US Marine accused of raping Filipino woman

[SunWuKong]

umm... two wrongs don't make a right. 'nuff said, i think. the Seoul justice system should have given those men much more severe punishment.

[mrazntre]

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

As if the two acts could be correctly classified on any level of being humane, no matter how many capital letters are used.

It is a disgusting form of "justice", and does not belong in any conceived discussion. If you hold yourself to no standard, then what have you let yourself become?

As if?

You brought it up, not me. No matter how you try to word your post, it still stands that "justice" is a perceived notion of society. (no matter how many quotation marks you use).

Standard? If I ever rape a woman, please, go ahead... cane me. That is the standard that I hold myself to. The standard applies universally and if you don't hold to the punishment of a criminal, then what have you let yourself become? Better yet, what have you let the criminial believe to be acceptable to society? That rape is okay?

[mrazntre]

Originally Posted by SunWuKong

umm... two wrongs don't make a right. 'nuff said, i think. the Seoul justice system should have given those men much more severe punishment.

one blind eye to a situation is so convenient.

[snailpoo]

Interesting.

So, let's start off with:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

I've worked with all the information given to me, just as well have, in reviewing these cases. To say I've totally ignored elements such as charges or other points is incorrect.

Now even with the understanding that reporting of cases is unreliable, can you see how these two cases are differentiable?

It's interesting how you raise this furor about how South Korea is so lenient about rape that it merely suspended the license of the rapist. Yet, the url of the article says:

However, the crime didn't take place because A hesitated because of conscience and the woman stepped out of the car saying she had other plans to attend to.

Can you show me how that fact pattern fits the criteria of rape? Sexual assault? Can you show me how the sentence received differs from the federal sentencing guidelines?

Next up:

The appeals court ruled that the woman had shown no evidence of having refused the man’s advances, and that he used “not enough violence to constitute rape.”

How is consent defined? How does South Korean case law define consent? How does the South Korean criminal code define rape? Is a level of violence required?


Now here's where things get interesting: The Korean taxi driver said that there was consent. The American serviceman said that there was consent. Why are you showing sympathy for one and not the other? Do you have other parts of the fact pattern that you are not sharing with us?



Now back to the law:

You say:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

I'm unsure of why arguing for higher standards suddenly invalidates holding others to the same. The standard I speak of is the practice of caning, not minimum sentencing for rape convictions.

Yet in the very next paragraph you say:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

U.S. law most certainly never trumps foreign law, but it is the job of the U.S. court defense or prosecution to fight like hell for a conviction equal to what would be administered by U.S. law.

Huh? Why? Why should US law apply to a foreign crime committed on foreign soil? You say that US law should not trump foreign law, yet you are argue "standards" that should apply? Which standards? ...American ones? Corporal punishment is against "standards," yet capital punishment, an American oddity, is ...? What standards should be applied to the definition of consent? of rape? What standards should be applied to evidence? burden of proof?


You say that:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

This is all going off federal law, and to repeat, I've never said or want to imply U.S. trumps any foreign laws. U.S. may be [insert adjective here] than some or many foreign laws, but that is simply unknown to me and I'm not going to be presumptuous.

Yet, you're obviously presuming to know, not only the specific fact patterns to each case, but also US law AND South Korean law.



So, here's the question, what do these three cases have to do with each other anyway? Only two have to do with US military personnel, and you seem to have conflicting views of those two cases, while the third...

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The standard I speak of is the practice of caning, not minimum sentencing for rape convictions.

Umm... not minimum sentencing for rape convictions. (how do you define "rape convictions," again?) Why did you raise these two other cases again?


Caveats:

*Not legal advice, legal opinion, legal research, or legal anything. Not to be considered reliable, factual, or researched, or professional. Does not create any sort of relationship, professional or otherwise.

*Not to be construed defending rape in any way --I'm just confused as to how two random and disjointed cases can be used to indicate anything.

[AgentTofu]

Originally Posted by mrazntre

Standard? If I ever rape a woman, please, go ahead... cane me. That is the standard that I hold myself to.

Allowing the state to inflict physical abuse upon you is not only a slippery slope, but is only a notch down from allowing executions. Even then it is questionable, as the physical abuse has no point. Incarceration is to keep the the criminal away, while a death sentence is to keep them away forever. Physical justice has none of those traits. Appeals and DNA evidence that come down the line later are useless once they've cut off your hands for stealing.


To snailpoo:

They wanted to charge one man on sexual assault, but only wanted to revoke his license. Yes, apparently violence IS needed for rape convictions in Korea. Where have I shown sympathy to any of these cases? Nowhere. They've all been convicted, and now the disparity between the sentences deserves to be examined.

