The Darwin Exception

because it's not always survival of the fittest – sometimes the idiots get through

  • Recent Posts

  • Stuff I Blog About

  • Visitors

    • 972,520 People Stopped By
  • Awards & Honors

    Yesh, Right! I don't HAVE any "Awards & Honors" - so nominate me for something - I want one of those badge things to put here. I don't care what it is - make up your own award and give it to me. I'm not picky.
  • Advertisements

CA vs. Spector – Not a Peep – But a Verdict in Utah

Posted by thedarwinexception on September 25, 2007

Not a peep out of the Spector jury – I guess they are watching their movie and noshing on popcorn. Maybe one of them smuggled in their own movie to watch – maybe “Beyond the Valley of the Dolls” or even “Kiss Tomorrow Goodbye.” Or maybe Michael Bay sent them over “Transformers”.

In the well of the courtroom we had some slight action – Donna Clarkson’s lawyers again came before Judge Fidler, case law in hand, to request that the Judge seal Lana Clarkson’s records and personal papers that were given to the court for the trial. Of course, anything entered into evidence is now considered “public record”, but as the attorneys pointed out there were over 5,000 emails alone taken from Lana’s computer, and that’s not counting the utility bills, the medical records, the photographs. The attorneys pointed out to the judge that these things belong to Donna Clarkson, and they were very concerned that they not be released or proliferated.

The judge said he would again take the matter under advisement.

Meanwhile, over in Utah, Jeffs has been found guilty on both charges of being an accomplice to rape. It’s encouraging that after announcing a deadlock, the jury went back in, got rid of one of the jury members, replaced her with an alternate and then came to a unanimous verdict. Of course, it was the wrong verdict, but you can’t have everything. I do though, hope that the Spector jury can follow suit and reach a verdict after deciding they were “at an impasse”. Maybe the trick lies in replacing a juror. If so, let’s hope the Spector jury replaces that foreman. He doesn’t exactly seem to be quite in touch with his fellow panel members – he announced that there was just no way for them to reach a conclusion, and when polled several jurors disagreed with him. Hopefully the foreman, juror number 10, took some notes about that.

But hopefully the Spector, if they come back with any verdict at all, come back with a more fair verdict than the Jeffs jurors did. This verdict was more an indictment of the Utah laws that set the age of consent at 14 years old and an indictment of the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints than it was an indictment of Jeffs himself. Is Jeffs an unlikable guy? Yup. Should he be locked up for *something*? Yes. But how you can convict a guy of being an accomplice to rape when the alleged rapist himself hasn’t even been convicted – or even charged – with the crime is astonishing.

And after seeing the 19 year old cousin who supposedly raped this girl testify on the stand, it’s clear why no one has charged him with the crime. Is it possible to commit rape when you have no idea what sex is, let alone “consent” or “rape”? This guy’s idea of courting the alleged victim was to unzip his pants and expose himself to her. He is as much a victim of the FLDS cult as his “wife” was. It’s really like putting a 6 year old on trial for rape – this guy had about as much knowledge of girls and sex as an average 6 year old would.

The jury got this one wrong – they didn’t like the cult, they didn’t like marrying off 14 year old girls and they didn’t like the indoctrination tapes they heard that encouraged girls to “do their wifely duty”, “go forth and multiply” and “submit and obey”. But being oppressive to women and brainwashing women isn’t a crime. And neither is spiritual counseling. This is a verdict that sits at the top of a slippery slope. The FLDS is a fringe group that most anyone who has evolved past the values and mores of the 1950’s – and lives outside of the Middle East – will find alarming and abhorrent, but what happens when these laws are used to prosecute unpopular priests and rabbis who counsel their followers to stay in unhappy marriages? Will they, too, be accomplices to rape?

Hopefully the one good thing that comes out of this is that Utah will wake up and change the age of consent to something more appropriate and in line with the values of the residents. This verdict seems to indicate that at least one jury thinks the age is too low.


31 Responses to “CA vs. Spector – Not a Peep – But a Verdict in Utah”

  1. Lajet said

    I wish I knew more about the Utah statute and the jury instructions to understand the jury’s verdict. But I won’t let that stop me from trying defend the jury’s verdict.

    Suppose Mr. A holds a gun to the head of Mr. M and tells him to have sex with Ms. N. He also tells Ms. N to do what Mr. M wants.

