General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJudge throws out case against UIC student charged with '50 Shades of Grey' assault
Judge Peggy Chiampas found no probable cause after a lengthy preliminary hearing in which the alleged victim testified.
The defendant, Mohammad Hossain, 19, a biology student, was released from custody Thursday evening. He had been held in protective custody at the Cook County Jail since his arrest last month.
As he left the jail, Hossain denied sexually assaulting anyone. He said he had learned to be careful about whom he can trust and now was focused on completing his education, whether at UIC or somewhere else.
"All that really matters is becoming a doctor," he said. "I have one goal in mind, and that's what I'll set my heart to."
His 19-year-old accuser, a chemistry major at UIC, testified for more than 90 minutes Thursday, at times wringing her hands as she told the judge her encounter with Hossain on Feb. 21 was consensual at first but that she told him to stop and began crying after he hit her hard with a belt.
"I was saying, 'No, stop,' shaking my head from side to side," she said
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-fifty-shades-of-grey-uic-sex-charge-met-0320-20150319-story.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Wella
(1,827 posts).
Wellingtom
(27 posts)"She denied they were re-enacting scenes from "Fifty Shades" and said she didn't know what Hossain meant when he told her he wanted her to resist."
From the article.
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)is about. Stalking, controlling, harming someone. Having that be romanticized is not ok.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/23/college-student-accused-of-rape-claims-he-was-reenacting-50-shades-of-grey/?tid=sm_tw
Response to uppityperson (Reply #3)
Name removed Message auto-removed
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)"Judge Peggy Chiampas found no probable cause after a lengthy preliminary hearing in which the alleged victim testified."
Since the accused was cleared, I'm not sure what destructive effects you're talking about in this case. 
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)At least not as far as most of the (non-rapist) world is concerned. It's just very, very hard to prove a date rape -- especially one that began mid-coitus -- occurred. That's ultimately what the judge ruled on.
It was probably the legally correct ruling, although it makes me sick to my stomach.
Wellingtom
(27 posts)NaturalHigh is correct. Nevernose and uppity person are wrong.
NBC: (first paragraph) "A judge on Thursday cleared a University of Illinois Chicago student of a rape"
http://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Student-in-Alleged-Fifty-Shades-of-Grey-Rape-Case-to-Testify-Thursday-296884431.html
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)He has not been cleared.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Still, the judge found no probable cause, so he's a long way from being a rapist as far as the law is concerned. As for the prosecutors seeking an indictment, I'm not sure how that works after this preliminary hearing.
Also, I was repeating the phrasing from the opening paragraph.
"A student leader at the University of Illinois at Chicago was cleared of a rape charge Thursday by a Cook County judge in a case that had drawn attention because he was accused of re-enacting scenes from the film "50 Shades of Grey.""
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)prosecute him. So no. He's not "a long way from being a rapist as far as the law is concerned" but this judge thought there was not enough to go to trial. That is all.
Even if he went to trial and got a not guilty ruling from a jury, that still does not mean "he's a long way from being a rapist as far as the law is concerned". It would mean that that jury, with those lawyers presenting, ruled in one way based on the judge's specific instructions. Not that "he's a long way from being a rapist as far as the law is concerned".
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)he is a long way from being guilty of anything as far as the law is concerned. Following any other line of thinking is saying that any person accused of anything is assumed guilty.
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)actually be guilty of a crime, don't you?
I think we may be arguing different things here.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Maybe we are. I tend to give people the benefit of the doubt until I have reason not to. At this point it's one person's word against another's.
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)real life otherwise. It is difficult prosecuting a "he said, she said" case, which could be why this judge say no. But it does not mean someone is not guilty as people do stuff all the time, yet aren't convicted. "innocent until proven guilty" is only in a court of law.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)they're guilty.
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)being bound by a judge's strict instructions can easily call someone guilty.
I saw someone steal from a store but they were not caught, did not have a trial and hence were not convicted. But I can accurately say they were guilty of theft.
Me, random person, is not a court of law, and not bound by a judge's strict instructions as to what different things mean.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)uppityperson
(115,679 posts)Have you ever done something wrong, or illegal, even something minor? (and if you say no, I will laugh and call your mom)
Were you convicted?
