Hung jury in stealthing case

[Lauren]

 

[baal6007]

Difficult thing to prove unfortunately.

 

[1moretry]

Difficult thing to prove unfortunately.

what .. that the jury are all hung ??
.. chetty chetty bang bang is a pretty old game for sure.

 

[Bonnie B]

Trial of man accused of 'stealthing' two women ends with hung jury | Region Canberra

CONTENT WARNING: This article refers to alleged sexual abuse. After spending days on their deliberations, jurors in the trial of…

region.com.au

If there was the man's DNA inside the woman, then surely he'd be found guilty. So, it was also the woman's obligation to get an internal swab done, then it would be an open-and-shut case.

Also, why would a woman want to go through this process if it wasn't true? That makes no sense.

And, if these women aren't believed, then again, fewer women will step forward when they are assaulted.

So once again Women are still sexually assaulted, and Men get away with their bad behaviour. It Just Sucks!!!!

 

[Channelle]

I must be too boring and sheltered - did not even know what this meaning of 'stealthing' is.
Knew what stealth is, and have often been quiet and unobtrusive and gone unnoticed.
And I know the stealth bomber.
But there we go, the forum once again educates me further.
And now that I know, can't say it's ever been a thought that's ever entered my very respectful head.

 

[baal6007]

Trial of man accused of 'stealthing' two women ends with hung jury | Region Canberra

CONTENT WARNING: This article refers to alleged sexual abuse. After spending days on their deliberations, jurors in the trial of…

region.com.au

If there was the man's DNA inside the woman, then surely he'd be found guilty. So, it was also the woman's obligation to get an internal swab done, then it would be an open-and-shut case.

Also, why would a woman want to go through this process if it wasn't true? That makes no sense.

And, if these women aren't believed, then again, fewer women will step forward when they are assaulted.

So once again Women

Trial of man accused of 'stealthing' two women ends with hung jury | Region Canberra

CONTENT WARNING: This article refers to alleged sexual abuse. After spending days on their deliberations, jurors in the trial of…

region.com.au

If there was the man's DNA inside the woman, then surely he'd be found guilty. So, it was also the woman's obligation to get an internal swab done, then it would be an open-and-shut case.

Also, why would a woman want to go through this process if it wasn't true? That makes no sense.

And, if these women aren't believed, then again, fewer women will step forward when they are assaulted.

So once again Women are still sexually assaulted, and Men get away with their bad behaviour. It Just Sucks!!!!

I understand what youre saying but it's equally as likely she consented and is now dragging him through the system out of spite. I've seen women do crazier things.

Im all for women being believed, but there also has to be proof beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Bonnie B]

I understand what youre saying but it's equally as likely she consented and is now dragging him through the system out of spite. I've seen women do crazier things.

Im all for women being believed, but there also has to be proof beyond reasonable doubt.

Spite of what? He's nothing special to them but a client. And an IT guy? Not a boyfriend? Nor a CEO? And who wants to go through the court system unnecessarily? The women aren't being named, there's no fame in this...... So maybe you should think about this more deeply?

Being stealthed by a client is traumatising. There's a heap of medical tests that need to be done. The unknown if you have anything. The violation of being penetrated without protection, and that means counselling. Then, being overly protective and cautious with every next client.

This is a form of rape, that's the bottom line, that's why it's illegal.

 

[Seduce me]

Trial of man accused of 'stealthing' two women ends with hung jury | Region Canberra

CONTENT WARNING: This article refers to alleged sexual abuse. After spending days on their deliberations, jurors in the trial of…

region.com.au

If there was the man's DNA inside the woman, then surely he'd be found guilty. So, it was also the woman's obligation to get an internal swab done, then it would be an open-and-shut case.

Also, why would a woman want to go through this process if it wasn't true? That makes no sense.

And, if these women aren't believed, then again, fewer women will step forward when they are assaulted.