    Mr. M does it. So does Ms. N.

    Both do it because a gun is at their head.

    Has Mr. M raped Ms. N?
    Has Mr. A raped Mr. M and Ms. N.

    What is the difference between holding a gun to someone’s head, and telling people to do something knowing that if you don’t you risk ostracism (with no place to go), financial ruin (well, you don’t actually own anything, but what is “lent” to you is taken away), possible “reassignemnt” within the community (losing contact with family and friends), and possibly the same consequences for your family members. oh yea, and there are rumors of people who disappear and are never seen again. And by the way, getting out of the community is next to impossible, and if you do, you probably don’t have a clue what to do and where to go. And you’ve not only been threated, you’ve seen these consequences for others who have disobeyed.

    I don’t think your average religious leader, even very paternalistic religions, have that level of consequences. You may risk damnation later on. You may risk excommunication. But not the rest of it, I don’t think.

    I’m not sure the issue is religion. It isn’t just eternal damnation that provides the threat and coerction against will.

    Now, add to that that:
    There was no legal marriage so there was no “wifely duty” to counsel.

    Ms. N was 14, which is statutory rape unless by a husband.

    NOt sure this is a fair analysis. Just trying to think things through.

  2. Lajet said

    Suppose Mr. M isn’t all that upset about having a gun to his head and told to have sex with Ms. N. Suppose he likes the idea. Does that matter?
    I’m not sure.
    Seems to me the issue is whether he would have acted on those thoughts/feelings/wishes without the gun to his head. And I’m not sure we know the answer, but he didn’t come across as someone who would do that.

  3. I don’t know. This one is difficult for me, because I genuinely don’t like the defendant and I really do think he should be in prison – for something. But I just don’t think this is the right charge. Not that what he advocates isn’t wrong – but this is just the wrong charge.

    Let me throw out this scenario – and see if you can see whay I think the way I do.

    Let’s take a state – Idaho – and say there is a powerful enclave of Jewish people that live there. The state doesn’t like them – for some unknown reason – too much political power, maybe.

    So the state starts to look a little closer at the lot of them – and finds Rabbi Yosef seems to be the main man. They start to harass Rabbi Yosef for all sorts of things – giving him parking tickets, auditing him, whatever.

    Then they find a former member of the Jewish community from Idaho – and the state talks to her/him, and finds out that when the former members son was 8 days old, Rabbi Yosef cut the kids foreskin off. So the state decides they will charge Rabbi Yosef with Aggravated Battery and disfigurement – on a minor. The parents will testify that Rabbi Yosef talked them into allowing him to do this under the cloak of religious counsel and the culture and spirit of their community. It’s a long standing religious rite and ritual that the Jewish community adheres to.

    Should the state follow through with the prosecution of Rabbi Yosef for aggravated battery? Why or why not?

    Show your work.


  4. Katprint said

    If religeous leaders become reluctant to perform not-legal (for example, without a marriage license) religeous marriage ceremonies involving underage girls as a result of the Jeffs verdict, I am OK with that.

    Uncoerced underage girls who REALLY want to get married can still go through the legal processes with their fiance, whether that is to get a formal court order or merely to get a marriage license at the County Recorder then have the marriage solemnized by the justice of the peace. Similar to the legal processes by which minors can get abortions without parental consent, or can get emancipated.

    I agree with Lajet that a person can commit a sex crime at the direction of another person (who is the mastermind/accomplice) even if the first person is personally lacking in capacity to understand or comprehend that a crime is taking place. By way of example, I have heard that some of the child pornography involves children having sex with other children; that would make the pornographer an accomplice to rape despite the victims not being rapists in the criminal sense.

