Hello and thank you for being a DL contributor. We are changing the login scheme for contributors for simpler login and to better support using multiple devices. Please click here to update your account with a username and password.

Hello. Some features on this site require registration. Please click here to register for free.

Hello and thank you for registering. Please complete the process by verifying your email address. If you can't find the email you can resend it here.

Hello. Some features on this site require a subscription. Please click here to get full access and no ads for $1.99 or less per month.

Gay Man Sentenced to 15 Years in Jail for Tricking Straight Guys Into Sex

A London gay man, accused in September of duping four straight men into having oral and anal sex by posing as a woman on Tinder and other dating apps, was sentenced Friday to 15 years in prison.

Duarte Xavier, 33, was found guilty of six charges of causing a person to engage in sex without consent, Evening Standard reports.

Xavier allegedly engaged the men on the apps with photos of a “good-looking” female. Using a “feminine” voice, he then arranged sexual liaisons at his flat or a park if the men promised to wear a blindfold throughout their encounter.

“By pretending that you were an attractive and sexually adventurous young woman, you tempted them into engaging in sex with you,” said Vice-Judge Advocate General Michael Hunter in court during sentencing.

“I have taken into account your deliberate and cruel tactics that you carefully used to subject your victims to this activity. You have demonstrated no remorse or understanding of the position of your victims.”

Xavier, who had been previously arrested twice but released pending inquiries, was finally charged after his third arrest. He committed two of his offenses while out on bail.

The judge told the police officer in the case, “I hope the fact that these victims were heterosexual males did not cause them to be put rather lower in the list of priorities.”

The court heard a statement from one victim who claimed he suffers from “extreme stress, anxiety, panic attacks, and depression” after being used for Xavier’s “own sick fantasy.” He added, “I feel I’m carrying around a dark secret that will always be part of me. I hope one day I can learn to trust people again.”

As previously reported, one man discovered Xavier’s true identity when he lifted his blindfold while receiving oral sex. “I saw this man with a beard,” he told the court.

This victim, who reported the incident to police, said he was “pissed off” upon learning his date wasn’t a woman. “My reaction was I slapped this man in his face once or twice and I said ’why didn’t you tell me the truth?’”

The duped man told jurors he had matched on a dating app with a woman named Anna who wrote, “Be my obedient toy.” He then went to Xavier’s flat, where he was told to put on a blindfold before his host emerged. Xavier reportedly continued to pester the angry man for a second encounter, messaging him with sad-face emojis.

A second man alleges he also received oral sex from Xavier, while two others claim they had anal sex with the accused, believing it was vaginal intercourse. One of the men allegedly duped into having anal sex with Xavier in a public park admitted the blindfolded encounter began with oral sex that he found “quite pleasant.”

“It was different,” he said, adding that he had no reason to believe it was “anything else” but sex with a woman. “I have not experienced anything like that before.”

Metropolitan Police officials have asked any other potential victims to make contact.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 115November 15, 2018 1:24 PM

Wait, these guys go to a stranger's house and put on a blindfold before sex...and he's the one who's going to jail?????

by Anonymousreply 1November 13, 2018 3:04 PM

Maybe he thought some straight dick would be worth going to jail for.

by Anonymousreply 2November 13, 2018 3:07 PM

Ahem.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 3November 13, 2018 3:09 PM
Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 4November 13, 2018 3:09 PM

Is this the 10th thread about this same article? I think it is.

No sympathy for these straight men here, btw. If a straight guy gay-bashes a gay man, fracturing his bones and blinding his eyes, he doesn't even get 10 years in Britain. How come CONSENSUAL sex with these dummies, something from which they will suffer NO long-term physical effects, results in an almost two-decade penalty?

by Anonymousreply 5November 13, 2018 3:09 PM

We should start a GoFundMe page for this poor guy. 15 years is way too long. This is a hate crime by a homophobic judge.

by Anonymousreply 6November 13, 2018 3:22 PM

This is where gay groups jump in and defend him.

