all kinds of alarms with a Christian, it is anything BUT a Christian sentiment! I guess you didn’t recognize that. Is this the first time someone has disagreed with your thinking on FR? Because by your response to me, it seems you think everyone must think like you.
I believe that by calling this dispicable act “rape” we are denigrating the true crime of violence that unsuspecting, honorable women must endure at the hands of a depraved stranger who victimizes totally innocent victimes. I think the different nature of both types of crimes should be separated into different catagories. That’s my opinion. Your’s may vary (and probably does).
So it is open season on all prostitutes? Anything goes? Rape isn’t really rape, since at some point they will offer their services for money.
Sadly (and unbelievably) that appears to be the consensus here on FR.
Enough to make me rethink of logging in here.
FACT: Prostitutes can be raped.
What don’t you understand about this?
Where’s the gun charges?
Sorry, judge, we’re not buying this load of crapola you’re selling. The prostitute may work in the sex trade, but that doesn’t mean that she isn’t entitled to “equal protection under the law”.
She was raped and, with all disrespect intended, you, your (lack of) honor, are a moron who should be removed from the bench!
This story will make Reader’s Digest ‘Outrageous’ section.
She consented with sex for money with 1 man.. she was gang raped at gun point.... sorry, but that’s far more than theft of services.
Re: she isn’t entitled to “equal protection under the law”.
I am not going to argue with someone who thinks there should be levels of protection under the law. Let me guess, you are entitled to these protections, right?
How sorry do I need to feel for a woman who placed herself in the position in the first place.
The men are animals, sick, twisted and disgusting. But in this case, so is the victim. She asked for it.
Look, I never would place myself in that situation. When do women actually need to be responsible for their own actions.
What she did is kinda like playing Russian Roulette. She loaded the gun, she placed it in her mouth, she may not have meant to pull the trigger, in fact at the last minute she changed her mind, but the gun went off. How much is her death her fault and not accidental?
You presume the prostitue is telling the truth?
“since at some point they will offer their services for money.”
More realistically at ANY point....
I don’t believe there are many hookers out their that won’t negotiate a price given the opportunity.
Nope, whe consented to waiting for at least one other man to show up with $100.00 for sex.
Let me fill you in on something.....it’s not a perfect world, and people do not always do what they should. This does not mean they should be GANG RAPED!
There was recently a girl in the midwest who was killed going to a nanny job using Craigslist. So this is all too believable.
Why should you NOT believe her story?
I must be old fashioned. Where was the candle light dinner? What movie did they go see? Any dancing and cocktails? All four of these guys need to spend 25 years at Graterford.
Are you a man or a woman?
Why the outrage? The judge presents an interesting legal distinction. Whores are assaulted violently all the time. Just watch any documentary on the subject. If men who don’t pay her also have forced sex with her, is it not indeed “theft of services”? After all, isn’t she a WHORE? Perhaps the “victim” will choose another line of work after this wake-up call. She is lucky to be alive. I hope she finds Jesus and gets off the streets.
I think you misread Dusty’s comment. You might want to look at it again.
A man.
Why this matters to you, I have no idea.
I apologize. I read it wrong and responded to quickly.
Because you seem to think that having sex with four men is much more distasteful than the two men she agreed to have sex with.
To a prostitute (a WOMAN)I doubt if she really was offended by the train of men. I think she was more than likely mad that she didn’t get paid. Thus the crime of robbery.
To any normal thinking man or woman, your line of so-called reasoning is sick.
I hate to tell you this but such "props" are used not just by prostitutes. You would be surprised by the things "normal" people are into.
I think the judge was out of line & NO those kind of props aren't in my home. The woman was gang raped & she did not agree to that. She may be a prostitute but she still has rights.
Do you really want this crime to be called and sentenced the same exact way that you would want the man who stalks your wife in a underground parking garage, puts his grimy hands over her mouth, hits her a few times, puts a knife to her throat - - then cuts her pants off her as he hold her with his knee on her throat on a cold, concrete floor then brutally rapes and tears her.
Look, it isn’t the same crime. One is rape, the other is sex without pay. Any reasonable person can tell the difference. I’ve said enough.
Instead, three other men arrived, and Gindraw pulled a gun and ordered the woman to have sex with all of them, she testified.
Someone can make a case that she "consented" to sex with one male, and perhaps two if the story of the friend who was going to bring another 100 dollars was to be believed. However, she was clearly forced at gunpoint to have sex with men she DID NOT agree to have sex with, and THAT is RAPE! Going by the statement she made, I think there are four counts of rape here. She was lured there with a promise of payment, and upon arrival she was told that there wouldn't BE any payment.
Nonetheless, as sportutegrl has pointed out, we need to wait for statements from the others involved, in the event this is another Duke case.
No, this is rape.
You may not want to think of the victim the same way, but prostitues bleed and can suffer too, just like any other living being.
An earlier report of the incident hadn’t made clear there were multiple attackers. Had there been only the customer, depending very much on the niceties of the laws defining rape, prostitution, theft of services and precedents in PA concerning sexual consent, it was just barely conceivable that the judge might have been right as a point of law.
As it is, I agree with calls for her disbarrment: the legal reasoning applied here would make all rapes of prostitutes into theft of services cases, since the other attackers in this incident plainly did not have any agreement explicit or implied from the victim to have sex. Were the precedent allowed to stand, any rapist who attacked a prostitute could advance the defense against the rape charge that he was just stealing her services.
Did you read this part?
“She went to a North Philadelphia home to meet the customer, who had agreed to pay her $150 for sex. He then said a friend was coming with the money, and that the friend would pay her another $100 for sex.”
She agree to sex with at least two men. That’s her own testimony.
One was bringing the money the other did not have. That does not mean she consented to sex with two men.
As I could refuse service to anyone in my store, if I had one, so should she be able to choose.
Some of these responses are just as gross as the judge’s ruling.
Re: I hope she finds Jesus and gets off the streets.
Because there are no Church going people who participate in prostitution, male or female, right?
The responses are are simply revolting.
I can’t believe the other poster understands anything about the effect having a gun held on you, with the possibility of death at any moment, has on a person. I hope that is all it is, and not abject callousness and even stupidity. (I’m sorry to even have to wonder about that last one, but I do)
No one asked anyone to feel sorry for her. Your reasoning is beyond strange, it’s scary.
Red, just stop. You know you’d miss the rest of us if you didn’t log in and you’re not making headway with this nutcase.
Just be glad that we are not subject to her reasoning (or lack thereof)
I would miss some, not others;-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.