  5. Cacafuego said

    The circumsion analogy doesn’t really hold water because you have 2000+ years of tradition & custom (and not just amongst Jews) to go by. Although that hasn’t kept some seriously penis-focused circumsion “victims” from suing their pediatricians and moells (sp?) for circumsizing them without their consent. Female circumsion might be a better analogy re Jeffs, but even then, when it gets down to it, that doesn’t fly either. Basically you have a man who has decided to enact an eugenics program, picking and chosing not only who marries who, but who *breeds* with who, one that did not appear to exist (at least, certainly not to this extent) before he took over control of the cult/sect. He appears, from what I can tell, to be following the selective breeding charts used by dog breeders to create show dogs–ones that look good, exhibit certain strong characteristics, and are docile in the ring (ie, don’t fight their handlers and other dogs and do what they’re told). Traditionally, that means breeding uncles and great uncles to nieces/great-nieces and cousins to cousins. Sometimes half-brother to half-sisters. The whole point behind going after Jeffs is to legally dismantle what, in all likelihood, is turning into another Jonestown/Waco situation with the FLDS. Also, the drain on the tax-payers of Utah and Arizona re all these “lost boys” and escapee women being jettisoned into the community with little to no education or employable skills must be considerable.

    Someone asked why the victim’s stepfather wasn’t charged as an accessory as well, since he was one of the higher ups in the church. TUrns out he’s dead, and that he died under very mysterious circumstances not long after Jeffs took full power of the sect and began making breaking up families.

    Re Spector jury: just before the KTLA talking heads signed off for the afternoon, they commented on that the jury has ordered in dinner. Something they NEVER do, as they usually leave by 4-5pm. I suspect we might finally be on the verge of a verdict–possibly tomorrow.

  6. Cathy said

    I agree with you Kim. What was going on with the FLDS was no secret to the state. They almost encouraged it by handing out welfare checks and looking the other way. I think the fact that the victim (and I believe she was a victim) went to a civil attorney first let the D.A. know that she was serious and would proceed one way or the other. It would not have looked good if this issue got exposed from a civil court and ignored by a criminal court. Look at all the media exposure this has gotten. It tore the bandage off of a big ugly wound that needed medical attention long ago. Gross description huh? Just my opinion. Love Ya Kimmer!

  7. Lajet said

    I can see how your scenario is troubling. And it certainly could happen. Probably has happened – and it shouldn’t. So in answer to your question – No, the state shouldn’t follow through in your scenario.

    I don’t see the element of coercion in your scenario. The members all agreed with the teachings of the religion; they were not coerced to comply with the teachings of religion. Perhaps they agreed with the religion to avoid unwanted spiritual consequences, or excommunication. That doesn’t rise to coercion. If that was all Jeffs threatened with, then I don’t think the case would be as good.

    Well, that’s where I am now. Sure wish I knew more about the statute and jury instructions. I think I’m about the same place you are – but leaning on the other side of the fence. So please come up with more “but what about.” I find this case fascinating.

  8. The circumsion analogy doesn’t really hold water because you have 2000+ years of tradition & custom (and not just amongst Jews) to go by.

    As well as marrying off your daughters as soon as they hit puberty. The FLDS church didn’t invent this tradition – it was not long ago in this country that if you weren’t married by the time you were 16 you were considered an “old maid” and quite unmarryable. The national average age of marriage has only increased – not decreased, largely influenced by life expectancy. It made no sense to marry in your 20’s 2000 years ago when you were probably going to die in your 40’s.

    My own gradmother was pregnant with her third child on her 17th birthday – it was customary for girls of that era to be married by the time they were 15.

    Basically you have a man who has decided to enact an eugenics program, picking and chosing not only who marries who, but who *breeds* with who,

    Another tradition long endorsed and utilized in many cultures and communities – go rewatch Fiddler on the Roof or Hello Dolly. And Tevya’s daughters were about the same age as the accuser in this case.

    Also, the drain on the tax-payers of Utah and Arizona re all these “lost boys” and escapee women being jettisoned into the community with little to no education or employable skills must be considerable.

    As considerable as the welfare checks they hand out monthly to practicing members?


  9. Lajet said

    Good points Kim. You’ve got me coming back to the uncomfortable position on the top of the fence.

    But I’m still stuck on this coercion. In Fiddler on the Roof the family and it’s members had a choice whether to follow the teachings of the church. There’s wasn’t someone outside dictating who they had to marry – and who, if they didn’t behave properly, might decide to take away their family – or worse.

    it’s entirely possible that if Jeffs didn’t coerce anyone, jsut suggested to the parents that this person would make for a proper arranged marraige, that everything else would be the same. The parents would have taken the suggestion or hte revered one. The girls woudl have married off with her parent’s uncoerced consent. They would have couseled wifely duty. Everything could be the same as it is. But htat’s not what happened. And while everything MIGHT have been the same in this case, there would have been some case to come along where the parents or the girl said no. But we’ll never know if that was this case, becuase Jeff’s was coercive.
    I think (but still not positive.)

