Home Politics & Debate
If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨

'Rape' victim so fat she should be glad of the attention

Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://www.metro.co.uk/news/article.html?in_article_id=49517&in_page_id=34

A barrister provoked outrage yesterday by claiming that the victim of an alleged gang rape was so fat she would have been 'glad of the attention'.
Sheilagh Davies, defending one of three boys accused of raping two girls, said the 16-year-old girl had 'slimmed down a lot' since the alleged attack.
She told Inner London Crown Court: 'She was 12st 6lb – not quite the swan she may turn into. She may well have been glad of the attention.
«13

Comments

  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    If if were the father of that girl, the barrister in question would have his head kicked in very soon indeed...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    if i was a friend of that girls, that barrister would be glad to be alive.....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    To be fair isn't a barristers job to put across the arguement of the defendent, regardless of his/her own personal opinion?


    I doubt very much the barrister in question believes all of the larger ladies out there should be lining up to get raped.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    To be fair isn't a barristers job to put across the arguement of the defendent, regardless of his/her own personal opinion?


    I doubt very much the barrister in question believes all of the larger ladies out there should be lining up to get raped.


    er would you say something like that witohut meaning it, IN COURT
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    IN COURT it's her job to put across the defence for the defendents regardless of what it is.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Aladdin wrote: »
    If if were the father of that girl, the barrister in question would have his head kicked in very soon indeed...
    She, please note.

    I can't believe a woman would say that. But then I'm a crazy feminazi so what do I know? But honestly, I don't think there is any excuse to make statements like that in court. If the rapists get off (heaven forbid) it sets a very dangerous precedent indeed.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    piccolo wrote: »
    If the rapists get off (heaven forbid) it sets a very dangerous precedent indeed.



    Glad you've become judge and jury by reading a quote...


    If they "get off" then surely they've been judged as to having not committed rape, and are innocent?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Reading between the lines the barrister doesn't seem to be arguing that rape is OK and fat girls should be glad they were raped, but that the sex was consensual and an unattractive girl consented to have have gang sex due to low self esteem about her attractiveness....
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    theres a question on ethics Mr. Orange; it is the job of this barrister to defend her client to the best of her ability, but not to try to de-stabilize the witness with irrelevant conjecture.

    A thoroughly disgraceful way for a professional in any capacity to behave, she should be ashamed and disciplinary action should be taken.
    Reading between the lines the barrister doesn't seem to be arguing that rape is OK and fat girls should be glad they were raped, but that the sex was consensual and an unattractive girl consented to have have gang sex due to low self esteem about her attractiveness....

    That is a point. And yes that would be certainly a permissable defence, however objectionable.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Reading between the lines the barrister doesn't seem to be arguing that rape is OK and fat girls should be glad they were raped, but that the sex was consensual and an unattractive girl consented to have have gang sex due to low self esteem about her attractiveness....

    Exactly how i viewed it too, but again newspaper reports could mean anything really!
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Even the devil deserves a good defence, frankly I dont think this is a good line to take because the jury wont like it.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I can't fathom the idea that rapists choose their victims by deciding who would be most 'glad of the attention'. That's a crock if ever I heard one.

    I have no idea if these girls were raped or if they had consensual sex, basically it's irrelevant to the point here. The issue is that an officer of the court/law implying that women who are overweight (and slaves to fashion if her comments re: provactive dressing are to be taken into account) trends are somehow deserving of rape or sexual assault is outrageous. She should be ashamed of herself.

    Being overweight is an adequate excuse to defend a rapist. Well, I never...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    briggi wrote: »
    The issue is that an officer of the court/law implying that women who are overweight (and slaves to fashion if her comments re: provactive dressing are to be taken into account) trends are somehow deserving of rape or sexual assault is outrageous.


    I don't think that is the issue.

    My personal opinion is that it was said in the context that Flashman Ghost stated, and during the good old newspaper publication process it was deemed to be a more exciting story if it was left a little vague to allow people to jump to the conclusion that she's saying "Rapes okay, as long as it's on a fatty".

    From the defendents point of view can you see them, even being complete and utter idiots thinking that should they say "She was fat so i knew she'd be begging to be raped" would wash in court? It would be a straight forward admission of guilt.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    To be fair isn't a barristers job to put across the arguement of the defendent, regardless of his/her own personal opinion?


    I doubt very much the barrister in question believes all of the larger ladies out there should be lining up to get raped.

    yes it is a barristers job but she should NEVER say anything like that nobody should ever say somebody should be glad of the attention of rape its discusting. I wonder how the barrister would of taken it if it was her daughter who had been raped and somebody said that
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    what she said was completely ridiculous and beggers belief.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Rachael wrote: »
    what she said was completely ridiculous and beggers belief.

    Yeah when taking the title of this thread as a basis for the context it was said in.

    Though how you can honestly believe anybody would be trying to build a defence from that is crazy.

    Try reading it as Flashman stated and form an opinion, i think it would be more valid to the reality of what was said
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    Yeah when taking the title of this thread as a basis for the context it was said in.

    Though how you can honestly believe anybody would be trying to build a defence from that is crazy.

