Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

News & Politics News & Politics

OT: Court Rules Severely Disabled Woman Wasn't Raped Because She Didn't 'Bite, Kick or Scratch' Her Assailant

Posted by   + Show Post


Court Rules Severely Disabled Woman Wasn't Raped Because She Didn't 'Bite, Kick or Scratch' Her Assailant

Truly outrageous standard.

In a 4-3 ruling Tuesday afternoon, the Connecticut State Supreme Court overturned the sexual assault conviction of a man who had sex with a woman who “has severe cerebral palsy, has the intellectual functional equivalent of a 3-year-old and cannot verbally

communicate.” The Court held that, because Connecticut statutes define physical incapacity for the purpose of sexual assault as “unconscious or for any other reason. . . physically unable to communicate unwillingness to an act,” the defendant could not be convicted if there was any chance that the victim could have communicated her

lack of consent. Since the victim in this case was capable of “biting, kicking, scratching, screeching, groaning or gesturing,” the Court ruled that that victim could have communicated lack of consent despite her serious mental deficiencies:

When we consider this evidence in the light most favorable to sustaining the verdict, and in a manner that is consistent with the state’s theory of guilt at trial, we, like the Appellate Court, ‘are not persuaded that the state produced any credible evidence that the [victim] was either unconscious or so uncommunicative that she was physically incapable of manifesting to the defendant her lack of consent to sexual intercourse at the time of the alleged sexual assault.’

According to the Rape, Abuse, and Incest National Network (RAINN), lack of physical resistance is not evidence of consent ,as “many victims make the good judgment that physical resistance would cause the attacker to become more violent.” RAINN also notes that lack of consent is implicit “if you were under the statutory age of consent, or if you had a mental defect” as the victim did in this case.

Anna Doroghazi, director of public policy and communication at Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services, worried that the Court’s interpretation of the law ignored these concerns: “By implying that the victim in this case should have bitten or kicked her assailant, this ruling effectively holds people with disabilities to a higher standard than the rest of the population when it comes to proving lack of consent in sexual assault cases. Failing to bite an assailant is not the same thing as consenting to sexual activity.” An amicus brief filed by the Connecticut advocates for disabled persons argued that this higher standard “discourag[ed] the prosecution of crimes against persons with disabilities” even though “persons with a disability had an age-adjusted rate of rape or sexual assault that was more than twice the rate for persons without a disability.”

http://www.alternet.org/civil-liberties/court-rules-severely-disabled-woman-wasnt-raped-because-she-didnt-bite-kick-or
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
by on Oct. 3, 2012 at 9:05 PM
Replies (31-40):
jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 8:59 PM

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 





_Kissy_
by on Oct. 5, 2012 at 9:02 PM
http://thestir.cafemom.com/in_the_news/144534/man_convicted_of_raping_disabled

Quoting SallyMJ:

I don't think this is accurate - Can't find this topic on any regular news site. It is dated March 2012.  If something this outrageous, it would be all over the regular newspapers and news sites. But it's not. 

So I think it's a hoax.

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 11:48 PM

That "NBC Connecticut" is not our regular NBC news. Look at all the citations online. None of them are for reputable news sources. If it were true, would be on cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, ny times, la times, etc, etc,Not enought facts in the story. Does not pass the sniff test.  I got caught up myself until I tried to corroborate the story. Nothing.

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 




SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 11:49 PM

No - it's not true. Try to corroborate this on a reputable news source. You can't. There is nothing. This is not a true story. 

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 






SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 5, 2012 at 11:51 PM

Hi Kissy,

You are quoting this site. Circular reasoning. This story not in any reputable news site. 

Fake story.


Quoting SallyMJ:

That "NBC Connecticut" is not our regular NBC news. Look at all the citations online. None of them are for reputable news sources. If it were true, would be on cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, ny times, la times, etc, etc,Not enought facts in the story. Does not pass the sniff test.  I got caught up myself until I tried to corroborate the story. Nothing.

