Saudi millionaire 'accidentally tripped and penetrated' girl. doesn't go to jail

[Le0]

Well, he must have also tripped and accidentally slipped some ££ into the judge's pocket. But on the bright side, not all Arabs are billionaires.

 

[shelke]

I see this thread is a complete mess already. According to the Telegraph, he completely denied the rape:

You must be registered for see links

"I'm fragile," he said. "I fell down but nothing ever happened, between me and this girl nothing ever happened."
He said it was possible he had semen on his hands after the sexual encounter with her friend.
During the trial, Judge Martin Griffiths permitted the rare step of allowing 20 minutes of Abdulaziz's evidence to be heard in private.

This could be anything from jury intimidation (tampering), solicitation on part of the girl and case being pulled by the girl herself over some settlement. Solicitation is quite the epidemic amongst teenage girls, and the trend is only growing in many countries; Germany and Japan being the worst (reported) offenders. Giving sexual favours to shop-keepers to ease off the cost burdens is a growing problem in USA as well. There were reports of 12 year old young girls offering oral *** for 20 dollars to high-school seniors. So, this cannot be ignored as well.

I am not siding with anyone, as we do not know the details. However, the private evidence is quite questionable. Either, the entire jury (and the judge) were bought before this case even began, or the girl did solicit herself (along with her 24 year old friend) and tried to claim fowl play and the man had the evidence of the aforementioned arrangement between them, as it only took the jury 30 minutes to deliberate.

If he did provide enough evidence to create reasonable doubt, I can see why this happened. But ... an obligatory:

You must be registered for see images

Sorry, couldn't resist.

 

[The Demon Hawk]

Money always solves your problems.

You must be registered for see images

Yup, it's the only super power in real life.

Well, he must have also tripped and accidentally slipped some ££ into the judge's pocket. But on the bright side, not all Arabs are billionaires.

Lmfao xd

 

[Avani]

I see this thread is a complete mess already. According to the Telegraph, he completely denied the rape:

You must be registered for see links

 

[Senju Bean]

Why are people jumping to conclusions here?

Why don't you guys take a sip of tea and chill the f*ck out.

 

[Le0]

Sorry but this story is not as obvious to me as it is to you or others. The article says that Abdulaziz offered some evidence in private, we don't even know what that was, and I'm not going to jump into the asumption of him having bribed the judge and the jurors, because it's not how it works.

Unfortunately, that's how bribes work. The idea of evidence being presented in private shouldn't be push aside because the question remains, why was it presented in private and not out in the open? Of course this is not unheard off, the 20 minutes he took to present the evidence in private has been done before but there is a reason why it is classified as a rare step, especially in a rape trial. This is where the suggestion of bribery was brought up.

Now I'm not british so may the brits on this site correct me, but I don't think the british justice system is biased in favor of rich saudi rapists

Of course it is not biased, but the British justice system is known for being poor in standard. There has been more questionable decisions and sentences even before this case and even outside of the rape category.

and I don't know if half an hour of jury deliberation is so unheard of that it raises suspicion.

Half an hour deliberation are normal so anyone who raises any suspicions based on this are not used to the juror system.

the evidence

According to him, his penis might have been poking out of his underwear after the previous encounter with her friend, he also claim that he had some semen on his hand(s) but the fact of the matter is the traces of his semen were found on her vaginna. He also claimed that she seduced him but then he claimed nothing ever happen between them.

I wouldn't be so naive to believe that the 18 yrs old girl accompanied the businessman simply because he offered a ride, and even went up to his flat with her friend just like that. Obviously the man wanted to have ***, and obviously the girls were into it, otherwise a 18 yrs old girl doesn't hang out in casinos with a rich man that invites her and her friend to his home, and said little girl doesn't just take a sleep on the couch innocently while her friend is being fcked next room.

Let's question 13 year old girls going to 16+ concerts.
Let's question 16 year old girls going to 18+ parties.
Let's question 18 year old girls going to 21+ clubs.
The girl accompany her 24 year old friend to the casino, that's all there is to it. Of course it's always used as an argument by opposing lawyers, most of the time to crack the "victim's" mind and I am certain it played a major role in this case but let's base this on the evidence given, not on the "she wanted money" speculation. The male stated nothing happen but before that claim she seduced him, did it or did it not happen?

(Sorry if I missed anything from the article).

I like your argument but it is purely based on "why was she there?", not on the evidence. If evidence aren't properly used in a case then there shouldn't even be any case in the first place. The male's evidence are not good enough while the female had a decent enough evidence to win the case. I'm still certain the reason the male won the case was due to the simple "why was there there" argument, or who knows, bribery aren't ignored by many as the main reason the male won. Anyways, rep+.

 

[shelke]

Or he settled with the girl and she took the case back. Doesn't make the story less bizarre. Last year it was this guy

You must be registered for see images

Seems like getting your foot on a banana peel on floor means it's time to get laid.

Yes, and I mentioned it being a likelihood. Although her being at his apartment is very ambiguous as her friend clearly went with him to his apartment for ***. It is even mentioned in the article. This does look like solicitation. But, the other aspects cannot be ruled out. Very bizarre case.

