« Newest National Sensation: Nappy Headed Hos | Main | The police also noted that the sky is blue and the sun sets in the West »

Another day, another judge ruining a rape case

I am sure you still remember the mess about the judge that ruled that the words “rape” and “victim” could not be used in his courtroom during a rape case. Well, he has just been topped by a judge in Philadelphia.

gavel.jpgA 20-year-old prostitute and single mother, quite desperate for money, agreed to perform sexual favors on scumbag Dominique Gindraw, 19, for the rock-bottom price of $150. She met him at what she thought was his residence, only to find out it was an abandoned building. Gindraw had also invited a friend, and the woman agreed to service him as well for another $100. But that wasn’t the last surprise in store that night.

When the “friend” arrived, instead of money, he drew a gun. Two other men showed up and they proceeded to force themselves on Gindraw at gunpoint. A fifth man showed up and, seeing her crying, asked what was wrong. When he didn’t get a response, he declined his “turn” and helped the woman dress and leave.

Now, here is where it gets messed up. Philly judge Teresa Carr Deni ignored the gunpoint-gang-rape charges and set all five men to trial for “theft of services” because the prostitute had already agreed to sex but merely failed to get paid for it. Judge Deni further rationalized her contempt for the victim in a conversation with the Daily News reporter:

“Did she tell you she had another client before she went to report it?” Deni asked me yesterday when we met at a coffee shop.
“I thought rape was a terrible trauma.”
A case like this, she said - to my astonishment - “minimizes true rape cases and demeans women who are really raped.”

This ruling pissed off assistant district attorney Rich DeSipio so much that he refused to present another rape case involving the same defendant that was also brought before Judge Deni, citing that he didn’t wish to put the other victim through such a “farce.” Deni had the second case dismissed for failure to prosecute. Even the cop who investigated the incidents was shocked:

Police Detective Jack Ryan, who investigated the incidents, said the victims in the two cases “were in fear for their lives. Since they saw one of the doers really well, it crossed both of their minds that they’d be killed.”
Deni’s decision to drop the sex charges is “frankly, appalling,” he said.

DeSipio intends to refile, with a different judge of course.

Okay, what the hell is going on here? I know I am not a lawyer, but since when is putting a gun to a woman’s head and forcing her to have sex with several strange men not considered rape? Even if the woman, by the judge’s rationale, offered sexual services, she only offered them to one person, which was Gindraw, and she only agreed to the second guy later on. But wouldn’t that be rendered moot once the gun came into play? She didn’t have consensual sex with them, and was stiffed on her payment — they forced themselves onto her. The only one who might have deserved some leniency was the guy who didn’t join in and instead helped her out.

What really gets my goat is that the judge claims that it was the victim that damaged future rape cases. Apparently setting the precedent that it isn’t rape if she is a whore is quite the mighty blow for womankind.

| Comments (4)


Ugh! That story makes my stomach turn. What are those people thinking?!!? Thanks for giving some publicity to this.

Wow... just...wow. And to think, I thought the DC Dry Cleaners suing judge was the worst judge in the nation. This is fucking bonkers.

all rape is horrible and i don't want to down play it, but i really don't sympathize for my fellow women that put themselves in high-risk situations. there is always something else you can do for money besides hook. NOT to say this lady deserved it, but she sure wasn't being smart.

Hmmm, I don't know, there's a certain legal logic here at least for the first two dirtbags, but, I'm not familiar with the local rape statute so I'm not gonna comment further. Why don't they appeal the ruling?