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 





jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Oct. 6, 2012 at 12:10 AM

Then why are the case proceedings - the court transcripts -  listed on the state of Conneticut's official Judicial Branch website?

Am I missing something here? 

It's not like it's TMZ or something.  It's not a gossip website; it's legal record.  Not all court cases make the media.  Yet, this case is there. 

You don't need to corroborate this via the media - it's a matter of public record, of court record.  Shame the media didn't really pick it up.

I'm sorry but are you somehow related to Mr. Fourtin, the man who allegedly raped this disabled woman?   Are you connected in any way whatsoever to him or to his alleged victim? 

Quoting SallyMJ:

No - it's not true. Try to corroborate this on a reputable news source. You can't. There is nothing. This is not a true story. 

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 







SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 6, 2012 at 12:29 AM

Right- You found me out. I indeed am a straight woman in California who rapes disabled women in Connecticut. Makes a lot of sense.

I didn't see the court transcripts - All I saw in any of the articles was the story, without much detail. When did this happen? I just find it hard to believe than none of the mainstream media, none of the online media picked up this story. Because they would have. That's what seems off here.

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Then why are the case proceedings - the court transcripts -  listed on the state of Conneticut's official Judicial Branch website?

Am I missing something here? 

It's not like it's TMZ or something.  It's not a gossip website; it's legal record.  Not all court cases make the media.  Yet, this case is there. 

You don't need to corroborate this via the media - it's a matter of public record, of court record.  Shame the media didn't really pick it up.

I'm sorry but are you somehow related to Mr. Fourtin, the man who allegedly raped this disabled woman?   Are you connected in any way whatsoever to him or to his alleged victim? 

Quoting SallyMJ:

No - it's not true. Try to corroborate this on a reputable news source. You can't. There is nothing. This is not a true story. 

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 








jaxTheMomm
by Gold Member on Oct. 6, 2012 at 12:38 AM

I'm really not trying to be difficult.

It's just that this is actually a legitmate court case in Connecticut.  You need to click on the link from the official judicial branch website from that state.  Just because you can't find a news story about it doesn't mean that the court records are invalid.

"the State of Connectcut v. Richard Fourtin (SC 18523), argued October 17, 2011."

It's all there.  I would agree, we should see this in the MSM but they are focusing on other things right now, unfortunately.

All that said, this isn't a hoax.  I think we would all do well to read up on the offical court papers, learn more. and ask the MSM why it isn't as important as what they are reporting now.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Right- You found me out. I indeed am a straight woman in California who rapes disabled women in Connecticut. Makes a lot of sense.

I didn't see the court transcripts - All I saw in any of the articles was the story, without much detail. When did this happen? I just find it hard to believe than none of the mainstream media, none of the online media picked up this story. Because they would have. That's what seems off here.

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Then why are the case proceedings - the court transcripts -  listed on the state of Conneticut's official Judicial Branch website?

Am I missing something here? 

It's not like it's TMZ or something.  It's not a gossip website; it's legal record.  Not all court cases make the media.  Yet, this case is there. 

You don't need to corroborate this via the media - it's a matter of public record, of court record.  Shame the media didn't really pick it up.

I'm sorry but are you somehow related to Mr. Fourtin, the man who allegedly raped this disabled woman?   Are you connected in any way whatsoever to him or to his alleged victim? 

Quoting SallyMJ:

No - it's not true. Try to corroborate this on a reputable news source. You can't. There is nothing. This is not a true story. 

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 









SallyMJ
by Ruby Member on Oct. 6, 2012 at 4:15 AM
1 mom liked this

Yikes. It is starting to appear on more sites. I am sorry - because I couldn't find it on regular news sites and because it sounds so bizarre, I couldn't even imagine that it was true. I have to say - The plaintiff's attorney (was it the DA or a regular attorney?) seems to have done a very poor job. This was the state Supreme Court! Does this mean they can go next to a Appeals Court, before the U.S. Supreme Court?