Is this a ... running gag or something? Jesus, this is disgusting. I hope this doesn't turn into some internet meme for rape cases.

 

[Avani]

Yes, and I mentioned it being a likelihood. Although her being at his apartment is very ambiguous as her friend clearly went with him to his apartment for ***. It is even mentioned in the article. This does look like solicitation. But, the other aspects cannot be ruled out. Very bizarre case.

Is this a ... running gag or something? Jesus, this is disgusting. I hope this doesn't turn into some internet meme for rape cases.

Not sure but I won't be surprised. First time I heard the reference it was in that Bruce willies movie. But these two are real cases..

 

[Babadook]

And to the people who are defending this idiot "I Tripped" are truly something else

But if he tripped because the girl pulled him onto herself, that's also something else, isn't it?

Anyway, calling out those who 'are defending this idiot's, saying that we are 'something else', is not an argument and it proves nothing, maybe except for the fact that you probably didn't bother reading all my posts. I did admit several times that the man may be lying very well, but there is a chance he said the truth. Anyway, I personally condemn one night stands and getting drunk, so it's not like I condone his allover behavior, I was more like defending the verdict, because it's sad how most people see a thread title or an article title that reads something like 'saudi millionaire calims to have raped a girl accidentally by tripping, gets acquitted', and automatically assume that's all there is to it.

You may think the story is ridiculous, sure it is, but that's not proof. What's ridiculous in my opinion, and scary at the same time, is how people would sentence a man to jail because they are lazy to give it a second thought, and that you rather believe that the court was bribed without having any proof, just because it's convenient. Then when someone points out that there is another side of the story , all people can do is shrug off the issue by a 'yawn' or simply ignore my questions- because they know they have no answers.

So let me ask you too to show me conclusive proof corroborated by evidence of witnesses and signs of violence.

Let me also ask, what story would you people actually believe? He could have just said that he was asleep the whole time and has no idea how his semen got there, he could have said he forgot what happened that night as he was drunk. He coudl have said that after having *** with the first girl, he also had consensual *** with the younger one as well. He could have bribed the 24 yrs old girl to go along with his lies.

Unfortunately, that's how bribes work.

Well of course bribes are done in secret, like most crimes are done with the intent of keeping it hidden...what I was saying is that you don't just go accuse a court of having been bribed every time you read about a decision that's not in favor of you.

The idea of evidence being presented in private shouldn't be push aside because the question remains, why was it presented in private and not out in the open? Of course this is not unheard off, the 20 minutes he took to present the evidence in private has been done before but there is a reason why it is classified as a rare step, especially in a rape trial. This is where the suggestion of bribery was brought up.

And we don't know exactly what he said in private, right? It could be anything.

Of course it is not biased, but the British justice system is known for being poor in standard. There has been more questionable decisions and sentences even before this case and even outside of the rape category.

There are poorly made trials and poorly substantiated verdicts everywhere, but it's possible that the prosecution was at fault, might have made mistakes during the trial. Even if it was a mistaken decision, there is no reason to jump in the conclusion that the jury or the court must have been bribed. As you say, it's possible that it was simply one of those poorly conducted cases.

According to him, his penis might have been poking out of his underwear after the previous encounter with her friend, he also claim that he had some semen on his hand(s) but the fact of the matter is the traces of his semen were found on her vaginna. He also claimed that she seduced him but then he claimed nothing ever happen between them.

All that can be known for sure about what happened, can be summed up in two sentences:

- two girls willingly accompanied a rich guy, going up to his flat, staying there all night
- first the older girl had *** with the man, but then somehow semen got on teh body of the younger one as well, who later accused the man of rape

That's all. The only fact that suggests the possibility of rape, is the presence of semen, so it's a crucial point. because, from this point on, the question is how did it got there. We've got two stories, and I see odd things in the girl's version as well, but people make the mistake of focusing too much on the guy's story just because it sounds ridiculous. But ridiculous doesn't mean it's impossible, and even if it's hard to believe, it doesn't make the girl's version automatically true. I'm still waiting for people to show me the proof that convinces them beyond a doubt that the girl said the truth and rape happened.

As for the man saying that she tried to seduce him, but nothing ever happened...I think he meant that nothing sexual happaned (vulgarly: he didn't fck her). But he did admit that there was an accidental kiss.
So, what's so impossible about his story? That the girl pulled him over, he tripped, and his jizzy hands/penis touched with the girl's body? I know it's weird and hard to believe, but if it's not proven that that's not what happened, then I think I have a legit basis to have my reasonable doubts. That's all I'm saying. If you have no doubts at all and you would have voted guilty with a clear conscience, good for you, but please tell me what conclusive proof did convince you exactly? Because the man making weird statements alone doesn't prove much. It could just as well be a proof that he just doesn't remember.

The girl accompany her 24 year old friend to the casino, that's all there is to it. Of course it's always used as an argument by opposing lawyers, most of the time to crack the "victim's" mind and I am certain it played a major role in this case but let's base this on the evidence given, not on the "she wanted money" speculation. The male stated nothing happen but before that claim she seduced him, did it or did it not happen?