A number of questions about consent, charges, and more mean nothing as I've only taken a position on one. Caning. The rest is simply going to be the job, repeat, job of a U.S. legal prosecution/defense team to fight for. Sometimes they will win, others they will lose, and they will prance around all kinds of standards when they do so.

Originally Posted by snailpoo

So, here's the question, what do these three cases have to do with each other anyway?

Two of them are incredibly similar cases, but with the roles reversed, and the other is simply laughable in it's execution and result. 10 months vs 40 years? What a joke.

[snailpoo]

Hrm. Odd.

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

They wanted to charge one man on sexual assault, but only wanted to revoke his license.

So going back to your original statement:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

Going back to the conviction, we've seen such punishments as two year in jail, or even only revoking a driver's license for the rape of U.S. servicewomen.

1. There was no rape.
2. There was no U.S. servicewoman.
3. Remind me what the elements of sexual assault are again?


Now here's the really weird thing:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

Where have I shown sympathy to any of these cases? Nowhere. They've all been convicted, and now the disparity between the sentences deserves to be examined.

Do you know something about all three cases that you're not telling us? In one case, there was no rape and no charges of rape, let alone a conviction. In another case, the conviction was overturned. Yet, you're telling us that all three should not have a disparity between sentences?

Forget differing fact patterns. How do you reach a conclusion that they shouldn't have differing sentences when they don't even have the same charges (or lack thereof) ...to say NOTHING of the fact that they're in different jurisdictions?

Erm?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

A number of questions about consent, charges, and more mean nothing as I've only taken a position on one. Caning. The rest is simply going to be the job, repeat, job of a U.S. legal prosecution/defense team to fight for.

That's simply not true.

In addition to caning, you've taken the position that US sentencing guidelines should trump local law. The only problem is that you ignore how local law defines the crime that you're applying the sentences to... in addition to ignoring, well, the facts of the crime.

And, umm... since when is it the job of a U.S. legal prosection team to fight for conviction of a foreign criminal who committed a crime in a foreign jurisdiction?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

Sometimes they will win, others they will lose, and they will prance around all kinds of standards when they do so.

Two of them are incredibly similar cases, but with the roles reversed, and the other is simply laughable in it's execution and result. 10 months vs 40 years? What a joke.

Are they? Again, do you have additional information that you're not sharing with us?

Many people have the pitfall of playing armchair quarterback to legal cases, but in situations like this, did you even watch the soccer match you're trying to quarterback?

[AgentTofu]

The amount of conclusions and out of context assertions you have reached are rising with every post. Just going over the last one...

You have said I don't think there should be any disparity between the cases, that they don't have the same charges (two of them do), that they shouldn't have different sentences (it is the disparity that calls observation), that U.S. attorneys don't fight for their clients for the most minimum or maximum of sentences, that US laws trump local law (for the third time NO), that US attorneys don't prosecute in foreign cases (this is a legal task setup through embassies), that facts of the crimes of the crimes are ignored (they were all found guilty on the charges), and that 10 months vs 40 years isn't a joke.

It was pretty much all over when you had to ask what the cases had to do with each other. Wow.

So highlighting other similar cases is a no-no, but just randomly demanding a caning is A-OK?

[SunWuKong]

i don't know why the disparity in punishment is especially anything to pay attention to. you're talking about two different governments, and two nations that have different historical interactions with the US. even their military agreements with the US are not exactly the same.

[AgentTofu]

And for that reason, it highlights why US legal teams attempt to apply Federal US standards to sentencing agreements if they have means. Otherwise a disparity between legal systems is seen like these all the time.

[snailpoo]

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The amount of conclusions and out of context assertions you have reached are rising with every post. Just going over the last one...

Actually, I was just pointing out your assertions.

Here's why:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

You have said I don't think there should be any disparity between the cases,

Let's match that with:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

(they were all found guilty on the charges), and that 10 months vs 40 years isn't a joke.

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

that they don't have the same charges (two of them do),

Really? 1st degree? 2nd degree? Rape? Sexual Assault? Ciminal Depravity? Attempted?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

that they shouldn't have different sentences (it is the disparity that calls observation),

Again, let's match that with:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

(they were all found guilty on the charges), and that 10 months vs 40 years isn't a joke.

IF you were just observing, then why should the US care? Why should the US care what if that KOREAN citizen had is license revoked for drugging a KOREAN woman?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

that facts of the crimes of the crimes are ignored (they were all found guilty on the charges),

No they WERE NOT[/b], let's review:

For the first case you raised:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The Seoul High Court yesterday overturned the conviction

For the second case you raised:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

However, the crime didn't take place because A hesitated because of conscience and the woman stepped out of the car saying she had other plans to attend to. A few days later, the woman found out what happened and sued A. Prosecutors dropped the case, but police cancelled A's license.

