The man hasn't been named by Belgian media. 😠
Internet detectives, hear my call! Find the name of this rapist so that we may plaster it everywhere like the rapist Brock Turner!
We're not The Onion! Not affiliated with them in any way! Not operated by them in any way! All the news here is real!
Posts must be:
Please also avoid duplicates.
Comments and post content must abide by the server rules for Lemmy.world and generally abstain from trollish, bigoted, or otherwise disruptive behavior that makes this community less fun for everyone.
And that’s basically it!
The man hasn't been named by Belgian media. 😠
Internet detectives, hear my call! Find the name of this rapist so that we may plaster it everywhere like the rapist Brock Turner!
Just like Brock Turner, the rapist!
Oh Brock Allen Turner, the rapist who now goes by Allen Turner?
Yup, the rapey one
Oh wow, something from Belgium showed up here. Obviously most reactions are the same here. But I would urge everyone to read more details about this. As there much more uncomfortable nuance here. One of those being that the dude is also in agreement he did something wrong. He also gave a relatively accurate description of the events of that evening that got proven with phone records and CCTV at different locations. Making his account of what happened at the least somewhat reliable.
Obviously the woman could not consent because she was drunk as fuck. And she's allowed to get drunk as fuck without being taken advantage off. CCTV showed them kissing at the bar they met. Phone records show he tried to call her friend she was supposed to go home with. CCTV shows them going to that friend's dorm and not getting in and waiting there for half an hour. Then they walk back to his place while kissing on the way there. The morning after his messages to her indicate he wants to continue seeing her. (https://m.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20250402_95297572?journeybuilder=nopaywall but it's in Dutch)
Again, she could not consent, and he as the least drunk of both of them bears the responsibility of this. I do think he should have had some form of punishment above of what he got and for the woman's feeling of safety a restraining order like she asked. And something that would have made mandatory counselling and follow-up possible. Not to mention that although justice in Belgium isn't supposed to be revenge, it should also cause some sort of satisfaction for the victim.
This situation just shows that the definition of rape over the decades has become more complex and nuanced, but unfortunately the tools to deal with this have not. This dude definitely did something wrong, but he's not just a vicious predator.
If they were both drunk, could either of them consent?
It really depends on how drunk you actually were at the time, and that’s what makes cases like this so difficult. Generally speaking, simply being drunk isn’t enough.
Hell, even being blackout drunk isn’t enough. Because you can be blacked out without being passed out; Blackout drunk simply means your brain isn’t recording things to your memory, so you won’t remember it after you sober up. Contrary to popular belief, alcohol doesn’t make you forget existing memories. It just makes it so you don’t ever commit things to memory in the first place. That’s what happens when you’re blackout drunk.
In order to be incapable of consenting, you need to be so drunk that you can’t comprehend what is happening. Because informed consent requires two things: Information anbout what is happening, and enthusiasm. You can have both, even while blackout drunk. Because you forgetting your enthusiasm the next morning doesn’t automatically make it rape. After all, you were informed and enthusiastic when it was happening, so you consented. If you were capable of understanding what was happening and were enthusiastic, it’s not legally considered rape.
And that’s a surprisingly high threshold to beat. You usually need to prove to the courts that you were basically passed out (and therefore unable to be informed about what was happening) before they’ll consider it rape.
Even if people would colloquially consider drunk sex rape, that’s not typically how the courts view it. And that’s a large part of why so many accused rapists get off without a guilty verdict; The victim basically has to prove that they were missing either information or enthusiasm to overcome the accused’s “they consented to it” defense. And if the victim was blacked out and doesn’t even remember the evening, that becomes extremely difficult to do without outside witnesses corroborating that the victim was passed out and/or combative.
And hell, in cases like the Brock Turner one, even when the victim proves that she was passed out, the rapist can still get away with just a slap on the wrist.
He can get away with it when he's "Upstanding Citizen From An Impeccable Family, And This Would Ruin His Future."
In other words, a rich male white kid. Whose daddy plays golf with the attorneys, and judge.
You can’t legally consent to things if you aren’t of sound mind and body.
So if he’s gonna rape as a med student, he’s definitely gonna rape as a doctor. And that judge is a rapist too, judging from their warped views
I thought the same thing. The judge is too lenient and I question their morality.
This reminds me of the rapist Brock Turner, aka Allen Turner, the rapist.
Oh Allen Turner? Who started using his middle name instead of Brock Turner? Because he raped an unconscious woman behind a dumpster? That guy? (Brock/Allen Turner?)
I just want to be sure I'm thinking of the right guy...
https://www.cnn.com/2016/06/06/us/sexual-assault-brock-turner-stanford/index.html
This Brock Allen Turner right?
Yes, the rapist Brock Allen Turner is also the first thing that crossed my mind. How he got away after raping that girl and now is even trying to change his name.
And when I say I don't trust judges and that the justice system of most places is broken for giving a single person the final decision power, based on whatever they think is right, people say I'm trolling.
Judges pull decisions out of their ass to fulfill whatever interest they have. Or sometimes just because they are stupid.
Good judges are super rare.
Yeah in this case I think it's more a case of "hey this guy looks kind of like my son". In this case I think it led to a miscarriage of justice, but I think in other cases that kind of thinking could protect against excessively harsh punishments. In the end I think it comes down to inequality. Bigger inequality shrinks the pool of people judges can intuitively relate to, which in turn makes judgements more unequal.
By finding him guilty but not punishing him, he will be made to feel guilty and the chance of him reoffending will be prevented, without socially impairing the man
What a load of horse shit. “Letting him get away with rape penalty free will ensure he doesn’t do it again” is some crazy fucking logic. Seems like knowing there are no consequences for your actions would make repeating the offense significantly more likely.
What the actual fuck.
Don't worry, that's not the real reason. The real reason is most likely that the perpetrators family is rich and the victim's family isn't.