Never mind all that rubbish . Is Bettercallsaul dead yet?
Never mind all that rubbish . Is Bettercallsaul dead yet?
Seek and you shall find!
adrienn (09-08-14)
Virgin on the redicilous ha ha!Originally Posted by Claudia23
Seek and you shall find!
adrienn (09-08-14)
Honestly I am gutted by the thanks you got for that
UB40 (09-08-14)
Well the chances are she probably was,at some point.
Did the Judge have a lot of sex,did he/she like it freaky?
Nice idea, but no.
Not at the time of the rape
There was no baby. AFAIK it is a true story; I read it on a blog a few years ago, the piece was written by the woman herself. i can't be certain, but I think that she knew the judge before the rape trial.
This was written up as a guest post on a blog a few years ago; but I can't remember where I read it, and I can't find it online. So, I'm going by memory; I'm not fully certain of some of the fine details, though they aren't really important.
The tattooed woman was at a party, and went to the loo. She was followed, and raped in the loo. That is her story, and I've no reason to doubt it.
At the trial, much was made of the tattoo. It seems that the defence were trying to portray her as a 'slut', a 'slattern', someone who'd had consensual sex but then regretted it, and made an allegation of rape to try to clear herself. It seems that the presence of a tattoo meant that she was a 'wanton woman', the sort of person who would have a tattoo to mark her as such, and who would have sex wherever and whenever she could.
Consent is always a central issue in rape trials; did she say 'yes' or 'no', and if 'no' did she really mean 'yes'. As I remember, there wasn't clear cut evidence of physical injury; the defendant did not deny that they had had sex.
After the verdict, the judge told the jury what had been withheld from them; their expressions indicated to the woman that they realised that they had come to the wrong decision.
The judge told them her occupation; she was (is) a solicitor. Immediately, she changed from a 'wanton woman' and a 'slut' into a middle-class, educated professional who just happened to have a tattoo. A very different person to the one they had been led to believe she was. The judge knew she was a solicitor, but I'm not sure why this information was withheld from the jury. If she was personally known to the judge, the proper course of action would have been for him to recuse himself from the case. Perhaps, he had met her in court, or heard of her on the grapevine; but still.
What's this got to do with escorting? Well, the issue of consent boils down so often to he said/she said. That is, who is the more truthful or reliable witness, the one who makes the better impression on the jury. I don't know how many escorts have tattoos, though I'd guess that as they are often quite recognisable, that many tattoos are photoshopped out. And would an escort's occupation be withheld from a jury?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote