Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: Bobboau on July 20, 2013, 10:56:40 pm
-
http://stream.aljazeera.com/story/201307200035-0022922
-
Oh, my...the internet is in a hell of a ****storm over this one.
/me runs for cover
-
...
And I already thought I had a ****ty morning... This is rather depressing.
-
Oh my God. There's one guy in the comments section who thinks she wasn't raped because you can test it using a rape kit (wtf). Another man blames her for going to an Arabic culture whose values are incompatible with our own. Can't judge that, though. That would be bigoted!
-
I read that the other day.
I wish this type of **** was widely published and shouted from the rooftops. If Westerners quit going to Dubai and boycotted the UAE for this bull**** (both recreation and business), the Emirates would quickly find themselves in a heap of trouble.
Needless to say, Dubai is now off the list of place that will ever see my money.
-
Oh hai, the UAE embassy has some public email addresses. If you feel the UAE's actions are shameful and abhorrent, let them know!
http://www.uae-embassy.ae/Embassies/uk/Content/588
-
:nono: Seriously UAE, I accept differences in culture but the whole point of rape is that they have no choice.
-
:nono: Seriously UAE, I accept differences in culture but the whole point of rape is that they have no choice.
Unfortunately, the "cultural difference" here is "Yeah, we don't believe women have equal rights", "We have completely unhealthy attitudes toward sex", "We're Arabia, we're the center of the world, who cares what others think?", and several others in that kind of vein.
There's a point where my tolerance for cultural differences simply stops, and the UAE is way past it.
-
culture difference or always blame it on the women, I don't get it
-
I read that the other day.
I wish this type of **** was widely published and shouted from the rooftops. If Westerners quit going to Dubai and boycotted the UAE for this bull**** (both recreation and business), the Emirates would quickly find themselves in a heap of trouble.
Needless to say, Dubai is now off the list of place that will ever see my money.
Good point :yes:
It is really beyond my understanding... Put somebody in a prison for being a victim :banghead: I've never heard about such incident in a country without Sharia.
-
This is what happens when you take a backwards, 3rd world culture and give them a lot of money very quickly. This sort of behavior would be expected in a dinky, isolated village, not in a 1st world country. Somebody (like the government of Norway) should remind the Emirs that they aren't chieftains of a bunch of poor farm villages, but a government of a country, and they should act the part. This includes paying attention to how sexuality is threated in other countries. I hope this puts a big dent in UAE's tourism revenue, at least.
-
And the UAE one of the most progressive Arab countries!
I'm surprised the man got punished at all.
-
Really, all over the Middle East (aside from Israel, but it has it's own problems) the most widespread mentality is that of tribal village folk. A lot of times, it goes along with actually living in a poor, run down village that's hardly better (sometimes worse, even) than what people lived in 2000 years ago. Sometimes, though, one of those villagers came across oil and from a small time chieftain turned into an oil Sheik and his people into rich businessmen. Inside, though, they remained the backwards villagers they were before.
In general, I believe this is the root of all problems with the Middle East. Technological advance was brought about by other countries and thus didn't go along with cultural advance, which is what is needed to have a stable country. They have weapons, money and power, but are, on average, not mature enough to make proper use of all that. Thus power gets abused, money gets wasted and weapons are used way too much. That's not to say there isn't progress, but it'll take a lot of time till they can really be trusted with what they have now.
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
nearly thought you were nuke until you second guessed yourself lol
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
nearly thought you were nuke until you second guessed yourself lol
Yeah that's what I thought too.
-
I saw the thread title and instantly thought of this (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/world/middleeast/01dubai.html).
-
I saw the thread title and instantly thought of this (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/world/middleeast/01dubai.html).
Isn't homosexuality, like, against the Koran? And Arab cultural norms?
Apparently they make exceptions for rape--as did the Ancient Romans.
EDIT: Then again, rape of women is also against the Koran. In the sense of it being adultery.
-
I saw the thread title and instantly thought of this (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/world/middleeast/01dubai.html).
Isn't homosexuality, like, against the Koran? And Arab cultural norms?
Apparently they make exceptions for rape--as did the Ancient Romans.
Male-on-male rape doesn't necessarily mean the rapists were gay. It's about power and humiliation more than anything else.