If not, does that mean you were not guilty?
Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Were you convicted of doing so? Were you guilty of doing so, even if not convicted?
kcr
(15,320 posts)is ridiculous. People are able to assess facts outside of a jury box. People spend most of their lives outside of one.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)bupkis.
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)Your replies are italics, mine are not. Since you chose to not respond to my assertion that it is possible to be guilty without being convicted, even when I gave such a basic example, you instead pull a strawman.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You do know it isn't necessary for a court to rule someone guilty to have them actually be guilty of a crime, don't you?
if they're not convicted, you (random person) don't know that they're guilty and shouldn't claim they're guilty.
Nope. Me, random person, can have an opinion based on the information available and not being bound by a judge's strict instructions can easily call someone guilty.
I saw someone steal from a store but they were not caught, did not have a trial and hence were not convicted. But I can accurately say they were guilty of theft.
Me, random person, is not a court of law, and not bound by a judge's strict instructions as to what different things mean.
your opinion is based on bupkis
I saw a person steal something, they are guilty of theft. Are you guilty of anything?
Have you ever done something wrong, or illegal, even something minor? (and if you say no, I will laugh and call your mom)
Were you convicted?
If not, does that mean you were not guilty?
Have you ever driven over the speed limit? Were you convicted of doing so? Were you guilty of doing so, even if not convicted?
did you see anything in this case? were you involved? no, you read something on the internet, bfd
bupkis.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)worth bupkis.
You didn't see anything.
You weren't involved.
You have no personal knowledge of anything.
You read something on the internet.\\BFD
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)having been convicted. Not about this case. Like you said, reading comprehension.
snooper2
(30,151 posts)
you wrote that....LOL....I have to bookmark this for the ages!
boston bean
(36,223 posts)Have an opinion on a wrongful conviction. Being outside a jury box and all I would assume they don't believe it ever happens.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)As far as I know you have never been cleared, and therefore don't deserve to be described as innocent.
This allegation has more merit than yours because a judge has not yet thrown the above allegation out of court as unsupported by evidence.
Wellingtom
(27 posts)You argued that strict judge instructions allowed a rapist to win a case. How should the judge's instructions be changed? By the way, I've heard people complain about jury instructions, but never about "judge instructions".
uppityperson
(115,679 posts)Sometimes instructions FROM judges, not for judges as you say, put excess limitations on a jury. It isn't black and white, it depends. And my comment was that I, as an individual, can say someone is guilty, not being bound by the rules of the court.
kcr
(15,320 posts)Sorry
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)uppityperson
(115,679 posts)I don't get why people have to be in a jury box to form opinions
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)See how that works?
OJ is a murderer, fyi.
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)Geez! bu$h entered the White House through nefarious means, and started bombing Iraq the month after his inauguration. From 1991 to 2003, Iraq had been the most sanctioned, the most surveilled, the most bombed country in the world. Under those conditions, it would have been impossible for Iraq to the develop the weapons of mass destruction that bu$h claimed it had, and people around the world with working brain cells knew that, resulting in the most massive global anti-war protests since the Vietnam War era. And the UN had inspectors in the country who were looking for those alleged weapons. When they weren't finding any, as had been expected, bu$h told them to get out of Iraq if they valued their lives, because he had such a hard-on to start his war.
On the other hand, the topic of the present discussion is a private matter of "he said, she said" between two people almost no one knows outside of their respective families and circle of friends. To try to conflate the two cases is absolutely ludicrous.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)and OJ a murderer.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)Stop trying to minimize it by calling it "a private matter."
Art_from_Ark
(27,247 posts)There are allegations of rape that a judge disagreed with. On the other hand, the actions of bu$h and company resulted in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people, the displacement of hundreds of thousands of others, and the destruction of a country which resulted in the emergence of one of the most horrible organizations imaginable. Trying to equate the two is absolutely ridiculous.
gollygee
(22,336 posts)until tried in court.
