How much court time and legal resources are being squandered on drunken sluts who feel regret rape the morning after?

Hertford man jailed for sex assault
Details of sexual activiity

'm no rapist...just a fool
Details of sexual activity

Drunken malicious neurotic sluts are still being actively encouraged by the female Director of Public Prosecutions to report rape.

Interview in which John Humphrys hints that DPP Alison Saunders is running a political campaign to prosecute and persecute men with no public interest considerations, only a feminazi agenda

Remember: stupid drunken sluts are more likely to be taken advantage of by men.

Remember: these sluts have no morals, only malice and neuroses, and their eye on the £11,000 they will receive from the Criminal Injuries Compensation Board when a libtard judge convicts some hapless beta male that the slut regrets having sex with, or if he fails to call or thank her the next day, like Julian Assange.

Rape compensation cut overturned

Zara Faris: "Feminists have made a joke about rape." From 59th minute

https://heartiste.wordpress.com/2014/09/24/regret-rape-foiled-by-text-messages/

Feminazi laws leave *all* men vulnerable to accusations of sexual impropriety

How chasing the female vote increased our taxes and the size of the state while reducing our liberties

Do you believe this woman who accused her husband of raping her hundreds of times?

Philosophical and legal questions on rape

Is being raped while you're unconscious slightly "better" than being raped while conscious?

This was a question asked today by one of the members of Public Debate at https://www.facebook.com/groups/466234513398453/?fref=ts

• Yes
• No
• Depends on who the rapist is

You would have to get a girl, rape her in two different ways and then ask her how she feels after each experience.

For the purposes of the procedure of this hypothetical experiment, should she first be raped while she is conscious or unconscious?

I would suggest that it would be more "efficient" to rape her while she is conscious and then ask her if she would prefer to be raped while she was unconscious or unconscious the second time you rape her

Her answer would be telling as to how much she resented or enjoyed the experience.

Which is worse?

• rape by someone with whom one has previously had consensual sex
• rape by a complete stranger

If a rape victim is financially compensated, should the circumstances of the rape and her sexual history be taken account into account when establishing the quantum for damages, or should a virgin receive the same sum as a common prostitute?

• a virgin should be compensated more than a common prostitute
• a virgin and common prostitute should receive the same compensation

Is it the greatest injustice to treat unequal things equally?

Should marital rape come under the category of unreasonable behaviour rather than rape in its strictly understood sense, since a marriage can be annulled if it is not consummated, with the implication that each party to the marriage has a duty to have sex with the other?

• Marital rape should be considered a species of unreasonable behaviour, and no more.
• A husband who rapes his wife should be punished as severely as a burglar who rapes a householder's wife or a woman who is a householder.

Should all who marry be required to agree a marriage contract and the marriage contract stipulate frequency of sex as one of its terms?  (It is perfectly possible to stipulate in the marriage contract the number of times one's spouse can be required to have sex in a given week/month/quarter/year, and whether they can be "rolled over" in the event of unavoidable spousal absence or indisposition.)

Is it logically possible to obey a woman when she commands you to rape her?

"The freer with her favours the average British woman is, the less should be the sum of compensation for an act of rape."  Agree/Disagree

"The compensation for rape should be based on what a professional prostitute would charge for the sex act in question, multiplied according to the amount of force used, as well as the sexual history of the rape victim."  Agree/Disagree

Is it "better" to be raped while conscious or unconscious?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-27726280

Measures aimed at addressing drop in rape convictions launched

Alison Saunders says "myths and stereotypes" must be addressed

Let us hope "our" Alison will not be the next Mary Kellett. She is clearly biased against anyone who does not conform to her PC feminazi views.

http://thebattlefieldoflove.blogspot.co.uk/2012/07/why-is-alison-saunders-of-gender.html
Why was Alison Saunders of the *gender imbalanced* London CPS "disappointed" that John Terry was acquitted of a racially aggravated offence?

