Harsh sentence

Robert Wolfe

I once woke to find myself fingering my sleeping girlfriend. Completely involuntary. Sexsomnia is a real thing.

Kidchameleon

Robert Wolfe wrote: »

I once woke to find myself fingering my sleeping girlfriend. Completely involuntary. Sexsomnia is a real thing.

According to many people on here and members of the judiciary you are a sex offender.

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I don't need to try, I have been there. Its not that big of a deal, sure, I was pissed off but that's about as far as it went. I can tell from the victim impact statement that she is simply baying for blood, now that is shameful because the guy is now going to spend a year in jail (where his chances of being actually raped increase). He will be on the sex offenders register. His life is ruined over an honest mistake a snowflakes fee fee's.

Your single experience is not how everyone responds to such an event. She did not invent the trauma and you're literally smearing the victim. You've invented so many things about her motivation already... Eg the jealous friend nonsense.

Robert Wolfe

Kidchameleon wrote: »

According to many people on here and members of the judiciary you are a sex offender.

I know, which is why I never told my gf.

eagle eye

batgoat wrote:

Your single experience is not how everyone responds to such an event. She did not invent the trauma and you're literally smearing the victim. You've invented so many things about her motivation already... Eg the jealous friend nonsense.

Look, we don't have all the information. Based on the information we do have it seems a very harsh sentence.
Based on the information we have it does seem she is going way ott.

It's entirely possible that there is a lot more to it but we don't know that.

I'm not condoning his actions either and it's quite possible that this particular girl is sensitive enough to be highly traumatised by this. Every case is different.

All we are doing is having a conversation based on the information given to us.

batgoat

Except you don't even seem to view his pretty apparent lack of remorse to be an issue... This fed into his sentence. He is responsible for it going to trial. Lack of intent does not make it not a crime...

GreeBo

Boggles wrote: »

Similarly TBF it could also be how he acted afterwards.

Also I would suggest that his defense all though plausible IMO, may not actually be true.

He could have well chanced his arm while his Fiancé was passed out in another room, also plausible.

Court reporting by the media is by and large a shambles, if the case was more salacious or involved someone famous we'd have full transcripts.

I'd false rape accusations are rare, i think your scenario is eve rarer tbf.
Why would you assume he is lying?

batgoat

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd false rape accusations are rare, i think your scenario is eve rarer tbf.
Why would you assume he is lying?

A complete lack of remorse isn't exactly a great sign of his moral compass.

GreeBo

batgoat wrote: »

A complete lack of remorse isn't exactly a great sign of his moral compass.

I didn't realise a moral compass was something that could get one imprisoned.

If someone accused me of lying and told anyone who would listen that i sexually abused them, culminating in me in court, I'm not die how much their feelings would bother me, especially if it was my "sister"

batgoat

GreeBo wrote: »

I didn't realise a moral compass was something that could get one imprisoned.

If someone accused me of lying and told anyone who would listen that i sexually abused them, culminating in me in court, I'm not die how much their feelings would bother me, especially if it was my "sister"

It would impact how long you'd be facing in jail. Pleading not guilty and making no effort to recognise impact upon the victim, will result in harsher sentence.

Apollo1080 wrote: »

What's the basis for saying he lacked remorse outside of someone else saying he lacked remorse?

How many accounts are you on at this stage?

Kidchameleon

batgoat wrote: »

Your single experience is not how everyone responds to such an event. She did not invent the trauma and you're literally smearing the victim. You've invented so many things about her motivation already... Eg the jealous friend nonsense.

I'm not smearing anyone and I haven't invented anything. I am offering opinions on possible scenarios based on the evidence I have - which is the same evidence everyone in this thread has. We could all be wrong.


I don't believe the "victim". That is my opinion which I am perfectly entitled to. And please, spare me the usual "you were not on the jury so your opinion doesn't matter" crap, I know that already.

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I'm not smearing anyone and I haven't invented anything. I am offering opinions on possible scenarios based on the evidence I have - which is the same evidence everyone in this thread has. We could all be wrong.


I don't believe the "victim". That is my opinion which I am perfectly entitled to. And please, spare me the usual "you were not on the jury so your opinion doesn't matter" crap, I know that already.

The judge and jury did believe her. Yes you were smearing a victim when you stated it was probably some jealous act to pursue the case. Yes you're smearing victims of such assaults by saying that it's not believable that such an assault could have significant impacts upon their mental health.

Kidchameleon

batgoat wrote: »

Yes you were smearing a victim when you stated it was probably some jealous act to pursue the case.

