Prostitution and "theft of services" Options

[Melissa]

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=3801167&page=1

Philly Judge Criticized for Rape Decision
Judge Dismissed Rape Charges Against Man Accused of Forcing Prostitute to Have Sex
By SCOTT MICHELS
Oct. 31, 2007

A judge in Philadelphia has come under fire for a controversial ruling in which she reduced charges so that a man accused of raping a prostitute at gunpoint faced only robbery charges for "theft of services."
judge man
(ABC News Photo Illustration)

Municipal Judge Teresa Carr Deni earlier this month dismissed rape and sexual assault charges against Dominique Gindraw, who is accused of forcing a prostitute at gunpoint to have sex with him and several other men. Deni left intact charges of armed robbery for theft of services against Gindraw.

Prosecuting Gindraw for rape, the judge said in a subsequent newspaper interview "minimizes true rape cases and demeans women who are really raped."

The decision — and Deni's subsequent comments to a local newspaper — prompted about 40 complaints from around the country to the local bar association, said executive director Ken Shear, as well as a campaign by women's groups to encourage people to vote against Deni when she is up for reelection Tuesday

The Philadelphia Bar Association this week took the unusual step of publicly criticizing the ruling.

"I am personally offended by this unforgivable miscarriage of justice," said bar association chancellor Jane Dalton. "The victim has been brutalized twice in this case: first by the assailants, and now by the court."

"A victim is a victim regardless of how they come to be in that position," Dalton told ABC News.

Deni did not immediately return a message for comment left this morning.

Her lawyer, George Bochetto, said Deni "makes decisions based on the evidence presented in a court of law, not newspaper accounts of the story. She finds the chancellor's comments to be regrettable."

The accuser testified that she initially agreed to have sex with Gindraw and a friend of his in exchange for money, but that Gindraw refused to pay her, held a gun to her head and forced her to have sex with several men, according to a transcript of an Oct. 4 court hearing.

"She consented and she didn't get paid. … I thought it was a robbery," Deni told the Philadelphia Daily News.

Prosecuting Gindraw for rape "minimizes true rape cases and demeans women who are really raped," she told the paper.

more at the site.

When a prostitute gets refused payment and raped at gunpoint, should it be considered rape or theft?

I guess I can understand why some people are so offended by the judge's decision to only charge theft of services and armed robbery instead of rape, but I actually agree with her. It technically is just an armed robbery. The prostitute consented to the sex in exchange for payment, got sexed, didn't get paid,... therefore she was robbed of her services. To charge "rape" is to take advantage of the element of sex in her situation - I mean, she is a prostitute after all. It completely undermines what "rape" is, especially because they DID have her consent. It's not like she refused the sex completely, with or without payment, then was forced.

[Reidar]

She consented to getting paid for sex, not having a gun pointed to her head. If she was to be paid afterwards, and the man refused to fork it over after both individuals mutually engaged in the act, then that would be theft.

It was the other way around. There were also more men involved than what she consented to.

That is rape.

But the verdict isn't surprising, considering how many bull**** judges letting child molesters off with mere misdemeanors have been in the news lately. It's an epidemic.

[Melissa]

So you're saying that if he held a gun to her head and forced her to have sex with a few extra people, then paid her in the end, she'd be here making this complaint? I think that's bullshit. The lines of consent have also become so blurred. A yes, to me, is a yes. There is no "Yes, I will only do it in this and this position, blah blah blah." Did she lay down rules before she consented? Is there some sort of contract? Obviously not, and obviously, she's stupid.

Most people know what they're going into when they prostitute themselves and, if she were smart, she would get herself a pimp. Prostitution itself is also currently illegal in Philly (I believe), which makes her stupid to think that she'd come out with a good deal in a court case.

This is another reason why I think prostitution should be legalized and regulated; so there wont be shady cases like this where the lines between what's right and wrong aren't so blurred.

[Reidar]

So you're saying that if he held a gun to her head and forced her to have sex with a few extra people, then paid her in the end, she'd be here making this complaint? I think that's bullshit.

Whether or not she chooses to press charges doesn't change it from being coerced sex. Rape.