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)is not.
see how that works?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)call you on your anti-democratic bullshit.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)right wingers, neocons and neolibs seem to just love them.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)article. Unlike some people, I don't consider that that means I'm in full possession of all relevant facts. I guess you have to be an 'expert' to think that.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)The judge said there wasn't enough evidence to go to trial. I'm pretty sure that means that his guilt has not been proven. Pointing that out doesn't make one a "rape apologist." 
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Certainly, superior people such as yourself should just be allowed to pass judgement.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)your postings on my Assange thread. These little men who use sexual coercion and force and threat of even worse violence are not the victims. ...and it makes me ill when fellow DUers seem more interested in a man's reputation than a woman's trauma.
He didn't stop when she asked, Manny. And that's rape.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Would you claim that continuing after a woman tells you to stop isn't rape?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Link please?
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)Hossain continued striking the woman — including with his fists, according to an arrest report — and she managed to get one arm, and then another, free. But he then held her arms behind her back and sexually assaulted her as she continued to plead for him to stop, according to Karr.
Hossain's roommate came home soon after the assault and, prosecutors said, Hossain held the door shut to prevent him from entering. The woman then left and told another person what happened, then called police.
Police arrested Hossain later that night in another dorm building in the 700 block of South Halsted Street, according to an arrest report. He was interviewed by UIC detectives and, according to Karr, admitted assaulting the woman and "doing something wrong." He allegedly told police he and the woman were re-enacting scenes from "Fifty Shades of Grey."
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-50-shades-of-grey-uic-sex-charge-20150223-story.html
You can also read his nauseating Facebook update after rape....
http://heavy.com/news/2015/02/mohammad-hossain-50-shades-of-grey-university-of-illinois-rape-sexual-assault-suspect-facebook-defense/
Nice defense of this little man, Manny.....
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)the judge says, the cops said. ya, the judge lets a 40 yr old man go after raping a 13 yr old until she kills herself, that the girl was promiscuous and the 40 yr old man could not help himself. the judge say, .... an old man raping 13 yr old neighbors not a big deal. the judge says, during a gang rape a boy pulled out when the victim said no, so he is good. the police says, it is the 11 yr olds fault she was raped by adult men.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)And look at how the apologists look at the court process to justify ignoring those words and actions.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)they raped, and this last one, beat.... girl/women.
and those words, the mens words, are ignored.
that tells us. these men find the girl/women unimportant.
what person sees that way?
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Some people are pointing out that Americans have the right to due process and fair trials before being locked up.
I personally don't want anyone locked up based on public reaction to a news story that may or may not contain all the pertinent facts.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)Nobody is ignoring, dismissing, or excusing anything.
Some people are pointing out that Americans have the right to due process and fair trials before being locked up.
I personally don't want anyone locked up based on public reaction to a news story that may or may not contain all the pertinent facts.
This is where the whole "innocent until proven guilty" thing we talked about in Civics classes comes in. Let us all remember that if American jurisprudence were based on popular mob sentiment formed by media sensationalism and lack of facts, three Duke lacrosse players would be in prison now for crimes they did not commit.
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)Who, IIRC, you've determined is a rapist, and further that anyone who sympathizes with his reluctance to go to Sweden is a "rape defender". If my recollection on this is not correct, or you'd like links to where you've done what I recall, let me know.
As to this "50 Shades" case - I'd have to go with the judge (who I note is a woman) as the best source of information -- she's spent more time on this, and has more knowledge of the circumstances and of the law than I do. Again, please correct me if I'm wrong, but the judge seems to believe that the evidence does not even get to the point where it's worth a trial for rape.
To be clear, I'm not going to defend this guys actions - but that's different than not insisting that he's guilty of a charge that a judge doesn't think he's likely guilty of.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)assume the judge is the best source of information? That's a sign of misunderstanding how the process works at this stage.
That particular assumption.....that the judge is the "best source of information" indicates to me that you are woefully unfamiliar with how a preliminary works.
I hope the DA takes it to the grand jury.
one_voice
(20,043 posts)alleged rapey lips:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2015/02/23/college-student-accused-of-rape-claims-he-was-reenacting-50-shades-of-grey/?tid=sm_tw
He knew he'd done something wrong. HE SAID those words. Whatcha think he thought he did wrong?