Maybe a Change.org, R6?

by Anonymousreply 7November 13, 2018 3:35 PM

Sex by deception is rape. The guilty man knew the guys would withhold their consent unless he deceived them. The sentence is just.

by Anonymousreply 8November 13, 2018 3:49 PM

R8 is correct.

by Anonymousreply 9November 13, 2018 3:52 PM

Ok let me tell you, this is messed up but there are some men who fantasize about this sort of thing. I'm a dominatrix and there are A LOT of heterosexual men who want to suck cock and or get fucked by cock..... but they don't want to "know" it's a man. The man accused of doing this...TARGETED SUBMISSIVE MEN. "Be my good boy"...yeah he knew who he was targeting. **Just so I'm clear, this isn't right. What he did was wrong. But I do wonder if any dominant/submissive fantasies were discussed.

by Anonymousreply 10November 13, 2018 3:53 PM

R10, are you trans...? (born male)

by Anonymousreply 11November 13, 2018 4:00 PM

Those guys are idiots. What dumb asses. Really this is hard to believe.

by Anonymousreply 12November 13, 2018 4:11 PM

It’s not rape. Maybe false advertisement, but definitely not rape. The “victims” went to his house, put on a blindfold, got hard and got sucked/fucked his hole... all willingly. This was not a violent act. It was a freak living out his fantasy and the “victims” got what they wanted out of it.

by Anonymousreply 13November 13, 2018 4:17 PM

[quote]R13 It was a freak living out his fantasy and the “victims” got what they wanted out of it.

It would appear not, or it wouldn’t be in court.

by Anonymousreply 14November 13, 2018 4:35 PM

R14,

You don’t think there are frivolous court cases? That’s what happens in countries with overzealous, uneducated law enforcement and too many lawyers who make sure the cash comes flowing in for themselves.

by Anonymousreply 15November 13, 2018 5:02 PM

I don’t imagine the men would have made the complaints if “everyone got what they wanted out of it”.

And if this is the third time the police were involved, by r13 ‘s reasoning we’d have to believe all the previous men were a-okay with the events, too, yet decided they’d risk distasteful publicity (and the inconvenience of investigations) just for fun.

That doesn’t sound frivolous, and it doesn’t seem likely.

by Anonymousreply 16November 13, 2018 5:13 PM

15 years is utterly ridiculous. He's not a menace to society. He didn't do anything to violently harm anyone.

by Anonymousreply 17November 13, 2018 5:15 PM

15 years is totally just. I agree that it is closer to rape than not. Sex crimes don’t have to be violent. Molestation is not always, or even usually, violent, but it’s still a sex crime.

They gave consent through deceit, which in my mind negates the consent.

by Anonymousreply 18November 13, 2018 5:23 PM

I don’t have an opinion about the length of the sentence, as I don’t know what sentencing in other sexual abuse cases are, but I do think it’s right that he should serve time. Especially as this was the third time police were involved.

by Anonymousreply 19November 13, 2018 5:29 PM

R17 = rape apologist

by Anonymousreply 20November 13, 2018 5:38 PM

This is rape. There is no grey area. No consent was given to have sex with another man. I can’t believe there are people here who actually think this is no-harm-no-foul.

by Anonymousreply 21November 13, 2018 5:43 PM

Not sure it's really rape - they wanted sex and they got sex. If it was a blonde girl they were meeting up with, should she disclose that she's not really a blonde because she colored her hair earlier in the day? Maybe it's wrong because he lied to them (Hell, Donald does it every day!!) but 15 years is rough.

by Anonymousreply 22November 13, 2018 5:50 PM

Dude, come on, r22.

They consented to het sex...not homo.

Big difference between hair color & sex organs.

by Anonymousreply 23November 13, 2018 5:55 PM

He was arrested for doing this and then did it twice more while out on bail. I think this, plus showing no remorse, justifies the sentence.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 24November 13, 2018 6:06 PM

ATTENTON, EARTHLINGS! THIS IS A PUBLIC ANNOUNCEMENT:

There's a slightly earlier thread on this news item already. See R3.