I think I explained that above. He did admit there was a kiss when the girl pulled him on herself, he just meant that there was no ***. Of course he could be lying. But as you just said, let's base this on the evidence. Where are the witnesses or the signs of violence to suggest that the girl was raped?
I'm making speculations because there are so many possiblities here because of the lack of enough evidence, that I have doubts.

I like your argument but it is purely based on "why was she there?", not on the evidence. If evidence aren't properly used in a case then there shouldn't even be any case in the first place. The male's evidence are not good enough while the female had a decent enough evidence to win the case. I'm still certain the reason the male won the case was due to the simple "why was there there" argument, or who knows, bribery aren't ignored by many as the main reason the male won. Anyways, rep+.

Well, thanks for the rep, at least you use your brain, not just trying to shrug it off.
As for your statement that if there is not enough evidence, there shouldn't be a case at all..sorry but I disagree. As you admitted, the quality of the british justice system is rather bad, so sociologically there is a pressure on both the prosecution and the court to produce successful cases. I can mostly speak for my country though, but my teachers (even judges themselves) often criticize the poor quality of the lower courts. And there are cases when the prosecution/the police launched a trial and it turns out their evidence was questionable. If there would be no case without good evidence, by that logic, all accusations should end with a guilty verdict. But obviously that's not the case.

Also, I think my argument was a bit more than just 'why was she there'. I did deal with the question of evidence, because I don't see enough evidence. So we see this totally differently
In any case, the story is not so obvious to me, hence my doubts. And if the jurors on this trial (and I don't know what majority is required for a jury verdict to reach, I guess it's a simple majority), so if at least half of the jurors share similar doubts with me, then that explains their verdict. There is nothing wrong with that legally, they had their doubts, just like I do, no need to accuse them of being bribed. With that much effort you could just also accuse me of being corrupt...

 

[shelke]

Not sure but I won't be surprised. First time I heard the reference it was in that Bruce willies movie. But these two are real cases..

Jesus ****ing Christ ... Humanity never ceases to disgust me.

 

[Le0]

Well of course bribes are done in secret, like most crimes are done with the intent of keeping it hidden...what I was saying is that you don't just go accuse a court of having been bribed every time you read about a decision that's not in favor of you.

It is not an accusation as it is not pathetic to defend the "offender". It is simply an assumption purely based on the actions / what they witness which they find odd and suspicious.

And we don't know exactly what he said in private, right? It could be anything.

Exactly.

There are poorly made trials and poorly substantiated verdicts everywhere, but it's possible that the prosecution was at fault, might have made mistakes during the trial. Even if it was a mistaken decision, there is no reason to jump in the conclusion that the jury or the court must have been bribed. As you say, it's possible that it was simply one of those poorly conducted cases.

I also mentioned sentences e.g murderers sentenced to less than 10 years in prison for murder (with intent).

To the post: Valid argument.

All that can be known for sure about what happened, can be summed up in two sentences:

- two girls willingly accompanied a rich guy, going up to his flat, staying there all night
- first the older girl had *** with the man, but then somehow semen got on teh body of the younger one as well, who later accused the man of rape

That's all. The only fact that suggests the possibility of rape, is the presence of semen, so it's a crucial point. because, from this point on, the question is how did it got there. We've got two stories, and I see odd things in the girl's version as well, but people make the mistake of focusing too much on the guy's story just because it sounds ridiculous. But ridiculous doesn't mean it's impossible, and even if it's hard to believe, it doesn't make the girl's version automatically true. I'm still waiting for people to show me the proof that convinces them beyond a doubt that the girl said the truth and rape happened.

As for the man saying that she tried to seduce him, but nothing ever happened...I think he meant that nothing sexual happaned (vulgarly: he didn't fck her). But he did admit that there was an accidental kiss.

He claimed that he went into the living room with his erect penis, he saw the girl laying down in an awkward position so he decided to get her a t-shirt, the longest he could find, while having either both or one of his hand(s) covered in semen and proceed to offer it to her and asked if she would like to stay or not and the girl quickly opened both her eyes and pulled him on top of her and she kissed him and he kissed her back and she put his hand on her crotch but she then felt "embarassed" because she realize he was not in the mood - despite kissing her while in the room with an erected penis. He's a man in his late 40's so I can assume viagra played a part but there was no mention of viagra therefore that should not be counted in this argument / debate.

- Why would a man able to spend a few minutes of his time to carefully find a shirt, the longest one, but did not find the time to wash his hand?

- Why would a man entered the living room in his underwear with his erected penis poking out of it just to offer someone a shirt - while asking if they wanted to leave or not?

Bold : He claimed he kissed her back, there was no accident involved.

So, what's so impossible about his story? That the girl pulled him over, he tripped, and his jizzy hands/penis touched with the girl's body? I know it's weird and hard to believe, but if it's not proven that that's not what happened, then I think I have a legit basis to have my reasonable doubts. That's all I'm saying. If you have no doubts at all and you would have voted guilty with a clear conscience, good for you, but please tell me what conclusive proof did convince you exactly? Because the man making weird statements alone doesn't prove much. It could just as well be a proof that he just doesn't remember.