MannyGoldstein
(34,589 posts)(Except when it comes to certain public officials, as we on DU know).
Do you think he committed a crime? If so, why do you think the judge did not think so?
one_voice
(20,043 posts)You said this:
We have this:
To answer your question, yes I do think he committed a crime. When a woman says no, stop, please don't, get off, leave me alone, etc you must listen and obey. I don't care if you're mid pump you STOP, GET OFF, LEAVE HER ALONE, etc. Or at the very least you pause and say---do you want me to stop. Yes?
As to why the judge didn't think so, I don't know there's no indication in the article. But, this is what I think.
I believe the judge heard Fifty Shades of Grey, not in a relationship, started out consensual, and nothing more. She'd said yes...that's all that matter. The fact she's then said no didn't factor in.
There's also this which I completely agree with:
She was punished for knowing her rapist and having 'casual' sex. You either be good girls or suffer the consequences. It's bullshit.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)Of course the usual suspect turn up to defend him. Disgusting.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)witnesses.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)to kill someone in this country so long as the killing is justified. Which the justice system decided in these cases it was. Just like in the rape case the justice system decided the alleged rapist should not be tried as there is no probable cause. Others differ (just like many differ with the George Zimmerman and Darren Wilson cases) and are expression their opinions here.
Can you understand that?
Do you not see your hipocracy in seeing injustice in the Zimmermann/Wilson cases while excoriating those who do the same in this instance?
ND-Dem
(4,571 posts)that has never been at issue.
I have a problem with people calling someone a rapist when he was found not guilty.
kelly1mm
(4,734 posts)or Wilson 'Murderers"? LOTS of that here on DU and funny but I don't recall you getting so worked up about that when they clearly (by your definition) are not murderers.
Look, this is the intenetz - people have opinions, that (shockingly) disagree with your opinions. Sometimes they use works in the heat of argument that are not technically true or would be bad form in debate class. But this aint debate class.....
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)a judge says.....
cause god knows, a judge has never let rape slide.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)seabeyond
(110,159 posts)can a human being so callously ignore the rapists own words. beating the girl as she struggled to free herself to get away.
what kind of man can read that, and reply as you did?
really, i do not get it. is it a simple matter that you did not even bother reading it, so you can hold to your postion?
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)We have access to... hyperbole.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)msanthrope
(37,549 posts)No, she doesn't. Not at this stage.
lumberjack_jeff
(33,224 posts)I find it surprising that anyone would think that readers of the newspaper have access to better quality information than those in the courtroom.
msanthrope
(37,549 posts)
LisaL
(44,974 posts)
Blue_Adept
(6,402 posts)Seriously, 99% of what they present in it isn't anything to be called destructive in the slightest.
I took my significant other to see it as I was curious to see how they translated it from the awful book. She'd heard how awful it was. But what she saw was so tame that a lot of people would call it vanilla sex.
Starry Messenger
(32,342 posts)Can some legal mind explain this to me?
Comrade Grumpy
(13,184 posts)If so, there would be probable cause to take him to trial.
The judge found there was not sufficient evidence to bind him over for trial.
former9thward
(32,076 posts)When the prosecution presents their evidence ( and they don't necessarily present all their evidence and they don't necessarily present it in the way they would at trial) the judge decides whether it is more likely than not that the defendant committed a crime. If the judge does decide that they set a trial date.
At the trial it shifts from a more likely than not standard to beyond a reasonable doubt standard. The prosecution now has to prove a defendant did the crime beyond a reasonable doubt which is much harder than just proving probable cause.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)You need to make sure both parties know exactly what is going on and have a mutually agreed upon safe word to stop all activities. It seems as if Mohammad had no idea how to engage in BDSM and I would have no heartache if the prosecutor decides to pursue the case in some form or another because from the information provided he is culpable of sexual assault at the very least.
In a true BDSM relationship it is the submissive who has the power to stop interaction at anytime due to the safe word, without this it cannot be consensual because he had both the power and control, and that just becomes violence and abuse.
