Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Much a Dew (er) about nothing

Judge Dewer. What a dweeb. Imagine saying such a thing... Imagine... close your eyes, No, scratch that. You can't read this with your eyes closed.
I'm a bit of a drunk, I'll admit it (after all, we are imagining things here). I go to the bar, and order a double... the first of a few. After four of these I wander over to the pool table and start lipping off, critiquing the players, laughing at their attempts to sink whatever ball they are going for. Stripes, solids, they all look the same. The players are beginning to get perturbed.
I wander over to an attractive female and start chatting her up. She's clearly there with the guy next to her, but what do I care? I'm a bit obnoxious... and loud.
Finally, I begin to make disparaging comments about someones mother, and I get a few shots to my head, followed by my face making a quick connection with the floor as I fall like a poplar tree that rotted out at the base in a strong wind.
Police come, people are taken away, I get medical attention, and after sobering up, I want charges laid. Police are reticent. They don't feel that the case will have merit, but I insist. After all, I have witnesses!
We go to court, and there are a slew of people who testify that they saw me get my beat down, but also that I was belligerent. I was loud, obnoxious, I was inappropriately hitting up a female and annoying her boy friend, and a general annoyance to everyone there.
The judge is ready. He's found that the other guy IS guilty of assaulting me, but suspends his sentence as a result of my actions.
He BLAMING ME! He's saying, You deserved a shit kicking because you were drunk. You were annoying everyone, looking for a fight.
While he may never SAY those things, that's what I think he's saying. He's blaming the victim, the poor guy who can't control his drinking.
I NEVER hit anyone. I didn't "deserve" the beat down, but since the judge considered MY actions, I can certainly make that claim. I've been victimized again by the court.

I don't see the above example as being too different than the judgment that was passed that continued to be good fodder for many wanting to make a big deal about the rights of a certain group who continue to be oppressed by another group.

We could go on about NOT putting yourself into situations that are likely to result in actions toward your person that are unwanted.

Does the citizen who walks down the 300 block of Pritchard Avenue with an 18 of beer "deserve" to be stabbed, and robbed of his beer? No. Was it smart? No. The victim didn't deserve it, but unwelcome attention is a reasonable expectation.

Someone is wandering around with a few thousand dollars cash in their wallet and pay for their groceries with cash, taking out the wad and counting out the required payment, flashing the cash to everyone nearby. Smart? No. Do you "deserve" to get rolled for your roll? No, but it wouldn't be out of line to call that person "stupid".

Go to the bar and forget to wear panties and a bra, chat up a guy all night, go back to a quiet area and have him ignore your words "stop". Did you "deserve" that? No. Were you "smart"? No, you were rather stupid. You were a part of setting the stage, and to SAY that isn't wrong.

Best I know, there were no witnesses to the incident Dewer ruled on, so he DID believe her, but considered the evidence when he passed his sentence, and why not? Guess what? Greg Selinger, pontificating about how this should be reviewed after steadfastly saying the Government can't get involved in judicial decisions is playing to a small crowd. The 100 or so were out marching tonight, telling us how they are oppressed daily...

2 comments:

  1. If I am reading the subtext of your froth correctly, you are saying she's partly responsible for being raped? Have I got that right? You believe the victim "set the stage" for the violation - ergo, she is partly to blame for being raped? Sad you would stoop to such a low level to justify Dewar's failure to apply the law properly on a rape conviction - bottom line - there is NO excuse for rape. AND if convicted, there can be no excuse for a Judge who then sentences the newly-convicted felon in a manner that blatantly ignores the well established sentencing guidelines. You're misguided, having read many of your posts you come across as the "tough on crime type" ... except in this case. Curious how so many of you tough-on-crime reactionaries are all too often willing to make exceptions in cases where the weak, marginalized, and/or oppressed are concerned.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Fat Arse, Not at all. She did absolutely NOT "deserve to be raped". Nor did "I" deserve to be pummeled in the bar, the beer box toter beaten, the fool with his money robbed... no one "deserves" crime against them in any way. To SAY that the victim had some influence on the events that brought about the unwanted contact, and to point out that there were things done to influence those things isn't sexist, or wrong. Sentence him to whatever and if it's outside of the prescriptive guidelines, the Crown should appeal. The uproar is over the comments made my Dewar.
    Consider that we live in a country where we need to consider the ethnicity of someone in sentencing, yet we need to exclude the circumstances of a crime in sentencing.
    I am abhorred by the idea of rape, more so than other physical assaults, but I don't find the judges comments,(as I read them reported), over the top, sexist, or anti-victim.
    Let me ask you. In the story about me in the bar, did I deserve a beat down? Did I have some influence on the evenings events? Did I do something to expose myself to the unwanted physical contact? Does that make me "Partially responsible" for my beating?

    ReplyDelete