and other accusations, because an Arab man was convicted of "rape by deception" for claiming to be Jewish and thereby persuading an Israeli woman to have sex with him?
It was all the rage here in July, with people piling on with accusations like Israel is RacistIsrael is Racist, a diary, Arab man claims to be Jewish to get laid. Convicted of rape, another diary, and Arab-Israeli Found Guilty of 'Rape by Deception' after Pretending to be Jewish, a third diary. The one-diary-per-subject rule doesn't really apply when it involves I/P.
Well, a funny thing happened on the way to the penitentiary.
Many were outraged that an Arab man would be sentenced to prison for rape by deception. Yes, even staunch feminists who, in any other arena, might defend a woman's right not just to say "no," but to only say "yes" when fully informed, were upset.
The victim was accused:
Were it not for the bigoted character of the "victim" there would be no case at all. It was consensual sex between adults.
The woman initially accused Mr Kashur under oath of a brutal rape against her consent, a charge that carries a heavy jail sentence. But when Mr Kashur's lawyer mounted his own investigation and disproved her claims, the Jerusalem District Court agreed to a plea bargain.
So the woman first lied about being raped. She should be the one behind bars for making a false accusation.
BTW: what's the penalty/sentence for being a really dumb meet-and-screw whore ?
So much for the myth that all Jewish women are smarties.
Kinky, yes; a smartie, maybe.
The woman IS to blame. Not for having sex with the guy, but for putting the guy in jail merely because she's prejudiced against Arabs.
What this woman did is extremely reprehensible; bigoted and almost pathologically vindictive.
Obviously it is racist. Clearly the woman who filed the charges is a racist. But the shocking thing is that the Judge would then agree with her.
Reminds me of the stories of white Americans lynching black Americans for "looking at a white woman the wrong way". Obviously not the same result, but the same racist thinking behind it.
Israel was accused:
Israel is racist and evidently before that as well.
Israelis consider miscegenatation to be treason. They are obsessed with maintaining racial purity.
Since laws against miscegenation are considered racist and anachronistic, Israel calls it rape.
the entire proceeding was nothing more than a racist lynching.
Transcripts have now been released. Is anybody interested in what actually happened?
The woman's testimony, which throws a completely different light on the case, had not been released until now, since she testified during an in camera court session, whose contents had been under gag order. The identity of the complainant, B., remains under gag order.
B.'s life story is crucial to understanding the affair. B. is in her late 20s, and comes from a city in central Israel. Her father began sexually abusing her when she was 6, and later sent her to work as a prostitute. Much of her youth was spent in boarding schools. As a teenager, she worked as a prostitute and started abusing drugs, and at one point she lived on the street. None of this ended her father's abuse. Just a month before her encounter with Kashur, her father sexually assaulted her again, and she fled to a shelter for young women at risk.
As soon as they entered the building, B. claims, Kashur started to force himself upon her. ...
B. says Kashur showed no restraint. "He lifted up my shirt and bra and he kissed my body," she says. At this point, an unknown blonde woman entered the stairwell, and Kashur stopped, B. says. He decided to move from the stairwell to the elevator. "When I was with him in the elevator he also touched me, and he was behaving like a psychopath. I was really afraid of him. I started to sense that something very strange was happening, because I noticed that I wasn't arriving at any workplace, and I didn't see any cup of coffee; so I started to get scared, and I screamed," she testifies.
When they got off the elevator at the building's top floor, B. claims, Kashur led her to the stairwell to the roof. There, she states, he raped her. "He took my pants and underpants off," B. says. "All this happened by force; I didn't agree to anything ... Then he took my clothes off; he then put saliva on his penis and there was, like, full penetration - this was not, as he says, with consent. He put me down on the floor, and then he started to kiss my breasts, and then, like, I asked that he stop, and I tried to push him away, but he pressured me with his hands. When I tried to push him with my hand on his stomach, then what had already happened once happened again, this was at a later stage; he was inside me, and then he said that if I kept quiet and stopped trying to resist him, it would be over more quickly, and he wouldn't, like, use force. But I resisted, and it happened by force."
"I was really hysterical," she testifies. At this stage, she noticed blood around her vagina, and that added to her fears. A few minutes later, her brother called, and B. asked him to contact a worker from the shelter. This woman quickly contacted B., who told her what happened.
Later, a Magen David Adom team showed up. B. states that she was later checked at Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, which documented scratches on her body. The prosecution's files contains photographs of her wounds.
A few months later, the case went to court.
A few months later, on March 19, 2009, B. took the witness stand in the Jerusalem District Court and gave her version of events. The above quotes are the main part of her testimony. She appeared stressed, and seemed almost hysterical. Her words were broken and occasionally unclear; at certain points the judges offered her some water, and on one occasion she was advised to sit down and to try to calm down.
The person who brought the most emotion and rage out of B. was defense counsel Adnan Aladin. For instance, when he asked her about her background as a prostitute, B. yelled: "You already have completely confused me. You're looking at me and smiling, it's simply ..." Judge Zvi Segal then advised her: "You should look at us." B. replied: "He simply makes me lose my concentration, I'm sorry."
Ah yes, the old "you can't rape a prostitute" defense. Appalling, but effective, which is why most US courts don't allow that sort of evidence into cross examination against rape victims. That said, there is no question the woman faced problems with her testimony. There were significant inconsistencies. She had a history as a prostitute, and as victim of sexual abuse. She had made several such accusations in the past, with some convictions and some cases not prosecuted. What did the prosecutors do? They did what prosecutors do everywhere, pled the case to a lesser offense.
Under the plea bargain, the sides agreed to alter the charges from rape without consent to rape with consent attained through deception. The new indictment, filed on July 14, 2009, reformulated the facts, saying, "The accused, who was married, presented himself falsely to the complainant as an umarried Jew, and as someone who was interested in a serious relationship, and proposed that she accompany him to the building. As a result of this false presentation, the complainant agreed to accompany the defendant."
This was not a case of anti-miscegination laws, a racist woman, or a racist state.
I just thought some of you might want to know.