Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
this is mental!
It went to trial, he got off by saying 'ewwww have you seen the state of her', the jury agreed. I cannot believe he didn't get a conviction!
how did he manage to get her undressed and not know, even if it was pitch dark - there are two dress size of different in them.
I know, the comment about 'urrgh i just slept with someone old enough to be my mum' was disgusting! she didnt ask for that.
Mad she didnt wake up too. Not very comforting to know someone could do that without you knowing.
But still, his excuses are fucking terrible. That IS rape!
its conceivable he did. I mean the way the thing played out it seems like thats what genuinely happened. This doesnt necessarily mean he shouldnt be charged obv.
...selective reporting by The Mail maybe? Seems a bit weird.
i find it hard to believe that he got away with this
He enters her room, then err... enters her and when it gets to court he goes all 'Lol! Have you seen her? She's well old, how bad do I feel? ROFL'
Bit of a kick in the teeth.
I was wrong.
the intent to have sex without consent.
and it's worrying that he seems to have been let off on that basis alone.
His reaction afterwards is possibly even worse as it seems to lack any sympathy what so ever.
The article makes no sense.
She was asleep when he started, so thats rape for sure right?
that it's ok because it was his girlfriend he was intending to rape, not the actual victim
who the fuck even has sex with their girlfriend while she's asleep? Messed up.
therefore it is rape.
Wheras drunken consent is still consent, regardless of how pissed you are.
(If you someone yeeeeah I love the idea of waking up to find you having sex with me so please do that, there would be no way of then doing that without it being rape)
of the thread i thought it was another rubbish new york band. it probably is.
WHAT THE ACTUAL FUCK
I shudder to think what strategy the defence barrister used to address the jury.
Ladies and gentlemen. This is a cardboard cutout of his hot 19 year old gf in a bikini on holiday in Malaga...
was it reasonable for him to believe there was consent? In this case, was it reasonable for him to believe it was his gf? We no longer have the Morgan test of genuine though mistaken belief.
Its obviously very hard to gather any facts from the article cause it's so shit but it does seem on the face of it wrong... Do you know if it was appealed?
'Mr Khan, a waiter in an Indian restaurant, told Guildford Crown Court that his girlfriend had promised to have sex with him that night but had decided she was not well enough.'
i mean, obviously like you said this isn't the most reliable or conclusive of sources, but if that part is true and his girlfriend had decided she didn't want to have sex with him that night and then he had sex with someone who he believed was her sleeping, then he's a rapist either way, regardless of who he thought he was raping
is absolutely not the same as 'i thought there was consent' - to suggest that being romantically involved with someone equals unconditional consent to all sexual encounters is ridiculous, and if she was sleeping then there couldn't possibly have been any indication of consent
but life is more complicated than that.
1. did a sexual act take place? It suggests he admits this much though it's not conclusive.
2. did he believe she was consenting at the time? was this reasonable? He argues that the other woman appeared to be consenting by the way she touched him or something. Perhaps this is where his thinking there was consent arose from. We don't know how she touched him, the article doesn't say.
3. if not did he believe she had consented before he went away and came back? was this reasonable? She might have said "yeah in a bit" or something, again the article does not say.
I chose to take it for granted that he was arguing that he believed his gf had consented but he had mistaken her identity because otherwise the problem would be too easy.
It would be interesting to see if this was appealed and on what grounds.
Under twisted laws that were introduced by Nu Labour if a woman is drunk and a man has sex with her that is rape regardless if the man is drunk or not this has no doubt resulted in many men being wrongly convicted of rape, thankfully the jury did not beleive Joanne Freeman and now because she will not receive any compensation as Mr Khan was cleared she is selling her story to the press.
I mean, I have to hope that whoever read that was some kid thinking they were being really funny. I *think* that's better than someone honestly believing that.
I think it's earnest.
But she isn't blonde. She appears to have natually darker hair with some parts dyed a lighter shade - at the time the photograph published here was taken. I really think she would do well to retract that part from her story as it is not helping her situation.
- Paula, UK, 8/3/2011 12:42
'she looks like a liar' etc.
The one that essentially says: grow up, have kids, become narrow-minded. Christ.