EDIT: And dehumanization/objectification, too.
-
I saw the thread title and instantly thought of this (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/01/world/middleeast/01dubai.html).
Isn't homosexuality, like, against the Koran? And Arab cultural norms?
Apparently they make exceptions for rape--as did the Ancient Romans.
Male-on-male rape doesn't necessarily mean the rapists were gay. It's about power and humiliation more than anything else.
EDIT: And dehumanization/objectification, too.
It doesn't mean they're gay--the amount of it in our prison system proves that. However, it is a homosexual action, and thus people who claim to oppose homosexuality on religious grounds but try to cover this stuff up are hypocrites.
-
Why are rape victims so universally ostracized? It seems like every culture engages in this victim-blaming bull**** and makes excuses for the rapists (she was a slut, she was dressed provocatively, blah blah blah we men can't control ourselves blah blah). Even my country, which is one of the more progressive, stereotypes female rape victims as liars who just want to get money. Male rape victims are disregarded if the rapist was a women (you should have enjoyed it) and laughed at if it was another man.
-
I've never understood that either.
-
Why are rape victims so universally ostracized? It seems like every culture engages in this victim-blaming bull**** and makes excuses for the rapists (she was a slut, she was dressed provocatively, blah blah blah we men can't control ourselves blah blah). Even my country, which is one of the more progressive, stereotypes female rape victims as liars who just want to get money. Male rape victims are disregarded if the rapist was a women (you should have enjoyed it) and laughed at if it was another man.
There's a LOT of history during which women were treated as property more than human beings. Modern ideas of equality are really that: Modern. Voting rights for Women are, generally, something that came about during the 20th Century.
There's a lot of societal mechanisms that were built during that time, and our criminal justice systems took rather a long time to get away from the idea that, for example, "all sex in a marriage is consensual". Also note how the number one defense for rapists through the ages has been "Well, she wanted it. Just look at how she dresses!".
Everyday sexism is real. This, this stupid ****ing idea that women who get raped are at least partially to blame, is one of its consequences.
-
I've never understood that either.
You know, any man that uses the "I couldn't control myself, she was acting indecently" excuse is basically admitting to being a savage with no handle on his base emotions. Both Christianity and Islam condemn people like that, yet theocracies are often even more hostile towards rape victims than secular societies.
-
Why are rape victims so universally ostracized? It seems like every culture engages in this victim-blaming bull**** and makes excuses for the rapists (she was a slut, she was dressed provocatively, blah blah blah we men can't control ourselves blah blah). Even my country, which is one of the more progressive, stereotypes female rape victims as liars who just want to get money. Male rape victims are disregarded if the rapist was a women (you should have enjoyed it) and laughed at if it was another man.
There's a LOT of history during which women were treated as property more than human beings. Modern ideas of equality are really that: Modern. Voting rights for Women are, generally, something that came about during the 20th Century.
There's a lot of societal mechanisms that were built during that time, and our criminal justice systems took rather a long time to get away from the idea that, for example, "all sex in a marriage is consensual". Also note how the number one defense for rapists through the ages has been "Well, she wanted it. Just look at how she dresses!".
Everyday sexism is real. This, this stupid ****ing idea that women who get raped are at least partially to blame, is one of its consequences.
indeed forms the basis for rules like a woman should be covered at all times in public as displays of flesh are a temptation/invitation
-
I've never understood that either.
You know, any man that uses the "I couldn't control myself, she was acting indecently" excuse is basically admitting to being a savage with no handle on his base emotions. Both Christianity and Islam condemn people like that, yet theocracies are often even more hostile towards rape victims than secular societies.
Oh don't get me started on religions not practicing what they preach, Apollo... :lol:
I wonder if the "I couldn't control myself" thing is ever true? Can people be overwhelmed to that extent?
-
Why are rape victims so universally ostracized? It seems like every culture engages in this victim-blaming bull**** and makes excuses for the rapists (she was a slut, she was dressed provocatively, blah blah blah we men can't control ourselves blah blah). Even my country, which is one of the more progressive, stereotypes female rape victims as liars who just want to get money. Male rape victims are disregarded if the rapist was a women (you should have enjoyed it) and laughed at if it was another man.
