Rich Bloke Kills Girlfriend ‘During Rough Sex’ - gets 3 years

[two sheds]

I tend to see it as a dice throwing exercise. The better your case the higher your dice score. Rich people can afford more lawyers to throw more dice to find the obscure precedent that a judge can hang the decision on.

 

[Athos]

I tend to see it as a dice throwing exercise. The better your case the higher your dice score. Rich people can afford more lawyers to throw more dice to find the obscure precedent that a judge can hang the decision on.

There's some truth in that, generally.

But, on the specifics of this case, the verdict didn't turn on some obscure precedent, nor any decision of the judge. It was the CPS's decision to accept the plea.

In reality the medical evidence - specifically the cause of death - was such that they'd never get home on murder, so they'd effectively have been gambling a plea to manslaughter for the chance of a conviction for GBH, against the risk of an acquittal in the context of juries' biases towards middle class men and against 'a certain kind' of woman.

 

[Mumbles274]

Here's a link to the Femicide Census that Karen Ingala Smith and Women's Aid carried out: https://www.womensaid.org.uk/what-we-do/campaigning-and-influencing/femicide-census/

It is unremittingly grim reading

Judge’s remarks.

I warn you, if you’ve felt that weeps and my posts make uncomfortable reading, this is utterly horrific. It’s made me feel quite nauseous.

R -v- John Broadhurst: sentencing remarks of Mr Justice Julian Knowles

Anyway, I don’t believe the account. Also, if she was that drunk, she was incapable of consent. Just because she’s dead, it doesn’t change that

Thanks for posting those. Again, not posts i can 'Like'.

 

[8ball]

In reality the medical evidence - specifically the cause of death - was such that they'd never get home on murder, so they'd effectively have been gambling a plea to manslaughter for the chance of a conviction for GBH, against the risk of an acquittal in the context of juries' biases towards middle class men and against 'a certain kind' of woman.

Cheers for the analysis. Though it is depressing as fuck.

 

[trashpony]

It's not actually getting worse from the stats. It's been this bad for a long time.

It does seem like 'ooh she liked it rough' has been a defence used in quite a lot of cases recently. I think as mainstream porn gets ever more violent towards women, men carrying out extreme violence in their relationships becomes more commonplace.

 

[two sheds]

There's some truth in that, generally.

But, on the specifics of this case, the verdict didn't turn on some obscure precedent, nor any decision of the judge. It was the CPS's decision to accept the plea.

In reality the medical evidence - specifically the cause of death - was such that they'd never get home on murder, so they'd effectively have been gambling a plea to manslaughter for the chance of a conviction for GBH, against the risk of an acquittal in the context of juries' biases towards middle class men and against 'a certain kind' of woman.

Indeed. I'd still put it down to past/present actions of unscrupulous lawyers and lax judges, though. A politician commenting on the underwear incident said she thought that judges and (as I recall) juries need educating in the issues. That should include the bias in your last sentence. There was an excellent and related John Barnes interview posted recently that should be compulsory viewing for them.

 

[wiskey]

Judge’s remarks.

I warn you, if you’ve felt that weeps and my posts make uncomfortable reading, this is utterly horrific. It’s made me feel quite nauseous.

R -v- John Broadhurst: sentencing remarks of Mr Justice Julian Knowles

Anyway, I don’t believe the account. Also, if she was that drunk, she was incapable of consent. Just because she’s dead, it doesn’t change that

That was horrible reading but thanks for sharing it.

Why he wasn't questioned about how he could get lubricant to remove the bottle but not ring an ambulance is pretty baffling (paragraph 33 which I can't quote for some reason).

 

[8ball]

It does seem like 'ooh she liked it rough' has been a defence used in quite a lot of cases recently. I think as mainstream porn gets ever more violent towards women, men carrying out extreme violence in their relationships becomes more commonplace.

I guess. It's always hard to tell real trends from noticing pieces of media coverage because you're also dealing with their biases in terms of what they choose to focus on.

