There is a disturbing case out of Israel where an Israeli man of Arab origin has been convicted of rape after having consensual sex with a woman after he allegedly told her he was Jewish and looking for a lasting relationship. Sabbar Kashur, 30, was sentenced to 18 months in prison by a Jerusalem court.
The woman says that the two met in downtown Jerusalem in September 2008 where Kashur, an Arab from East Jerusalem, introduced himself as a Jewish bachelor seeking a serious relationship. The two then had consensual sex in a nearby building. When she later found out that he was an Arab, she filed a criminal complaint of rape and indecent assault.
Kashur pleaded guilty to a charge of rape by deception. Judge Tzvi Segal (part of a three judge panel) acknowledged that this was not a “classical rape by force” but insisted that the woman clearly would not have had sex with an Arab. That seems true but that does not mean it is rape as opposed to a tort lawsuit. Pick up lines are notoriously embellished if not outright false. It is the danger that comes with one-night stands where the rule is caveat emptor, or “buyer beware.”
Notably, the panel insisted on jail time as a sentence when probation was possible. Segal added:
The court is obliged to protect the public interest from sophisticated, smooth-tongued criminals who can deceive innocent victims at an unbearable price – the sanctity of their bodies and souls. When the very basis of trust between human beings drops, especially when the matters at hand are so intimate, sensitive and fateful, the court is required to stand firmly at the side of the victims – actual and potential – to protect their wellbeing. Otherwise, they will be used, manipulated and misled, while paying only a tolerable and symbolic price.
That reads uncomfortably close to old miscegenation cases where judges sought to protect women from “smooth-taking” black men.
Even in cases where women have been falsely told that a lover does not carry an STD, the matter is addressed in the United States as a matter of civil not criminal battery. Does this mean that any false fact used in a one-night stand is now a criminal matter deserving of jail or it is only Arab status that gets that level of punishment? For example, if a Israeli man says he is unmarried and looking for a lasting relationship, can he be jailed? If so, the Israeli jail would be stuffed to over-capacity.
We have been following a crackdown on Israeli women dating Arab men recently.
Source: Guardian.
Weren’t we just basning poor old Jimmy Carter for refering to Isreal as having a form of apartheid? Even if you’re a citizen, if you’re not a jew, you enjoy watered down rights. It will be interesting to see how much support continues towards Isreal once the ultraorthodox rabbis declare all the reform jews to be goyim.
I’d just like to take this moment to promote NOT having sex on the first date, so you can learn a bit more about your dating partner before banging a [INSERT QUALITY THAT WOULD BE AN INSTANT DISQUALIFIER].
Wootsy, et.al:
Suppose a man convinced a woman that he was rich? Not to pick on one stereotype, suppose a woman insisted that her breasts were natural? Does a post-op TS commit a crime by telling her partner she’s a woman? How far do you take the “informed consent” argument?
People lie all the time in hopes of scoring. I’m not defending the practice, or the man involved in this case, but its simple common sense. Expecting truth in a casual pickup setting is willful ignorance as much as the lying is willful deception.
Better, in my opinion, to rely on caveat emptor. There is no crime here (IMO). I’m unconvinced there is even a tort.
California does have rape by deception, but it does not apply to fraud in the inducement as in the referenced case. Interestingly, under case law a false representation that the perpetrator has married the victim is a crime, and considered fraud in fact rather than fraud in the inducement. Apparently, having sex with a legal spouse is a different act than having sex with someone not a spouse. Therefore, consent to the former is not consent to the latter.
Ok, I think she felt screwed, maybe not in the end, but still the same…
The only rape by deception cases I can think of fall into two categories: deception about the nature of the act itself (e.g. a medical doctor raping a woman while she believes she is getting a medical examination) and deception about the legal status of the act (the only example I can think of is deceit about the marital status of the two partners–a fake wedding or a twin impersonating a woman’s husband).
So I agree with Buddha–this is racist, pure and simple.
W=c,
I’m with Pogue on this one. The guy is a pig, not a criminal.
“I don’t think that anyone would suggest that this Arab man didn’t do something wrong, but to lock him up for “rape by deception”…
In Arab countries, women are stoned for less…..
The manner of thinking that allows men to treat women this way is 1 reason.
“Did you ask the first date questions?”
Well, I did ask the usuals. “What do you do for a living? … Do you have any siblings? … What’s your favorite music? … Do you have any pets?” …and so on. But I do admit to not asking if she was crazy. I don’t know how well that would have gone over.
Upon first dates, maybe we should all bring along lengthy questionnaires to be assured that there is no deception whatsoever.
It would have been handy to have data to refer to subsequent any future engagements.
“Question 67: Would you describe yourself as (circle one)
5. Completely sane
4. Reasonably sane, but I have my moments.
3. Mostly irrational, but functional.
2. Under supervision of mental health professionals.
1. Completely batsh!t crazy.”
A-HA!! I see that she has circled #1.
“Ummm… no sweetheart, I don’t think I’ll be able to make it to the movie tonight… or any other night. BTW, lose my phone number and forget I exist, please.”
I’m pretty sure that women could use valuable information to better judge a potential will also havemate.
“Question 85: Where do you feel most comfortable (circle one)
5. Dressing up for fancy dinners and dancing the night away.
4. Getting up early to make you breakfast in bed before cutting the grass.
3. Disregarding chores to play video games.
2. Eating fried foods no matter if it gives me gas.
1. Drinking copious amounts of cheap beer while watching football.”
Seems to me that no matter what stage a relationship is in, there is always at least a modicum of deception. Like it, or not. This is especially true at the first stages of a relationship. From completely misrepresenting yourself to merely wearing a slimming outfit – we’re always pulling the wool over the others eyes. This is where that whole buyer beware thingie comes in.