I said it was an "equally likely scenario", I did not say it was "probably a jealous act". They are two different things so please dont try and put words in my mouth.

batgoat wrote: »

Yes you're smearing victims of such assaults by saying that it's not believable that such an assault could have significant impacts upon their mental health.

I just don't believe it, based on personal experience, that is my opinion. I could be wrong though and that is why we have a jury panel made up of a few people - because the legal system recognizes that people's opinion and experiences can differ.

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

I said it was an "equally likely scenario", I did not say it was "probably a jealous act". They are two different things so please dont try and put words in my mouth.






I just don't believe it, based on personal experience, that is my opinion. I could be wrong though and that is why we have a jury panel made up of a few people - because the legal system recognizes that people's opinion and experiences can differ.

You have no basis for the act of jealousy...

Kidchameleon

batgoat wrote: »

You have no basis for the act of jealousy...

As I have stated (and I am not going to repeat myself again) it is an opinion, my personal opinion therefore I don't need a basis for it - it could be based on personal experience for all you know.


As I have also stated, we could all be wrong because none of us know the full details of this case.

One eyed Jack

Kidchameleon wrote: »

As I have stated (and I am not going to repeat myself again) it is an opinion, my personal opinion therefore I don't need a basis for it - it could be based on personal experience for all you know.

If it’s an opinion based upon your personal experience, then your personal experience is the basis for your opinion. What your personal experience has to do with anyone else is something you have yet to explain. Their reactions will be based upon their personal experiences, regardless of what you do or don’t believe or who did or didn’t fondle your junk. That’s entirely your own business. It has no bearing on anyone else’s experiences, and your opinion of their experiences carries even less weight - it’s completely and utterly irrelevant.

As I have also stated, we could all be wrong because none of us know the full details of this case.

No we couldn’t all be wrong as nobody else has gone to the lengths you have to suggest without any foundation or evidence that the victim could have been lying, made the whole thing up, is overreacting and hamming it up in their victim impact statement. You honestly imagine that people who deal with these cases day in, day out, are as naive and simple as you make out? That might suit your narrative, but seeing as you have no basis for it and it is just your opinion based upon, or could be based upon your personal experience (I really don’t care either way tbh), I think it’s safe to dismiss your opinion as utter nonsense.

GreeBo

batgoat wrote: »

The judge and jury did believe her. Yes you were smearing a victim when you stated it was probably some jealous act to pursue the case. Yes you're smearing victims of such assaults by saying that it's not believable that such an assault could have significant impacts upon their mental health.

So disbelief is reserved for the accused and not the alleged victims?
Glad we cleared that up.

Can you confirm if the sex of the accused matters, just for conplete transparency?

batgoat

GreeBo wrote: »

So disbelief is reserved for the accused and not the alleged victims?
Glad we cleared that up.

Can you confirm if the sex of the accused matters, just for conplete transparency?

We can definitively say that the assault occurred. There's no question there. Yet you and a handful of others are trying to find fault in the victim who has shown no signs of doing anything wrong.... Those directing this nonsense at her include a guy who has registered twenty accounts in two days..

Yep I'm pretty fine with going to court with cases like this regardless of gender. It's not acceptable.

Boggles

GreeBo wrote: »

I'd false rape accusations are rare, i think your scenario is eve rarer tbf.
Why would you assume he is lying?

TBF I didn't really assume anything, I speculated on one possible scenario as did you.

I think what we can assume with some certainty though is, how the bride to be reacted was probably key in any escalation.

The big day couldn't have been far away.

Speculation

Did she pick a side, did the wedding go ahead?

If it did ago ahead was there a fracture in the wider circle of friends which lead to a significant chunk not showing up for the wedding.

Did everything become so toxic that then she went to the Guards. Who knows.

GreeBo

batgoat wrote: »

We can definitively say that the assault occurred. There's no question there. Yet you and a handful of others are trying to find fault in the victim who has shown no signs of doing anything wrong.... Those directing this nonsense at her include a guy who has registered twenty accounts in two days..

Yep I'm pretty fine with going to court with cases like this regardless of gender. It's not acceptable.

What fault have i found with the victim??

Boggles

batgoat wrote: »

include a guy who has registered twenty accounts in two days..

That is pretty weird to be fair.

Reviews and Books Galore

Boggles wrote: »

It's entirely his own fault he got a custodial sentence.

Apart from the crime itself, the judge looks at 3 main things before determining an appropriate sentence. He had the 2 "hardest" ones covered.

No previous record and long employment history.

The 3rd being remorse, the easiest one, because you can fake it.