Let's not have 2 confusing, dueling threads on the same issue.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 25November 13, 2018 6:09 PM

Um, no, actually YOU feel the need to interrupt and control others, right?

by Anonymousreply 26November 13, 2018 6:11 PM

The crime is gay. That’s the crime.

by Anonymousreply 27November 13, 2018 6:21 PM

Don't make me send you to Muriel's principal office, R26.

Do you know what is the fallout of dueling threads - ANARCHY!

by Anonymousreply 28November 13, 2018 6:21 PM

R10, well duh, of course they were submissive. The blindfold is a bit of a tip off, no?

I think you just want to talk about how you're a dominatrix and therefore oh-so-edgy. We're all suitable impressed, now off with you.

by Anonymousreply 29November 13, 2018 6:22 PM

He had the book thrown at him because he did it twice more after being arrested the first time for doing the exact same thing. I can’t understand why people are complaining that the sentence isn’t justified.,,

by Anonymousreply 30November 13, 2018 6:31 PM

Point to a similar case involving heterosexuals, R30, and we’ll callnit justified.

by Anonymousreply 31November 13, 2018 6:33 PM

*call it

by Anonymousreply 32November 13, 2018 6:33 PM

Point to cases where straights pretended to be gay to deceive gays, r31?

by Anonymousreply 33November 13, 2018 6:41 PM

Enough R33. You know exactly what I mean. You’re being obtuse. Point to a similar case where a repeat heterosexual offender received this many years.

by Anonymousreply 34November 13, 2018 7:23 PM

Not murder or rape, because this case is neither.

by Anonymousreply 35November 13, 2018 7:24 PM

Is this case a fraud case? Identity theft is five years. Credit card fraud is up to 15z

by Anonymousreply 36November 13, 2018 7:29 PM

“[The flat] was in darkness when the victim arrived. He shouted "hello" and was told to close the door and come upstairs. As he did so, he felt someone grab him and pull his trousers down and an item, believed to be a pillowcase, was pulled over his head. But the victim managed to struggle and use the light from his mobile to discover Xavier...”

The sentence is pretty severe, but honestly - this guy was escalating into violent behavior. Scary stuff.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 37November 14, 2018 6:58 AM

He was gender fluid!

by Anonymousreply 38November 14, 2018 7:29 AM

The victims allegedly promised they wouldn't remove their blindfolds, but THEY DID! Isn't a verbal contract enforceable? Maybe he should put them LOL

by Anonymousreply 39November 14, 2018 7:59 AM

Oh - he’ll be even more gender-fluid in prison, R38.

by Anonymousreply 40November 14, 2018 8:40 AM

What if he identifies as female? Is it still a scam if he really thinks he is a woman?

by Anonymousreply 41November 14, 2018 8:59 AM

he has cocksucking lips

by Anonymousreply 42November 14, 2018 10:16 AM

So the guys go to a stranger’s house, put on blindfolds, and he’s deceiving them??? They’re idiots!

by Anonymousreply 43November 14, 2018 10:40 AM

Would it have been rape if it was a woman but she looked really different from her online pics?

by Anonymousreply 44November 14, 2018 10:41 AM

So 98 percent of gay porn scenarios would be illegal if not fantasy.

by Anonymousreply 45November 14, 2018 11:06 AM

Being a different sex is a lot bigger deal than being older / fatter than your profile pic r44. He intentionally deceived them. They consented to sex with a woman, he isn’t one. That is rape, both in law and morally.

by Anonymousreply 46November 14, 2018 11:47 AM

[quote]15 years is totally just. I agree that it is closer to rape than not. Sex crimes don’t have to be violent. Molestation is not always, or even usually, violent, but it’s still a sex crime.

[quote]They gave consent through deceit, which in my mind negates the consent.

I agree with everything you posted R18 EXCEPT for the length of the sentence. Fifteen years is ridiculous, especially in an overcrowded prison system. Two or three years--at the most is sufficient. Depending on the crime, I believe prison should be a revolving door. Again...DEPENDING on the crime.

