OK - you can scroll down a bit and read RussDiamond's ranting about PACleanSweep and their plan to defeat all the judges up for retention.

I have to confess that I typically vote against retention unless I have a specific reason to do so, because I think retention elections are dumb. I haven't decided what I'll do this time; I don't really align myself with PACleanSweep.

However, PACleanSweep or no, you must vote no on retaining Teresa Carr Deni. She just made a catastrophic ruling so activist and with such blatant disregard for the law and the roles of the legislature and jury that she is clearly not competent to sit on the bench.

She decided that a prostitute, who had agreed to have sex with two men for a certain amount of money, and who was then gang raped at gunpoint by five men and given no money, was not a victim of rape but merely a victim of "theft of services".

The law is quite clear: rape is having sex with a victim by forcible compulsion. And once there's a gun in her face and she's saying no, that is forcible compulsion. Doesn't matter how she makes her living, doesn't matter what was said before. These jerks were forcible compelling this woman to have sex, and in taking the decision away from the jury, this judge ignored the law.

You can read about this appalling disgrace here:

http://www.feministe.us/blog/archive...t-of-services/
and
http://www.philly.com/dailynews/loca...e_system_.html

PACleanSweep believes that all the judges have violated the Constitution and thus proven themselves unfit to sit on the bench. That may be, but it is certainly a more esoteric argument than this one, where the law, the allegations and the subsequent gross dereliction of duty are absolutely clear.

VOTE NO ON RETAINING JUDGE TERESA CAR DENI.

__________________
Thomas Taylor

Interested in NP tech, kids and snark? Follow me on Twitter.

Teresa Car Deni for municipal judge. Got it.

__________________
A song that says it all.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BqITJFGyq4s

...on this horrendous ruling, but I'm sorry to hear anyone consider any portion of our Constitution "esoteric."

Russ, in English, it is generally the case that adjectives modify the nouns to which they are closest, and it is quite rare to find a situation where an adjective modifies a noun from a previous sentence.

In this particular case, "esoteric" appears immediately before "argument," and most, if not all, readers would appreciate that I was suggesting that your argument, not any part of the Constitution itself, is "esoteric." With the addition of the adverb "more" which modifies "esoteric," I'm indicating that I don't necessarily find your argument inherently esoteric, just more so than my own argument about this specific judge's ruling. Note also that "esoteric" is not synonymous with "incorrect" or "wrong."

Since your blanket argument on all the judges is based not on any ruling they individually handed down, but on a passive acceptance of a larger payheck, I think that it's a fair characterization.

You should work on your reading comprehension skills if you're going to make public denouncements of elected officials based on close readings of legal documents.

__________________
Thomas Taylor

Interested in NP tech, kids and snark? Follow me on Twitter.

My apologies.

Has anyone dug up the transcript of this case yet?

Wow, Teresa Deni did that?? I was actually good friends with her back in the 1970s (back then she called herself just "Teresa Deni".)

You know, she is a lesbian and a feminist (back in the 70s she belonged to Dyketactics, in fact), why would she rule that way?

I just read Jill Porter's article reguarding this case. http://www.philly.com/philly/hp/news.../10497662.html

3 things jumped out that left a bad taste in my mouth.

First this Judge seems to have redefined what is Rape. The defandant, made a deal for consentual sex for payment. However in my experience working with victims of sexual assault and rape, as soon as one participant withdrawls their consent for sex, and the other dose not comply with their will, and proceeds to have sex against consent, it's rape. It's also rape if one party is put into a situation they cannot freely withdraw their concent on their own terms. Even if one is a prostitute, it should not exempt them from their freedom to withdrawl consent. Rapes of girlfriends and wives have been dismissed using similar logic.

One has to take into account the defendant was put into a position that she could not excercise her power to freely consent. Judge Deni did not. The original deal was for sex between 2 parties, later modified by the defendant to include one other person for an additional payment. Suddenly the agreement between the parties was again modified to include even more participants than originally agreed to, and a gun was introduced to secure this modification of the agreement. In this case did the defendant have the ability to freely excercise her will to withdrawl consent? I think not. What if it wasn't a gun that was used, but a tranquilizer, or she was forcebly held down against her will by the others present? IMO both all methods are of equal tact, to force the defendant to give up her free will and negate the ability to withdrawl her original consent. Clearly this is a matter that must be addressed in trial and decided by a jury, and not a Judge.

Also, in the story I read, Judge Deni told Jill Porter if she was aware that the defendant met with another client, and then reported the incident to authorities. What troubles me is that it seems that the Judge was using this fact to discredit the defendant, and also somehow justify the incident she experienced being gang raped at gunpoint as emotionally insignificant, and justify her decision on the case. I'm going out on a limb and stating I do not believe Judge Deni to also be a licensed clinician and an expert with victims of sexual assault and rape. Clearly this decision needed the input of a clinical expert to testify wether the action of taking on another client indicates that what the defendant reported, really was not rape, but as the judge felt, a robbery due to lack of payment. Additionally victims of this sort of traumatic experience behave in many ways following the experience. To an untrained or inexperienced individual, the behaviors may not seem logical, thus not representative of what one would guess following a rape or sexual assault. And I stress guess, because that is clearly what Judge Deni seemed to do using this info. She is quoted as stating " I thaught rape was a terrible trauma" Well it is Judge Deni, but people react to trauma many diffrent ways.

Finaly, I'm curious not to read about any "unlawful use of a gun" charge. When someone is "robbed", as Judge Deni ruled, and a gun is used to execute the crime, is the use of a gun not also a crime? I guess not in her mind or it would the charge would have been Armed Robbery, not Theft of Service!?!?!?

Judge Deni clearly longer qualifies to sit as a Judge. I hope she can also sleep well with that.

This is a case which should go to trial.

Philadelphia NOW has written to the Bar Association calling on them to rescind their recommendation that Teresa Carr Deni be retained as Municipal Court judge. See attached letter:


Ken Shear
Executive Director
Philadelphia Bar Association


Dear Mr. Shear:

The Philadelphia Chapter of the National Organization for Women calls on you to rescind your recommendation that Teresa Carr Deni be retained as Municipal Court judge.

According to thus far uncontested reports, Judge Deni dismissed charges of rape and assault against a male defendant who lured a prostitute to an abandoned property and forced her at gunpoint to have sexual relations with him and three other men. The victim had agreed to a few hours of paid sex with the defendant and one other man. She had not consented, however, to sex with the other two, nor had she consented to unprotected sex in an abandoned building. There can be little question as to her lack of consent—those who engage in consensual sex do not have to be held at gunpoint.

Whether the defendant in this case is in fact guilty of rape may well depend upon specific facts as yet unknown. Finding such facts is the function of juries. Judge Deni’s premature dismissal of the case, if allowed to stand, will forever prevent relevant facts from being discovered, and may well result in a criminal’s remaining unpunished.

Judging from her comments as published, Judge Deni’s decision to dismiss the charges of rape and assault seems to be based on her abhorrence of prostitution and her contempt, even disgust, for those who practice it. A judge is not free, however, to ignore a crime because she disapproves of the victim. Judge Deni’s willingness to ignore the law and sound judicial practice renders her unfit for retention. We hope that you rescind your recommendation to retain her.

Yours respectfully,


Karen Bojar
President
Philadelphia Chapter of the National Organization for Women

What does that have to do with anything?

__________________
---Shosh

Because her ruling seemed to run so counter to the way she used to believe (when I knew her, anyway). I was trying to illustrate that.