The case is bizarre because the jury had absolutely no choice but to find him guilty IMO, even if they believed his version of events, mistaken identity is not an excuse for lack of consent.

Surely his legal team would have advised him to plead guilty, send in a long letter of apology and not take it to trial. He chose to take to trial where he chose not act contrite.

The question is why didn't he?

Either he is complete d1ckhead simpleton or as I suspect given the dynamics of the relationships involved, the glaring animosity grew from further events after that night.

In comparison to other sentences, yes it would appear harsh, but that was his fault ultimately.

Perhaps he thought he was being set up? Hmmm, perhaps set up is the wrong idea, but felt as if the woman had an axe to grind.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

eagle eye wrote: »

How would it be? The details made available to us make a lot of us believe the sentence was harsh.
If you want to say it's not and suggest you know more then share it.

When you can’t even tell from the article whose house it happened in, you know that details have been omitted. The jury heard everything. To convict, intent would have to be established. He was convicted. The conviction was sexual assault. 12 months for sexual assault? That’s not harsh.

GreeBo wrote: »

What, you mean other than labelling people with a different opinion than you as sexual abusers?

If those people fondle fully asleep people, yup.

If you have a problem with that label... okay?

Context, nuance, blah-de-blah. When my friend told us what happened to her, we were repulsed. As was she, the person it happened to. I could pretend we felt otherwise but I’d be lying.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

Please do.

No problem, Boggles, here you go. I've bolded the pertinent part.

jiltloop wrote: »

That's fair enough, but some people have different relationship parameters. My fiancée and I would have no problems having a sleepy fondle or initiating sex through intimate touching while the other is asleep. It's one of life's simple pleasures on a weekend morning!

So to state carte blanche that touching your partner intimately while they're asleep is assault with no room for nuance is frankly ridiculous.

For the record I've no problem with the conviction in the OP but having read through the thread and seeing some people condemning any touching of one's partner while they're asleep as assault no matter what I felt I had to disagree because I'm quite confident I'm not someone who is capable of a sexual assault.

Jiltloop has literally said here that his partner is sometimes asleep when he intimately touches her. Not waking up, not sleepy, actually asleep. What do you think intimate touching entails? Fingering, the term I used, can be vulva, vagina, clit, any of those. You gonna try to argue that intimate touching excludes any of that? Yeah right.

Others on the thread haven’t spoken in specifics but said that they see no problem with it.

Well anyway, you asked for a concrete example and you got one. Unless you want to argue that “intimate touching” (Jiltloop’s phrase) doesn’t involve touching your partner’s genitals. In which case, knock yourself out.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

jiltloop wrote: »

I have stated that for me and my partner waking each other up with sleepy intimate fondling is normal.

Your translation of this is that I wake my partner out of a deep sleep by inserting fingers in to her vagina??!!

This is why I usually don't offer an opinion in topics such as this, there's always someone to misrepresent it and then the debate breaks down from something that could be healthy and constructive to a pointless situation where one has to argue about what their position or argument is.

The fact is initially stated my opinion that certain carte blanche statements on this thread by 2 or 3 posters labelled perfectly normal behaviour between consenting adults in long term relationships as sexual abuse.

I'll bow out of this now because your tactics are not what I'd call a reasonable discussion.

Fingering is anywhere genital, at least to me. What on earth do you constitute as “intimate fondling”? Oh and you also said she is sometimes asleep when you do that. Not sleepy. Asleep. You literally said that in a post on this thread. I’ve highlighted the pertinent bit in the post above this one. There’s no misrepresentation. Jesus, at least stand by what you have posted.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Jiltloop has literally said here that his partner is sometimes asleep when he intimately touches her. Not waking up, not sleepy, actually asleep.

Not sure if I'm misreading you here, are we supposed to be shocked by that?

A lot of men and women, when in a relationship, do this to each other, and would be bemused that someone would consider that to be rape. Maybe I'm misreading your post..?

Dakotabigone

Fingering a person while asleep is not on.

Dakotabigone

Dakotabigone wrote: »

Fingering a person while asleep is not on.

But what about the contrary? I find it difficult to believe that any man in a long-term relationship hasn't had his girlfriend try to wake him up in this way.

Rape is a really serious matter, and perhaps this is a bit off-topic, but I really don't believe we should be conflating rape or serious sexual assault with the circumstances referred to here.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

Not sure if I'm misreading you here, are we supposed to be shocked by that?

A lot of men and women, when in a relationship, do this to each other, and would be bemused that someone would consider that to be rape. Maybe I'm misreading your post..?