Bold : I'm playing devil's advocate. I'm on the middle. There are points that made me find it believable and points that made me find it unbelievable. The underlined post is what made me find it unbelievable.

Where are the witnesses or the signs of violence to suggest that the girl was raped?
I'm making speculations because there are so many possiblities here because of the lack of enough evidence, that I have doubts.

I wonder the exact same thing. The part where she woke her friend up and assumed she was dead because she did not respond to it was odd, especially so when there have been no mention of her other friend's testimony.

Well, thanks for the rep, at least you use your brain, not just trying to shrug it off.
As for your statement that if there is not enough evidence, there shouldn't be a case at all..sorry but I disagree. As you admitted, the quality of the british justice system is rather bad, so sociologically there is a pressure on both the prosecution and the court to produce successful cases. I can mostly speak for my country though, but my teachers (even judges themselves) often criticize the poor quality of the lower courts. And there are cases when the prosecution/the police launched a trial and it turns out their evidence was questionable. If there would be no case without good evidence, by that logic, all accusations should end with a guilty verdict. But obviously that's not the case.

Also, I think my argument was a bit more than just 'why was she there'. I did deal with the question of evidence, because I don't see enough evidence. So we see this totally differently
In any case, the story is not so obvious to me, hence my doubts. And if the jurors on this trial (and I don't know what majority is required for a jury verdict to reach, I guess it's a simple majority), so if at least half of the jurors share similar doubts with me, then that explains their verdict. There is nothing wrong with that legally, they had their doubts, just like I do, no need to accuse them of being bribed. With that much effort you could just also accuse me of being corrupt...

Doubts is what create a fair trial so I'm glad there are people with doubts.
I did not look for other replies you posted to others because well, most of their replies are just based on an already set mind, there was no room for acceptance and most vent their angers out so it would be a waste of time.
Their excuse of a successful case are a safe verdict, hardly successful.
Lack of valid evidence would create a flawed case, it'll turn from a trial into a he/she said he/she said, it would turn into a morally verdict rather than a fair trial. A case without the proper evidence is no case.
What country are you from?
As I stated before, there is no accusation. To accuse you of being corrupt based on this is like stating "I am right for what I believe, if you differ from me then you are wrong".
Anyways, if you can answer the underline part with something reasonable and valid then you definately will be able to convince me of your doubts.

 

[Tyris]

UK courts... I guess they would fix it by making another documentary about crime rate in another nation yet again.

They do the same in the good ole US of A and other places sadly

 

[Babadook]

It is not an accusation as it is not pathetic to defend the "offender". It is simply an assumption purely based on the actions / what they witness which they find odd and suspicious.

But assuming that someone has committed a crime is the definition of accusation. Let me also emphasize that there is a principle that postulates an assumption of innocence. Not guilt. Suspicion is enough to start an investigation, or even get the case to a trial, but it's not beyond reasonable doubt.

Exactly.

So if it could be anything, why immediately assume it must have been bribe?

He claimed that he went into the living room with his erect penis, he saw the girl laying down in an awkward position so he decided to get her a t-shirt, the longest he could find, while having either both or one of his hand(s) covered in semen and proceed to offer it to her and asked if she would like to stay or not and the girl quickly opened both her eyes and pulled him on top of her and she kissed him and he kissed her back and she put his hand on her crotch but she then felt "embarassed" because she realize he was not in the mood - despite kissing her while in the room with an erected penis. He's a man in his late 40's so I can assume viagra played a part but there was no mention of viagra therefore that should not be counted in this argument / debate.

This is what I found:

"Abdulaziz said he had accidentally fallen on the youngster as she tried to seduce him, and that was how traces of his DNA came to be in her vagina.

He said he had gone to wake her to offer her a T-shirt to sleep in or a taxi ride home, but she had pulled him on top of her and placed his hand between her legs.

He said it was possible he had semen on his hands after the sexual encounter with her friend."

You must be registered for see links

[Afterwards] I went to the sitting room to switch off the TV and drink some water – I saw her, she was in an awkward situation the way she was laid down,' he said.

He continued: 'I found her a T-shirt, I found her the longest T-shirt so that she would be comfortable, I said “there's a T-shirt, if you want to sleep here you're welcome, if not I will get you a taxi”.

'Her eyes were closed, she opened her eyes straight away, it was like a giggle and straight away she kissed me and I kissed her back – I'm not proud of it, but I would never have done anything else.'

He claimed she put her hand on the back of his head, then placed his hand on her crotch.

'I think she was embarrassed because she knew I wasn't up for anything, I said [your friend] is sleeping here and if you want you can go.'

Mr Abdulaziz admitted that he went to rouse the sleeping girl wearing only his underpants, and said that his erect penis may have been poking out.

You must be registered for see links

There is this thing called morning erection, I don't see what's the big deal about it.

