Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
necropheliac or moron? (Sally Anne Bowman Murder)
- Thread starter pachyderm
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Before someone says something smart....something that will contribute to the convo, I want to say something that may be inappropriate. I haven't read the article yet, but saw her photo. She's hot.
Ok, continue...
EDIT: Ewwww......
Ok, continue...
EDIT: Ewwww......
another link, one where you can see more of her. (you sickos!)
This case is revolting. I don't care if he killed her or not, having "sex" (term used loosely) with an unconscious woman is a vile and very disturbing thing to do. It's better that this guy (again, term used loosely) not be out walking amongst the rest of us.
GROSS!
This case is revolting. I don't care if he killed her or not, having "sex" (term used loosely) with an unconscious woman is a vile and very disturbing thing to do. It's better that this guy (again, term used loosely) not be out walking amongst the rest of us.
GROSS!
Could not agree more. This pile of s*** should never be allowed out of prison. In fact he should be placed with the general population in the 'Scrubs' or the 'green' and leave them to deal with him.
If she were already dead, is it rape? It should at least be attempted rape.
He's been charged with murder and he's going to have a hard time convincing the jury that it wasn't him. But, if he isn't found guilty of murder, then I wonder if he'll be found guilty of other charges, if indeed there are any.
If he didn't murder her, but is found guilty, well, that wouldn't be a massive injustice but rather a just punishment for being such a disgusting moron.
But if he didn't do it and he's found guilty then there will still be a murderer out there! He's going to go down for something but only the killer should be going down for murder!
What I was saying was that if his version of events was found to be true and she was unconisous at the time then that is rape. If he is found to be lying and she was dead then that is necrophila. If he is lying and it found to be that he killed her then it is murder and necrophila/rape depending when he committed the act, end result = prision.
It is ilegal was introduced as a specific offence in 2004, although it probably fell under a different law before then.
You don't care if he killed her or not?
He either committed rape+necrophilia, or rape+necrophilia+murder. Unfortunately, his punishment is going to be similar regardless of which one he did (maybe 10 years in jail). After all, he seems crazy enough for people to just feel bad for his mental state.
So at BEST, he's a would-be rapist (and accidental necrophiliac). Nobody's going to lose any sleep when this guy gets locked away.
If he's not guilty of murder but is guilty of necrophilia, would it be possible for him to walk free having already served a certain amount of time in prison? The maximum jail term for necrophilia is 2 years.
But I think I read somewhere that he actually thought she was alive at the time, but was a bit dizzy and passed out on the ground woozy from overdrinking. He's an accidental-necrophiliac, but actually a rapist. His intent was rape. Can he be found guilty of necrophilia if there was never any intent to sleep with a dead person? He thought he was raping a live person.
Ok....going to bed now.
Ok....going to bed now.
You're right. My sentiments are that this guy should go to jail. The murderer, whether it's him or not, should definitely also brought to justice.
Thankfully I was wrong.
However not nice to see the maximum sentence of 2 years
Offence of Necrophilia
2 years is very low imo.
Although there would have to be a case to determine if she was a live or dead at the time he committed the act. In which case he would probably argue that she was dead. 2 years vs. life. Either way he is screwed and rightly so. I think that it is a case of intended rape but he could get away with necrophilia.
This of course assumes he is found innocent of the actual murder.
side note: the wording of the law is specifically aimed at males, does that mean women can't be convicted of necrophilia, or having sex in toilets, exposure + probably more.
Although there would have to be a case to determine if she was a live or dead at the time he committed the act. In which case he would probably argue that she was dead. 2 years vs. life. Either way he is screwed and rightly so. I think that it is a case of intended rape but he could get away with necrophilia.
This of course assumes he is found innocent of the actual murder.
side note: the wording of the law is specifically aimed at males, does that mean women can't be convicted of necrophilia, or having sex in toilets, exposure + probably more.
bad choice of words on my part maybe. I just think the whole thing is revolting regardless of if he was the one who killed her or not. he's just very very sick. I don't have any pity for him either.
Agreed, I think if he turns out to not be the murder then they'll hit him with attempted rape or something else, as 2 years for that is not good enough!
I'm not so sure. It's not a subject I care much about, however, necrophiliacs are clearly not a danger to society and the benefit of locking them up for 2 years is questionable. I wonder if psychotherapy would be a more effective help them, as well as being cheaper than having them in jail for 2 years.
You see this is why I think this guy can't claim necrophilia, as in court he said he thought she was unconscious...... which makes it rape as that's what he thought he was doing.
From the BBC "Mark Dixie, accused of killing Sally Anne Bowman, said he did not realise she was dead until after he had sex with her body, the Old Bailey heard."
I agree that purposely finding a dead body and doing "stuff" to it is less of a danger to society, so maybe 2 years is just.
I think he's trying to save his reputation, which is actually quite funny, in a creepy sort of way.
If he thought she was unconscious but she was actually dead then he is guilty of attempted rape and necrophilia, but not rape itself. Necrophilia and rape are mutually exclusive, otherwise there'd be no need for a specific law against Necrophilia. Reading the Sex Offences Act. 2003, basically, rape is defined as person 'A' having sex with person 'B' without person 'B's consent. The frame of mind of person 'A' is never mentioned so therefore irrelevant.
If his version of events is true, I don't think it's clear that he raped her, although he certainly, by his own admission, attempted rape. It would probably make a difference to his sentence if he were to be found not guilty of murder.
If the law views attempted rape as rape, then I'm completely wrong.
Obviously, IANAL.
I trend to agree, it seems as though they a trivialising a serious event... I find it disturbing that he's disgusted with himself for raping a corpse but he seems as thought he'd be ok with it if she just past out.
Another pro for the death penalty or chemical castration.