 

[Athos]

Indeed. I'd still put it down to past/present actions of unscrupulous lawyers and lax judges, though. A politician commenting on the underwear incident said she thought that judges and (as I recall) juries need educating in the issues. That should include the bias in your last sentence. There was an excellent and related John Barnes interview posted recently that should be compulsory viewing for them.

Yes, I do agree that the rules should be tightened did that judges don't let defence counsel get away with some of the antics they do at the moment.

 

[Athos]

It does seem like 'ooh she liked it rough' has been a defence used in quite a lot of cases recently. I think as mainstream porn gets ever more violent towards women, men carrying out extreme violence in their relationships becomes more commonplace.

I think there's a lot of truth in this. Porn is becoming increasingly grim, and ubiquitous. Soon, we'll have a whole generation of young men whose early sexual development is based on some pretty skewed views.

I know all the arguments about not 'kink shaming' consensual stuff, but the sheer volume and extreme nature of a lot of it is shifting many men's idea of what's normal. And, increasingly, women are expected to go along with that; whilst technically consenting, that consent is procured through social (if not direct) pressure. For instance, I'm sure there's a lot of young girls having rough anal sex who'd rather not, but feel they should as that's the new normal.

The pushing out of the boundaries only helps those who'd otherwise be overstepping.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

There's some truth in that, generally.

But, on the specifics of this case, the verdict didn't turn on some obscure precedent, nor any decision of the judge. It was the CPS's decision to accept the plea.

In reality the medical evidence - specifically the cause of death - was such that they'd never get home on murder, so they'd effectively have been gambling a plea to manslaughter for the chance of a conviction for GBH, against the risk of an acquittal in the context of juries' biases towards middle class men and against 'a certain kind' of woman.

I think you’re being too generous to both the judge and the prosecution here.

From reading the judgement, I was struck by the fact that the cause of death was not clearly spelled out. Unless I missed it, it is not clear whether it was the alcohol poisoning or the head injuries or some combination. Provided that the head injuries were a more than minimal cause of the death then liability for the death can be pinned on the defendant. I refuse to believe that forensic evidence could not have been adduced that linked his actions to the head injuries she sustained.

Turning to the judge, whilst it’s true that he could only sentence in relation to gros neg manslaughter, he could take the injuries into account as aggravating factors. Yet his judgement minimises D’s culpability for those injuries.

For example, the judge finds that the injuries caused by inserting the spray can were not criminal. To support this he cites a case where the defendant inserts a finger into a victim whilst wearing a signet ring. The ring caused internal bleeding which led to the victim’s death. That D was acquitted on the basis that the insertion was consensual, done for sexual pleasure and was not intended to cause injury. Yet the obvious difference in this case was that inserting a spray can into a vagina that is so big that it couldn’t be dislodged is, at the very least, very reckless as to the risk of injury. It is not comparable to a careless act that accidentally caused injury. It is grotesque and absurd that the judge did not find such a violent act of sexual abuse to be criminal, particularly in the broader context of the case.

And then there’s the vomit-inducing and utterly one-sided evidence of his ‘good character’ which seems to be based entirely on the defendant’s self-assessment as well as that of his family and mates.

I don’t think it’s fair to pin all of the blame on the *possible* prejudices of the jury for everything that happened in this case.

 

[trashpony]

I guess. It's always hard to tell real trends from noticing pieces of media coverage because you're also dealing with their biases in terms of what they choose to focus on.

Violent porn is a lot more mainstream now than it used to be. And there is a lot of evidence from young women that they're being pressured into having 'rough anal sex' as Athos says. It certainly wasn't a 'thing' when I was young

 

[Athos]

I think you’re being too generous to both the judge and the prosecution here.

From reading the judgement, I was struck by the fact that the cause of death was not clearly spelled out. Unless I missed it, it is not clear whether it was the alcohol poisoning or the head injuries or some combination. Provided that the head injuries were a more than minimal cause of the death then liability for the death can be pinned on the defendant. I refuse to believe that forensic evidence could not have been adduced that linked his actions to the head injuries she sustained.

Turning to the judge, whilst it’s true that he could only sentence in relation to gros neg manslaughter, he could take the injuries into account as aggravating factors. Yet his judgement minimises D’s culpability for those injuries.