There's a LOT of history during which women were treated as property more than human beings. Modern ideas of equality are really that: Modern. Voting rights for Women are, generally, something that came about during the 20th Century.
There's a lot of societal mechanisms that were built during that time, and our criminal justice systems took rather a long time to get away from the idea that, for example, "all sex in a marriage is consensual". Also note how the number one defense for rapists through the ages has been "Well, she wanted it. Just look at how she dresses!".
Everyday sexism is real. This, this stupid ****ing idea that women who get raped are at least partially to blame, is one of its consequences.
indeed forms the basis for rules like a woman should be covered at all times in public as displays of flesh are a temptation/invitation
Which in turn implies that any woman who doesn't deserves to be harassed.
You know, any man that uses the "I couldn't control myself, she was acting indecently" excuse is basically admitting to being a savage with no handle on his base emotions. Both Christianity and Islam condemn people like that, yet theocracies are often even more hostile towards rape victims than secular societies.
Oh don't get me started on religions not practicing what they preach, Apollo... :lol:
I wonder if the "I couldn't control myself" thing is ever true? Can people be overwhelmed to that extent?
I guess misogyny is just so entrenched that it twists the religion to be more sexist. While not exactly a model of feminist thought, Islam in its original form was much more equality-minded than what you see in the Arab world.
As for your question, I imagine that nothing short of a physical disorder would make that explanation valid. Certainly, lust alone would not 'force' someone to rape a woman.
-
Male-on-male rape doesn't necessarily mean the rapists were gay. It's about power and humiliation more than anything else.
EDIT: And dehumanization/objectification, too.
I was under the impression that boner from naked men = gay. I guess I gotta look into it some more.
You know, this case can be drawn with interesting implications to western first-world "rape culture"...
-
Male-on-male rape doesn't necessarily mean the rapists were gay. It's about power and humiliation more than anything else.
EDIT: And dehumanization/objectification, too.
I was under the impression that boner from naked men = gay. I guess I gotta look into it some more.
You know, this case can be drawn with interesting implications to western first-world "rape culture"...
If you wait long enough anything including inanimate objects and/or sitting around, trying to think of nothing will get you a boner. Doesn't mean a thing except that you are horny.
Being horny doesn't turn anyone into a rapist however. That's just a bull**** excuse a rapist would use to get away with what they did.
-
Male-on-male rape doesn't necessarily mean the rapists were gay. It's about power and humiliation more than anything else.
EDIT: And dehumanization/objectification, too.
I was under the impression that boner from naked men = gay.
...you do realize power and sadistic bits give you a boner regardless of what's naked, right? That was kind of the point he made.
-
Wait, people actually get arousal out of that? :wtf:
-
Wait, people actually get arousal out of that? :wtf:
EDIT: Sorry, with the new yt tag, I couldn't resist. But yes, some people get off on that.
-
Wait, people actually get arousal out of that? :wtf:
...how did you spend so long on the internet without being aware there's an entire class of fetishes that are based around power dynamics or at least heavily associated with them?
Yes. Yes they do.
-
Seriously, I thought the reason there were so many jokes about it was because it wasn't possible.
-
Wait, people actually get arousal out of that? :wtf:
Yes, quite a few. Usually, it takes form of civilized, consensual BDSM. Sometimes though, it takes form of rape. I think it's in no small part due to stigma associated with BDSM, ironically enough. There are probably backwards places where rape is more "socially acceptable" than BDSM. I imagine that, if a fundamentalist priest (no matter of which religion) from a small community heard of one of his parishioners practicing BDSM, he'd preach just about that for the next weak. On the other hand, you've all seen how the same fundamentalists deal with rape.
I wonder if the "I couldn't control myself" thing is ever true? Can people be overwhelmed to that extent?
There are "people" who could, but this is a pretty poor excuse. It can be an explanation, but an important part of what makes us human is the ability to control ourselves. Therefore, I consider such "people" animals, nothing more. I believe they should therefore be treated like any dangerous animal. Homo Sapiens, as you know, means something along the lines of "Wise Man" or "Thinking Man". I've taken to calling animals which don't fit under that name "Homo Insipiens" ("Unwise Man" or "Not-thinking Man" :) ). Needless to say, I'm not fond of this pest.