A yes, to me, is a yes. There is no "Yes, I will only do it in this and this position, blah blah blah." Did she lay down rules before she consented?

Yes, she did. She would have sex with the man and his friend for a fee. This was violated on both fronts. She was forced to do it for free, and she was forced to have sex with additional men.

It can't get more concise than that.

[Stuckie]

Prostitution is illegal. Since prostitution is illegal, the "services" of a prostitute aren't a legitamite business. Its like someone stealing illegal drugs from a drug dealer. They just cant call the cops and say, "Help! Someone stole my crack!" If they find the person that stole the drugs, they'll only be charged with possesion and maybe breaking and entering if they went into the dealers house. But not theft. So raping a prostitute isn't theft, its rape. Plain and simple.

[Melissa]

I actually somewhat agree with Reidar, but I'm still inclined to think that there wasn't a problem with the ruling.

Prostitution is illegal. Since prostitution is illegal, the "services" of a prostitute aren't a legitamite business. Its like someone stealing illegal drugs from a drug dealer. They just cant call the cops and say, "Help! Someone stole my crack!" If they find the person that stole the drugs, they'll only be charged with possesion and maybe breaking and entering if they went into the dealers house. But not theft. So raping a prostitute isn't theft, its rape. Plain and simple.

First of all, a drug dealer wouldn't go to the cops, he'd go to somebody with the means to get his drugs back or beat the shit out of the guys who stole it, which is why most prostitutes should have pimps or somebody to back them up. If a drug dealer went to the police, he'd get in trouble. Because prostituting is illegal, she should've been tried and fined, or whatever it is that prostitutes get.

If an illegal immigrant was working as a housecleaner and the owner of the house refuses to pay him/her, he or she would (hopefully) be smart enough not to go to the police.

In her case, however, yeah, she had a gun held to her head, but she seemed more upset because she didn't get paid. Judging by the things she said, if they had done all of this then given her money in the end, she probably wouldn't even be in the court complaining.

[Reidar]

It doesn't matter what she would be inclined to do. Speculative motives have no bearing on the law. Wherever her personal offense lies doesn't change the fact that it was rape. She could just as well be pursuing this for the incentive of monetary reasons and nothing else, and it wouldn't matter. A judge has no place to do that. "Oh, it seems like the rape didn't really bother you as much as you're claiming it did, so his sentence will be lightened." That's an absurd system.

[Melissa]

Which, as I said before, is why I realized that you were right.

If we take the law out of it, however, and just look at the situation without there being a court or a judge, etc... the prostitute was really stupid.

[NoSex]

If we take the law out of it, however, and just look at the situation without there being a court or a judge, etc... the prostitute was really stupid.

How was the prostitute stupid? She was (in all likelihood) in a state of economic despair. She was looking to gain a profit by providing a service on her terms (which, in any other field, is a perfectly reasonable goal). When her terms were not met, she was violated by a potential costumer against her will. I would suspect anyone, in a similar situation, would want redress. If anything is "stupid," (and I think you could agree) it's the social mores and norms which have forced this sort of legitimate business practice into a dangerous and non-fulfilling black-market.

[Melissa]

First of all, I do think that prostitution should be legalized so situations like this can be prevented. However, that's not the case right now, and because prostitution is illegal, she should have been ready for potentially shady customers. If something happens to her (and something has), the court will most likely not rule in her favor (and it hasn't). It's common sense. If you're going to get yourself in a situation that isn't legal in the first place, why are you running to the police when something bad happens?

Hence, she's stupid. I don't care how broke she was, there are always other options (that are legal) and she chose the stupid one.

[jesusisthebestth...]

Prostitution is illegal. Since prostitution is illegal, the "services" of a prostitute aren't a legitamite business. Its like someone stealing illegal drugs from a drug dealer. They just cant call the cops and say, "Help! Someone stole my crack!" If they find the person that stole the drugs, they'll only be charged with possesion and maybe breaking and entering if they went into the dealers house. But not theft. So raping a prostitute isn't theft, its rape. Plain and simple.

I never thought about it like this. Well said, hunnie