  10. Lisa Ann said

    Kim – as I said on AFCA, I was uncomfortable with the charges in the Jeffs case. We never did come up with a phrase that described the opposite of “jury nullifcation”, did we? (If I’m understanding jury nullification correctly – where the jurors decide, yes, the law was broken – but the law is wrong so we’ll find the defendent not guilty.) But I think that’s what happened in the Jeffs case – the jury was appalled at the practices of this group, and so found the leader guilty. Slippery slope indeed.

    Lisa Ann

  11. Cacafuego said

    The FLDS didn’t invent marrying off daughters the moment they hit puberty, and they didn’t invent incest or cannibalism, but if they were engaging in either under the claim it was was part of their religion (well, they’re definitely practicing incest, which, apparently, is another charge in another case Jeffs is facing), they’d find themselves in the same spot as the rape case. But then again, marrying off your daughters that young might also explain the staggering amount of child bed death and infant mortality back then, too. So just because it was a common practice doesn’t mean it was a smart one–as evidenced by the larger culture deciding child brides aren’t a good idea anymore and changing accordingly (like it also did re slavery & suffrage).

    Utah has looked the other way re the FLDS for a long time because the LDS heirarchy was willing to do so. However, over the last 20 years more and more non Mormons are moving into Utah and making themselves felt in the legislature. Utah’s LDS has always been something of a “subculture” within the larger culture of the USA, and the FLDS a subculture within *that* subculture. (When I travelled through the state for the first time in 1995, I wasn’t able to buy a cup of coffee, and all the soda machines vended Sprite and Fanta. And forget about buying smokes. I’ve been told this is no longer the case in SLC.) But Utuah is rapidly becoming a HUGE retirement community. Lots of people from California are moving there, to get away from LA & SF. The old power structure was willing to turn a blind eye to the FLDS welfare scams, etc. because odds were they all related to them, somehow. The newer power structure isn’t.
    And they’re sick of paying for polygamists on welfare. Even then, the Utah authorities were willing to look the other way, as long as the FLDS kept themselves (relatively) below radar. But with Jeffs taking over and exiling 100s of young men & boys, that guarenteed that the ever-growing non-LDS community in the state would become increasingly vocal about doing finally doing something to address the issue.

  12. rogerr said

    While the age of consent in Utah is 14, that does not apply if the other person is 3 years older or intice or lures the younger person into sex. The whole marriage was against her wishes. I am just curious had all of you Jeffs defenders would feel if one of your daughters at age 14 was inticed or lured into sex by her adult cousin. Might be singing a different tune perhaps? Jeffs was the one in charge not the husband.

  13. Judy said

    I agree with you Kim. There are lots of things this guy should go to jail for, but this is a very manipulative prosecution. It is a shame that fringe “religious” groups, by abusing their power and the freedom that we have in the US can cause all religions to lose their rights. I hope that that is not the case in this situation.

    Kim – weigh in on the investigation of “Chelle” for her comments on wishing JF’s untimely demise! Can’t wait to hear your take.

  14. Heather said

    As I understand it, Utah law permits the prosecution of a person who facilitates a rape as an accomplice. A fourteen year old is below the age of consent and cannot be legally married so Jeffs was facilitating statutory rape by coercion and by performing the “marriage ceremony” In addition, it is illegal for cousins to marry in Utah because they already have a very high rate of genetic problems caused by inbreeding.

    Useful links:

    Utah Legal Services Handbook on Utah Domestic Law

    The Salt Lake Tribune, which has some articles about the trial:

    An interesting article about the problems caused by polygamy and fundamentalist Mormon cults:

  15. In Fiddler on the Roof the family and it’s members had a choice whether to follow the teachings of the church. There’s wasn’t someone outside dictating who they had to marry – and who, if they didn’t behave properly, might decide to take away their family – or worse.

    But did those kinds of communities *really* have a choice? The matchmaker would sometimes pick someone the girl was not eager to marry – look at “Fiddler on the Roof” and the daughter that was to marry the 3 X her age butcher. She didn’t want to – but was supposed to.