I could probably manage a normal conversation with a completely naked woman, even if she was very attractive. Sure, it might be distracting, but that's it. Self control shouldn't be hard for anyone who wants to call him/herself human.
Aside from that, alcohol and drugs, if used in large enough quantities, are really good at reducing even the most intelligent, thinking men to mindless animals. Many rapists are either drunk, drugged, or both. Not an excuse, either, but another reason to use such substances with extreme care.
-
Wait, people actually get arousal out of that? :wtf:
Yes, quite a few. Usually, it takes form of civilized, consensual BDSM. Sometimes though, it takes form of rape. I think it's in no small part due to stigma associated with BDSM, ironically enough. There are probably backwards places where rape is more "socially acceptable" than BDSM. I imagine that, if a fundamentalist priest (no matter of which religion) from a small community heard of one of his parishioners practicing BDSM, he'd preach just about that for the next weak. On the other hand, you've all seen how the same fundamentalists deal with rape.
I'm going to ask that you provide some sort of evidence to back those accusations up.
-
Seriously, I thought the reason there were so many jokes about it was because it wasn't possible.
I mourn the loss of your innocence :(
I am partially serious about that.
However, I can't get my head around the idea that if you have this thing, you'll **** anything. Rape victims are usually female and usually pretty. If that is irrelevant, why not pick some homeless guy that no one will care about? Or some animal even, if power is the top factor?
I know some people are aroused by domination, but it's just a sexual preference, is it not? Some are aroused by being dominated.
-
It's an entire subculture, and while it's somewhat stigmatized, it's usually very civilized, and as long as everything is consensual, there's nothing wrong with that.
I'm going to ask that you provide some sort of evidence to back those accusations up.
Well, I kind of sat and thought about this. Just ask, why people practice rape instead of BDSM? In both cases, there's domination in play, but one is legal, but the other is not. BDSM should be a logical choice, no? But rape occurs, so there must be a reason. BDSM is considered "perverted" by some, and would most likely be unacceptable to a fundamentalist priest (I've seen a few of such before, it'd be easier to list inventions they don't condemn...), while in case of the rape, well, it's been mentioned already how backwards people react to that. My conclusions were the above, and I might very well be wrong on that.
-
Okay well - I was thinking of dictators getting boners during rallies or something, not like bondage fetishes. The later one I concur is rather obvious after internet experience.
-
I read an article a long time ago (which I lost, sadly), which described how (some) rapists of both genders were usually victims themselves who, through a skewed logic (whose details I can't remember), were seeking to destroy the self esteem of someone else to improve theirs. It was an interesting article, such a shame I lost the link.
-
A sadly common logic skew, and not only applicable to rape. "If I'm miserable, everyone should be", people do sometimes think like that. Anyway, if anyone has a link to this article, please post.
-
...how did you spend so long on the internet without being aware there's an entire class of fetishes that are based around power dynamics or at least heavily associated with them?
I would say that distinction is at LEAST phylum level, if not domain.
-
A sadly common logic skew, and not only applicable to rape. "If I'm miserable, everyone should be", people do sometimes think like that. Anyway, if anyone has a link to this article, please post.
But then the victim has become a hypocrite who deserves less sympathy. Doesn't that ever occur to them?
People have a remarkable ability to justify their own transgressions.
-
People have a remarkable ability to justify their own transgressions.
[yt]Lightbulb turning on[/yt]
-
However, I can't get my head around the idea that if you have this thing, you'll **** anything. Rape victims are usually female and usually pretty. If that is irrelevant, why not pick some homeless guy that no one will care about? Or some animal even, if power is the top factor?
I know some people are aroused by domination, but it's just a sexual preference, is it not? Some are aroused by being dominated.
Ahahahahaaa no.
Rape is always, ALWAYS about power. It is the ultimate form of dominance. How the victim looks is completely, utterly immaterial. And power over animals is not even close to the rush these people get from asserting their dominance over another human being. So there's no substitute.
BDSM and other practices are safe expressions of this, but they require that both parties have a degree of control over the act, something someone on a power trip is unlikely to give up.
Further reading: http://endrapeculture.com/2012/10/27/16/
-
Rape is always, ALWAYS about power. It is the ultimate form of dominance. How the victim looks is completely, utterly immaterial.