If this guy truly misrepresented, or outright lied, about who he was in order to better convince this woman to sleep with him (remember, she went willingly), then he is a pig, not a criminal.
Cheers.
Informed Consent Law & Legal Definition
Informed consent is generally agreement to do something or to allow something to happen only after all the relevant facts are disclosed.
Informed consent is defined as: “the agreement by a person to a proposed course of conduct after the lawyer has communicated adequate information and explanation about the material risks of and reasonably available alternatives to the proposed course of conduct.” In re Collmar, 417 B.R. 920, 923 (Bankr. N.D. Ind. 2009)
Affirmation of Fact Law & Legal Definition
An affirmation of fact is a statement of fact or promise made as part of a bargain. It is a positive assertion of a fact or a statement concerning the subject matter of a transaction, which might otherwise be only an expression of opinion, which is affirmed as an existing fact material to the transaction and reasonably induces the other party to rely upon it as a fact. It usually arises in a claim of a breach of warranty. An affirmation of fact is presumed to be a part of the bargain, and any fact that would remove such affirmation out of the agreement requires clear affirmative proof.
Affirmative Consent Law & Legal Definition
According to 15 USCS § 7702 (1), [Title 15. Commerce and Trade; Chapter 103. Controlling the Assault of Non-Solicited Pornography and Marketing] the term affirmative consent, when used with respect to a commercial electronic mail message, means that–
“(A) the recipient expressly consented to receive the message, either in response to a clear and conspicuous request for such consent or at the recipient’s own initiative; and
(B) if the message is from a party other than the party to which the recipient communicated such consent, the recipient was given clear and conspicuous notice at the time the consent was communicated that the recipient’s electronic mail address could be transferred to such other party for the purpose of initiating commercial electronic mail messages.”
http://definitions.uslegal.com/i/informed-consent/
and that lawyers argument? well I’d like that man’s card please….:)
“willful deceit? If so, my ex-girlfriend should have known she was crazy. Everyone else there (except me) seemed to know. And she definitely knew that her ex-boyfriend was insanely jealous.”
Crazy people usually think they are the sanest in the bunch.
Did you ask the first date questions? maybe she did deceive.
“maybe I shouldn’t have just jumped in the sack with any ole girl that came along putting up a front that wasn’t exactly accurate. And save myself a lot of misery.”
yes, tho you referred to her as an ex-girlfriend not a 1 night chippy so maybe the deceit was not so 1 sided?
Woosty, I’m not sure I can buy your “informed consent” premise.
Couldn’t I then have charges filed against my ex-girlfriend because she didn’t inform me that she was batsh!t crazy? Or that she had a very large and insanely jealous ex-boyfriend?
Or is this about willful deceit? If so, my ex-girlfriend should have known she was crazy. Everyone else there (except me) seemed to know. And she definitely knew that her ex-boyfriend was insanely jealous.
Or, maybe I shouldn’t have just jumped in the sack with any ole girl that came along putting up a front that wasn’t exactly accurate. And save myself a lot of misery.
I don’t think that anyone would suggest that this Arab man didn’t do something wrong, but to lock him up for “rape by deception”…
Come on.
Cheers.
This absurdity illustrates perfectly that bigotry in Israel by Jewish people against non-Jews is perfectly acceptable. How sad and pathetic. If we follow this logic then if any statements a man makes to a woman in Israel end up not being true and he has had sex with her then it can be called rape by deception because anyone can always claim that but for that one fact she never would have had sex with him. What a load of crap!
“Even in cases where women have been falsely told that a lover does not carry an STD, the matter is addressed in the United States as a matter of civil not criminal battery. ”
Why?
does it have something to do w/damages?
Tootie, I don’t know how foolish she was but I must say that I cringe when I see women attacking women in incidents like this because it is a thought born from a place of ‘she should have known better’ and blah blah blah….
It saddens me that the knee jerk response is not more like: how could a guy do this to another human being [lie]….or why did THEY behave so carelessly?
you know; As G*d says, it isn’t the Apple, it’s the PAIR!
consensual sex
consent is based on information, in healthcare we say ‘informed consent’.
Otherwise some smooth talking lawyer will see you sued for not doing your job.
The guy informed her he was a) Jewish, b) looking for a serious relationship. I don’t know the nature of their conversations, how many they had, if they discussed mutual anything how when where prior etc….or even if nooky on a street corner is the most serious relationship that she could muster and if she informed him of that….but when he gave false information he screwed her long before he screwed her….if you know what I mean…..
because human beans need to be able to rely on each other for behavioral expressions…and words are how we communicate…so don’t pee in the pool. thankyou
It is not necessary to jump to racist conclusions. Arabs and Jews share a common ancestor (Abraham), and this according to their own well established beliefs and common history.
This story is more like a commie telling a capitalist he is a capitalist just to get a date with her.
And then some.
She was the fool.
http://www.dangoor.com/73page25.html
Exactly.
“…the sanctity of their bodies and souls.” –Which, of course, would not have been violated had she pulled a nooner with a Jew boy instead.
!?!
Disgusting.
“That reads uncomfortably close to old miscegenation cases where judges sought to protect women from “smooth-taking” black men.”
I’m thinking more along the lines of “exactly like old miscegenation cases”.
Way to go, Israel! Woo hoo! Do you still wonder why people think your state acts like a bunch of hypocritical nitwits? Do yah really?