Also, I would suggest some psychological help for this idiot. He should be grateful that he didn’t get his brains spilled everywhere.

by Anonymousreply 47November 14, 2018 12:49 PM

I’ll sign a change.org.

by Anonymousreply 48November 14, 2018 12:55 PM

It's not rape because they consented to sex (albeit, with a woman) but it was still wrong. I think he deserves the sentence he got.

by Anonymousreply 49November 14, 2018 12:58 PM

Hmmm I don’t know. If I consent to have oral sex or to top and my partner pins me down and penetrates me I’d consider that rape even though I consented to have a sexual encounter. I’m also thinking if this guy had lured lesbians into his home by pretending to be a woman and one of them pulled off the blindfold and saw a man would people be more inclined to believe it was rape.

by Anonymousreply 50November 14, 2018 1:06 PM

Well, at the moment there is no consent, that could be rape. What is this creep was really 16 years old? The victims can't argue it wasn't illegal because they "consented" to having sex with an adult, right? Just saying there are many ways to see this - but we're all in agreement that this guy is a creep.

by Anonymousreply 51November 14, 2018 1:17 PM

None of those guys knew it was a female. They all knew it was a male.

by Anonymousreply 52November 14, 2018 1:36 PM

Of course it is (R41) because even if he thought he was a woman he isn't one - not in any way that is recognisble or material of real for the men he had sex with. I think it's really important to prosecute cases like these, especially at the moment, as it draws a line that says that other people's direct experience of material reality, especially as it relates to sex and consent, matters, regardless of whatever someone might have in their own head.

Not that he seems to be claiming anything to do with gender identity, this was simple deception, but it definitely relates to arguments around sex, gender and material reality that the current gender-as-non-material identity idiots are trying to claim.

by Anonymousreply 53November 14, 2018 1:51 PM

When he gets out of prison, they should make him wear an ankle bracelet that only lets him use the women's bathrooms.

You know so straight men can feel safe going to the bathroom & all.

by Anonymousreply 54November 14, 2018 2:01 PM

Xavier is also a habitual, violent, repeat offender, which makes the analogies of “Would they gave given him 15 years if he was a fat, ugly, trans-Asian?” lame and useless. But this is DL, so carry on!

by Anonymousreply 55November 14, 2018 2:10 PM

So a few closet cases let themselves be tricked then their internalised homophobia kicked in, went hysterical and wanted to see 'justice' prevail on some 'predatory homo.'

What fucking cunts. As if anal sex would ever feel like vaginal sex with a wanton slut that advertises her wares for strangers. Honestly this case is just sad and pathetic and really homophobic.

I see the SJW don't care though, not enough brownie points when gays involved, not enough PoC to cum over.

by Anonymousreply 56November 14, 2018 2:18 PM

R56 Women have anuses too. And mouths.

by Anonymousreply 57November 14, 2018 2:23 PM

R13 and all the "it isn't rape-rape" assholes sound like the dude who used to diddle me as a kid. "You got hard. You came. You liked it. So you were equally a part of it." Chilling.

Just because a body responds to sexual stimulus the way it was designed to does not imply consent.

R8 is right. This is rape. End of.

That said, I feel that trans people who fail to disclose to the sex partners should be subjected to just as severe a sentence. "But I really believe I'm a man/woman" is not a valid excuse when you deceived a sex partner who thought you were the real McCoy.

by Anonymousreply 58November 14, 2018 2:53 PM

The sentence is justified. I would have given him life! One less homosexual on the streets.

by Anonymousreply 59November 14, 2018 3:23 PM

R58 Rape? Bullshit. These idiot men WILLINGLY went to a strangers apartment and put a blindfold on. That screams stupid and dangerous. You'd know if you were getting sex from a man after prior instances from women. The experience would be different especially has he had a fucking beard.