For example, the judge finds that the injuries caused by inserting the spray can were not criminal. To support this he cites a case where the defendant inserts a finger into a victim whilst wearing a signet ring. The ring caused internal bleeding which led to the victim’s death. That D was acquitted on the basis that the insertion was consensual, done for sexual pleasure and was not intended to cause injury. Yet the obvious difference in this case was that inserting a spray can into a vagina that is so big that it couldn’t be dislodged is, at the very least, very reckless as to the risk of injury. It is not comparable to a careless act that accidentally caused injury. It is grotesque and absurd that the judge did not find such a violent act of sexual abuse to be criminal, particularly in the broader context of the case.

And then there’s the vomit-inducing and utterly one-sided evidence of his ‘good character’ which seems to be based entirely on the defendant’s self-assessment as well as that of his family and mates.

I don’t think it’s fair to pin all of the blame on the *possible* prejudices of the jury for everything that happened in this case.

It's not a judgement, but sentencing remarks. In which the judge can only refer to that which he can be certain (effectively, the bruising from the conduct the defendant admitted, and not the head injury).

In terms off causation, it seems that the only injury likely to be sufficient is the head injury, and the prosecution would struggle to show (beyond reasonable doubt) he inflicted it (although, personally, I believe it now likely than not that he did) - had such evidence been aduced (and not capable of being rebutted), I think it's unlikely the CPS would have thrown in the towel on the murder.

Im terms of the vaginal injuries, I'd agree with you (albeit it'd be the GBH would likely be a s.20 rather than the 18 with which he'd been charged). But I'm not sure how much difference that'd make on sentencing. Maybe another six months, with a one third reduction, of which he'd serve half i.e. two months, maybe. It'd still be woefully inadequate for what this cunt did.

In terms of good character, I suspect more weight is given to the absence of previous convictions than to someone's mates saying they're a good lad.

 

[Athos]

Violent porn is a lot more mainstream now than it used to be. And there is a lot of evidence from young women that they're being pressured into having 'rough anal sex' as Athos says. It certainly wasn't a 'thing' when I was young

Mainstream porn sites now have a popular genre called 'painal.'

 

[8ball]

Violent porn is a lot more mainstream now than it used to be. And there is a lot of evidence from young women that they're being pressured into having 'rough anal sex' as Athos says. It certainly wasn't a 'thing' when I was young

Yeah, I agree with that, and that it is depressing. My comment was about the limitations of what can be concluded from media coverage of two particular acts of extreme violence.

 

[8ball]

Mainstream porn sites now have a popular genre called 'painal.'

Ick.

Learning some unedifying new words from this thread.

 

[Athos]

Ick.

Learning some unedifying new words from this thread.

Another dedicated to 'unwanted facials.'

Mainstream pornography - which increasingly shapes male sexuality - seems to be mutating from blokes being turned on by looking at naked women (the relatively benign jazz mags of my youth) to being turned on by degrading and hurting women without consent.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

I thought an extreme porn law passed recently? Not sure how they’ll manage to police it though.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

It's not a judgement, but sentencing remarks. In which the judge can only refer to that which he can be certain (effectively, the bruising from the conduct the defendant admitted, and not the head injury).

In terms off causation, it seems that the only injury likely to be sufficient is the head injury, and the prosecution would struggle to show (beyond reasonable doubt) he inflicted it (although, personally, I believe it now likely than not that he did) - had such evidence been aduced (and not capable of being rebutted), I think it's unlikely the CPS would have thrown in the towel on the murder.

Im terms of the vaginal injuries, I'd agree with you (albeit it'd be the GBH would likely be a s.20 rather than the 18 with which he'd been charged). But I'm not sure how much difference that'd make on sentencing. Maybe another six months, with a one third reduction, of which he'd serve half i.e. two months, maybe. It'd still be woefully inadequate for what this cunt did.

In terms of good character, I suspect more weight is given to the absence of previous convictions than to someone's mates saying they're a good lad.