I didn't bring viagra in the discussion, a 45 yrs old man doesn't necessarily have erection problems.

And again, his story doesn't even look self-contradictory (at least to me there is nothing that can't be reconciled). Sure it doesn't seem like an everyday situation but well, none of us are middle-aged millionaires inviting two girls to our house for the night and we don't get our semen on girls, sure. But reality sometimes produces the most unlikely situations, and I don't see why the man's story couldn't be true.

I also sense a fallacy of false dilemma in the thread. That there is the girl's story (A) and there is the man's story (B), and it's either B or A. But I think you have to examine the stories separately. You have to examine if A is true or not, and if B is true or not. B's story being harder to imagine doesn't make the girl's story true. I see problematic parts about her version too. Why didn't she scream? Why didn't the neighbors hear it? Why was there no fight? Why didn't she immediately make a report to the poilce? Why didn't her girl friend corroborated the 18 yrs old girl's version? Why would a rich guy risk his career when he can buy any girl he wants? Why would he bother sneaking up to the teen girl, when another girl is already lying next to her?

- Why would a man able to spend a few minutes of his time to carefully find a shirt, the longest one, but did not find the time to wash his hand?

I did some research. It's just an online poll, but out of 46 answers, only 25 people wash their hands after masturbation.

You must be registered for see links

- Why would a man entered the living room in his underwear with his erected penis poking out of it just to offer someone a shirt - while asking if they wanted to leave or not?

Why couldn't a man in his own house do whatever he wants, even walking in the living room with an erect penis, especially if the girl was asleep anyways. Apparently he was not ashamed, but the girl doesn't sound like a shy person either. Why wouldn't he offer her a shirt, or a taxi? Why is it not possible that when he was crossing the living room, the girl woke up, saw his erect penis, and decided to seduce the man? She pretended to still being asleep, and when the man walked up to her to wake her up, she pulled him over and kissed him, he kissed her back but when she wanted to have ***, he stopped. The girl got embarrassed and she decided to call for a rape, out of revenge or embarrassment maybe, especially when she thought it over that the semen on her body might be a good evidence to win the case and some money along with it.

Bold : He claimed he kissed her back, there was no accident involved.

I used the word accidental

Occurring unexpectedly, unintentionally, or by chance.

You must be registered for see links

>.<

Bold : I'm playing devil's advocate. I'm on the middle. There are points that made me find it believable and points that made me find it unbelievable. The underlined post is what made me find it unbelievable.

I see. But the main question, the way I see it, is not if you believe the man's story or not. The main question is if the girl proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the man raped her? I think she didn't.

And if you are in the middle, let me ask, if f.e the punishment for this rape was a lifetime jail sentence or capital punishment, could you send this man in jail for his whole life, or could you get him executed with a clear conscience, if you are in the middle?

What country are you from?

Spoiler

see in my repcomment

As I stated before, there is no accusation. To accuse you of being corrupt based on this is like stating "I am right for what I believe, if you differ from me then you are wrong".

Well, if the man was acquitted yet people insist that he is still guilty of rape...then they do accuse him. If people claim that the court/jury was bribed, then that's also accusing them of a crime. Now of course I'm using the word 'accuse' in a general sense, of course 'accusation' in legal terminology means charging someone in front of an authority. Of course NB is not a court so saying that someone is a rapist, is not the crime of false accusation...but claiming that someone has committed an illegal action- that fits the general meaning of accusation. Also some people said that I'm a 'rape apologist', or I'm the ' same type of person' as the people in the jury/court- who, according to people on NB, are obviously corrupt.

Of course I know you didn't accuse me of anything.

And I also don't think it is about who is right or wrong. I very well admitted that it's much possible that the man lied. But I have doubts, and so, as a juror, I would have also voted not guilty. I understand where people are coming from by saying the man's story is bizarre or hard to believe, but without conclusive proof, you cannot really say that he is a rapist, despite the court has just acquitted him. It's always those who vote guilty that have to show what convinced them beyond a reasonable doubt that the man is guilty. As someone who would vote not guilty, all I have to point out is that I'm not convinced, I have not seen proof that this woman was forcefully penetrated by that man, as she claims.

Maybe it's a stupid analogy, but let's say someone cuts his hand. Previously, he had a debate with his roommate who is stronger. Even the neighbors heard them shouting. The guy's blood spilled on the roommate's clothes. He goes to the police claiming the roommate cut him in his anger, and all the evidence points in that direction. The roommate even has fingerprints on the kitchen knife as he uses it as well. Is it enough to sentence him for assault? Now of course this is an imaginary situation, and in my country we don't even have a jury system...so I'm not sure how a jury would decide, but if I were a juror in such a case, I'd again vote not guilty because we've got two narratives and while the cut guy's story is more backed up, I still see a chance of him being the liar. Maybe it's just because I've read too many detective stories...(Again, this example might be stupid, so then just forget it).

 

[Loki d]

If she was lying why did he use such ridiculous statements (obvious lies and a mockery to victimized women) in his defence. He would have a better argument if he was innocent.

