The Rape of Mr. Smith

[rama putri]

"Mr. Smith, you were held up at gunpoint on the corner of First and Main?"

"Yes."

"Did you struggle with the robber?"

"No."

"Why not?"

"He was armed."

"Then you made a conscious decision to comply with his demands rather than resist?"

"Yes."

"Did you scream? Cry out?"

"No, I was afraid."

"I see. Have you ever been held up before?"

"No."

"Have you ever given money away?"

"Yes, of course."

"And you did so willingly?"

"What are you getting at?"

"Well, let's put it like this, Mr. Smith. You've given away money in the past. In fact, you have quite a reputation for giving your money to charity. How can we be sure that you weren't trying to have your money taken from you by force?"

"Listen, if I wanted -"

"Never mind. What time did this hold-up take place, Mr. Smith?"

"About 11:00 p.m."

"You were out on the streets at 11:00 p.m.? Doing what?"

"Just walking."

"Just walking? You know that it's dangerous being out on the street that late at night. Weren't you aware that you could have been held up?"

"I hadn't thought about it."

"What were you wearing at the time, Mr. Smith?"

"Let's see... a suit. Yes, a suit."

"An expensive suit?"

"Well - yes. I'm a successful businessman, you know."

"In other words, Mr. Smith, you were walking around the streets late at night in a suit that practically advertised the fact that you might be a good target for some easy money, isn't that so? I mean, if we didn't know better, Mr. Smith, we might even think that you were asking for this to happen, mightn't we?"

From "The Legal Bias Against Rape Victims (The Rape of Mr. Smith)" by Siobhan Morrissey.

 

[Dash]

I dont get it

 

[conquistador69]

Sure you do ...

I dont get it

I'm not sure what prompted the poster to put this up ...
but if you read between the lines, most of us likely "get it".

It's an allegorical "cross-examination" of a man who got
robbed, in the same manner that Rape Victims routinely
get hostilely "cross-examined" during Rape cases.

This type of "cross-examination" never happens to male
robbery victims, because it would be viewed as unseemly
to blame a robbery or attempted murder victim, yet at
the same time, it is a commonplace event to treat the
victim of a violent Rape in this manner.

The questions this allegory asks is: How is it acceptable
to treat any victim of violent crime in this manner? Why
are the standards of treatment so different for Rape?

Anyway, enough of me and the soapbox ... *grin*
Cheers,
Conquistador

 

[sorely]

Very well explained

 

[BuffNaked]

Walking late at night dressed like he has money, what did he expect to happen. Stupid rich people.

 

[Gawd]

But not so funny really... is the fact that we are all being conditioned to think that we don't have the right to safety and security everytime that we walk down any street in any town no matter what our gender, economic status, colour, race, etc...! Criminals get rights every time they break the law... Where are our rights!! Just remember that with rights come incumbent responsibilities...to be a good citizen, help your neighbour, call the cops, make a statement, testify in court, etc. If we all do this we can reclaim society from the thugs and criminals!!

It's not that we're being conditioned, but rather how a defense lawyer can easily turn things around to make the victim look like the perp... and it works! That's the problem.

 

[fuji]

It is actually pretty stupid to walk around in an expensive suit in a bad area at 11pm at night. The guy probably does deserve to be robbed for being such an idiot.

Of course, such a cross examination of either a rapist or robber is equally stupid--it doesn't matter if the victim was "asking for it', the law is the law. Your victim being an idiot is no justification for committing a crime.