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