So what did happen?
there is more to this case...
There’s ways around it.
Safi and Bowen were strangers to each other when they met at a downtown Lincoln bar the night of Oct. 30, 2004. According to testimony from the first trial, the two had drinks and then left together after the bar closed at 1 a.m.
Bowen told an investigator the following day she could not remember most of the previous evening and that she did not willingly accompany Safi, according to a Lincoln Police report from November 2004.
She told the investigator she could only recall waking up in a strange apartment with an unknown man who was “having sexual intercourse with her.”
Now I ‘get it’.
I wish I could take a stick to the judge. Then later, I wish the police would refuse to allow the jolly jurist to describe himself getting sticked as “an attack” in their report. He could only describe it as “an encounter [with a stick]” or a “chance meeting [with a stick]”.
I wonder where the feminist groups are. Shouldn’t they be protesting this idiot judge’s ruling?
I have also begun to wonder if Mr. Safi is a practitioner of the ROP?
Deconstruction of the language - and the failure to have a national language - will destroy this country.
Judge “Jeffre”! Puhleeze!
This judge seems to have been studying the vocabulary of bill clinton.
just another example of how our judicial system has gone wrong. last night on o’reilly they were talking of a judge that gave a convicted rapist probation because he felt that he was depressed when he committed the crimes. people better wake up soon before it is too late, or is it to late already?
Why doesn’t censorship apply? A government agent is restricting her speech.
Maybe the judge should be “gravitationally suspended” from an “arborescent form” that is “vertically superior” using a “vegetable-based cord.”
We need to know this guys history. If he is drugging his dates this may not be the first time.
No, it doesn't.
Who is Pamir Safi?
Somehow I don’t think he is that nice Norwegian boy from down the street.
And he probably isn’t Presbyterian, either.
Won’t hold up on appeal. Victim can testify to whatever she wants to, and the defense attorney can cross-examine her to cast doubt on various aspects of her testimony.
Sounds like a loony judge, but it's nothing a clever person couldn't get around...
"When he shoved his genitalia into me without my permission, consent, or willingness, I..."
The jury will get it.
In Bowen’s opinion, Cheuvront’s ruling means she will have to lie on the witness stand. "The word ‘sex’ implies consent,” she said. “I never once would describe (what happened) as sex. He’s making me commit perjury.”
Hyperbole, but that's nothing new for a courtroom debate. He made a stupid ruling (probably while trying his best to make sure that there are no grounds for appeal). Take it and move on. Use it later (in your own appeal) if need be.
I have said it for 50+ years::
When men are the victim of rape like women are, this crime will be punishable by death..no parole..no appeals..DEAD.
Men just don’t get it.