Unbelievable! Judge's ban on the use of the word 'rape' at trial reflects trend

Since when is clear, descriptive English not enough for such fucking judges. Next they will rule you can't say the defendant stabbed me.

In future assault cases you'll have to say something along the lines of the person standing accused inserted a knife into my stomach without my consent, I suppose.

It's the only way Tory Bowen knows to honestly describe what happened to her.

She was raped.

But a judge prohibited her from uttering the word "rape" in front of a jury. The term "sexual assault" also was taboo, and Bowen could not refer to herself as a victim or use the word "assailant" to describe the man who allegedly raped her.

The defendant's presumption of innocence and right to a fair trial trumps Bowen's right of free speech, said the Lincoln, Neb., judge who issued the order.

"It shouldn't be up to a judge to tell me whether or not I was raped," Bowen said. "I should be able to tell the jury in my own words what happened to me."

Bowen's case is part of what some prosecutors and victim advocates see as a national trend in sexual assault cases.

"It's a topic that's coming up more and more," said Joshua Marquis, an Oregon prosecutor and a vice president of the National District Attorneys Association. "You're moving away from what a criminal trial is really about."

In Jackson County, Senior Judge Gene Martin recently issued a similar order for the trial of a Kansas City man charged with raping a teenager in 2000. Despite the semantic restrictions, the Jackson County jury last week found Ray Slaughter guilty of forcible rape and two counts of forcible sodomy. [emphasis in original]

Note: Headline links to source.

More good news

I'm sure this isn't the final word, but this is one intelligent judge.

A federal judge in Boston has dismissed a suit by two families who wanted to stop a Massachusetts town and its public school system from teaching their children about gay marriage, court documents show.

The families last year filed the suit asserting that the reading of a gay-themed book and handing out to elementary school students of other children's books that discussed homosexuality without first notifying parents was a violation of their religious rights.

Federal Judge Mark Wolf ruled on Friday that public schools are "entitled to teach anything that is reasonably related to the goals of preparing students to become engaged and productive citizens in our democracy."

"Diversity is a hallmark of our nation. It is increasingly evident that our diversity includes differences in sexual orientation," he said.

IMHO this is how the courts should work. Courts should be impartial. They should judge each case on the evidence presented.

Hell, I'm sure some parents would object if their children were taught the "new math" without parental consent.

(read more)

Bush loses another terror case

You know, many more cases like this (see Hamdi, Rasul,and Hamdan) its gonna make it awfully dicey for the GOP to run on the terrorism issue. That's especially so if these people get their day in court and win.

What do you do with a U.S. citizen detained by the U.S. military in Iraq and accused of aiding terrorists?

The U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for D.C. said today in a decision eclipsed by the wall-to-wall coverage of Anna Nicole Smith’s death that if you’re the U.S. government, you must give him a chance to argue his innocence in a U.S. court.

That’s not what the Bush Administration wanted to hear, however. The administration had wanted to turn Ahmed Omar over to an Iraqi court for trial.

(read more)