http://thevoiceofreason-ann.blogspot.co.uk/2013/05/matriarchy-proposes-to-make-it-easier.html

http://www.the-spearhead.com/2011/03/29/the-movement-to-disbar-mary-n-kellett/

@BBCr4today @ntfem so approx. 40% of rape taken to trial FAIL to get conviction? WHAT is going wrong? the poor victims ..
— J (@Jamesgold45) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today It could mean that women who falsely accuse men of rape fail to get a conviction. @cpsuk
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today It is clear that Alison Saunders has a feminist agenda to get as many rape convictions as possible. @cpsuk
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Rape shd be treated as a species of personal injury so an element of contributory negligence can be imputed.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk The idea that women should take any responsibility for anything at all these days in Britain is anathema.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Not all laws are just, especially when the DPP is a female pursuing a feminist agenda to undermine men.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Oral sex is used these days as a means of paying cab fares, apparently. http://t.co/ntxYWp6u3P
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Rape should be treated as a personal injury and the quantum of damages should be calculated rationally.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Rape is only the lowest of crimes that destroys lives if the victim a virgin, but not if she is prostitute.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk If rape victim is a prostitute, then perhaps it shd be treated as robbery or obtaining services by deception
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 What nonsense are you referring to?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk The Director of Public Prosecutions should be studiously impartial. The last one was a Labour stooge.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk I am not saying women are never raped, you fool, but there are many obvious cases of contributory negligence
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Excuse me, but I think a rape victim who was a virgin should be compensated more than a prostitute.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Rape is not "just" a personal injury. Are you so sure rape victims would object to being financially compensated?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 You could ask the prostitute how much she would have charged for what the rapist did, and make him pay twice, thrice etc that.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 @BBCr4today @cpsuk Are you saying Muslims are not "sensible human beings"?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Why don't you ask women if they think rape victims should be financially compensated?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Perhaps the rape victim should be compensated to such an extent that she half hopes he would do it again?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 I am sure there are many women who think it is fair enough that rape victims should be financially compensated.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 If the principle that rape victims should b financially compensated is agreed then the basis of compensation should be fair.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 If the victims of crime are prepared to accept compensation, why are you forbidding that? It is up to them, surely?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 I have never suggested rape victims want to be raped!
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Do calm down. It should always be up to the victim what she wants to happen to the perpetrator.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 You are being hysterical now. If a rape victim wants to accept compensation you really have no business forbidding this.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 If the rapist cannot afford to financially compensate his victim he should be enslaved.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 I am sure there are lots of rape victims who would like to be financially compensated for their sexual injury.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 A doctor who even has sex with his female patients is struck off and generally is. I have never suggested otherwise.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 I don't know how much rape victims should be compensated, bu a sensible basis can be worked out along the lines of Kemp & Kemp.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Kemp & Kemp is what lawyers use to work out the quantum for damages in personal injury. http://t.co/dsn8tSwsRW
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 It is different for doctors, I would suggest, who are expected to have what are called medical and professional ethics.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 I would have thought being struck off as a doctor is sufficient punishment after his conviction of rape. You want to hang him?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 You disappoint me being one of those people who assume people are mad just because they have views you disagree with.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 You are being rather low to suggest I am a rapist just because I suggested that rape victims should be financially compensated.
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@Jamesgold45 Discussing how rape victims should be compensated is not "supporting rape", you fool. Is it your time of month?
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

@BBCr4today Let us hope DPP Alison Saunders will not be the Mary Kellett of Britain. https://t.co/Z3VsDJCNvR and https://t.co/RL0kKP8dDZ
— Claire Khaw Ra (@ntfem) June 6, 2014

Instead of fighting crime police censor Facebook and Twitter

http://news.sky.com/home/uk-news/article/16191419


The police don't seem to realise that tweeting and reading offensive tweets has nothing to do with public order

For an offence to be a public order offence the offence has to be committed in a public place with people who can see and hear you in a context of public order.

Getting angry reading something offensive you read on your PC, laptop or phone in your home or place of work has NOTHING to do with public order.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Order_Act_1986  makes it quite clear that all the offences listed in the Act have to take the place in the context of a PUBLIC PLACE.