Thats a huge generalization, tough. Motivations for rape are not a settled thing and are probably multifactorial and variable. They may include desire for power over others, anger, cultural acceptance, sexual gratification and weak legal sanctions.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape#Motivation_of_perpetrators
-
From that same snippet:
The World Health Organization (WHO) states that the principal factors that lead to the perpetration of sexual violence are:
- beliefs in family honor and sexual purity;
- ideologies of male sexual entitlement;
- weak legal sanctions for sexual violence.
Please show how these are not ultimately about asserting power over others. Yes, saying they're all about power is a generalization, but one that is in the end pretty accurate, I believe.
-
Ahahahahaaa
Don't laugh at me.
-
Ahahahahaaa
Don't laugh at me.
/me laughs.
:P
-
Ahahahahaaa
Don't laugh at me.
/me laughs.
:P
Oh, I'm going to have to come and kill you now...
:D
-
On topic, please.
Lorric: The idea that rape is a function of attractiveness (i.e., the more attractive you are, the more likely it is that you'll be raped) has been pretty conclusively disproven. As with all crimes, opportunity plays a far greater role in determining such things; That's why it's unfortunately necessary for women to be cautious to a degree us men cannot imagine.
What this idea feeds back into is this meme that the victim is partially to blame for being victimized, and that's really really not the right way to think about these crimes.
-
Lorric: The idea that rape is a function of attractiveness (i.e., the more attractive you are, the more likely it is that you'll be raped) has been pretty conclusively disproven. As with all crimes, opportunity plays a far greater role in determining such things; That's why it's unfortunately necessary for women to be cautious to a degree us men cannot imagine.
What this idea feeds back into is this meme that the victim is partially to blame for being victimized, and that's really really not the right way to think about these crimes.
Then why is it so often pretty girls, the young and attractive? You say it's been disproven, but that's what I see when I see rape victims.
I don't know if we should discuss this though, with how you get on this kind of topic. You've been nice lately, can you stay that way?
-
I'm just going to go out on a limb that mostly it's the pretty girls that go out downtown into clubs, bars etc whereas the not so pretty stay home and do other things
So in terms of opportunity, breaking and entering don't enter into the mix
Intoxicated and stumbling down the street however
But I'm basically being mean and saying what is defined as unattractive gals are usually found indoors and away from these situations by lack of proximity
Which is a stupid thing to say, but I don't mind saying stupid things. I'd also like to say that every gal should be issued a Mosin-Nagant with fixed bayonets and travel in packs
-
Given that the majority of rapes happen in domestic situations, whether or not you're out on the town doesn't really factor into it.
-
However, I can't get my head around the idea that if you have this thing, you'll **** anything. Rape victims are usually female and usually pretty. If that is irrelevant, why not pick some homeless guy that no one will care about? Or some animal even, if power is the top factor?
I know some people are aroused by domination, but it's just a sexual preference, is it not? Some are aroused by being dominated.
Ahahahahaaa no.
Rape is always, ALWAYS about power. It is the ultimate form of dominance. How the victim looks is completely, utterly immaterial. And power over animals is not even close to the rush these people get from asserting their dominance over another human being. So there's no substitute.
Common belief, but far, far from proven. The idea that sexual gratification plays no part in rape ever is discussed by Steven Pinker (admittedly briefly) in "The Better Angels of Our Nature" (which is a really good book). He calls it " the politically correct ideology of rape" and one example of an "unexamined codes of etiquette, ideology, and taboo".
Rape is, like any human/human interaction, a complex beast that defies easy and completely consistent definition. I have no doubt that power plays a role - often a major, even dominant role - in a large number of rapes. But to claim that sexual gratification never plays any part in any rape is absurd - hell, to make any statement so absolute as that about any human interaction is absurd. :rolleyes:
On topic, please.
Lorric: The idea that rape is a function of attractiveness (i.e., the more attractive you are, the more likely it is that you'll be raped) has been pretty conclusively disproven.
