• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Australian woman raped in UAE, then jailed for 8 months for reporting it

Status
Not open for further replies.
UAE is such a shithole. It's a tourist trap that wants to meld capitalistic decadence with Islamic super-conservatism. It just does not work.
 
Deified Data said:
Easily the most dysfunctional major religion, and that's saying a hell of a lot.
Click to expand...

This.
Monotheistic religions are kinda fucked up by default (indoctrination of kids, oppression of gay people & women, trying to convert as many people as possible), but islam really goes above and beyond.
 
Rocket Scientist said:
http://en.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1e6kvm/uae_rape_victim_jailed/c9xa9na



Pled not guilty and no mention of four witnesses, jailed.

Guess they watch CSI over there too.

All I can find about four witnesses is for adultery.

Of course, Dubai is still fucked up and I'm guessing she was jailed because she admitted to ''adultery'' and the guys got off because they didn't admit anything. Fucked up.
Yes it's going to be wonderful to see millions suffer because of backwards religious leaders, dictators and help from Western imperialists keeping them dumb. It's their own fault.
Click to expand...

that was my question as well. Most explanations about the 4 witnesses rule is about adultery and even sodomy. I don't think either are punishable crimes but convictions will be rare when you need 4 witnesses. Rape does not need 4 afaik, but someone can clarify that.

I don't know what happened in this case and if there was no evidence for the rape to be proven but what happened to her was terrible and unacceptable

edit: there is precedence that the UAE uses DNA evidence
 
Valnen said:
Her country failed her if they let her serve the time.
Click to expand...
Wtf UAE! Eh I guess I'm going to add this to the list of countries that I will not visit with my significant other. And wtf! Why couldn't her embassy do anything. Ducking hell this is fucking outrageous jsfnjivv
 
Nesotenso said:
that was my question as well. Most explanations about the 4 witnesses rule is about adultery and even sodomy. I don't think either are punishable crimes but convictions will be rare when you need 4 witnesses. Rape does not need 4 afaik, but someone can clarify that.

I don't know what happened in this case and if there was no evidence for the rape to be proven but what happened to her was terrible and unacceptable
Click to expand...
Unacceptable definitely. My best guess is that she was convicted of adultery. This down here applies to Pakistan though:

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

Critics of the law include those who claim that it equiparates the crime of zina (adultery) and zina bil-jabr (rape). As for the rape, a woman alleging rape is required to provide four adult male eyewitnesses. In principal the failure to find such proof of the rape does not place the woman herself at risk of prosecution. However in practice these safeguards have not always worked.[6][7] Moreover, to prove rape the female victim has to state that sexual intercourse had taken place, which seems in practice to be viewed judicially as an admission of guilt on her own part, rather than as evidence of rape (see blaming the victim). If the alleged offender, however, is acquitted for want of further evidence the woman now faces charges for either adultery, if she is married, or for fornication, if she is not married. According to a report by the National Commission on Status of Women(NCSW) "an estimated 80% of women" in jail in 2003 were there as because "they had failed to prove rape charges and were consequently convicted of adultery."[8]
Click to expand...
It's fucked up.
 
scar tissue said:
This.
Monotheistic religions are kinda fucked up by default (indoctrination of kids, oppression of gay people & women, trying to convert as many people as possible), but islam really goes above and beyond.
Click to expand...

What about widespread cover up of pedophilia? The only reason Christian aren't more fucked up than Islam is because of secularism, don't kid yourselves if Christian theocrats were in charge it would be just as bad.

Not to mention the fact that rape culture is still prevalent in western countries in spite of its apparent superiority.
 
If memory serves, "rape" is covered under the umbrella of "sex outside of marriage" in Islam. Therefore, you will always need either a confession or four (male) witnesses. The Islamic sites I went to in order to investigate the matter conceded this, and then tried to obfuscate the issue by pointing out various flaws in the Western conception of and punishment for rape.

^^^^ If you are unable to see the difference between the rape culture of the West and the way rape is treated under Sharia, I pity you.
 