And if the jurisdicial system was honest and for the people, many government officials would be exposed and punished.

'little hoe'..? hm.

I would like for you and the others to provide a better statement. You guys don't know what it's like to be accused of a crime that everyone assumed you did because common sense says so. Or his/her statement is more believable therefore it must be true.

In my experience I was lied on by some prick about a crime. He gave a very believable story that I couldn't refute. He twisted everything. Plus given my skin color and the crime it was. Still till this day I don't know what I could have said that would have made me non guilty.

This girl was at his place for what reason? Why was she there? She didn't get to sleep with him instead it was her friend. Her motives are unclear and overshadowed by her rape story.

 

[Babadook]

That ''innocent'' man wasn't put behind bars though so apparently they did their job right..right?
The only ones dumb enough to not see through the lies of this Saudi are you and that babadoop

Ad hominem. You provide no proof, you just throw some insults out there.

You apparently haven't read my posts either, because I did admit like a hundred times that the man may very well be lying, but it's not proof that you "see through his lies". But I guess you possess such insight due to shrooms...And you can't even spell my name correctly...talking about dumb...

If she was lying why did he use such ridiculous statements (obvious lies and a mockery to victimized women) in his defence. He would have a better argument if he was innocent.

To me his unlikely story actually shows that he might be saying the truth. Exactly, why would someone make up such ridiculous statements? If he wanted to lie, he could have said much better versions. The truth sometimes is ridiculous and bizarre.

And it seems you people still don't get that it's not about the man's story being unbelievable. The question is if the girl proved beyond a doubt that she was forcefully penetrated? Where are the witnesses? Where are the signs of violence?

And again, the story may be hard to believe, but not impossible. Please prove to me that according to the laws of physics and nature, the man simply couldn't have jizzed on her upon tripping as she pulled him onto herself?

As far as I know, no demands for financial retribution have been made on her hand.
And here is just one of his many suspicious typically crook statements:

''When arrested, Abdulaziz responded by telling police "She'll have to prove it", the court was told.''

And? He apparently just knew his rights better than you people do...I wonder how you,for example would defend yourself if your disabled ex-gf accused you of rape? She is disabled, your semen was on her vagina, apparently you raped her taking advantage of her. Everything else must be your lie.

I don't think most people are getting what babadoop is saying.
He isn't siding with the Saudi guy and neither with the girl. He's just stating points of why the jury could have acquitted him.

As for my take on the news. I don't believe in the Saudi man's story and it is likely he bribed coz i don't see any normal person being acquitted with a statement like that. :|

Of course I'm not siding with the Saudi guy, I despise such lifestyle but that goes for the girls' lifestyles as well...I was trying to approach the case from a legal point of view. I have reasonable doubts, and so I as a juror would have had the right to vote not guilty. If I'm dumb or corrupt for not sentencing a man simply because his story is weird, then go ahead, call me dumb. But in my eyes all those people who still fail to understand that it's not about beliefs, are dumb as well. I believe in God, yet I don't send people to jail just because God said so in my dreams...Belief is not a legal term. And as I said, if I were simply to rely solely on my instincts or sentiments, I'd also be more inclined to 'believe' the girl instead, but the legal phrase 'reasonable doubt' implies using your reason. I can't sentence this man with a clear conscience because there is not enough evidence to support the girl's claim (no witnesses, no signs of violence).

I really don't care to go more graphic. Believe what you will. But it's really most unlikely story I have ever heard. Accident my foot.

Again, you are focusing too much on the guy's story. It's unlikely, sure. Just like it is unlikely that on the 11th of September, 2001, planes crashed in the WTC and the Pentagon. But it happened. And some people, even from this thread, insist that it's unlikely that terrorists alone could have carried it out, so it must have been an inside job. Both sides provide arguments, both are convinced of their truth, and that the other party is dumb. But unlikely things happen. I would have never imagined 10 yrs ago that I'd end up wasting time trying to explain the law to kids on an animeforum when in fact I should be studying for exams...

Oh we all get him. We still think jury was either bribed or was blaming the victim. Asking for proof for internet reactions to a funny 'excuse' is something people don't care about.

So you're just calling people a rapist and a court/jury corrupt for fun? Because iT's just an anime forum where you don't have to provide proof? I see.And here I thought I should take you seriously.

 

[Le0]

But assuming that someone has committed a crime is the definition of accusation. Let me also emphasize that there is a principle that postulates an assumption of innocence. Not guilt. Suspicion is enough to start an investigation, or even get the case to a trial, but it's not beyond reasonable doubt.

So if it could be anything, why immediately assume it must have been bribe?

Because that one of the first thought that comes to most mind.
- A millionaire presented an evidence in secret, an evidence that played a role in the millionaire's innocence. As unfortunate as it is, the word millionaire plays a major role in people's mind.

I'm not even going to think about the chances of a bribery anymore because logically speaking, it seem illogical. I've come up with another solution, one which would favor the millionaire. I'm thinking it could be possible that the evidence the millionaire presented in secret was an act up of the situation that transpired as his apartment. I'm sure to play the situation again, chances are he wore the similar clothing he wore during the situation (underwear) and re-play the situation to prove his innocence. I'm not even sure if that is allowed but I've seen cases where things like that are done as a final option / final argument.