I suspect what happened was that the defendant’s expensive legal team were skilled enough to give the CPS a run for their money and so they made a ‘better the certainty of something rather than the risk of nothing’ calculation in dropping the murder/GBH charges.

But this cuts both ways, the defence most likely changed their plea to guilty of manslaughter because they feared the possibility of a murder conviction. This suggests that the evidence could have been strong enough to secure such a conviction. Both sides engaged in risk minimisation strategies and arrived at the plea bargain. But whether the CPS should have done so is still an open question it seems to me.

With regard to the judge, I get that his sentencing discretion was limited by the defendant’s plea, but using what discretion he had to be lenient to the misogynist torturer who literally got away with murder ought to be criticised in my view.

 

[Athos]

I suspect what happened was that the defendant’s expensive legal team were skilled enough to give the CPS a run for their money and so they made a ‘better the certainty of something rather than the risk of nothing’ calculation in dropping the murder/GBH charges.

Absolutely. That's their proper role.

But this cuts both ways, the defence most likely changed their plea to guilty of manslaughter because they feared the possibility of a murder conviction. This suggests that the evidence could have been strong enough to secure such a conviction. Both sides engaged in risk minimisation strategies and arrived at the plea bargain.

I think you're probably right. I'd say the odds were still in their favour, but spending 18 months inside for gross negligence manslaughter is so much better than mandatory life for murder that it wasn't worth running even a small risk.

But whether the CPS should have done so is still an open question it seems to me.

I'd have liked to see it run the course with the original indictment, with the possibility of the jury returning a manslaughter verdict in the alternative.

With regard to the judge, I get that his sentencing discretion was limited by the defendant’s plea, but using what discretion he had to be lenient to the misogynist torturer who literally got away with murder ought to be criticised in my view.

Here we partially disagree. Whilst I agree that it might have been possible to give a slightly stiffer sentence, I think his discretion was pretty limited, and the fact the sentence was inadequate was more a fault of the system than his application of it.

 

[mojo pixy]

Another dedicated to 'unwanted facials.'

Mainstream pornography - which increasingly shapes male sexuality - seems to be mutating from blokes being turned on by looking at naked women (the relatively benign jazz mags of my youth) to being turned on by degrading and hurting women without consent.

fwiw there's plenty of gay porn about of this nature too. porn generally seems to be more oriented around humiliation now than ever before, it's harder to be 'sex positive' about it nowadays.

 

[mojo pixy]

dp

(no pun intended)

 

[Jeff Robinson]

fwiw there's plenty of gay porn about of this nature too. porn generally seems to be more oriented around humiliation now than ever before, it's harder to be 'sex positive' about it nowadays.

Absolutely, in the past fighting conservative sexual repression and censorship was the key goal and still is an important one. But arguably now, even more pressing is addressing the effects of capitalism and patriarchy in manufacturing increasingly violent and abusive desires under ‘sexual freedom’.

 

[Geri]

Is it true that he also poured bleach on her face?

 

[8ball]

I thought an extreme porn law passed recently? Not sure how they’ll manage to police it though.

I remember it being discussed but I thought it had fallen through due to lack of agreement.
The porn industry is like the Wild West at the moment, but getting various parties to agree on degree of regulation is going to be the problem.

 

[wiskey]

Is it true that he also poured bleach on her face?

Yes, to 'clean' her

 

[Geri]

Yes, to 'clean' her

Christ almighty. The man is animal, he should be locked up for life.

 

[Jeff Robinson]

Is it true that he also poured bleach on her face?

It is reported in the press but not mentioned in the judgement. When he called 999 he described her as ‘dead as a doughnut’. But the judge said in his sentencing remarks that he was convinced it was a loving relationship.

 

[8ball]

Much as porn may be getting disturbing, I think this guy is a psychopath and would have found other inspiration without it.

 

[ViolentPanda]

It is reported in the press but not mentioned in the judgement. When he called 999 he described her as ‘dead as a doughnut’. But the judge said in his sentencing remarks that he was convinced it was a loving relationship.

TBF, someone who was probably sodomised on the playing fields and in the dorms of British public schools, might have some strange ideas about what constitutes a "loving relationship".