Who knew pleading stupidity was such a defense and grant you automatic victim status.

by Anonymousreply 60November 14, 2018 3:33 PM

R60 Why did these men go to such lengths to have sex with a “woman” under these circumstances? I’m guessing their wives or girlfriends were bad at or refused to give them bjs and anal. That’s why a lot of “straight” guys suspend disbelief and have sex with men dressed as women.

They want the chrome sucked off they tailpipes.

by Anonymousreply 61November 14, 2018 3:46 PM

Who knew defending an obvious case of rape would show you up as a wilfully stupid pro-rape apologist r60?

by Anonymousreply 62November 14, 2018 3:47 PM

I'm not a pro-rape apologist at all, just sick of seeing gay men treated differently than heterosexuals. Do you honestly think that if a woman was doing the conning that she would get the same sentence?

Did they honestly think that a cute, pretty 18 year old girl was going to be on the end of the sexual act. It's common sense and if you willingly put yourself in danger then you sort of get what you deserve.

He went to a live action glory hole and got duped big deal.

by Anonymousreply 63November 14, 2018 3:56 PM

r63 He had prior arrests and was resorting to force (that’s when the victim escaped and reported him to authorities.) I doubt that an 18 year old girl would be that kind of threat to a grown man. But if you have an instance of that happening, by all means post it here!

by Anonymousreply 64November 14, 2018 4:07 PM

R64 Where is the force part? In the article I read it did not mention force.

It shouldn't matter if an 18 year old was a threat a not.

The bottom line is they used an app, which is dangerous due the anonymity it provides and they willingly went along, even when he refused to show them his face. A normal person would have had alarm bells go off and terminate the sexual act immediately. One guy enjoyed it until it turned out he had sex with a man.

I just refuse to accept that they thought they were having sex with a woman and ultimately freaked out and created the duped excuse because they couldn't handle the fact they enjoyed sex with a man.

by Anonymousreply 65November 14, 2018 4:17 PM

R60, that’s like saying if a girl goes to a guy’s hotel room then he’s allowed to do ANYTHING sexual he wants to her.

She may be ok with intercourse but if he forces anal on her, then she’s NOT A VICTIM because she went to HIS ROOM.

That’s RAPE CULTURE brah

by Anonymousreply 66November 14, 2018 4:23 PM

Video of one such encounter. Watch some poor, unwitting hunk get taken advantage of by an unsightly fag (or some kind of woman, I actually can't tell).

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 67November 14, 2018 4:34 PM

What exactly is the charge again him - rape? Or something else? I don’t believe it’s rape-rape, as Whoopie said. Lol.

by Anonymousreply 68November 14, 2018 4:37 PM

To the rape apologist guy.

This guy is not one of us. He's not just a gay dude, and this is not homophobia. He's a predator who sought out unwilling victims.

Enough with the bullshit.

BTW, heterosexual men who "pretend" to be one thing (a nice guy) but end up raping women on a date are legion. Your ridiculous argument, which would be--"But she wanted to get busy with him"--ignoring the fact that, as it actually happened, it was not consensual, and that a woman (or anyone) can withdraw consent during sex at any time--is truly moronic.

by Anonymousreply 69November 14, 2018 4:43 PM

Did R64 answer the “force” question?

by Anonymousreply 70November 14, 2018 4:49 PM

I had to FF R69.

by Anonymousreply 71November 14, 2018 4:51 PM

And due to your astounding stupidity I had to F&F you r71.

by Anonymousreply 72November 14, 2018 4:57 PM

Any consent obtained via impersonation is not meaningful, lawful consent. There was a recent case of an identical twin brother who tricked his twin's girlfriend into sex. The jury found hm guilty of rape.

by Anonymousreply 73November 14, 2018 4:57 PM

[quote]Do you honestly think that if a woman was doing the conning that she would get the same sentence?