So once again Women are still sexually assaulted, and Men get away with their bad behaviour. It Just Sucks!!!!

Not necessarily. The law is far more complex than that.
For example, a person could argue that sexual intercourse was consensual, but there was a misunderstanding or disagreement about what was permitted during that encounter. In many cases, it ultimately comes down to one person's account against the other's, with the court having to assess all of the available evidence.
It's also a fair question to ask. False allegations do occur, just as genuine sexual assaults occur. People can have a variety of motives, including spite, personal grievances, financial incentives, or other reasons. Equally, many complainants are telling the truth.
The reality is that we don't know what evidence was presented to the jury, what evidence was challenged, or what weight was given to it. Whether DNA was present or whether ejaculation occurred does not, by itself, determine guilt or innocence. Criminal cases are decided on the totality of the evidence and whether the prosecution can prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

 

[Bonnie B]

Not necessarily. The law is far more complex than that.
For example, a person could argue that sexual intercourse was consensual, but there was a misunderstanding or disagreement about what was permitted during that encounter. In many cases, it ultimately comes down to one person's account against the other's, with the court having to assess all of the available evidence.
It's also a fair question to ask. False allegations do occur, just as genuine sexual assaults occur. People can have a variety of motives, including spite, personal grievances, financial incentives, or other reasons. Equally, many complainants are telling the truth.
The reality is that we don't know what evidence was presented to the jury, what evidence was challenged, or what weight was given to it. Whether DNA was present or whether ejaculation occurred does not, by itself, determine guilt or innocence. Criminal cases are decided on the totality of the evidence and whether the prosecution can prove the charge beyond reasonable doubt.

A 41-year-old white IT man vs two prostitute women, I can almost guarantee there is some prejudice in the outcome.

 

[Celeste_SJ]

Cases like this, around consent, attract speculation. I personally believe the sex worker because when you really think about the emotional cost of making a Police report, making statements about abuse and going through the investigation process, any medical examinations, then the ordeal of a court case where unfortunately in rape and sexual assault cases the victim has to defend themselves.

I honestly think the investigation and court process in sexual assault is designed to protect the rapist, not the victim. I think it's even worse when you truly consider how unlikely it is that the jury will have members who are informed about sex work and the rights of sex workers. While society has made some progress and there are more sex worker alliances and understanding than in the past sex work is not discussed as a career option in schools and is often sensationalised or stigmatised in media which can shape a jurors opinion making it harder for a sex worker to get justice than any other victim. There may be cases where the victim lies about sexual assault to harm the accused but the victim however really consider a sexual assault process, things like:

Confidential counselling reports about the assault can be subpoenaed as 'evidence' by the sexual abuser.

Courts don't recognise the impact of shock and trauma on the brain that means sometimes memory recovers as time passes or sometimes it never does and that lawyers defending rapists can legally call that lying and continue questioning and that legal questioning can retraumatise the victim.

In rape and sexual assault cases things like the victims sexual history and what they wore can be evidence 'she wanted it at the time'. Car theft is also a crime and when a person is a victim of car theft Police and lawyers don't ask what the victim what they were wearing when it was stolen or what kind of relationship they had to their cars prior to the incident and sexual assault is more damaging than car theft.

Sex workers are highly unlikely to go through the long, drawn out and painful process because they have a grudge against a client. Why would a sex worker risk her health and her career when she could catch a disease that actually kills her by removing the condom? Sex workers have to have excellent boundaries, professionalism, they are used to saying no to sexual acts, they are well informed about the risks of unprotected sex. I have seen clients discuss BBJ and other unprotected sex services they would like on some forums, I have never seen a sex worker discuss wanting unprotected sex with a client.

Personally I think a hung jury shows the world still has a long way to go when protecting the rights of a sex worker as equal to that of anyone in any other profession.

 

[baal6007]

Spite of what? He's nothing special to them but a client. And an IT guy? Not a boyfriend? Nor a CEO? And who wants to go through the court system unnecessarily? The women aren't being named, there's no fame in this...... So maybe you should think about this more deeply?

