Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!decvax!cca!ima!inmet!mazur
From: mazur@inmet.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.women
Subject: Re: Defence of lawyer on 60 minutes - (nf)
Message-ID: <872@inmet.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-Feb-84 00:05:49 EST
Article-I.D.: inmet.872
Posted: Fri Feb 10 00:05:49 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 12-Feb-84 21:48:07 EST
Lines: 32

#R:ubc-visi:-15800:inmet:10900043:000:1348
inmet!mazur    Feb  8 18:42:00 1984

***** inmet:net.women / ubc-visi!mokhtar / 11:44 pm  Jan 30, 1984

        
 There is no doubt that rape is very tragic and painful. No doubt that
 what the rapist did was definitely wrong and he/she should be punished
 for it but there must be a difference in the punishments of two rapists
 one of whom cuts the victim "into pieces" and the other who does not
 inflict any "physical damage" on the victim. 
                                     
----------

There is a difference between the two.  In the case of a victim cut into
pieces, the rapist would probably be charged with assault and battery as
well as rape, and if he/she (using she reluctantly) were found guilty,
he/she would most likely be sentenced to a much longer prison term.

The other difference is that the first victim would have less trouble
convincing a judge and jury that he/she was raped.  The second victim could
find himself/herself on trial, especially if he/she knew her attacker.
Questions like "What were you wearing, why were you there, why did you let
him/her bring you home..." implying that the victim some how could have
encouraged/allowed the attack.

Big question: can anbody on the net think of a court trial where a man
(and I don't mean child abuse) accused another man of raping him?  What
were the results?

Beth Mazur
{ima,esquire,harpo}!inmet!mazur