Mark L said:
If memory serves, "rape" is covered under the umbrella of "sex outside of marriage" in Islam. Therefore, you will always need either a confession or four (male) witnesses. The Islamic sites I went to in order to investigate the matter conceded this, and then tried to obfuscate the issue by pointing out various flaws in the Western conception of and punishment for rape.
Click to expand...

No it isn't. Rape is classified as rape and the offenders get capital punishment. Don't know what websites you are using.
 
In this is why the burqa is so important. Imagine how many of these vile criminal women would consent to rape if the countries romantics could see how beautiful they are.
 
Kurtofan said:
What about widespread cover up of pedophilia? The only reason Christian aren't more fucked up than Islam is because of secularism, don't kid yourselves if Christian theocrats were in charge it would be just as bad.

Not to mention the fact that rape culture is still prevalent in western countries in spite of its apparent superiority.
Click to expand...
To be honest in a lot of places this is the case. They just hide it (though you can't really call it hiding, they've just found a way to make people accept it) much better than their islamic counterparts. Just look at the US congress.
 
Mark L said:
If memory serves, "rape" is covered under the umbrella of "sex outside of marriage" in Islam. Therefore, you will always need either a confession or four (male) witnesses. The Islamic sites I went to in order to investigate the matter conceded this, and then tried to obfuscate the issue by pointing out various flaws in the Western conception of and punishment for rape.

^^^^ If you are unable to see the difference between the rape culture of the West and the way rape is treated under Sharia, I pity you.
Click to expand...

doesn't seem to be true to if you are going by precedent from diff. cases.
 
Demon Ice said:
I always found it interesting and unfortunate what a dichotomy the Dubai is. One the one hand you have this amazingly advanced and modern architecture, and on the other hand (assuming it hasn't been chopped off), you have such an outdated and barbaric system of laws.

Such a shame, she made the mistake of being a woman in a Muslim country.
Click to expand...

You mean the architecture that remains mostly empty and was built on the backs of poor laborers that are basically slaves?
 
Baki said:
No it isn't. Rape is classified as rape and the offenders get capital punishment. Don't know what websites you are using.
Click to expand...

Here is where I got it from:

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f20/how-is-a-rape-proved-islamic-court-48560/

and here is the salient quote-

"Classifying rape as hirabah is the view of some classical scholars like Ibn Rushd the elder I believe but it was a minority view and its only recently that people like Asifa Qureshi at the Nawawi foundation have started to argue for it. I don't think it can be right as one of the requirements of hirabah is that it be done with a view to terrorize the population. I don't see how an act of rape in private can always fulfil that criteria.

Plus one of the conditions of punishing the muharib is that you catch him before he surrenders himself. So all a rapist has to do is to fess up before the police catch him and he avoids punishment altogether!"

The implication of the statement is that rape is classified by most mainstream islamic scholars as zimaa, which is the aforementioned sex outside marriage, yes?
 
This happened a couple of years ago. We had a thread on it but I'll post what I did there that explains the complexity of prosecuting someone for rape in Sharia

The Islamic requirement to prove rape is similar to that to prove adulterery; multiple witnesses (four) seeing intercourse take place. The reasoning given for why multiple witnesses are needed is due to the severity of the sentence if found guilty; death, specifically stoning. But whilst sex involving married individuals are often kept secret, how is a rape victim meant to prove their case? It was a topic that was coming up in articles and then I found this, written by the former Chief Justice of a Shariah supereme court in Pakistan.

http://www.central-mosque.com/fiqh/prow2006.htm

The legal implications of the ‘Protection of Women Bill’ which was recently passed by the National Assembly of Pakistan can only be known to the people who are well-versed with the intricacies of the legal system. But the picture being painted is that the bill is going to provide a remedy to those women who are facing severe oppression and hardships due to the Hudood Ordinance, and that it will also provide a great relief to countless women. It is also being claimed that the bill does not violate the injunctions of the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Let us take a serious and realistic look at the basic (fundamental) points mentioned in this bill, and observe how much they correspond with the claims being made. If we study the bill we would arrive at the conclusion that the bill contains only two substantive points:

Firstly, the punishment for rape (zina bil jabar) as ordained by the Quran and Sunnah, known as the Hadd, has been completely abolished in this bill. As such, a person who has committed rape cannot be given the punishment according to Shariah law and instead will receive a ta’azeeri punishment according to the Pakistan Penal Code(anything below hadd).