    And look at the daughter who chose to marry the boy outside the faith – she was “excommunicated” and basically lost her whole family – in the end, Tevya still did not even embrace her as the family left the village.

    This is not a new phenomenon – the marrying off of girls at a very young age to men who are picked FOR them. That’s my only point in all of this. It’s not new, and it’s still practiced in many, many cultures.

    But Jeffs isn’t on trial for matchmaking – he’s on trial for rape, which is a whole nother barrel of monkeys.

    And a better question to debate in this case is: Can you rape someone when you have no knowledge of sex? Because if the 19 year old *didn’t* rape the girl, then Jeffs couldn’t be an accomplice. And I’m not convinced Allan Steed was capable of rape with the limited knowledge he had of sex.


  16. But then again, marrying off your daughters that young might also explain the staggering amount of child bed death and infant mortality back then, too.

    This is an excellent point, and one that I think is very, very valid. Just in doing my own genealogy research, I was staggered at the number of “infant deaths” among many of the very, very young mothers in my own extended family tree.

    as evidenced by the larger culture deciding child brides aren’t a good idea anymore and changing accordingly (like it also did re slavery & suffrage).

    I am REALLY hoping that Utah raises their age of consent, as well, after all of this.


  17. I am just curious had all of you Jeffs defenders would feel if one of your daughters at age 14 was inticed or lured into sex by her adult cousin. Might be singing a different tune perhaps? Jeffs was the one in charge not the husband.

    Well I am certainly not a “Jeffs defender”, I think the guy is guilty of lots of things, maybe not this, but a lot of things. But as to how I would feel if my daughter was “enticed” or “lured” into sex, well, I would probably be a hell of a lot more outraged than this girls parents were. And Jeffs wasn’t the one ultimately in charge – her parents were. THEY made the choice to follow this guy and to live in this culture. Not the accuser in this case. It was the parents responsibility to get the fuck out of there – not the girls. This girl had no adult looking out for her best interests – that wasn’t Jeffs responsibility, either, it was her PARENTS. The mother should be charged with neglect, abuse, child endagerment and any other thing you can think of. Why isn’t her mother being charged as an accomplice to rape? She decorated the bedroom for her 14 year old daughter and new son in law – wasn’t that enticement and encouragement?


  18. weigh in on the investigation of “Chelle” for her comments on wishing JF’s untimely demise! Can’t wait to hear your take.

    Oh God.

    She’s a fucking retard. And denying authorship was not a smart thing to do. She certainly holds out that this is her MySpace page in every other instance, why not this one? It’s quite difficult to “hack” someone’s MySpace page, and the history of the page would suggest that it has been maintained and set up by her.

    I think it will be one of the great ironies of all time if Phil goes home a free man and Chelle gets locked up on some Federal charge of threatening a court officer.


  19. A fourteen year old is below the age of consent and cannot be legally married

    Cannot be legally married but CAN consent to sex. There’s a difference.

    Jeffs was facilitating statutory rape

    No, it wasn’t statutory rape. That’s a whole nother thing. It couldn’t be statutory rape because she was 14 – the age of legal consent to have sex. That’s why they had to get Jeffs as an accompolice to RAPE, not statutory rape.


  20. Kim (Canada) said

    Hey folks….
    With regards to the “Chelle” incident on the myspace page – Originally that was posted on the “Spector Team” page which is a site that is up and running thanks to a fellow named Paul Huebl. My understanding is that he is an ex-cop turned Private Inv., and he created that page in support of the Spectors, and because he strongly believes in “Fair trial” and didn’t believe that Spector was going to get that opportunity….As for it getting onto HER myspace page, it was the exact same pic and statement that someone obviously cut and pasted onto her page from Paul Huebl’s….This was added to the “friends” section and could have been added by anyone…
    Now before everyone starts going “wranggy” on me….No I’m not defending her….It wouldn’t surprise me if the freak’n idiot did do something that stupid! I was quite relieved when I heard that they would investigate it further….But in all honesty here, I really believe that some other “idot” is trying to stir up trouble here for her, seeing as their hopes for a “guilty” verdict isn’t quite happening fast enough…

    I say, “sit on it!”

    Two thumbs up!!