    Try reading it as Flashman stated and form an opinion, i think it would be more valid to the reality of what was said

    I understand that she was acting as defence but by saying what she said I dont think she showed an ounce of decency and should be ashamed. I did read the entire article you know and not just the title of this thread.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    I'm not sure its a defence as reported though (You honour the defence submits that even though she was raped she enjoyed it really). More likely the defence is claiming she had low self esteem due to her weight and she wasn't raped and a journo has decided to take it out of contect because they needed a few column inches and you can always rely on a bit of outrage to sell papers...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    But, how would the barrister know whether she had low self esteem due to her weight? That's mighty fucking presumptious, as soon as you hit the 12stone mark, a woman's bound to feel bad about herself?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    katralla wrote: »
    But, how would the barrister know whether she had low self esteem due to her weight? That's mighty fucking presumptious, as soon as you hit the 12stone mark, a woman's bound to feel bad about herself?

    It may be presumptious, but that's a different case. It also may have come out during other parts of the case...
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    he should be stripped of his post for being irrisponsible.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Mr Orange wrote: »
    To be fair isn't a barristers job to put across the arguement of the defendent, regardless of his/her own personal opinion?


    I doubt very much the barrister in question believes all of the larger ladies out there should be lining up to get raped.

    sorry but since when is 'she's fat and needed some cock' a legit legal argument?

    dude ought to be disbared
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    A few months ago, I wrote some comments in which I labelled lawyers as "scum of the earth". The people here who are studying for law degrees and the such exploded in manufactured outrage. Whilst some expressed their disapproval publicly, one preferred to tell me privately in a message that was full of personal insults and made no effort to explain why I was wrong to say that. This story vindicates what I said. I was completely right. I claim again today that lawyers are the scum of the earth. If anyone wants to try proving me wrong, feel free. (and this time, try to keep the petty insults out of it)
  • Indrid ColdIndrid Cold Posts: 16,688 Skive's The Limit
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    A few months ago, I wrote some comments in which I labelled lawyers as "scum of the earth". The people here who are studying for law degrees and the such exploded in manufactured outrage. Whilst some expressed their disapproval publicly, one preferred to tell me privately in a message that was full of personal insults and made no effort to explain why I was wrong to say that. This story vindicates what I said. I was completely right. I claim again today that lawyers are the scum of the earth. If anyone wants to try proving me wrong, feel free. (and this time, try to keep the petty insults out of it)
    IMO, only the lawyers that defend people they know (or believe) to be guilty are scum, along with those who try to get to their clients other things that they don't deserve.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    cartyweb wrote: »
    he should be stripped of his post for being irrisponsible.

    Err..yeah. Not quite how it works though :yeees:

    I think it's been taken out of context. It's a lawyers job to put across all possibilities and one of those possibilities is that the girl consented and did 'enjoy the attention'. Maybe her clients have told her exactly that, the girl was fat and did consent. Since we only have a 'story' to go on and don't actually know all the facts then i don't think we can really comment fairly.

    SG, in reply to your comment, i dont think lawyers are the scum of the earth. I work very closely with lawyers in my job and have to say that the ones i work with are some of the nicest people you could meet. They're just normal people doing a job. It's against the rules to defend someone pleading not guilty if they've admitted they're guilty so any lawyer defending his client is doing so on the basis that they believe their they are innocent.

    ETA: I am not naive, i realise that SOME lawyers probably are scum and don't necessarily play by the rules, i'm just pointing out that they're just human and don't deserve to all be given a label just because of their job.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    A few months ago, I wrote some comments in which I labelled lawyers as "scum of the earth". The people here who are studying for law degrees and the such exploded in manufactured outrage. Whilst some expressed their disapproval publicly, one preferred to tell me privately in a message that was full of personal insults and made no effort to explain why I was wrong to say that. This story vindicates what I said. I was completely right. I claim again today that lawyers are the scum of the earth. If anyone wants to try proving me wrong, feel free. (and this time, try to keep the petty insults out of it)

    please. You're making a broad statement about a whole group of people based on a select few. Lawyers have gotten out of control in many countries, that doesn't mean they're all scum, nor does it mean they don't serve a vital purpose.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    IMO, only the lawyers that defend people they know (or believe) to be guilty are scum.

    ...so every public defender ever? It's part of the legal system that defendants get legal aid even if they're clearly guilty, it's meant as a way to prevent tyranny. Defense attorneys play a vital part of the legal system by filling that role.

    Defending an accused rapist who's clearly guilty is never an easy thing to do, but they deserve representation just like everyone else.
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    Defending an accused rapist who's clearly guilty is never an easy thing to do, but they deserve representation just like everyone else.
    Erm... why?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    stargalaxy wrote: »
    Erm... why?

    innocent untill proven guilty; otherwise, why bother having due process?
  • Former MemberFormer Member Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
    innocent untill proven guilty; otherwise, why bother having due process?
    Perhaps we should make those convicted of rape, and other such scum, pay back every penny they took from the state in legal aid. I doubt taxpayers would want their money spent on keeping filth on the streets, after all.
Sign In or Register to comment.