This is what I found:

"Abdulaziz said he had accidentally fallen on the youngster as she tried to seduce him, and that was how traces of his DNA came to be in her vagina.

He said he had gone to wake her to offer her a T-shirt to sleep in or a taxi ride home, but she had pulled him on top of her and placed his hand between her legs.

He said it was possible he had semen on his hands after the sexual encounter with her friend."

You must be registered for see links

[Afterwards] I went to the sitting room to switch off the TV and drink some water – I saw her, she was in an awkward situation the way she was laid down,' he said.

He continued: 'I found her a T-shirt, I found her the longest T-shirt so that she would be comfortable, I said “there's a T-shirt, if you want to sleep here you're welcome, if not I will get you a taxi”.

'Her eyes were closed, she opened her eyes straight away, it was like a giggle and straight away she kissed me and I kissed her back – I'm not proud of it, but I would never have done anything else.'

He claimed she put her hand on the back of his head, then placed his hand on her crotch.

'I think she was embarrassed because she knew I wasn't up for anything, I said [your friend] is sleeping here and if you want you can go.'

Mr Abdulaziz admitted that he went to rouse the sleeping girl wearing only his underpants, and said that his erect penis may have been poking out.

You must be registered for see links

There is this thing called morning erection, I don't see what's the big deal about it.

I didn't bring viagra in the discussion, a 45 yrs old man doesn't necessarily have erection problems.

And again, his story doesn't even look self-contradictory (at least to me there is nothing that can't be reconciled). Sure it doesn't seem like an everyday situation but well, none of us are middle-aged millionaires inviting two girls to our house for the night and we don't get our semen on girls, sure. But reality sometimes produces the most unlikely situations, and I don't see why the man's story couldn't be true.

I also sense a fallacy of false dilemma in the thread. That there is the girl's story (A) and there is the man's story (B), and it's either B or A. But I think you have to examine the stories separately. You have to examine if A is true or not, and if B is true or not. B's story being harder to imagine doesn't make the girl's story true. I see problematic parts about her version too. Why didn't she scream? Why didn't the neighbors hear it? Why was there no fight? Why didn't she immediately make a report to the poilce? Why didn't her girl friend corroborated the 18 yrs old girl's version? Why would a rich guy risk his career when he can buy any girl he wants? Why would he bother sneaking up to the teen girl, when another girl is already lying next to her?


I did some research. It's just an online poll, but out of 46 answers, only 25 people wash their hands after masturbation.

You must be registered for see links

Why couldn't a man in his own house do whatever he wants, even walking in the living room with an erect penis, especially if the girl was asleep anyways. Apparently he was not ashamed, but the girl doesn't sound like a shy person either. Why wouldn't he offer her a shirt, or a taxi? Why is it not possible that when he was crossing the living room, the girl woke up, saw his erect penis, and decided to seduce the man? She pretended to still being asleep, and when the man walked up to her to wake her up, she pulled him over and kissed him, he kissed her back but when she wanted to have ***, he stopped. The girl got embarrassed and she decided to call for a rape, out of revenge or embarrassment maybe, especially when she thought it over that the semen on her body might be a good evidence to win the case and some money along with it.

I did exactly as the bold and it does change my view bit by bit. Until now, I've searched everywhere for testimony from her friend but it seem she did not provide any. Your argument are valid, I simply have no other way to counter or to even argue with it. I guess in the end, only those two knows what truly happens.

I used the word accidental

Occurring unexpectedly, unintentionally, or by chance.

You must be registered for see links

>.<

I'm learning new things everyday.

I see. But the main question, the way I see it, is not if you believe the man's story or not. The main question is if the girl proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the man raped her? I think she didn't.

And if you are in the middle, let me ask, if f.e the punishment for this rape was a lifetime jail sentence or capital punishment, could you send this man in jail for his whole life, or could you get him executed with a clear conscience, if you are in the middle?

Well, the sentence are way over the top but honestly, I wouldn't know what I'd do. I mean, to send the man to the punishment given would be unfair if I have my doubt but at the same time, if the girl were being truthful then she will have to live with that for the rest of her life without any justice. I certainly wouldn't sentence the man to such punishment when I have no idea if he is at fault or not.

Well, if the man was acquitted yet people insist that he is still guilty of rape...then they do accuse him. If people claim that the court/jury was bribed, then that's also accusing them of a crime. Now of course I'm using the word 'accuse' in a general sense, of course 'accusation' in legal terminology means charging someone in front of an authority. Of course NB is not a court so saying that someone is a rapist, is not the crime of false accusation...but claiming that someone has committed an illegal action- that fits the general meaning of accusation. Also some people said that I'm a 'rape apologist', or I'm the ' same type of person' as the people in the jury/court- who, according to people on NB, are obviously corrupt.

That's valid.

Bold : People think what is sensible to them but in truth, people like that played a major role in sending so many innocent people into prison.