Imagine, if you will, a crowd all sitting in the park (a public place) with their laptops and phones reading the same offensive racist/sexist/disablist/homophobic tweet/blog/Facebook status update.  They all get very angry and want to commit horrible acts of violence against the person from whom the offensive comment originated.

BUT HE IS NOWHERE TO BE FOUND.

For the crime to be complete the person who caused the offence has to be PRESENT in the same public place too.

Otherwise, the person is only guilty of expressing an offensive opinion which in a supposedly free society he should be allowed to without being harassed by the police, who apparently have nothing better to do.

Are we a free society or not, PC Plod?   Or don't you care because you have to make a certain number of arrests and convictions in order to get your promotion?

Perhaps this question should be more appropriately addressed to Keir Starmer, the Labour-supporting and proud Director of Public Persecutions.  

I advise anyone whom the police persecutes for this "offence" to opt for Crown Court trial and get a decent lawyer.

I wonder if you can have a policeman convicted for wasting police time.   I know you can certainly get him convicted for malicious prosecution if he maliciously prosecutes you and the court does not convict you because it is so obviously trumped up, trivial and de minimis.  

My recommended guidelines that DPP should issue on criminal joint enterprises

0810
The Crown Prosecution Service is to issue new guidelines in England and Wales on "joint enterprise" cases that allows every member of a gang to be charged with murder even if only one of them carried out the killing. Lorraine Fraser whose son Tyrone Clarke was stabbed to death in 2004, describes how current "joint enterprise" law was used in her sons case and Lord Ken Macdonald, former director of Public Prosecutions for England and Wales, outlines the complexities of the law.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9680000/9680466.stm

It is very simple.  Just let off the one whose evidence convicts any member of the gang.

Any more gordian knots for me to cut today?

Emma West charged with s 4A of the Public Order Act 1986

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intentional_harassment,_alarm_or_distress
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Standard_scale#United_Kingdom

If found guilty she could be imprisoned for up to 6 months or pay a fine of up to £5,000.

This is the way the government intends to deal with anyone who complains loudly and publicly about immigration using the Public Order Act, even when it is quite obvious that what Emma West did caused no public order problems on 18 October 2011 for she was only arrested her after manufactured outrage was generated when it was posted on YouTube on 4 December 2011. 


res ipsa loquitur, as the lawyers say.

http://www.thisiscroydontoday.co.uk/Emma-West-arrested-Tram-Experience-footage/story-14020313-detail/story.html

Her prosecution is clearly politically-motivated by a Director of Public Prosecutions who is openly and unashamedly a supporter of the Labour Party to whom immigrants are its clients.

Is it the role of the DPP to initiate a malicious prosecution and false imprisonment of a woman with a history of self-harming to intimidate those who wish to complain about immigration into silence?

Of course not.   

Free speech anyone?  But I think Censorship laced with State Intimidation is the preferred tipple of the liberal political establishment who have betrayed the white working classes, treated like the badly-brought up illegitimate children whose sexually-liberated free-loving parents now wished they had smothered at birth.

I still like to think a good lawyer would get her off and get Keir Starmer sacked as Director Public Prosecutions for an act of malicious prosecution and false imprisonment, or at any rate get the decision of the CPS to prosecute her judicially reviewed.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_review_in_English_Law

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_imprisonment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malicious_prosecution

Is the BNP getting together a decent firm of lawyers to see that she doesn't get fucked over by the liberal establishment?  Is it fuck.

David Ewings of Ewings & Co is her brief.   http://www.ewings.uk.com/criminal.html

He seems perfectly competent to me except that he seems all on his lonesome own, and maybe Emma West needs someone bigger and better like one of the firms listed at
http://www.legal500.com/c/london/crime-fraud-and-licensing/crime to show she is not going to take any shit from the cunting liberal establishment with their trumped-up charges and their manufactured outrage.

If only I were the leader of the BNP, eh?  But I'm not, so white working class people had just better curl up on the ground and protect their head with their arms while taking more kicks to the head by the liberal establishment and their immigrant voters to whom they gave so many British passports.   Cos that is the way things are now.

Deuteronomy 28:43.

http://bible.cc/deuteronomy/28-43.htm