Firstly, no I don’t consider that rape and never said that. So yes, you are certainly misreading that. Where did you see rape mentioned?

Aaah, I wouldn’t be able to tell you who is shocked by it and who isn’t. Some people would be (I was, some other people on-thread seemed to be) and some wouldn’t (some posters on-thread took this view).

In the post you quoted, I was providing an example for Boggles who asked for one.

For me, touching me genitally whilst I sleep is repulsive. Yup, even if my husband did it.

retro:electro

Not forgetting this one, ODB.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

retro:electro wrote: »

Not forgetting this one, ODB.

I knew there was another one. Thanks, retro!

GreeBo

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

For me, touching me genitally whilst I sleep is repulsive. Yup, even if my husband did it.

What you fail to comprehend is that your feelings don't make it s sexual assault.

I find people who spit in public repulsive yet no one is going around locking them up.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

GreeBo wrote: »

What you fail to comprehend is that your feelings don't make it s sexual assault.

I find people who spit in public repulsive yet no one is going around locking them up.

No failure to comprehend. I’m not going to burst into a couple’s bedroom and declare that I think a sexual assault has happened. I’m saying if it happened to me, I would consider it sexual assault. Only the person it’s happened to can decide if they think they have been sexually assaulted and whether to report it. For me, the idea of anyone touching me in any way intimately whilst I’m asleep is repulsive, no matter who it is: long-term partner or perfect stranger. Who knows how a court would view it but I wouldn’t be confident in betting that a jury would find the idea that it is sexual assault absurd. After all, whilst some people on this thread have defended this behaviour, others have not. I’m not all alone here.

And, as my friend found out when it happened to her, apparently this can happen in a relationship without it being ascertained that it’s okay to do so. No prior discussion happened where she could say “Nope, not for me!”. She was not in the loop. He partner just did it. And she felt violated.

BBFAN

Robert Wolfe wrote: »

I once woke to find myself fingering my sleeping girlfriend. Completely involuntary. Sexsomnia is a real thing.

That is very disturbing. I think you need help for that.

Kidchameleon

Whoever he thought he fondled, he thought they were awake because he said "show me your clit". I think some people in the thread are forgetting this

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

Clutching at straws there

Not really, when he said it, it could have been when she woke up. It seems more like you're clutching at straws as you imply she was lying about being asleep... Any other leaps that you want to make?

Kidchameleon

batgoat wrote: »

Not really, when he said it, it could have been when she woke up. It seems more like you're clutching at straws as you imply she was lying about being asleep... Any other leaps that you want to make?

When did I imply she was lying about being asleep? She stated clearly that she was "falling asleep", therefore she was not asleep - her words not mine.

She did not "wake up" at all. She already was awake. You need to re read all the articles on this case before you comment again and accuse posters of lying

batgoat

Kidchameleon wrote: »

When did I imply she was lying about being asleep? She stated clearly that she was "falling asleep", therefore she was not asleep - her words not mine.

She did not "wake up" at all. She already was awake. You need to re read all the articles on this case before you comment again and accuse posters of lying

Do you think it's better that she was half asleep when he did it? My main issue with you is that you're obsessed with portraying the guy who did it as a victim.

Kidchameleon

I think its better we discuss the facts that we have at hand instead of making them up to suit our own narritive

Oh and by the way, you dont have to have an issue with a strager on the internet you could just ignore it. No need to take things so personally

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

No problem, Boggles, here you go. I've bolded the pertinent part.

Well no, that isn't pertinent at all. That is just similar to the non relevance you have all ready quoted.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Jiltloop has literally said here that his partner is sometimes asleep when he intimately touches her. Not waking up, not sleepy, actually asleep. What do you think intimate touching entails? Fingering, the term I used, can be vulva, vagina, clit, any of those. You gonna try to argue that intimate touching excludes any of that? Yeah right.

I'm not going to argue any semantics with you. I don't have to.

I am using what you have all ready clearly defined as "fingering", a definition you were clear about in telling the anecdote about your friend.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

The details: she woke up to find her boyfriend fingering her. Nothing more complicated.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Important note: it wasn’t a “sleepy fondle”. She was asleep. Drooling on the pillow, REM, dreaming about being a Viking asleep. She eventually woke because I guess even when fully asleep, you can be woken by something and I’m guessing fingers inside a vagina might do it. I’ve had sleepy morning sex. Sleepy as in awake.

That is pretty clearly defined.

So I'll state once more.

Boggles wrote: »

I haven't seen one person suggest fingering a partner out of a deep sleep would be a clever thing to do.