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

It was pretty much all over when you had to ask what the cases had to do with each other. Wow.

Wow?

Wow?

You cannot give the the fact patterns for each case.

You cannot give the legal definitions or the law applicable to each case.

You cannot give any accounts as to what happened during trial.

You cannot even give the charges filed in each case.

And yet, out of the millions of cases around the world, you highlight the disparities between 3 cases because?

Keep in mind that one of the cases had NOTHING to do with America.

..and yet, regardless of all the holes you have in your knowledge of law and facts, you are "observing" the differences in the sentencing between these three cases because...?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

So highlighting other similar cases is a no-no, but just randomly demanding a caning is A-OK?

I think by now, it's pretty clear that "other similar cases" is just not true.

But it's called consistency. You're arguing for international conformity to American sentencing guidelines. You deny this by claiming that US law shouldn't trump local law ... while you object to corporal punishment available in some local law.

Which is it?


Simply put, my objection to your entire call for "observation" of the diverse sentences in these three cases ignores the fact that the three cases were the result of different facts, different charges, and different law.

[AgentTofu]

The charges were rape. They both concerned service members. The other story used context to Korean courts and how lightly they are handled. The fact patterns are that the roles were reversed, both times the excuse of consensual sex were used, and the end results varied drastically.

There is one clear difference one can observe right away from both cases. A serviceman is sent to trial and a media circus begins. A servicewomen is raped and... Silence. This send a clear message to our service members and citizens abroad just where their support will come from.

One can easily object to corporal punishment while still obeying local laws. One can argue for no conformity to American sentencing guidelines, and that an international conformity of laws would be a mistake for all of us as global citizens. This should not stop one from condemning psychical abuse of any nature.

[snailpoo]

I don't know what more to say to you. You claim that two situations are alike, yet you have NO IDEA about either. Whenever I ask you for more information, you come back with a one sentence assertion.


For the last time:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The charges were rape. They both concerned service members... The fact patterns are that the roles were reversed, both times the excuse of consensual sex were used, and the end results varied drastically.

Prove it.

We can start backwards. Let's ASSUME that the charges were rape. Let's ASSUME similar fact patterns and that both were found guilty.

Let's simplify the discussion and use the 2006 Federal Sentencing Guidelines (without the amendments).

What's the base offense level that you start of with in the Phillipines case? What about the Korean case? What's the final offense level you end up with in the Phillipines case? What about the Korean case? What are the corresponding maximums for each?

Now, care to replicate this exercise for all fifty states and DC? Care to tell me the RANGE of sentences you come up with?

Now, given the RANGE of sentences that you can come up with in American law, how can you possibly complain about the differences in two SPECIFIC cases in two DIFFERENT countries?


Oh, but you can't even get here yet. Since we're working backwards, what are the facts of the cases? How is rape defined in these two countries? You can't even get to conviction and sentencing until you establish facts.



And the kicker:

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The other story used context to Korean courts and how lightly they are handled.

ONE case creates "context to Korean courts?" ONE case?

Are you kidding?

I mean, if we can use just one case to show "context" for an entire judicial system, what if I mention, say:

A 13-year-old rape victim from Lawrence, KS spent nearly a week hospitalized in Topeka after an emotional breakdown in which she mutilated her arms and wrists with broken glass.

What triggered the incident, the girl's mother said, was a judge's finding days earlier that the girl was an "active participant" in her own rape -- and that her attackers deserved probation, not prison.

The presumed penalty for rape under Kansas law is at least 13 years. But earlier this month, Douglas County District Judge Paula Martin granted an exception to state law, ordering probation and 60 days in jail for the two convicted rapists.

http://www.wherestheoutrage.org/articles/art_120.php

...if you're able to use one random case to put "context" about the Korean system, by your odd logic, what does this one random case say about the American system you're arguing should apply?



And seriously, you've picked the license revocation one as the case you're using to show "context?" That case? The case where THERE WAS NO RAPE, not even by the American definition? The CIVIL CASE? The case brought by the NON-rapist AFTER the PROSECUTOR DROPPED CHARGES? That case?

I mean, when you completely ignore facts, what if someone came along to say that the US doesn't care about rape because of what happened in the Duke Lacrosse case?



You've basically taken the two different results of two UNRELATED cases to argue that American standards should apply, except that you're ignoring that

1. The FACTS of the cases are different,
2. The LAW and the COUNTRIES are different, and
3. EVEN if American standards applied, you would have different outcomes, ANYWAY.