Yes, Oona Outrage, I do.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 74November 14, 2018 5:02 PM

In googling r73's case, I came across Wikipedia's entry for [italic]Rape by deception[/italic] and holy fuck

[quote] On March 30, 1984, Daniel Kayton Boro called a Holiday Inn in South San Francisco. Mariana De Bella was a hotel clerk who answered the phone that morning. Boro told De Bella that he was "Dr. Stevens" and that he worked at Peninsula Hospital. Boro (pretending to be "Dr. Stevens") said that he had the results of her blood test and that she had contracted a dangerous, extremely infectious and possibly deadly disease from using public toilets. Boro went on to tell her that she could be sued for spreading the disease and that she had only two options for treatment. The first option he told her about was an extremely painful surgical procedure (which he described in graphic and gory detail) that would cost $9,000 and require a six week hospital stay that would not be covered by insurance. The second option, Boro said, was to have sexual intercourse with an anonymous "donor" who would administer a vaccine through sexual intercourse with her. The clerk agreed to the sexual intercourse and arranged to pay $1000 for it, believing it was the only choice she had. Boro instructed her to check into a hotel room and call him when she was there. Boro then arrived at her room as the "donor." He told her to relax and then had sex with De Bella. Boro used no physical force and his victim knowingly allowed him to have sex with her because she believed (falsely) that her life was threatened if she did not receive this "treatment."

[quote] Boro was arrested at the hotel shortly after when the police arrived after being called by the victim's work supervisor. He was charged with rape, burglary, and grand larceny under various California statutes and convicted at trial. However, his conviction for rape was later overturned by the California Court on the grounds that California lacked a law against fraudulently inducing someone into sexual intercourse. His convictions for grand larceny and burglary were not overturned however because he fraudulently took $1000 from his victim.

[quote] The California Legislature subsequently amended the rape statute in 1986 to include that a rape does in fact occur when a victim is not aware of the essential characteristics of the act (the sexual intercourse) due to the perpetrator's fraudulent representation that the sexual act served a professional purpose.

[quote] Boro was arrested again for the same scheme three years later. This time he was convicted of rape under the revised California statute. It is believed that Boro used this scheme to rape dozens of women over many years.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 75November 14, 2018 5:06 PM

[quote]Rape? Bullshit. These idiot men WILLINGLY went to a strangers apartment and put a blindfold on. That screams stupid

If stupidity were a criminal offence sweetheart, you'd be struggling to accessorise your orange jumpsuit with a belt fashioned from plaited Cheeto packets.

by Anonymousreply 76November 14, 2018 5:07 PM

R75 thanks for posting that.

by Anonymousreply 77November 14, 2018 5:07 PM

R71 I too FFed you and I am not R69. Dumb bitch who can't accept an opinion different than yours.

by Anonymousreply 78November 14, 2018 5:11 PM

If it was a first-time office then the sentence he received would seem harsh. However, he was arrested for it the first time, released on bond, and then did it twice again...THAT'S why he deserved what he got. Plus, the judge said he showed no remorse. So what about those sex vids that show someone going into a glory hole booth believing he's going to get head by the girl who said she's suck him off on the other side - but it's a GUY she swaps places with. Is that rape? LOL

by Anonymousreply 79November 14, 2018 5:19 PM

How many years did he get R73?

by Anonymousreply 80November 14, 2018 5:19 PM

R74 She got 8 years, a gay man got double. How is that fair?

R76 Why get personal? Does common sense offend you.

Mariana De Bella is an idiot.

What do all these victims have in common. No common sense and fresh air where their brain should be. Yes it sucks they got duped, but when you disengage your critical thinking and engage in risky behaviour then on some level you have to be held accountable too. You can't always blame someone else for your poor decisions.

It's also interesting to note that victim supporters fail to realise is that because he's a gay man he's received a far harsher sentence than what a woman or a self proclaimed heterosexual man would have received.

by Anonymousreply 81November 14, 2018 5:23 PM

So what are you supposed to do if you’re only attracted to str8 men?

by Anonymousreply 82November 14, 2018 5:26 PM

R81, you’re on a Datalounge. Plenty of people here think the sentencing may be too light.

by Anonymousreply 83November 14, 2018 5:26 PM

R82 - Grow up, that's what.

