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.
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.
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.
You presume the prostitue is telling the truth?
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.
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 don’t know why... but I like it.
she consented to perform services, but was not paid.
She should be arrested for prostitution
They should be arrested for (whatever crime it is called to solicit a prostitute)
AND they should alsobe charged with theft of services, armed robery with a gun.. etc etc
EVERYONE goes to jail here (all the people that should!!)
you are not looking at this in context.
It seems like it was a VERY VERY weak rape case. Pathetically so. In fact it is still a weak robbery case because “theft” does not apply to illegal deeds. (like trying to collect in court on loansharking or illegal gambling)
Remember folks Nifong is NOT the exception he is the rule.
A crime is still a crime no matter who the recipient is. Say a drug user shows up for a fix and instead gets pummeled close to the light at the end of the tunnel... was a crime perpetrated or was it not?
Probably a shoplifting charge would be more appropriate.
That's rape and assault in addition to robbery. If the judge can't see that, she shouldn't be a judge.
If she met the first man and agreed to have sex with him for money and then he subsequently didn't pay her, it was really a breach of contract. Certainly not rape.
If she agreed to have sex with the first two men for money and they subsequently didn't pay, it would be the same.
If she agreed to have sex with one or both of the first two men for money, but before the act occured they said they wouldn't be paying her and then had sex with her anyway against her will, it is rape.
If the 3rd and 4th man showed up and came to a financial agreement but subsequently didn't pay, again it's breach of contract.
If the 3rd and 4th man arrived and had sex with her against her will it's rape.
If any crimes occured then all the other men who were present and were aware of it are accomplices unless they attempted to stop it.
I basically break it down like this, if her issue is that she was not paid for something that was agreed to the crime is breach of contract (or perhaps theft if that's how the laws in her state are written). If there was sex that happened but was NOT agreed to it was rape. Each of the men should have his actions assessed individually and he can only be held accountable for his actions and any crime that he was aware of.
Wow, I didn’t know there were so many people on FR that subscribed to the self-serving, self-righteous, self-ISH philosophy of “Well, the victim shouldn’t have put him/herself in that situation”.
Actually, this reminds me of one of the things that bugged me (and still does) about FR when I first signed on almost 6 years ago: Far too many apparently rational people seem to think that, in certain situations, victims of crime “deserve it” or “get what they asked for”, as if that somehow mitigates the responsibility that squarely rests on the shoulders of the offender.
So much for “personal responsibility”. I guess it takes a “village to make a criminal”? Myself, I don’t care what someone does for a living, or where they walked at night, or what kind of clothes they wear: If one is a victim of crime, one is a victim, period. The time of day, place, or profession of the victim doesn’t mitigate the responsibility of the offender one iota.
To say otherwise is, at least, unsympathetic and at worst, evil in its cruelty. Disagree? Post away, but I have no desire to debate the merits of something that should be clear to anyone with compassion.
I mean, I wouldn’t want to be have somebody knock my front teeth out with a hammer and thrown me down a flight of stairs so I spend 3 months in the hospital, but in Ohio, if someone did that he’s be out of jail before I’m out of the hospital. On the other hand, a guy who wants a twofer with a whore could conceivably get life in prison. Just something about that relative punishment doesn’t seem quite right.