Being stealthed by a client is traumatising. There's a heap of medical tests that need to be done. The unknown if you have anything. The violation of being penetrated without protection, and that means counselling. Then, being overly protective and cautious with every next client.

This is a form of rape, that's the bottom line, that's why it's illegal.

I completely agree. But innocent until PROVEN guilty has to hold.

I can quote many cases where men have been incorrectly convicted based on a womans word. It sucks but the burden of proof lies with the accuser.

 

[Seduce me]

A 41-year-old white IT man vs two prostitute women, I can almost guarantee there is some prejudice in the outcome.

The legal standard is beyond reasonable doubt, not "I almost guarantee it."
You can't criticise prejudice while assuming guilt based on someone's race, job, and gender. "Almost guarantee" isn't evidence—it's prejudice dressed up as certainty.

 

[Seduce me]

Cases like this, around consent, attract speculation. I personally believe the sex worker because when you really think about the emotional cost of making a Police report, making statements about abuse and going through the investigation process, any medical examinations, then the ordeal of a court case where unfortunately in rape and sexual assault cases the victim has to defend themselves.

I honestly think the investigation and court process in sexual assault is designed to protect the rapist, not the victim. I think it's even worse when you truly consider how unlikely it is that the jury will have members who are informed about sex work and the rights of sex workers. While society has made some progress and there are more sex worker alliances and understanding than in the past sex work is not discussed as a career option in schools and is often sensationalised or stigmatised in media which can shape a jurors opinion making it harder for a sex worker to get justice than any other victim. There may be cases where the victim lies about sexual assault to harm the accused but the victim however really consider a sexual assault process, things like:

Confidential counselling reports about the assault can be subpoenaed as 'evidence' by the sexual abuser.

Courts don't recognise the impact of shock and trauma on the brain that means sometimes memory recovers as time passes or sometimes it never does and that lawyers defending rapists can legally call that lying and continue questioning and that legal questioning can retraumatise the victim.

In rape and sexual assault cases things like the victims sexual history and what they wore can be evidence 'she wanted it at the time'. Car theft is also a crime and when a person is a victim of car theft Police and lawyers don't ask what the victim what they were wearing when it was stolen or what kind of relationship they had to their cars prior to the incident and sexual assault is more damaging than car theft.

Sex workers are highly unlikely to go through the long, drawn out and painful process because they have a grudge against a client. Why would a sex worker risk her health and her career when she could catch a disease that actually kills her by removing the condom? Sex workers have to have excellent boundaries, professionalism, they are used to saying no to sexual acts, they are well informed about the risks of unprotected sex. I have seen clients discuss BBJ and other unprotected sex services they would like on some forums, I have never seen a sex worker discuss wanting unprotected sex with a client.

Personally I think a hung jury shows the world still has a long way to go when protecting the rights of a sex worker as equal to that of anyone in any other profession.

I'm not on anyone's side because none of us know what evidence was presented.
People can tell the truth, and people can lie. The fact that making a report is traumatic doesn't automatically make an allegation true.
False accusations and genuine victims both exist. That's why the legal standard is evidence beyond reasonable doubt, not personal belief.

 

[Celeste_SJ]

I don't think the investigation or the court process is actually fair for the victim seeking justice in sexual assault cases. Look at movements like #MeToo or statistics where victims report sexual assault to other professionals but not the Police that indicate there are a large number of sexual assault victims speaking out compared to relatively low numbers of sexual assaults that are reported to Police and of those an even smaller percentage are found guilty. There is no way all those victims are lying and seeking to ruin the life of the accuser.

 

[Seduce me]

The problem is that when false accusations are made, it can make it harder for genuine victims to be believed when they come forward.
There was a case where a man was convicted over an allegation that was later found to be false. He spent time in prison, lost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and could never get that time or money back.
So asking, "Why would someone go through something so traumatic to make a report?" isn't proof. People can have many different motives. That's why evidence matters, not assumptions.

You can find this on ACA. also,nick Yarriambiack another case so many that are not even come out to the public

 

[baal6007]

I spent two years in the family court while my ex wife accused me of everything under the sun to stop me from seeing my kids. I almost lost everything including my own sanity. Just "believing" the woman is not the answer. As traumatic as it was im very thankful the system finally realised there was literally zero proof and dismissed the whole thing.

If we ever end up in a situation where we just take someone's word for it, its game over.

 

[Bonnie B]

And how many women haven't been believed? Enough that they don't bother going to the police when it happens because there's no point in adding to the traumatic experience? .......??? Evidence would be yes!

Read the article again, both claims of sexual intercourse without consent were dismissed, yet the woman stated, "he saw an opportunity, and he took it", and he was told multiple times to wear a condom for the service to go ahead.

He stated, 'it may well be that she had made an honest but mistaken belief about this incident'.

She is very clear that she never gave consent, and he never denied doing it, instead blaming her memory.

Every sex worker insists on wearing a condom with strangers to protect themselves. If it's not on, then it's not on, end of story. If you take it without consent, then that's rape, no questions need to be asked further.

 

[Bonnie B]

I spent two years in the family court while my ex wife accused me of everything under the sun to stop me from seeing my kids. I almost lost everything including my own sanity. Just "believing" the woman is not the answer. As traumatic as it was im very thankful the system finally realised there was literally zero proof and dismissed the whole thing.

If we ever end up in a situation where we just take someone's word for it, its game over.

I spent 10+ years in the family court against my children's father. Only after he sexually abused our daughter did the court did the court aknowledge that I was right.
I was then given full custody, which I declined as all I wanted was "as per the children's wishes'. It's their choice to choose their relationship with their Father, not mine.
The door can swing both ways.

 

[baal6007]

I spent 10+ years in the family court against my children's father. Only after he sexually abused our daughter did the court did the court aknowledge that I was right.
I was then given full custody, which I declined as all I wanted was "as per the children's wishes'. It's their choice to choose their relationship with their Father, not mine.
The door can swing both ways.

The door definately can swing both ways. That's my point.

 

[Seduce me]

And how many women haven't been believed? Enough that they don't bother going to the police when it happens because there's no point in adding to the traumatic experience? .......??? Evidence would be yes!

Read the article again, both claims of sexual intercourse without consent were dismissed, yet the woman stated, "he saw an opportunity, and he took it", and he was told multiple times to wear a condom for the service to go ahead.

He stated, 'it may well be that she had made an honest but mistaken belief about this incident'.

She is very clear that she never gave consent, and he never denied doing it, instead blaming her memory.

Every sex worker insists on wearing a condom with strangers to protect themselves. If it's not on, then it's not on, end of story. If you take it without consent, then that's rape, no questions need to be asked further.

Exactly — she said it. An allegation is not proof.
The court had access to all of the evidence, not just her account, and still couldn't reach a clear conclusion. That's why the legal standard is beyond reasonable doubt, not simply believing one side.

 

[Bonnie B]

He never denied doing it; she flat-out said he took what he wanted. That's no consent, that's not okay and nor will it ever be

 

[Seduce me]

And she flat-out said it happened. That's still an allegation, not proof.
If simply saying something happened was enough to establish guilt, there would be no need for a trial, jury, or standard of proof.

 

[Celeste_SJ]

The problem is that when false accusations are made, it can make it harder for genuine victims to be believed when they come forward.
There was a case where a man was convicted over an allegation that was later found to be false. He spent time in prison, lost hundreds of thousands of dollars, and could never get that time or money back.
So asking, "Why would someone go through something so traumatic to make a report?" isn't proof. People can have many different motives. That's why evidence matters, not assumptions.