Of course I know you didn't accuse me of anything.

And I also don't think it is about who is right or wrong. I very well admitted that it's much possible that the man lied. But I have doubts, and so, as a juror, I would have also voted not guilty. I understand where people are coming from by saying the man's story is bizarre or hard to believe, but without conclusive proof, you cannot really say that he is a rapist, despite the court has just acquitted him. It's always those who vote guilty that have to show what convinced them beyond a reasonable doubt that the man is guilty. As someone who would vote not guilty, all I have to point out is that I'm not convinced, I have not seen proof that this woman was forcefully penetrated by that man, as she claims.

Maybe it's a stupid analogy, but let's say someone cuts his hand. Previously, he had a debate with his roommate who is stronger. Even the neighbors heard them shouting. The guy's blood spilled on the rommate's clothes. He goes to the police claiming the rommate cut him in his anger, and all the evidence points in that direction. The rommate even has fingerprints on the kitchen knife as he uses it as well. Is it enough to sentence him for assault? Now of course this is an imaginary situation, and in my country we don't even have a jury system...so I'm not sure how a jury would decide, but if I were a juror in such a case, I'd again vote not guilty because we've got two narratives and while the cut guy's story is more backed up, I still see a chance of him being the liar. Maybe it's just because I've read too many detective stories...(Again, this example might be stupid, so then just forget it).

That's not a stupid analogy. I'd have to admit, even I would sided with the "victim" based on the established evidence while the "accused" would only have what he has to say to back it up.

 

[Monxstaa]

-His proof seems senseless as heck, there is no such thing as tripping over and accidently raping.
-Rich Saudis get pass for their uncivilized and lowly behaviour a lot...Even in places their culture are not prominent they show off and benefit from their power, i personally experienced it and i know it due to my study field.
-UK and Saudi has fishy relations between each other, as i pointed in that news link.
-Court's decision took a mere half hour.

Yeah the can be apologists if it suits them. It is not odd considering the world we live in.


As i said Saudi rich men get pass everywhere. They have power & certain way of living in their homeland and they can actually implement it every other place.



His source is probably avoiceformen.com

But its not all Saudis are like that tbh its mostly rich people who get no jail time because of money.

 

[Babadook]

Because that one of the first thought that comes to most mind.
- A millionaire presented an evidence in secret, an evidence that played a role in the millionaire's innocence. As unfortunate as it is, the word millionaire plays a major role in people's mind.

Yeah I understand. Especially that we are talking about a saudi guy here, and apparently many people here are biased towards saudis for personal reasons .

I'm not even going to think about the chances of a bribery anymore because logically speaking, it seem illogical. I've come up with another solution, one which would favor the millionaire. I'm thinking it could be possible that the evidence the millionaire presented in secret was an act up of the situation that transpired as his apartment. I'm sure to play the situation again, chances are he wore the similar clothing he wore during the situation (underwear) and re-play the situation to prove his innocence. I'm not even sure if that is allowed but I've seen cases where things like that are done as a final option / final argument.

Good idea, I guess.

I did exactly as the bold and it does change my view bit by bit. Until now, I've searched everywhere for testimony from her friend but it seem she did not provide any. Your argument are valid, I simply have no other way to counter or to even argue with it. I guess in the end, only those two knows what truly happens.

Well, it seems we are reaching a mutual agreement here.

Really, if this man was sentenced for being guilty, I wouldn't have a problem with that either. I'd understand that the majority of the jury was convinced of his guilt. But I personally would have voted not guilty, and I was just trying to explain why. Now of course a legal decision doesn't always mean that it's what really happened.

I'm learning new things everyday.

Haha.

Well, the sentence are way over the top but honestly, I wouldn't know what I'd do. I mean, to send the man to the punishment given would be unfair if I have my doubt but at the same time, if the girl were being truthful then she will have to live with that for the rest of her life without any justice. I certainly wouldn't sentence the man to such punishment when I have no idea if he is at fault or not.

I guess it boils down to whether someone would rather not let a criminal get away if there is a chance of him actually being guilty and committing other crimes if acquitted...or you rather take the risk of letting a criminal go if there is a chance he is not guilty. As the justice system runs on the principle of the assumption of innocence, the latter view is dominant in courts, at least that's what I was taught. But laymen are more likely to adopt the first mindset.

There was a case recently in my country that a guy was stealing wine from a farmer's cellar all the time, and the farmer got fed up and wanted to punish the impostor by pouring acid in the wine. In the end, the guy died, and some of his friends that also drank from the stolen wine, got into hospital. The farmer was sentenced for prison, for murder. Many people got upset when the decision got published...but legally it was a fair sentence.

 

[QueenPrincess Legendary]

'accidentally tripped and penetrated'. So by tripping you end up penetrating a girl.

 

[Pumpkin Ninja]

1. They're both lying. He had *** with her but it wasn't rape, and she just cried rape. Not too much of a stretch as her and her friend were at his place for some reason, while the friend was having *** with him.

2. It was actually rape and this man just got out because of his money.