| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:39 pm Post subject: S Korea convicts husband of rape |
 |
|
Finally some justice...oh wait...
| Quote: |
A court in South Korea has found a husband guilty of raping his wife, in what is thought to be the first such verdict in the country's history.
The 42-year-old man met his wife, a 25-year-old Filipina, through a match-making agency and they married in 2006.
But the court in the southern city of Busan found that the new bride's new life was far from happy.
News reports describe the judgement as the first to recognise the existence of sexual coercion in marriage.
In its ruling the court said: "The accused put her through numerous hardships and threatened her with weapons to satisfy his desire, in breach of her right to self-determination in sexual acts."
But the convicted man has not been sent to jail - his 30-month sentence has been suspended for three years.
Foreign brides
South Korean human rights groups have welcomed the ruling but say that social attitudes remain out of touch with the rapid advances women have enjoyed in employment and education.
Meanwhile the number of foreign brides being brought into the country has increased rapidly over the past decade, said to have been driven by a decline in the number of South Korean women choosing to stay in the countryside.
Some rural councils have even subsidised overseas marriage trips for their local men. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 3:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Although the sentence is a joke, it's still a step forwards in the right direction. The article notes this is thought to be the first such verdict.
Not only is the victim a woman but she is also a foreigner. This seems to be something of a historical milestone. If this sets a precedent that a wife can be raped by her husband then it's another step in the right direction and something that is long overdue.
That said the guy should be in jail and for more than three years...oh well, if he's got any brains he'll treat her better from on now, if they don't get divorced over this. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Guri Guy
Joined: 07 Sep 2003
Location: Bamboo Island
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
1 step forward and 1 step back is more like it. He was half heartedly charged. However, didn't the judge chastise and scold the wife for not communicating with her husband and not understanding Korean culture?
WTF... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ManintheMiddle
Joined: 20 Oct 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Small steps in the right direction, indeed.
Now if we could have penalties for hagwon owners who hire Western female teachers in the hopes of getting them into bed, we'd really have something. I can't tell you how many stories I've heard from these would-be victims. A couple were even brought to a hotel in Seoul upon arrival and introduced to friends of the owners in a suite who were in pajamas. Many Korean men think that all Western female teachers are easy to get in the sack. So their Neanderthal attitude toward domestic help and mail order bride marriages comes as little surprise, unfortunately. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
1 step forward and 1 step back is more like it. He was half heartedly charged. However, didn't the judge chastise and scold the wife for not communicating with her husband and not understanding Korean culture?
WTF... |
It's hard to say because the OP forgot to post the link. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| He was drunk and he was very sorry after and his victim was a woman? Get out of jail free card in Korea, pretty much. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 8:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| nevermind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dmbfan
Joined: 09 Mar 2006
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
ED209
Your avatat is a little uncalled for....in my opinion.
It offends me... 
dmbfan |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jandar
Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Guri Guy wrote: |
1 step forward and 1 step back is more like it. He was half heartedly charged. However, didn't the judge chastise and scold the wife for not communicating with her husband and not understanding Korean culture?
WTF... |
Having ontained the link to the original article, I see no mention of such a scolding.
Do you have a source or are you repeating a rumor? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJjr
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 9:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| When are these guys going to learn that these mail order brides are into them for their money and not sex and definitely not cooking and cleaning? These guys must be reading too many Harlequin romance novels or some shit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
caniff
Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 10:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RJjr wrote: |
| When are these guys going to learn that these mail order brides are into them for their money and not sex and definitely not cooking and cleaning? These guys must be reading too many Harlequin romance novels or some shit. |
Yeah, that must be it. Korean rednecks are too romantic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RJjr
Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 16, 2009 11:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| caniff wrote: |
| RJjr wrote: |
| When are these guys going to learn that these mail order brides are into them for their money and not sex and definitely not cooking and cleaning? These guys must be reading too many Harlequin romance novels or some shit. |
Yeah, that must be it. Korean rednecks are too romantic. |
Haha, damn straight! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003
Location: I walk along the avenue
|
| Posted: Sat Jan 17, 2009 12:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
Urban Myth wrote:
| Quote: |
Although the sentence is a joke, it's still a step forwards in the right direction. The article notes this is thought to be the first such verdict.
|
And it wasn't until relatively recently that marital rape was fully criminalized in the UK.
| Quote: |
Soon after R. v. Steele, the continuing erosion of marital exemption was stalled when the Sexual Offenses (Amendment) Act of 1976 was passed. The Act codified the common law of rape and included the phrase "unlawful sexual intercourse with a woman" within the definition of rape. (42) Because the Act did not provide a definition of "unlawful," rape continued to be defined under common law and was thus construed as meaning "outside of marriage." (43) Under this definition, rape within marriage was not "unlawful" and marital immunity would thus persist.
Not long after passage of the Act of 1976, however, the English judiciary was faced with a landmark series of marital rape cases. These cases would lead to the elimination of the martial rape exemption. The first of the series was R. v. R.[1], decided in July 1990 by Justice Owen. (44) The couple involved had married in August 1984 and separated in October 1989, at which time the wife left their home with their child, and went to her parents' house. (45) Two days later, the husband called and told the wife that he was going to seek a divorce. (46) A few weeks later, the husband broke into the home of his wife's parents and either forced or attempted to force (47) his wife to have sex. (4 The question before the court was whether the husband's actions fell under the definition of "unlawful sexual intercourse" as codified in the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act of 1976. Naturally, the defense rested on Hale's statement that a man cannot rape his wife and the husband's conduct therefore could not be unlawful. (49) But Justice Owen rejected Hale's statement as being made "at a time when marriage was indissoluble." (50) After reviewing the developing case law and distinguishing each prior case from the present case, (51) Justice Owen made his decision:
I accept that it is not for me to make the law. However, it is for me to state the common law as I believe it to be. If that requires me to indicate a set of circumstances which have not so far been considered as sufficient to negative consent as in fact so doing, then I must do so. I cannot believe that it is a part of the common law of this country that when there has been a withdrawal of either party from cohabitation, accompanied by a clear indication that consent to sexual intercourse has been terminated, that that does not amount to a revocation of that implicit consent. In those circumstances, it seems to me that there is ample here ... [that] would enable the prosecution to prove a charge of rape or attempted rape against this husband. (52)
|
I would imagine the history is similar for most western countries.
http://tinyurl.com/8du5qm |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
