From an earlier article.
Someone had sex with the woman on the left, so suddenly the perpetrator in the NZ case looks much more attractive..
Posted on 06/01/2007 2:59:55 PM PDT by DieHard the Hunter
An administrative error and a commitment to finish community work has saved the first woman in New Zealand convicted of having sex with an underage boy from going to jail.
Briar Dravitski, 24, made a brief appearance in the New Plymouth District Court yesterday.
She was due to appear for her fourth breach of community work after having her review of sentence dismissed earlier this week.
Judge Allan Roberts had indicated he would impose a 15-month jail term as a replacement sentence for the community work. That offer was declined by Dravitski's defence counsel, Pamela Jensen.
Having already breached three times, as well as being on a final warning, Dravitski faced jail yesterday.
The probation service withdrew the fourth breach, however, citing an administrative error.
That leaves Dravitski with close to 350 hours' community work to complete. She has finished 90 hours of a sentence that was handed down after she had sex with a 13-year-old boy. She was also convicted for assault and wilful damage.
The case attracted national headlines last year after she was the first woman convicted under new laws that meant men and women were treated equally as sex offenders.
Judge Roberts told Dravitski that he had no doubts that if she was a man, she would have gone to jail for her sexual offending.
How long you figure it took him to find his way out?
Of course I meant “GUILTY”...not “GUITLY”!
But then I was still in a state of shock from that graphic of the
GUILTY!!! party!
what a cow!
From an earlier article.
Someone had sex with the woman on the left, so suddenly the perpetrator in the NZ case looks much more attractive..
Got that right!
> suddenly the perpetrator in the NZ case looks much more attractive..
Mate, dunno ‘bout you, but with this one I’d need to be tied up and sedated with a gun to my head and no possible means of escape and no other prospect of survival before I could even contemplate it.
As to the one on the left... Crikey! What a nitemare!
I was just trying to put things a little more in perspective.
Guilty! (Unless she loses 30 pounds or so by the trial)
>>GUITLY!
Actually, I kimd of like the word GUITLY in this situation. It’s another good one for the FReeper lexicon I say. :)
GUITLY as charged!
You've never been thirteen? I would have followed her to her summer feeding grounds in the Bering Sea.
> I was just trying to put things a little more in perspective.
(grin!) To me it’s like the difference between being beheaded and being hanged!
(I’d rather die of old age, but given the choice of the two, I’d rather hang.)
Briar, you're a slut.
So, I have to ask...
HOW did this woman into the country?
when she has sex, she wants the men on top...
one guy had to get a ladder to get on top...
guys ask directions during sex...
when they finally got on top, their ears popped...
she wears two watches because she covers 2 time zones...
when she goes swimming, she leaves a ring around the lake...
when 2 guys broke into her house, she yelled "RAPE!"; they yelled "NO!"...
when she walks into a room, mice jump up on the chairs...
she's known as a "two bagger". You wear one on your head in case the one on her head comes off...
when she wears high heels, she strikes oil...
The double standard applies even in Australia!
In her case, I think "beyone the eclipse of a reasonable doubt," would be a more appropriate standard of proof.
Leni
“On a scale from 1 to 10, she’s a 747.”
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.