And to top it all off, you've taken ONE COMPLETELY UNRELATED case to color an entire court system.


Seriously, if you wish to continue, come back with actual facts. Answer some of the questions instead of asserting the same thing again and again.

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

One can easily object to corporal punishment while still obeying local laws. One can argue for no conformity to American sentencing guidelines, and that an international conformity of laws would be a mistake for all of us as global citizens. This should not stop one from condemning psychical abuse of any nature.

Huh. Really? Where does your objection to corporal punishment come from?

And, IF you are arguing for no international comformity to American sentencing guidelines, what is your point here in this thread? (Small hint: I'm the one arguing for no conformity).




*Nothing I post should be considered legal advice, legal opinion, legal research, or legal anything, and should not to be considered reliable, factual, or researched, or professional. Blah, blah, blah.

[AgentTofu]

There is a very clear idea of what charges (rape) and the verdicts handed down in both stories. If there are questions as to the particulars, it is in the hands of those that doubt the claims in the articles to research them further. It is black and white in the reporting on the stories. There is no need to assume.

The initial point was to highlight that there is simply cases like these from all sides, and the generalization of one kind of criminal is false. Case in point, just from last week:

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...1&archive=true

South Korean soldier accused of assaulting American

CAMP RED CLOUD, South Korea — A South Korean soldier faces trial in a military court, accused of sexually assaulting a female U.S. soldier at Camp Casey on Dec. 19, 2nd Infantry Division and Ministry of National Defense officials confirmed this week.

This isn't just about one case. This is about several others just like this that paint a clear picture that this was always a two way street, and generalizations about what the criminals always look like are false.

The objection to the corporal punishment was stated before as the slippery slope and standards of morality.

[snailpoo]

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

There is a very clear idea of what charges (rape) and the verdicts handed down in both stories. If there are questions as to the particulars, it is in the hands of those that doubt the claims in the articles to research them further. It is black and white in the reporting on the stories. There is no need to assume.

If it is so black and white, WALK ME THROUGH THE FEDERAL SENTENCING GUIDELINES. What are the offense levels you reach with both?

What you don't understand is the complexity of the range of charges that fall under rape/sexual assault. Since you're not getting it for sex crimes, let's try something with a similar breakdown (in certain US jurisdictions) 1st degree murder isn't the same as 2nd degree murder, which isn't the same as 3rd degree murder, which isn't the same as 1st degree manslaughter, which isn't the same as 2nd degree manslaughter, which isn't the same as involuntary manslaughter/criminally negligent manslaughter/vehicular manslaughter. The maximum sentence for 1st degree murder is a far cry from the low sentence for vehicular manslaughter, but when you read a single, one line blurb from a non-legal newspaper TRANSLATING a summary of a trial, you lose the actual charges.

And keep in mind that the RANGE of possible sentences corresponding to the RANGE of possible charges is just US federal statues, and think about how much of an assumption your making in comparing these two cases IN TWO DIFFERENT COUNTRIES.

...and this doesn't even take into account the fact that prosecutors often bring lesser charges because of faulty evidence, deal agreements, or a host of other reasons.


To put it bluntly, you're basically saying that a whale should weigh the same as a minnow because a fish is a fish.

And yes, I know that whales are mammals.

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The initial point was to highlight that there is simply cases like these from all sides, and the generalization of one kind of criminal is false. Case in point, just from last week:

http://www.stripes.com/article.asp?s...1&archive=true

This isn't just about one case. This is about several others just like this that paint a clear picture that this was always a two way street, and generalizations about what the criminals always look like are false.

You have this talent for picking cases that don't help your point.

1. You're arguing about differences in SENTENCING. Ummm... Has the trial even started yet?

2. You're arguing about how seriously the local government treates these cases. Ummm... How does this prove anything in ANY WAY? Are they not prosecuting him?

3. You're arguing about rape. Do the facts of this case match the criteria for rape? What are the charges again?

Originally Posted by AgentTofu

The objection to the corporal punishment was stated before as the slippery slope and standards of morality.

Again, it's interesting how you're arguing for US law while you're claiming to not argue for US, all the while you're assuming US law (or at least you think is US law).


*Nothing I post should be considered legal advice, legal opinion, legal research, or legal anything, and should not to be considered reliable, factual, or researched, or professional. Blah, blah, blah.

[Moong Joong]

If the South Korean soldier did this while stationed at a base somewhere in Korea occupied USA, with his government protecting him, applying Korean law to his case and threatening to cancel joint military exercises to get their way and there being a history of these sorts of things happening with SK soldiers...

then it'll be cause just as much of a sensation