Just so we are clear when I say "fingering", I'm using your clear definition of it.

Here it is again.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

fingers inside a vagina

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

I’ll happily provide examples.

Again please do.

retro:electro

GreeBo wrote: »

What you fail to comprehend is that your feelings don't make it s sexual assault.

And your feelings don’t make it not not a sexual assault
The point remains; fingering someone in their sleep without consent does constitute sexual assault, whether it’s considered acceptable in the parameters of your relationship or not. Because all it takes is your wife/gf/hook up to decide that this time she felt violated and that a boundary was crossed. And she could very well decide to report you for that, and there’s not a damn thing that you can do about it. And telling the guards that “their feelings don’t make it sexual assault” won’t really negate what just happened or work in your favour; because we have a law that decides that, not you.

Robert Wolfe

BBFAN wrote: »

That is very disturbing. I think you need help for that.

What help should I get?

On the flipside, many times I've ended up in bed with a very drunk girl and never touched her (I wait until the morning when she's hungover and horny).

Reviews and Books Galore

If he penetrated her with his fingers, wouldn't that be classed as rape?

Dante7

In the case under discussion, the accused did not insert his fingers into the victim's vagina. This is just made up nonsense by a lunatic fringe on this thread. If the accused had put his finger(s) inside the victim it would have been described as digital penetration. Vagina meaning the internal organ is a strictly medical term, and not a legal term. It is taken as read that he touched the outside of her genitals and did not penetrate her.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

I am using what you have all ready clearly defined as "fingering", a definition you were clear about in telling the anecdote about your friend.





That is pretty clearly defined.

So I'll state once more.



Just so we are clear when I say "fingering", I'm using your clear definition of it.

I was talking about what happened to my friend there. In that case, fingers were inserted. I know that’s what happened because she told me. That doesn’t mean that I think that that’s the entirety of the definition of fingering, does it? What you quoted of mine certainly doesn’t indicate that I think that’s the entirety of what fingering entails. I just know that it’s what happened to her because she told me. When she woke, fingers were inserted.

Your claim that you don’t want to get semantical rings a little bit hollow when you are nit-picking to this extent.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Dante7 wrote: »

In the case under discussion, the accused did not insert his fingers into the victim's vagina. This is just made up nonsense by a lunatic fringe on this thread. If the accused had put his finger(s) inside the victim it would have been described as digital penetration. Vagina meaning the internal organ is a strictly medical term, and not a legal term. It is taken as read that he touched the outside of her genitals and did not penetrate her.

If you’re talking about me, I know that. I read the article in the OP. I didn’t say that the accused inserted his fingers into the victim’s vagina. Maybe somebody else on the thread did but I did not.

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Your claim that you don’t want to get semantical rings a little bit hollow when you are nit-picking to this extent.

Again, there is no one nit-picking apart from your good self.

Your evolving definition was purely to keep pace with your dishonesty.

You have been asked several times now to back up your claims, you can't because your claims are bogus.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

Again, there is no one nit-picking apart from your good self.

Your evolving definition was purely to keep pace with your dishonesty.

You have been asked several times now to back up your claims, you can't because your claims are bogus.

No, they’re not.

My definition didn’t change, I just didn’t cover the definition entirely in the post about my friend because, well, why would I? I was specifically describing what happened to her and you decided that I thought that was the full definition of fingering.

Unless you can explain how saying my friend woke up with fingers inserted into her vagina means that I think fingers being inserted into a vagina is the entirety of the definition of fingering? Seriously, I’m all ears.

Or you could just admit that you are being obdurate now because you don’t want to be wrong. Two posters have openly admitted on the thread to intimately touching fully asleep partners. You seriously wanna nitpick about what exactly that entails? And why would anything other than insertion of fingers into the vagina be any more acceptable anyway? Vagina is a no-no but vulva or clit is... grand?

Boggles

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts wrote: »

Two posters have openly admitted on the thread to intimately touching fully asleep partners. You seriously wanna nitpick about what exactly that entails?

Again the only person indulging in nit-pickage is your good self.

The 2 posters were clear and honest, one you annoyed so much with your chicanery they got fooked off and left the thread.

Obvious Desperate Breakfasts

Boggles wrote: »

Again the only person indulging in nit-pickage is your good self.

The 2 posters were clear and honest, one you annoyed so much with your chicanery they got fooked off and left the thread.

I’m going to take this reply as a tacit admission that I did not in fact fully define ‘fingering’ in the post you quoted as apparent evidence. And with that, your position crumbles.