  21. Mort Snerd said

    Boy, I am just a very confused old man. I could understand that the Church could make them get married and control their lives. But where does any man get the right to force a “NO” into a “YES”? What “MAN” would force himself on his wife? Lets throw “Women’s Rights” under the bus and go back to them being chattel of the landlord and then argue about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
    A girl/woman said “NO”, everything else is “Foo-Foo dust” and as material as the fact that green men live on Mars. I do not care what law they charged him AND convicted him with. They got Al Capone with income tax evasion. So Mote it be,


  22. Glenda said

    What a fascinating discussion of a very disturbing case. And a diversion while we are WAITING for something to happen in the Spector case. But I really find this case more compelling on the social implications.

    I heartily agree that the statutory rape age should be raised–I honestly had no idea that it was different for each state. How could any legislature believe that 14 can be an age of consent? As a mother of 2 girls, of course I would be outraged to the point of murderous if someone told one of my girls that they had to have sex or go to hell. But, where is the prosecution of the mother for allowing her daughter to be placed in a dangerous situation??

    Other rape prosecutions have been successful when a married woman said “no” but it’s not always the case.

    I am so violently opposed to the concept of a religious sect being able to control their members to such a degree that, like Kim, I want Warren Jeffs in jail on principle alone. But, I never felt from the beginning that this was the path to take.

    My heart went out to that brave girl at her press conference yesterday and good for her for standing up and speaking for all the lost boys and girls. This ultimately becomes a societal problem when the state or other organizations get involved and say that the umbrella of freedom of religion cannot cover elimating basic human rights that this country upholds.
    And what about the laws against polygamy or incest–aren’t these better prosecutorial options rather than a suggestion/coercion to have sex?

  23. Glenda said

    Well two buzzes and a hearing at 1:30 PST. What do you imagine that could be about??

  24. Well two buzzes and a hearing at 1:30 PST. What do you imagine that could be about??

    I know….:sigh: 10 to 1 they are still hung.

    Or else they want the judge to see the pretty pictures they drew in their notebooks.


  25. PollyPolySci said

    A quick glance at the blogger’s criticism of the jury’s verdict yields two points: biased jury and broader implications of jury’s verdict.

    Biased jury – The idea that the jury’s discomfort with the FLDS’s beliefs did NOT contribute to their verdict is a silly idea. The only idea even more silly is the idea that the jury’s verdict was driven solely by their discomfort with the FLDS’s beliefs. The state of Utah does not offer a blanket invitation to sex with 14 year olds. As with most state laws, Utah allows circumstances to guide the legal definition of consent. If coercion (physical, emotional, mental, etc) enters into the circumstances, consent is no longer in operation. The jury’s verdict could only be legally wrong if there was no evidence of coercion. Obviously the prosecution team presented enough evidence to demonstrate that the young woman was coerced.

    Broader implications of verdict – The jury’s verdict does indeed open the possibility that any religious leader may be prosecuted for religious counseling that leads someone under 18 to have sex, but only if that religious counseling becomes coercive. I doubt a Rabbi telling a young woman she should fulfill her wifely duties would be enough evidence for a successful prosecution. But I bet there would be enough evidence if the prosecution team showed that the Rabbi manipulated the male/female composition of his congregation by removing young males, used physical and emotional abuse as a form of punishment, . . . in other words, engaged in all the activities that Jeffs engaged in. Jeffs was convicted for because he religious counseling was out of the mainstream; he was convicted because his religious counseling become coercive and that is in violation of Utah law. I believe that is why, according to a CNN report:

    Juror Ben Coulter told CNN that he initially planned to vote to acquit Jeffs, “until I actually got a chance to look over the laws and read them over and over again.”

    No doubt the state Utah needs to rethink its law regarding at what age a person can be viewed as mature enough to give consent to sexual activities. But the jury was not charged with the task of determining the reasonableness of the law; it was charged with determining if Jeffs violated the law.

  26. I know….:sigh: 10 to 1 they are still hung.

    I’m upping my bet to *definitely* they are hung – the whole damned defense team is coming in – they wouldn’t do that for a question.


  27. A.D.A. said

    Awesome, Tamara! I appreciate you!