You can find this on ACA. also,nick Yarriambiack another case so many that are not even come out to the public

The problem is with the system as it is victims are getting raped and assaulted as we write.... and may not even seek medical attention, let alone file a Police report. The whole system around how sexual assault victims seek justice and healing needs to change.

 

[Bonnie B]

And she flat-out said it happened. That's still an allegation, not proof.
If simply saying something happened was enough to establish guilt, there would be no need for a trial, jury, or standard of proof.

And if women were heard and believed when they were sexually assaulted, then maybe the statistics would come down?

But not today, when a man can say "nope, she had it wrong" to create a hint of doubt, because that's all that it takes to be let off.

 

[1moretry]

Cases like this, around consent, attract speculation. I personally believe the sex worker because when you really think about the emotional cost of making a Police report, making statements about abuse and going through the investigation process, any medical examinations, then the ordeal of a court case where unfortunately in rape and sexual assault cases the victim has to defend themselves.

I honestly think the investigation and court process in sexual assault is designed to protect the rapist, not the victim. I think it's even worse when you truly consider how unlikely it is that the jury will have members who are informed about sex work and the rights of sex workers. While society has made some progress and there are more sex worker alliances and understanding than in the past sex work is not discussed as a career option in schools and is often sensationalised or stigmatised in media which can shape a jurors opinion making it harder for a sex worker to get justice than any other victim. There may be cases where the victim lies about sexual assault to harm the accused but the victim however really consider a sexual assault process, things like:

Confidential counselling reports about the assault can be subpoenaed as 'evidence' by the sexual abuser.

Courts don't recognise the impact of shock and trauma on the brain that means sometimes memory recovers as time passes or sometimes it never does and that lawyers defending rapists can legally call that lying and continue questioning and that legal questioning can retraumatise the victim.

In rape and sexual assault cases things like the victims sexual history and what they wore can be evidence 'she wanted it at the time'. Car theft is also a crime and when a person is a victim of car theft Police and lawyers don't ask what the victim what they were wearing when it was stolen or what kind of relationship they had to their cars prior to the incident and sexual assault is more damaging than car theft.

Sex workers are highly unlikely to go through the long, drawn out and painful process because they have a grudge against a client. Why would a sex worker risk her health and her career when she could catch a disease that actually kills her by removing the condom? Sex workers have to have excellent boundaries, professionalism, they are used to saying no to sexual acts, they are well informed about the risks of unprotected sex. I have seen clients discuss BBJ and other unprotected sex services they would like on some forums, I have never seen a sex worker discuss wanting unprotected sex with a client.

Personally I think a hung jury shows the world still has a long way to go when protecting the rights of a sex worker as equal to that of anyone in any other profession.

Memory, and memories , is an extraordinary subject in itself .. and very often a "real to the person" memory is not a true nor complete recollection of an actual event , or conversation. Memories can be both destroyed and created for actual and imaginary events.
I am not in favour of stealthing nor rape in any form - lets be clear on that as a survivor.

 

[Bonnie B]

I think that when you're on the stand, you also need to be attached to a lie detector with a big screen as well. It would bring clarity and truth to he-said-she-said situations.

 

[baal6007]

And if women were heard and believed when they were sexually assaulted, then maybe the statistics would come down?

But not today, when a man can say "nope, she had it wrong" to create a hint of doubt, because that's all that it takes to be let off.

And whats the alternative? We just believe her word? What if hes right and she did consent?

 

[Bonnie B]

And whats the alternative? We just believe her word? What if hes right and she did consent?

Maybe men would stop sexually abusing 1 in 5 KNOWN women

 

[Seduce me]

I think that when you're on the stand, you also need to be attached to a lie detector with a big screen as well. It would bring clarity and truth to he-said-she-said situations.

Lie detection doesn't work thats why we don't use them in Australia

 

[baal6007]

Maybe men would stop sexually abusing 1 in 5 KNOWN women

Alot more men would be falsely accused like I was.