Secondly, the crime declared liable for ta’azeeri punishment in the Hudood Ordinance has been downgraded and declared merely ‘lewdness’, thereby reducing the severity of its punishment. Moreover, proving it has been made nearly impossible.

To abolish the punishment of rape (hadd) is a clear violation of the injunctions given in the Qur'an and Sunnah. However, it is being claimed that the punishment ordained by the Quran and Sunnah is only applicable when both the man and woman commit adultery with mutual consent; and that in the case of rape, the Qur'an and Sunnah have not prescribed any punishment. Let us first examine the extent to which this claim is correct:

1) The Holy Quran prescribes the punishment of adultery in Surah Noor as follows:

The adulterer and the adulteress, scourge ye each one of them (with) a hundred stripes. (24:2)
In this injunction the word zina is absolute, including both zina bil-raza (adultery) and zina bil jabar (rape). In fact, it is common sense that rape is a more serious offense than what is done with free will (i.e. adultery). Thus, as this is the punishment prescribed for adultery with free will, the punishment for rape would be even more severe.

This injunction is inclusive of the woman who commits adultery, yet further along in the same surah (Noor) those woman who have been raped are exempted from any punishment. Therefore the Holy Quran says:

‘And if one force them (i.e. those women), then, (unto them) after their compulsion, Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.’ (24:33)

From this becomes clear that if any woman is forced to commit Zina, then she cannot be punished for this. Rather, only the one who has transgressed is to suffer the prescribed punishment (Hadd) as has been mentioned in Surah Noor, Ayat 2 (24:2).

2. The stated Hadd of 100 stripes is to be inflicted on an unmarried offender. From the Sunnah Mutawatar it is further proven that a married person is to suffer Rajm, i.e., lapidating in the instance of his committing Zina. The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam did, and in this case did not differentiate between Zina bil Jabr (rape) and Zina bir-Radha (adultery with mutual consent).

Sayyidina Wail bin Hajr radiallahu anhu narrated that during the days of Allah’s Messenger sallallahu alaihi wa sallam, a woman had gone out to offer the prayer. On the way a man overcame and raped her. The woman cried for help and the man subsequently ran away. Thereafter the man admitted that he had raped the woman. The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alaihi wa sallam then inflicted the Hadd only upon the man, and not on the woman.

Imam Tirmidhi related this Hadith in his Jami with two different chains of transmission, and he declared the second chain of transmission as reliable. (Jami Tirmidhi, Kitabul Hadd, Bab 22, Hadith nr. 1453, 1454)

3. In the Sahih Bukhari is a tradition according to which a slave had raped a slave-girl. Sayyidina Umar radiallahu anhu then imposed the Hadd upon the slave, yet not upon the slave-girl. (Sahih Bukhari, Kitabul Ikrah, Bab 6)

It is thus proven from the Holy Qur’an, the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger sallallahu alaihi wa sallam, the verdicts of the Rightly Guided Caliphs and the noble Companions radiallahu anhum that the punishments to be inflicted for both Zina bir-Radha (adultery) and Zina bil Jabr (rape) are the same. It cannot be said that the Hadd mentioned in the Holy Qur’an and the sacred Ahadith is to be inflicted in case of Zina bir-Radh alone; and not in case of Zina bil Jabr.

Now arises the question as to why there is so much insistence on abolishing the shara’i punishment for Zina bil Jabr? The reason for this is the extremely unjust propaganda which certain circles have been busily spreading ever since the Hudood ordinance was implemented. According to this (false) propaganda, if any rape victim intends to sue the offender under the Hudood ordinance, she must produce four witnesses to support her claim. If this condition is not met, she is arrested in place of the offender. This claim has been and is being repeated incessantly, such that even educated people have begun to consider it as true. In fact, it is precisely claim which was argued as justification (for the new bill) by our president during his speech.