This and the closure of Craigslist personals should be a huge indicator... Fucking with straight guys leads to trouble.

by Anonymousreply 84November 14, 2018 5:27 PM

Why are you only attracted to straight men R82?

by Anonymousreply 85November 14, 2018 5:27 PM

R82 Start a porn site like Beefcakehunter or Military classified.

by Anonymousreply 86November 14, 2018 5:28 PM

R86.

by Anonymousreply 87November 14, 2018 5:29 PM

[quote]Why are you only attracted to straight men [R82]?

Because daddy issues.

by Anonymousreply 88November 14, 2018 5:31 PM

Because only str8 men are real men. And I can only be attracted to real men.

by Anonymousreply 89November 14, 2018 5:31 PM

R79 He also yanked down the last guy’s trousers and pulled a pillowcase over his head, started a sex act and then outed himself as male, which he seemed to get a thrill from. This is when the victim broke loose and got the hell out of there, notified the cops.

by Anonymousreply 90November 14, 2018 5:32 PM

You know R82 is going to die alone.

by Anonymousreply 91November 14, 2018 5:32 PM

Well, unfortunately Datalounge agrees with you there, R89. I don’t argue that anymore. It’s a losing battle.

Where are you getting that information from, R90?

by Anonymousreply 92November 14, 2018 5:35 PM

Yes, I am going to die alone. I’ve accepted it.

by Anonymousreply 93November 14, 2018 5:35 PM

R92 - see R37.

by Anonymousreply 94November 14, 2018 5:51 PM

So when he started talking in his high fake woman's voice telling them to put on a blindfold they had no clue? What is he a voiceover actor? GMFB. And did someone really take this case to the cops? Like saying "Officer, someone stole my heroin?"

by Anonymousreply 95November 14, 2018 5:52 PM

No, it really isn’t r95. It’s like saying “Officer, someone fraudulently presented themselves as female in order to gain sexual gratification and I did not consent to that”.

by Anonymousreply 96November 14, 2018 5:55 PM

r95 Maybe he talked like Cher. Most guys can do a Cher pretty well.

by Anonymousreply 97November 14, 2018 6:13 PM

[97] Jack?

by Anonymousreply 98November 14, 2018 6:58 PM

this sentence is homophobic

by Anonymousreply 99November 14, 2018 7:33 PM

Rape law is the same for gays and straights. Here it is:

Starting Points Single offence of rape by single offender: 5 years custody - victim 16 or over 8 years custody - victim 13 or over but under 16 10 years custody - victim under 13 Rape accompanied by aggravating factor: 8 years custody - victim 16 or over 10 years custody- victim aged 13 or over but under 16 13 years custody - victim under 13 Repeated Rape of same victim by single offender or rape involving multiple victims: 15 years custody Aggravating factors Abduction or detention Offender aware that he is suffering from a sexually transmitted infection More than one offender acting together Abuse of trust Offence motivated by prejudice Sustained attack Pregnancy or infection results Offender ejaculated or caused victim to ejaculate Background of intimidation or coercion Use of drugs, alcohol or other substance to facilitate the offence In AG's Reference No 73, 75 and 03 of 2010 R v Michael Anigbugu, Hyung-Woo Pyo and Mark Stuart McGee [2011] EWCA 633 the Court of Appeal considered two cases of women being seriously sexually assaulted at night when asleep in their own homes; and a third of a woman similarly assaulted whilst caring for a fragile elderly man whose home was burgled. Finding that unduly lenient sentences had been imposed in relation to all three defendants, the Court provided useful guidance on sentencing. This included: where rape is committed after or in the course of a burglary in a home, even in the absence of additional features beyond the rape and burglary, the starting point will rarely be less than 12 years imprisonment. They also identified further aggravating features including the taking of photographs of the victim which they described as 'a serious aggravating feature'.

