This post is on the BDSM Activism web board.
| 10 Jun 09, 11:17 AM stormywaters PT, 4 yrs |
I think they have been asking for volunteers for this for quite some time, about a year or so. I would certainly be very happy to do it. I think from the wider PR, campaigning, political point of view it would, as has been referred to above, be very important to get a suitable person(s). In other words not someone easily characterised by the media as weird in any other aspects of their lives. This will presumably be as much about the campaigning value in the wider sense as the specifically legal value. My object all sublime... | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:21 AM LittleMissEvil UK(BR), 4 yrs  |
This would only work if it was a statute, from what i can make out they are trying to challange the actual spanner rulling. If this is the case then it becomes a little more complecated, as they would need to get this test case all the way up to the House of Lords, and hope that the lords will use the practice statment, to over rule the previouse judgment.
Some people say i am evil, i have no idea why they think that. | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:21 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs   |
Yep. That is what worries me But as a female dominant I know that I'm in a very strong position to help make their case ie I'm not being 'abused by a man and am too stupid to know better' and I'm not a gay man because obviously that is just 'deviant homosexual torture' according to the homophobic Spanner ruling notes. "If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:22 AM Degenerate  UK(M), 4 yrs   |
word 'new' deleted! Sign up to CAAN's statement www.caan.org.uk | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:22 AM stormywaters PT, 4 yrs |
What they are after is probably best understood directly from their website but in essence they want to bring a case to challenge the validity of the CJB in terms of the human rights act, or something of that sort, and need individuals to bring such an action under their legal guidance. These people would basically be saying this is what I practice sexually and it seems to be illegal under the Spanner cases or CJB or whartever and I am asking the court to agree with me that that is a breach of my human rights under the EU human rights act. Details may not be quite like that but that is the broad idea. My object all sublime... | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:23 AM bohnanza UK(FK), 12 yrs  |
If Spanner are aiming to prove people can consent to receive non trivial injuries, where does that put people who are with violent partners? The big problem with prosecuting it used to be the assaulted not giving evidence against the assaulter, now a prosecution can be made on the evidence of injuries sustained. How does someone differentiate between the injuries caused by a punching and those caused by face slapping? Science, the only religion that works even if you don't believe in it. | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:26 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs |
I would suppose severity but then that is hardly quantifiable is it?
This is the difficulty. I'm all for a law that prosecutes fuckers who are violently abusive to their partners but there has to be something in that law that recognises the difference between consent and coercion. Unfortunately, I don't think that is possible "If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:28 AM LittleMissEvil UK(BR), 4 yrs |
This is the problem you will face, if you are arguing consent can be given for BDSM there is nothing to stop an abusive partner saying it was only bdsm. Its a very hard area to judge how it would go. Though not wishing to be the bringer of doom, i can see them sticking with the first judgment. Producing somthing that alows an amount of consent as a legal deffence is risking to many possible abuses. Some people say i am evil, i have no idea why they think that. | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:30 AM Lady_Anna_Bradford UK(BD), 5 yrs |
I raised the question of being open to prosecution with the Spanner Trust and they replied: "I can assure you that you cannot be prosecuted for assisting us, only for the court proving you did things which were illegal."
"If no sexual offence is being committed it seems very odd indeed that there should be an offence for having an image of something which was not an offence," Lord Wallace of Tankerness | ||
| 10 Jun 09, 11:32 AM Will_and_Echo UK(SW), 4 yrs    |
Yup. I actually wish I could help them out in this, but with the risk of business and family finding out a little too much, we just can't risk it. As far as I am aware, they are seeking ultra normal people for this, hopefully some couples who identify as heterosexual but kinky. I do hope they manage to get this moving along soon. Exx "What you blush to tell", says Venus, "is the most important part of the whole matter" |