Now if such propaganda is publicized so much so that even the children on the streets are talking about it, then those who speak out against will be perceived as insane. However, if anyone wishes to analyse the matter objectively, then I would request him to leave all of the propaganda aside for a moment, and consider the following points:

The fact of the matter is that I myself have been directly hearing cases registered under Hudood Ordinance, first as a Judge of Federal Shariah Court and then for 17 years as a member of Shariah Appellate Bench of the Supreme Court. In this long tenure, not once did I come across a case in which a rape victim was punished because she was unable to present four witnesses. It was in fact impossible precisely due to the Hudood Ordinance that this instance did not occur: as according to Hudood Ordinance the condition of four witnesses was necessary only to enforce the Shariah punishment (hadd). Yet at the same time clause 10(3) was included to award the taa’zeeri punishment when one did not have four witnesses. Instead, the crime could be proven through one witness, medical examination and a chemical analysis report. Consequently, most rape criminals were awarded punishment due to this clause.

What we need to consider is that if a woman was unable to present four witnesses and was given punishment, which clause of the Hudood Ordinance resulted in this? If anyone claims that she was punished because of Qazaf (false accusation of rape), then the response is that the Qazaf Ordinance, Clause no. 3, Exemption no. 2 clearly states that if someone approaches the legal authorities with a rape allegation, she cannot be punished if she is unable to present 4 witnesses. No court of law can be in its right mind to award a punishment to her in this case. The other possibility could be that the woman is awarded punishment for committing adultery with mutual consent. And if the court of law takes such a decision it would not be merely because the woman was unable to present four witnesses, but because the court arrived at this decision after giving due consideration to all the available and alternative evidences. Clearly if a woman accuses a man of raping her but subsequent evidence proves that she committed adultery with her free will, thus proving her allegation to be false, then punishing her will not be against the spirit of justice. But since usually there is a lack of sufficient evidence to prove that the woman is lying, even these such cases are rare. In 99% of cases it so happens that the court of law is not convinced that the woman has been raped, yet since there is lack of sufficient evidence to prove her wilful involvement, she is granted the benefit of doubt and set free.

In fact, this can be verified very easily by doing an analyses of the cases executed under the Hudood Ordinance in the last 27 years. Other judges who have been involved in the proceedings have been of the same opinion: that even when a woman’s character is found to be doubtful she is not punished; only the man is punished.

Since from the very beginning allegations were being raised against the Hudood Ordinance that innocent women were being punished because of it, an American Scholar Charles Kennedy became interested and visited Pakistan in order to conduct a survey of the cases. He analysed all of the data related to the Hudood Ordinance cases and presented the results in the form of a report which has since been published. The results are consistent with the facts mentioned above. He writes in his report:

Women fearing conviction under Section 10(2) frequently bring charges of rape under 10(3) against their alleged partners. The FSC finding no circumstantial evidence to support the latter charge, convict the male accused under section 10(2)….the women is exonerated of any wrongdoing due to reasonable doubt rule.

[Charles Kennedy: The Status of Women in Pakistan in Islamization of Laws page 74]

This is what an unbiased non-Muslim scholar who has no sympathies towards the Hudood Ordinance observed with regard to such women who had actually consented to committing Zina, but then due to pressure from their families, tried to declare it as rape. They were not asked to produce four witnesses, but to furnish circumstantial evidence. On being unable to furnish the circumstantial evidence which would verify their claim of having been raped, only the male parties were punished, whilst the female parties went unpunished- as no transgression could be proven on their part. Hence there is no such clause in the Hudood Ordinance that if a woman fails to produce four witnesses to support her claim of having been raped, she is to be punished in place of offender.

It is however possible that during investigations conducted by the police, and before the matter could be brought to the court, some rape-victims were indeed wrongly and without any justification arrested as committers of Zina bir-Radha. This does not, however, stem from a flaw in the Hudood Ordinance. Unfortunately, the police in our country are quite prone to commit such acts of injustice while enforcing the law. This does not necessitate that the law itself be changed. In our country, keeping heroin is a crime. And it happens quite often that the police themselves hide heroin with innocent citizens only to blackmail them afterwards. Should we then—in order to resolve this problem—abolish the law which states that keeping heroin is a crime?