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

I'm really not trying to be difficult.

It's just that this is actually a legitmate court case in Connecticut.  You need to click on the link from the official judicial branch website from that state.  Just because you can't find a news story about it doesn't mean that the court records are invalid.

"the State of Connectcut v. Richard Fourtin (SC 18523), argued October 17, 2011."

It's all there.  I would agree, we should see this in the MSM but they are focusing on other things right now, unfortunately.

All that said, this isn't a hoax.  I think we would all do well to read up on the offical court papers, learn more. and ask the MSM why it isn't as important as what they are reporting now.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Right- You found me out. I indeed am a straight woman in California who rapes disabled women in Connecticut. Makes a lot of sense.

I didn't see the court transcripts - All I saw in any of the articles was the story, without much detail. When did this happen? I just find it hard to believe than none of the mainstream media, none of the online media picked up this story. Because they would have. That's what seems off here.

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Then why are the case proceedings - the court transcripts -  listed on the state of Conneticut's official Judicial Branch website?

Am I missing something here? 

It's not like it's TMZ or something.  It's not a gossip website; it's legal record.  Not all court cases make the media.  Yet, this case is there. 

You don't need to corroborate this via the media - it's a matter of public record, of court record.  Shame the media didn't really pick it up.

I'm sorry but are you somehow related to Mr. Fourtin, the man who allegedly raped this disabled woman?   Are you connected in any way whatsoever to him or to his alleged victim? 

Quoting SallyMJ:

No - it's not true. Try to corroborate this on a reputable news source. You can't. There is nothing. This is not a true story. 

Quoting jaxTheMomm:

Maybe you didn't see this, I posted it upthread.

It's the court/case documentation from the official Conneticut judicial branch website:

http://www.jud.ct.gov/external/supapp/Cases/AROcr/CR307/3l07CR83.pdf

It appears it is not a hoax but indeed a legitimate case, but honestly I've had a very hard week and haven't read it thoroughly.  However, from the bit I did read, it seems like the original post is correct in it's summation.

Quoting SallyMJ:

Why are you defending a story that is not true? Do you want it to be true even though it is not?

I read the story. I looked up the URL. It isn't on any reputable news sources. It's still a hoax. 

Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(

Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.


Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?



Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).



Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?



Quoting SallyMJ:



HOAX - See my earlier post.



Quoting celestegood:



 That is messed up.






 










Kate_Momof3
by Platinum Member on Oct. 6, 2012 at 5:32 AM
NBC Connecticut is my local affiliate and it's the best local news team in the state.

Quoting SallyMJ:

That "NBC Connecticut" is not our regular NBC news. Look at all the citations online. None of them are for reputable news sources. If it were true, would be on cnn, abc, nbc, cbs, ny times, la times, etc, etc,Not enought facts in the story. Does not pass the sniff test.  I got caught up myself until I tried to corroborate the story. Nothing.


Quoting shimamab:

It's on page 2 of this thread. I can't make it clicky from mobile so you have to copy/paste it. Was really hoping you we're right about the hoax. :(



Quoting SallyMJ:

Where's your link. I can't find it myself online.



Quoting shimamab:

I posted a link from NBC Connecticut. That's a tabloid to you?





Quoting SallyMJ:

It's definitely a hoax. They are links to a tabloid-type website.

As in my main post - this story is only in special interest and tabloid-type websites. Something this outragous would be listed on regular news websites. It's not. My hoax-meter has been set off at least 2-3 times on this site in the past week.  It's not true.  Papers can be manufactured (eg., letter quoted in Dan Rather's report which lost him his job).




Quoting celestegood:

 Links are being posted, and they say its not a hoax.  Which is it?




Quoting SallyMJ:




HOAX - See my earlier post.




Quoting celestegood:




 That is messed up.








 




Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

close Join now to connect to
other members!
Connect with Facebook or Sign Up Using Email

Already Joined? LOG IN