Mitigating factors Where the victim is aged 16 or over: victim engaged in consensual sexual activity with the offender on the same occasion and immediately before the offence. Reasonable belief (by a young offender) that the victim was aged 16 or over. Dangerous Offenders See Legal Guidance Sentencing Dangerous Offenders

The following considerations will apply when a defendant is sentenced for an offence of rape:

The defendant will always 'qualify' for consideration of dangerousness as the offence of rape is serious specified; The court must firstly consider if the defendant is dangerous within the meaning of section 225(1)(b); The court must then first consider whether life imprisonment is justified (section 225(2)) and if it is, it must impose life. This is the only mandatory part of the sentencing regime that remains. It must always be considered, as rape carries a discretionary life sentence; If a life sentence is not justified, the court must consider if either of the conditions are satisfied - that is, if the 'notional term' should be 2 years (i.e. its worth 4 years determinate) or if there is a previous conviction for a schedule 15A offence (which includes most of the more serious sexual offences in the 2003 Act); If either of these conditions are met, then the court may (not must) impose a sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP), an extended sentence for public protection (EPP) or any other sentence.

Offsite Link
by Anonymousreply 100November 14, 2018 7:40 PM

I agree with R99. There was fraud involved but the sentence is fucking ridiculous. If a woman had tricked gay men into letting her suck them off or fucking her in a similar way there's no way she'd even get jail time. It's all about the stupid (probably white) men being triggered by having sex with a man.

by Anonymousreply 101November 14, 2018 7:47 PM

R101 I think it has to do with the notion that men are more violent, promiscuous, and likely to transmit STDs than women, and I think if a straight man tried this with a lesbian, he would also be punished severely. Not necessarily homophobia, but man-phobia.

The thing is: women don’t typically meet up with strangers for blindfolded sex, there is no case to compare this to. You are running on pure speculation.

by Anonymousreply 102November 14, 2018 8:02 PM

[quote] I think it has to do with the notion that men are more violent, promiscuous, and likely to transmit STDs than women

You must not know many women.

by Anonymousreply 103November 14, 2018 8:16 PM

You’re^^

by Anonymousreply 104November 14, 2018 8:17 PM

R103 I must “not know many women” AND I am “homophobic?” Your logic continues to astonish me.

by Anonymousreply 105November 14, 2018 8:33 PM

R105? Enough.

by Anonymousreply 106November 14, 2018 8:38 PM

Your entire post was speculation R102. *Pot waves to kettle*

by Anonymousreply 107November 14, 2018 9:12 PM

R101 My bad. I should have stated “we are running on pure speculation.” And I respect your opinion that homophobia is behind the excessive sentence. However, he’s sketchy AF, and is not a good example of an innocent gay man being railroaded.

by Anonymousreply 108November 14, 2018 9:19 PM

Agreed that he's sketchy R108/102 , not a good guy at all by any means. The excessive prison time is troubling however, especially in the UK where prison terms are often known to be light.

by Anonymousreply 109November 15, 2018 1:34 AM

R51 brings up a very interesting legal argument. If the accused was under the age of consent (but lied about it) , would the victim still be a victim or then the accused?

by Anonymousreply 110November 15, 2018 1:40 AM

The guy raped 3 men and attempted to rape a fourth, he's a serial offender and deserves a long sentence.

by Anonymousreply 111November 15, 2018 5:07 AM

Is it rape or more identity theft?

by Anonymousreply 112November 15, 2018 5:50 AM

He's not a rapist but I agree with the rest of what you say, R111

by Anonymousreply 113November 15, 2018 11:08 AM

He will not serve 15 years.

by Anonymousreply 114November 15, 2018 12:40 PM

Hope not R114.

by Anonymousreply 115November 15, 2018 1:24 PM
Loading
Need more help? Click Here.

Yes indeed, we too use "cookies." Take a look at our privacy/terms or if you just want to see the damn site without all this bureaucratic nonsense, click ACCEPT. Otherwise, you'll just have to find some other site for your pointless bitchery needs.

×

Become a contributor - post when you want with no ads!