Through its decisions, the Federal Shar’iah Court had several times put an end to maltreatment which rape victims were forced to suffer at the hands of the police. However, if one was to assume that this risk of abuse had not yet been fully eliminated, then one could draft a law stating that no woman claiming to have been raped could be arrested under any article of the Hudood Ordinance, until the court had delivered its final judgment. Even then, one could make further laws prescribing punishment for one who wrongly arrests a rape-victim. But under no circumstances is it permissible to abolish the punishment which the Holy Shari’ah has laid down for Zina bil Jabr (rape).

Hence,

The way in which the bill under discussion abolishes the punishment for rape as prescribed by the Holy Shari’ah is in utter contradiction with the Holy Qur’an and the Sunnah, and is in no way related to the alleged maltreatment of women.
Click to expand...

I've heard of judges giving rapists penal sentences because, whilst they had evidence to point to the individual being guilty, there were no four witnesses to see it and they considered that a crucial requirement for the death sentence, so they sent the rapist to prison as a compromise. The former Chief Justice, however, seems to fundamentally disagree with the necessitation for those four requirements in general whilst additionally arguing that women who cannot prove their allegation of rape cannot be punished. I can't confirm, but I seem to remember an argument that if a man accuses a married woman of adultery and he therefore cannot prove it, he would be sentenced with defamation/slander and be punished (severely, I've heard some say with the same sentence she would have gotten; death). So I'm not surprised to see stories of women being arrested and punished as the lack of evidence on their part would by default be considered an act of defamation. But it does bring an interesting discussion point within Islamic dogma and that is how to measure evidence and what value/role scientific evidence (to prove rape) has in situations like this. I would not be surprised if some Shariah judges dismissed that. The requirement for a ridiculous amount of witnesses to a sexual act was originally designed to protect people from false accusation but clearly when it comes to rape, there are questions. Regardless, these stories of women being penalised for having the courage to report rape is very disheartening. The Muslim forums I browsed for discussion of this reacted in disbelief, so I don't necessarily believe these incidents are indicative or a reflective of Muslim societies as a whole in their view to women - which I know some have argued.
 
Watching the video in the article the thing just keeps getting crazier and crazier than what is described in the short paragraphs. The perpetrators had an elaborate plan to get her to the place where they wanted her. The hotel withheld her documents citing financial debt...
 
And people still pretend Islam does not have a problem with women.

Can't wait until the apologists swoop in and start distorting the truth.
 
I thought this might have been a bump of the thread I posted 2 years ago. Is there an update to anything since that time?
 
lexi said:
I thought this might have been a bump of the thread I posted 2 years ago. Is there an update to anything since that time?
Click to expand...

No clue, I had no idea this had already been posted, I just saw it today on Reddit and the Yahoo article had today's date.
 
Angelus Errare said:
Sharia law has to be some of the most nonsensical shit ever.
Click to expand...

It's weird when people speak out against it so openly but then proceed to have no problem letting churches like the Catholics and other churches have their own internal law system that they enforce on their congregation.

Laws need to be rational and impartial for this reason. People are basing their civilization structure off a text of a civilization that doesn't exist anymore.
 
fallagin said:
Sorry you guys, but you cant say anything about this unless you have read the quran.
Click to expand...

Are you joking? I'm sure you are.

But basic human morality and ethics can see how this situation is incredibily messed up and disgusting.
I don't need to read anything.
 
I wonder how many times that group of 4 men that like to watch rape have gone in to court with the victim to confess what went down..

Reminds of back when the witch hunts went on here in America.
They would tie up potential witches with weights to their feet and would dunk em in the ocean. Supposedly a real witch would just float or fly away..
You would think that after a while when none of the "witches" live that someone would notice what's up..
 
xxracerxx said:
Watch the documentary called "The Invisible War" on Netflix to get outraged at the US Military's treatment of rape victims, both women and men. There are women who are charged with adultery after their superiors raped them, the kicker is the women were not married but the rapist was. No charges were filed against the rapist as well.
Click to expand...
The Islamist US military has gone too far w/the misogyny.
 
