CA Judge Suggests If Vagina Not ‘Shredded’ It’s Not ‘Real’ Rape

[ashling]

Last edited Sat Dec 15, 2012, 05:21 AM - Edit history (1)

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/12/14/ca-judge-suggests-if-vagina-not-shredded-its-not-real-rape/


Johnson made the shocking remarks at the 2008 sentencing of a defendant convicted by jury of rape, forcible oral copulation, domestic battery with corporal injury, stalking, and three counts of criminal threats, with use of a deadly weapon as to one count, according to the Commission’s release.

During the crime, the defendant had “heated a screwdriver and threatened to use it to maim [the victim’s] face and vagina, threatened to burn her face and hair with a lit cigarette lighter, and threatened to shoot and kill her. He ordered her to perform fellatio, raped her, and ejaculated into her mouth.”

Judge Johnson, who ironically is a former sex crimes prosecutor, wasn’t buying “No means no.” Johnson’s courtroom comments are included in the Commission’s release:

I’ve seen sexual assault. I have seen women who have been ravaged and savaged, whose vagina was shredded by the rape…if someone doesn’t want to have sexual intercourse, the body shuts down. The body will not permit that to happen unless a lot of damage is inflicted, and we heard nothing about that in this case. That tells me that the victim in this case, although she wasn’t necessarily willing, she didn’t put up a fight. And to treat this case like the rape cases that we all hear about is an insult to victims of rape. I think it’s an insult. I think it trivializes a rape.

The prosecutor then responds that while the rapist was the victim’s ex-boyfriend, the woman didn’t “feel any less a rape victim because she had a [past] relationship with him.” The attorney pushes the judge on why he isn’t counting the defendant’s threats and use of a weapon as an aggravated count.

Johnson responds:

I just found the threats to be technical threats. I found this whole case to be a technical case. The rape is technical. The forced oral copulation is technical. It’s more of a crim[inal] law test than a real live criminal case.

No doubt this was a “real live” rape for the woman who experienced it, despite Johnson’s interpretation. The judge also said the rape crime was “only worth six years,” rejecting the prosecutor’s request for 16 years, based on a maximum sentence of 8 years each for two rape “occasions:” one for the vaginal rape and one for the oral.

Do you think this joke of a judge should be removed from the bench?

Write to the California Commission on Judicial Performance (which doesn’t accept complaints via phone or email):
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Suite 14400
San Francisco, CA 94102
Telephone: [phone]
FAX: [phone]

edit to add: when I saw this story earlier without having read this article I was disgusted and recorded my suggestion that his "ignorant misogynistic ass" be thrown off of the bench. I have carefully reconsidered this former opinion and feel that it was too mild x 100000.

[SheilaT]

1. At the risk of being really callous,

I think he needs to experience rape.

[LuvNewcastle]

2. Does a man's anus need to be shredded in order

for him to claim he's been raped? Does no mean no or is it just technical rape if a man doesn't try harder to fend off his attacker? I think these questions are fair enough to be asked of this 'judge.'

[Scootaloo]

3. FUCKING WHAT?!

That tells me that the victim in this case, although she wasn’t necessarily willing, she didn’t put up a fight. And to treat this case like the rape cases that we all hear about is an insult to victims of rape.

There are no words. At least none that wouldn't get me banned, I think.

[smirkymonkey]

4. K&R!

This Judge shoud be disbarred. He is repulsive.

[tclambert]

5. 2012 will be remembered as the year of stupid, stupid comments about rape.

I haven't heard some of these stupidities since the 1970s, when we were discussing stupid things people used to say about rape. I thought they were dismissed and over with back then. Silly me.