  28. Poppy said

    I find it interesting that some people are saying the girl’s *mother* was the one ultimately responsible for her, and suggesting the mother is really the one who should be charged. If I recall correctly, the girl’s stepfather is the one who went to Jeffs and suggested the first cousin as a husband for her. Yet no one is calling for *his* trial! Just seems like a little bit of gender bias…

    On another note, here’s an exaggeration of Lajet’s scenario:
    I’m Ms. N. I’m being held prisoner in a compound by Evil Dictator Mr. A. One day Mr. A brings me into a room with Mr. M, holds a gun to our heads and forces us to perform sexual acts with each other. Would I feel that M had raped me? No. Would I feel that I had raped M? No. Would I feel that Mr. A had raped both of us? Yes.

    I think in the Jeffs case, he, as the leader of the community, did hold a figurative gun to the heads of the girl and her cousin, and I think accessory to rape is an appropriate charge. I think he is responsible for the girl’s parents joining into the coercion. She said “No!”, but they all worked together to force her into submission against her wishes. Actually I think it’s appropriate for the parents and everyone else in the community who contributed to the coercion to also be charged.

    Remember, though, that they were following the instructions of, and led by — Jeffs.

  29. If I recall correctly, the girl’s stepfather is the one who went to Jeffs and suggested the first cousin as a husband for her. Yet no one is calling for *his* trial! Just seems like a little bit of gender bias…

    No, just that it’s kind of pointless to put dead people on trial. But if he was ALIVE – I’d be saying he should be tried, too, right along the girls mother.


  30. Weirdsly said

    I couldn’t watch as much of the Jeffs trial as I wanted, because every time I turned it on, Bob moaned and groaned and whined I couldn’t hear a thing. He even said he’d rather watch Antique’s Roadshow than that trial – and that was saying a lot. But I was impressed and shocked by what I did watch.

    First of all, what’s up with these people abusing their teenagers? Everyone knows that you can’t develop a decent lack of self-esteem if you don’t smoke weed, drink until you pass out, wake up wondering what happened to your panties and why you have that “Not so fresh feeling”, …you know, down there. Or achieve a proper level of self-loathing if you don’t over-indulge at the weekend kegger only to find Monday that a photo of you doing the filthy pirate with some random hogbeast has been uploaded to Facebook and everyone in school has seen it? And these qualities are vital to our way of life – I mean for christ’s sake, without them people would stop running over their credit limit buying useless items to fill the empty space and our entire economy would collapse!

    Secondly, and what is up with the Great Mormon Breeding Project? These people are multiplying like bacteria in a sweaty crotch. I mean, with apologies to Gertrud Stein, tt was just a few years ago that Utah wasn’t even there there. And now you can’t turn around without them running for President. I looked up how it all started and this is what I learned:

    The Book of Mormon starts out with a bunch of Jews in Israel who are tired of running banks and movie production companies. They decide it’s time to set out on a wacky-fun adventure and build a boat to go and colonize the New World. This they do, and hilarity ensues when God curses a bunch of people and turns their skin black, which becomes a source of constant back-pedalling by Mormon apologists decades after the book’s authoring. Jesus Himself later visits the continent and everyone gets all teary-eyed. Jesus says the exact same things he said in the Bible, therefore proving that the book is 100% totally accurate since it matches what it says in The Real Bible. Well, sort of. Jesus changed a few things, but it’s more or less the same.

    While the Smithsonian and other important archealogical instutions call it a bunch of bullshit, the book is rabidly popular among Mormons. The Book of Mormon is currently #99,538 on the bestseller list, because the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Day Saints prints millions of these things a day and reguarly dumps them by air over unsuspecting cities. This is actually too bad, because they will also send you a copy for free delivered by hand by two attractive young men, if you so request.

    So I learned that if we don’t stop this hick breeding project, there will be no room for the important people, the illegial immigrants. Personally, I’ll take Santeria, chili rellanos and Bohemia over the LDS, macaroni salad and Kool-Aide any day! Which brings me to my point – Kool-Aide is clearly the answer to the problem. We’ve just got to encourage them to regularly go all Waco/Jim Jones on us and the problem will be self-limiting. I was frankly surprised that the ATF didn’t get int there and take advantage of those 14 year old virgins. I mean these people were so naïve about sex, you really could give them that old line about it tasting like salty cucumbers and they’d go for the bone-a-phone.

    Hey, it’s worked for the Catholic Church right?
    © JB 2007

  31. Davis said

    Some religions have more kick than others in this country. If the 14 year old girl woulda married Woody Allen, you’d a never heard anything about it.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: