Raven's Trial Postponed

The trial of Raven Abaroa for the stabbing death of his wife, Janet in 2005 has been postponed until January.  It was originally scheduled to begin October 29th. 

http://www.wral.com/murder-trial-delayed-in-pregnant-mom-s-2005-stabbing-death/11680648/

Remember this one?  He was about to be arrested for embezzlement and Janet was pregnant with their second child.  He says he was at an indoor soccer game when she was killed, but other players said he left for a while.

His defense attorneys want to keep his computer forensics out of the trial.  The article didn't give the grounds...perhaps alleged improper seizure?

http://abclocal.go.com/wtvd/story?section=news/local&id=8853507

The Joran van der Sloot Saga Continues

This smirking photo accompanies a CNN article which states that Joran has knocked somebody up in the Peruvian prison where he is supposed to reside for the next 28 years.

It seems they have conjugal visits there.  Isn't that cute? 

From the article:

The mother, identified only as "Leidi" by the newspaper, met van der Sloot in prison and became pregnant after an unsupervised visit with the jailed 28-year-old, the paper said.
Van der Sloot's lawyer said he did not confirm the pregnancy, as stated by the newspaper. But Maximo Altez told Mayra Cuevas of "In Session" that Leidi is registered as van der Sloot’s girlfriend at Piedras Gordas Prison and they have had conjugal visits. Van der Sloot can receive visitors once or twice a month. Altez says he met Leidi in prison through another inmate.
 

She must be another of those poor, strange women who fall for killers.  Or for international noteriety.  Or something. 

If I were making a list of people who do not seem to be good candidates for fatherhood, Joran van der Sloot would be pretty far up. 

Let's review.  He grew up a member of the colonial overlord class on the tropical island of Aruba, where he preyed on local girls and tourists alike, granting his leavings to his adoring sycophantic local buddies.  That charming lifestyle ended when a tourist, Natalee Holloway, disappeared while in his company.  She has never been found, and he has never been charged in her disappearance, though he was arrested a couple of times.  He returned to The Netherlands, where he granted more than one interview in which he admitted killing her, only to recant when the hangover wore off.  An attempted extortion followed; he demanded a large sum of money from Natalee's mother in exchange for telling her where he dumped her daughter's body.  If I recall correctly, she gave him a smaller amount which he used to travel to Peru for a poker tournament.  He fancied himself an international poker star.  While there, he chatted up a local girl and killed her in his hotel room.  He was less lucky that time, not being on his home turf and all, and the hotel cameras caught him leaving.  He was arrested just over the border in Chile and returned to Peru to stand trial.  After some legal machinations, he discovered that a foreigner in Peru was not in quite the same position as a Dutch boy in Aruba, and confessed.  He is serving 28 years, two less than the 30-year maximum.

This "Leidi" has to be out of her mind to go anywhere near him, let alone allow him to impregnate her.  Perhaps she is counting on the fact that her child will be grown before this serial rapist and probable serial killer gets out of prison.

I hope she is lying and the child is anyone else's but his!

The Crazy Years Are Upon Us.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/10/03/947981/court-requires-disabled-rape-victim-to-prove-she-fought-back-calls-for-evidence-of-biting-kicking-scratching/

This is outrageous!  The Connecticut State Supreme Court overturned the conviction of a man who had been accused of raping a woman with cerebral palsy.  They say she didn't indicate lack of consent.

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.’
 

EXCUSE ME??  She “has severe cerebral palsy, has the intellectual functional equivalent of a 3-year-old and cannot verbally communicate.”

I am absolutely livid about this!  Just how was this woman supposed to communicate her lack of consent?  She might not have even been aware that what he was doing was wrong.  She probably had no idea what he was doing, period!

Anna Doroghazi, director of public policy and communication at Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services said,

 “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.”
 

Will someone please explain to me how a 3-year-old can give consent for sex?  Or are we running off the old maxim that states, "If they're big enough, they're old enough?"

I would like to know how these people manage to get to be judges. 

This has very unpleasant implications in other cases.  The phrases, "legitimate rape" and "forcible rape" come to mind.  We are inching galloping towards the day when, if she hasn't had the shit beaten out of her, no woman will be able to charge her attacker with rape.

The real question is (IMO), why are these judges and other politicians so willing to support and promote the right of men to rape?  Given what we know about rape (primarily that it's about power and control, not sex), it appears to be yet another backlash against the empowerment of women.

I have said it before and will again.  "Handmaid's Tale," here we come.