Has it? Sources please, and detailed data. That seems enormously, enormously unlikely. You think that rampaging soldiers wouldn't choose the most attractive woman in a household if they have the choice? Or that drunk guys at parties wouldn't preferentially try to force themselves on their most attractive potential target? I'm not saying that unattractive women have no risk of rape (the number of elderly women who're raped is pretty much proof of that - age rarely correlates with attractiveness), but you only have to think for a few seconds to come up with situations where this statement would seems extraordinary, so I'd expect some extraordinary evidence to back it up.
Again, in the same part of his book, Pinker states that this is not backed up by statistical facts about rape victims, and cites numerous sources - frustratingly, most of those are books rather than papers so I've not read them (and can't readily access them), but given how thorough and well researched the rest of his work is, I'm inclined to trust him.
-
My statement that rape risk is not a function of attractiveness cannot be backed up with research that I can find right now, so I'm going to retract it.
Regarding rape as a tool for establishing power:
It's my reading of the situation based on this article (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_of_sexual_violence), more or less. It seems to me that most motivations for rape ultimately go back to the rapist establishing dominance over the victim, whether it is as punishment, tool of coercion, or sexual satisfaction. It's also what I was told anecdotally, and I probably have committed the mistake of mistaking anecdotal evidence for fact.
-
I imagine that generally, the rapist's victim has to be compatible with his sexual preference. Men are victims less often than women (though not as much as the data would suggest, because they also report it less often), because most rapists are straight males. It seems logical that a woman (or man) that is generally considered unattractive would be less at risk of being raped, for pretty much the same reason.
-
There is news that she was pardoned:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dubai-pardons-woman-center-rape-dispute-19731633
-
There is news that she was pardoned:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dubai-pardons-woman-center-rape-dispute-19731633
Excellent.
-
Oh, good, and it only took threats to their image to do it.
-
Oh, good, and it only took threats to their image to do it.
Yeah, I know. But at least there's a way. It's an example to follow.
-
Good thing they wised up. A law that punishes the victim kind of defeats the point of having law in first place. That the hotel staff asked if she really wants to involve the police shows that UAE law still has quite a long way to go.
-
There is news that she was pardoned:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dubai-pardons-woman-center-rape-dispute-19731633
I'm glad she was. Sadly, someone without foreign support would probably have stayed in prison.
-
Indeed, though maybe the medial pressure alone would've sufficed, though would've taken longer. Also, unless we're talking a native, foreign support seems pretty much a given in such an outrageous situation.
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
Neutron bomb the whole Middle East and sell the land and infrastructure to China in exchange for unlimited oil rights. China solves overpopulation, we get oil, smaller national debt, world peace.
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
Neutron bomb the whole Middle East and sell the land and infrastructure to China in exchange for unlimited oil rights. China solves overpopulation, we get oil, smaller national debt, world peace.
China revokes oil rights, world war.
-
Or not trust them at all and just nuke the site from orbit
But that's being a little overkill isn't it?
Neutron bomb the whole Middle East and sell the land and infrastructure to China in exchange for unlimited oil rights. China solves overpopulation, we get oil, smaller national debt, world peace.
China revokes oil rights, world war.
The alternative: Nuclear Terrorism in Saudi Arabia, world war. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tom_Clancy%27s_EndWar) :D
-
Indeed, though maybe the medial pressure alone would've sufficed, though would've taken longer. Also, unless we're talking a native, foreign support seems pretty much a given in such an outrageous situation.
Yeah, I mean if it was a native nothing would have been done.
-
There is news that she was pardoned:
http://abcnews.go.com/International/wireStory/dubai-pardons-woman-center-rape-dispute-19731633
I'm glad she was. Sadly, someone without foreign support would probably have stayed in prison.
Someone without foreign support would likely have never gotten in the news in the first place. It's no accident that both this story and the one I posted involved foreigners.
-
you say "someone" as if it were hypothetical, as if there were not people in the exact situation you describe already.
-
True, I have no doubt that there are people who are/have been in that situation, but I don't have any evidence to point to, because they're not in the news. :P
-
you say "someone" as if it were hypothetical, as if there were not people in the exact situation you describe already.
Oh I have no illusions that the exact same thing doesn't happen to natives all the time.
-
Well, I guess it "normally" goes a bit differently. A native, knowing the law is idiotic, probably wouldn't have called the police in the first place. Which is probably even worse, because there's no way to track and try to expose this stuff.