Rape victim gets 200 lashes

Cassandra wrote: What "other side" do we need?

To quote an often repeated phrase in our justice (American) system, �the truth is in the details� is what I would hope to read prior to trashing the Saudi judges finding.  Without reading or listening to cross-examination all we have is her claim and account of what has taken place.  I have read some of her account and find it incredulous; however, once again, not having an opportunity to watch, listen or read a full accounting, my opinion is baseless much like those attacking Saudi justice.

abuayisha wrote: Cassandra wrote: What "other side" do we need?  To quote an often repeated phrase in our justice (American) system, �the truth is in the details� is what I would hope to read prior to trashing the Saudi judges finding.  Without reading or listening to cross-examination all we have is her claim and account of what has taken place.  I have read some of her account and find it incredulous; however, once again, not having an opportunity to watch, listen or read a full accounting, my opinion is baseless much like those attacking Saudi justice.

So, you say our opinions are baseless on the fact that we have not heard cross examinations? I mean For God sakes Abuayisha! You've formed opinions in the past posting articles. Seems like the pot is calling the kettle black?

abuayisha wrote: "..pot calling the kettle black."  Interesting.  Anyway, to illustrate my point, let�s take the Rodney King incident.  Even though Mr. King was victimized, in some peoples� opinion, Mr. King had still violated the law.  Now, I assume the State did not prosecute him due to the political outcry from the African American community and the infamous videotaped beating.  But, still he did commit a prosecutable crime the night of his beating.  The Saudi judicial system has seemed to find that the rape victim also violated a law and has proceeded to prosecute irrespective to political correctness.

Abuayisha I love how you do your 'comparable racial analysis.' Although you could have chosen a better example and less controversial figure (its only right since this girl in the article is not a controversial figure like Mr. King per se) but nonetheless I can address you on that note.

You said: Even though Mr. King was victimized, in some peoples� opinion, Mr. King had still violated the law

There is no opinion here as it is obvious through visual demonstration this man was beaten with excessive force regardless of the crime. Police Officers are taught (much like Muslims in physical Jihad) to use necessary force to subdue someone, but when it becomes excessive without probable cause then the association of guilt-to-blame shifts between the perp, and the lawgiver.

Now, I assume the State did not prosecute him due to the political outcry from the African American community and the infamous videotaped beating.  But, still he did commit a prosecutable crime the night of his beating.

You know there was a trial right? Abuayisha you are older than me and I feel like I'm wrong in telling you you are wrong. I mean, you seem to justify ignorant Saudi rule by using a poor example. Mr. King violated the law that is obvious and I still to this day, have no respect for a man who gets his butt kicked on national television only years later get busted for the same crime he commits. This only shows that you cannot rehabilitate someone unwilling to rehabilitate themselves. I agree with you here that he did violate the law, but there is no justification in excessive force and you failed to solidify your view here. Perhaps you need another example instead of this one because it is dubious and poorly explained.

Similarly, the Muslim and Arab world made an outcry at the Marine who killed a wounded insurgent. From the video it was somewhat obvious the wounded man was still alive but according to the Marine, in fear for his life killed the man. Only when under investigation speculation was that he wanted to put the individual out of his misery of course I may be imperfectly telling this tale but the point is, is that regardless whether our intentions are positive, if our actions are not consistent with our mind (in this case the actions must be suitable to what the world sees as just) then world opposition will follow.

The Saudi judicial system has seemed to find that the rape victim also violated a law and has proceeded to prosecute irrespective to political correctness. 

This has nothing to do with political correctness and everything to do with ethics. If it is Saudi Arabian law that violators of premarital coitus (or being alone with an unmarried man) gets 200 lashes then so be it. However, what is wrong is the fact that she was not represented properly by a defense and that, when she spoke out about her sentence she received an additional sentence for simply speaking out. Now, one cannot speculate many things about this case and unfortunately, because we weren't rpesent in cross-examinations opinions of all sorts are the result of thus.

I'm not saying its wrong to punish people accordingly what I am saying is that its wrong to be improperly sentenced without the proper defense and proper trial. You know as well as I do that in Saudi Arabia women already do not have a fair shot in that society, that alone is enough to create a pre-conceived idea of the kind of 'fairness' Saudi Arabia gives to criminals. Simply put, when men rape in that society they get off and women suffer.

Since humans are faulty, make mistakes, abuse, etc. This also means that al systems will have miscarriages of justice based upon human error, faults, etc. It happens in every country. I saw recently on TV, a case of a man who was executed for murder. The whole thing was not quite on the up and up. The guy's lawyer actually slept through the trial! The judge ruled that he has a right to a lawyer but not one who is awake.

As this person being interviewed said, there are no millionaires on dealth row.. and I would hazard to say this is probably true all over the world.

I am curious.. I know that men and women should not be alone with nonfamily membes, spouses, etc of the opposite sex. But is it considered at "crime" in Shirah law? Obviously, or according to the ruling, the woman violated Saudi rule, but is it Shirah?  Just curious. Hope I am making sense.