Saudi Rape victim is sentenced

DaemonSeid · #1 11-19-2007, 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

But Daemon's whole line of reasoning seems to be that since Saudi Arabia doesn't have a list, they don't have nearly as many sexual predators. That just isn't logical. The two things are unrelated.

That's not it at all...my reasoning whihc is more a question really....is....if there are stiffer penalties for these types of crimes, what are the frequencies of these types of crimes happening? Are the numbers greater or lower outside of that region?

Obviously these crimes do happen...we can't deny that. But because the punishments are so severe even with the sex offenders, do they have a lower rate of happening due to this?

Look at it like this too....what is the sense in reporting this story to the western world if this kind of thing is commonplace?

DSTCHAOS · #2 11-19-2007, 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DaemonSeid

That's not it at all...my reasoning whihc is more a question really....is....if there are stiffer penalties for these types of crimes, what are the frequencies of these types of crimes happening? Are the numbers greater or lower outside of that region?

Obviously these crimes do happen...we can't deny that. But because the punishments are so severe even with the sex offenders, do they have a lower rate of happening due to this?

Look at it like this too....what is the sense in reporting this story to the western world if this kind of thing is commonplace?

Are you on drugs?

Stiffer penalties do not always reduce crimes. That's because these laws are less about deterrence and more about retribution. People already know what the laws are before they commit the crime.

BTW, a reduction in crime can't be assumed to be about the penalties in place. We call that "tiger prevention." Crimes can increase or decrease independent of the penalties. That's why we conduct research to answer these questions instead of simply using our limited observation skills.

DaemonSeid · #3 11-19-2007, 01:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Are you on drugs?

Stiffer penalties do not always reduce crimes. That's because these laws are less about deterrence and more about retribution. People already know what the laws are before they commit the crime.

BTW, a reduction in crime can't be assumed to be about the penalties in place. We call that "tiger prevention." Crimes can increase or decrease independent of the penalties. That's why we conduct research to answer these questions instead of simply using our limited observation skills.

hey...I'm not a lawyer....

LOL

AKA_Monet · #4 11-19-2007, 02:26 PM

Ironically, the only researched sentencing that is used as a statistically significant deterrent is the Capital Punishment or the Death Penalty...

Viewing some of the stats, they may be weak, like a P < 0.04999, but it is still significant on a 2 tailed, heterodecastic analysis.

Giving lashes to anyone is "Cruel and Unusual Punishment" and could be labeled a torture by some circles. What is it going to teach the offender if you want to not have recidivism?

The other issue is why did these men feel they needed to sexually assault and rape a female friend? I do not know how Saudi courts operate, and we may not care about that issue, but I do not think they are "crazed lunatics" unable to control themselves to savagely brutalize a woman, today. I think this was a planned activity because they knew how this poor girl behaved and when she refused, they overpowered her... Simple as that.

Should they be punished? Definitely. Should the girl be punished? Like I said, was a rape kit put on her? If not, they authorities do not have any right to put her on trial because it becomes her words against the offenders. If they did, and she violated the law of not riding in the car with male non-relatives, at minimum, she should be made to pay in community service or administrative work.

Regardless of what we think of their laws, Saudi Arabia is a sovereign nation. However, I think it a human rights violation to punish any female who has had to endure a sex crime. That is my opinion. I could be wrong.

DSTCHAOS · #5 11-19-2007, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Viewing some of the stats, they may be weak, like a P < 0.04999, but it is still significant on a 2 tailed, heterodecastic analysis.

Yeah and that weak, statistical significance has never been able to truly support the deterrent effect of capital punishment and lead to lasting conclusions regarding its effectiveness.

It just adds fuel to the debate over statistical significance versus substantive significance.

AKA_Monet · #6 11-19-2007, 06:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Yeah and that weak, statistical significance has never been able to truly support the deterrent effect of capital punishment and lead to lasting conclusions regarding its effectiveness.

It just adds fuel to the debate over statistical significance versus substantive significance.

I know... Like, correlation does not imply causation... But, I guess "they" fail to realize that aspect...

PeppyGPhiB · #7 11-19-2007, 10:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

Should they be punished? Definitely. Should the girl be punished? Like I said, was a rape kit put on her? If not, they authorities do not have any right to put her on trial because it becomes her words against the offenders. If they did, and she violated the law of not riding in the car with male non-relatives, at minimum, she should be made to pay in community service or administrative work.

Regardless of what we think of their laws, Saudi Arabia is a sovereign nation. However, I think it a human rights violation to punish any female who has had to endure a sex crime. That is my opinion. I could be wrong.

I believe she's being punished for being in the presence of a male non-relative, not for being raped. They are punishing the males for the rape.

And I seriously doubt she had a rape kit done on her. Only a small percentage of the medical practitioners in Saudi Arabia are women, and I seriously doubt women there expose themselves in such a way to strangers that may even be doctors. But I could be wrong.

AKA_Monet · #8 11-19-2007, 11:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

I believe she's being punished for being in the presence of a male non-relative, not for being raped. They are punishing the males for the rape.

And I seriously doubt she had a rape kit done on her. Only a small percentage of the medical practitioners in Saudi Arabia are women, and I seriously doubt women there expose themselves in such a way to strangers that may even be doctors. But I could be wrong.

I asked those questions for a reason...

The fact is 200 lashes is harsh for riding in a car with a male non-relative. What if she did not get raped? Would she still get 200 lashes? Islamic law or not, fact remains, it violates human rights.

And they did not do a rape kit on her, although, the Saudi Kingdom could well afford it as much as we, the US, is paying for gas these days, to treat their women appropriately rather than using ancient codes of mores on women. But that's another thread...

DaemonSeid · #9 11-20-2007, 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AKA_Monet

I asked those questions for a reason...

The fact is 200 lashes is harsh for riding in a car with a male non-relative. What if she did not get raped? Would she still get 200 lashes? Islamic law or not, fact remains, it violates human rights.

And they did not do a rape kit on her, although, the Saudi Kingdom could well afford it as much as we, the US, is paying for gas these days, to treat their women appropriately rather than using ancient codes of mores on women. But that's another thread...

and she is not getting 200 lashed because of that either...she was originally scheduled a shorter jail sentence and 90 lashes...

here are the excerpts from the report:
According to Arab News, the court said the woman's punishment was increased because of "her attempt to aggravate and influence the judiciary through the media."

She had initially been sentenced to 90 lashes after being convicting her of violating Saudi's rigid laws on segregation of the sexes.

Under Saudi Arabia's interpretation of Islamic Sharia law, women are not allowed in public in the company of men other than their male relatives.

The initial sentences for the men convicted of the gang rape ranged from 10 months to five years in prison. Their new sentences range from two to nine years, the paper said.

Kevin · #10 11-20-2007, 02:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeppyGPhiB

I believe she's being punished for being in the presence of a male non-relative, not for being raped. They are punishing the males for the rape.

Oh, I misunderstood.

That makes it so much better.

Damn women running around with non-male relatives. I only wish the good 'ol U.S.A. could be so moral.

PeppyGPhiB · #11 11-20-2007, 02:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Oh, I misunderstood.

That makes it so much better.

Damn women running around with non-male relatives. I only wish the good 'ol U.S.A. could be so moral.

Again, didn't say it's right, was just pointing out that *technically* they aren't sentencing her for being raped.

Of course 200 lashes is ridiculous...it's ridiculous to PUNISH someone for being in a car with someone of the opposite sex. AND the punishment of lashing someone is ridiculous, too. It's archaic.

Are you guys "getting it" now, that there's no point in comparing Saudi Arabia to the U.S. of A.?

I just don't understand why all of a sudden people are up in arms about this. It's been going on forever there, and in other parts of the world. For years, the Taliban was treating women - actually, all of its citizens - in all kinds of inhumane and oppressive ways, but we didn't care over here. It took an attack from Osama to get us into Afghanistan. The American memory has a way of remembering what is convenient at the time.

DSTCHAOS · #12 11-20-2007, 12:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin

Oh, I misunderstood.

That makes it so much better.

Damn women running around with non-male relatives. I only wish the good 'ol U.S.A. could be so moral.

You should run for President.