LisaL
(44,974 posts)He wanted to engage in BDSM but had no idea how to do it "properly." Because the woman admitted she was consenting at least initially it would be tricky to prosecute. So judge decided it would not be possible to get a conviction and threw out the case.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)Unless they removed the law from the books you are able to withdraw consent during intercourse in Illinois:
So as soon as she said no, it became sexual assault, at the very least.
brooklynite
(94,725 posts)...andthere's no indication that intercourse was occuring,
LisaL
(44,974 posts)LisaL
(44,974 posts)The woman admitted she consented to bondage. At least it would appear the judge didn't see enough evidence to proceed with a trial. It doesn't look like the two of them had a "safe word."
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)the article state that he never told her exactly what he was going to do to her and it sounds like there was no command to make him stop.
I have a problem with people saying she consented and after that anything goes. If I was with a partner and I consented to be tied up but then they started to do things I didn't expect or thought they would do is it still consent? Suppose they decide to use something like this:
An electric shock wand on various parts of my body and I said no but they continued, is it my fault for agreeing in the first place and now too bad I gave consent? Once it started hurting and she said no it's no longer a consensual act, it's sexual assault and/or criminal battery.
smirkymonkey
(63,221 posts)It amazes me how much violence toward women is simply regarded as a non-issue in this country. It is almost given a pass.
LisaL
(44,974 posts)Revanchist
(1,375 posts)This man thinks he did nothing wrong and this ruling simply confirms it in his mind (at least that's my opinion). At the very least, this should be sexual assault. As the article states, it is very difficult to prove acquaintance rape cases but perhaps the burden of proof will be easier for the beating.
LisaL
(44,974 posts)If the judge didn't think there was a probable cause to proceed with a trial, seems impossible that the judge could find him guilty.
Revanchist
(1,375 posts)Last edited Sun Mar 22, 2015, 12:37 AM - Edit history (1)
while this judge doesn't think he's guilty of rape does not mean he couldn't be guilty of sexual assault, or as I said up thread, battery or abuse. If someone tries to get free of you whipping them and they redo the bindings and keep whipping you then that's a crime, sexual or not.
edit: corrected grammatical error
marions ghost
(19,841 posts)We can hope this offender now knows when to quit, but I doubt it.
Any guy (with his intelligence) who uses "Fifty Shades of Gray" as a defense for unwanted acts of violence in sex--has DEFINITELY got a serious underlying problem...
mercuryblues
(14,537 posts)boils down to this. If you want to rap woman, tell her to resist and stick a gag in her mouth. Then it becomes role playing.
The woman and guy had previous encounters consisting of light bondage. He tied her hands with a rubber band. So when he tied her up this time she agreed. He stuck a gag in her mouth and told her to act like she is resisting and started hitting her. She tried to say no. Shook her head no. Even got one hand lose in an attempt to escape. The 50 shades defense is going to be around a long time.
seabeyond
(110,159 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)There's a stellar sign of someone who either doesn't know what they're doing, or doesn't care.
alcibiades_mystery
(36,437 posts)Likely not for this particular charge.
But...
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)I was never implying that nobody should have an opinion about this guy's guilt or innocence. Of course we have opinions about alleged crimes and criminals that we read about.
However, as I also said upthread, the judge found no probable cause, so he's a long way from being a rapist as far as the law is concerned.
I don't see a contradiction between those two points.
TDale313
(7,820 posts)So while your statement that the law doesn't see him as a convicted rapist is true, there are without any doubt many, many, many rapes that never result in a conviction and many many many rapists who will never see the inside of a courtroom, let alone receive a prison sentence. We can act like the only rapes that happen are the ones that result in convictions, but I think that vastly downplays the scope of the problem.
NaturalHigh
(12,778 posts)and it doesn't change anything I wrote.
LWolf
(46,179 posts)doesn't really mean "no, stop," because we're all just "role playing." We don't really mean what we say. If something is scaring us or hurting us or taking us beyond what we are willing to endure, we have to use the right word..."red," or "popsicle," or whatever. Otherwise, whatever we say, we don't really mean it.
Like "she asked for it," "she shouldn't dress that way if she doesn't want it," etc., etc., etc...
sendero
(28,552 posts)I'm not even a practitioner but everyone knows that.