Sharia law? Funny how they only apply it for instances that make it easy for them. Sharia law also bans alcohol/cigarettes/skimpy clothing/etc. so they get to enjoy that but conveniently bring it back when it benefits them.
 
So disgusting and horrible I don't know what to say.

I want some input from IslamGAF about the Sharia law, what the fuck is up with this bullshit?

religion of peace lol
 
SomewhatGroovy said:
I would ask anyone to share when was the last time you or anyone has heard about a bunch of punks walking into a school to gun down innocent children? and on the rare circumstances that you know a story or two, when is the last time that anyone guilty of such an act gets "life in prison"?

stories like these do not define a law as a whole.

Another thing to think about: Do you link barbaric laws to barbaric people? Remember, we sit in a country that is divisive about how our own government operates. I bring this up in response to the "lol religion of peace" comments here that are irrelevant to how ordinary people living in these cities operate. Their laws and their core behavior are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

For the sake of argument, we're not counting the extremists that blow up girls schools right? Or what happened to Malala Yousafzai?
 
SomewhatGroovy said:
I would ask anyone to share when was the last time you or anyone has heard about a bunch of punks walking into a school to gun down innocent children? and on the rare circumstances that you know a story or two, when is the last time that anyone guilty of such an act gets "life in prison"?
.
Click to expand...

Maybe not with guns, but implying that there is somehow less violent crime in Dubai because of Sharia law is flat out untrue.

http://gulfnews.com/news/gulf/uae/general/fnc-concerned-about-rising-school-violence-1.635516

There is murder, human trafficking, etc.

And that's Dubai specifically. There are plenty of schools getting shot up in other Muslim nations. Especially when a girl tries to go to school, hoo boy.
 
SomewhatGroovy said:
I would ask anyone to share when was the last time you or anyone has heard about a bunch of punks walking into a school to gun down innocent children? and on the rare circumstances that you know a story or two, when is the last time that anyone guilty of such an act gets "life in prison"?

stories like these do not define a law as a whole.

Another thing to think about: Do you link barbaric laws to barbaric people? Remember, we sit in a country that is divisive about how our own government operates. I bring this up in response to the "lol religion of peace" comments here that are irrelevant to how ordinary people living in these cities operate. Their laws and their core behavior are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

islam is great
these sharia laws and whoever makes them are fucking backward morons
they need to get with the times
 
I've made fun of the witness requirement several times at my current job. It makes my boss squirm, but he hasn't offered up any counterarguments.

Demon Ice said:
I always found it interesting and unfortunate what a dichotomy the Dubai is. One the one hand you have this amazingly advanced and modern architecture, and on the other hand (assuming it hasn't been chopped off), you have such an outdated and barbaric system of laws.
Click to expand...

The biggest client of the building subcontractor I used to work for is now one of the most successful architects in Dubai. His firm is in Torrance, CA.
Anyone with money can hire an architect.
 
skinnyrattler said:
I'm not sure the average world citizen would have discovered this crazy law via research. Nor does her lack of research rise to my top 10 problems with this story.
Click to expand...

Top of my list for any country I'm visiting is research a list of rules laws and customs. This being a predominantly muslim country would have spurred me to research further, particularly sharia law. I don't think it is safe for any western woman to travel to any country that practices sharia law and I'm not the only person to feel that way. Not only was she violated she went to jail for it. That's not just victim blaming thats outright holding them criminally responsible.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

NHS surgeon who had his legs removed to satisfy sexual interest is jailed for fraud
2
64
1K
Avid Reading Horse replied
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (1990) back in theaters starting today 8/14 until 8/21 for the 35th anniversary
2
54
1K
Chuck Berry replied
  • Locked
A transwoman named jammie booker just won the title of 'World's Strongest Woman' at the World’s Strongest Woman competition in Arlington, Texas.
News Drama 
8
308
TommyCronin6969 replied
3 Months of Audible Audiobooks
Community 
25
873
poppabk replied
  • Poll
Does it count as cheating if it's another woman? ♀️
2 3
102
2K
E-Cat replied
Top Bottom