A Tel Aviv court’s decision Monday to sentence a convicted rapist to community service rather than jail has sparked a storm of protest among rape victims’ groups and a Facebook page calling for the resignation of one of the judges.
However, some legal experts say that the lenient verdict is not unreasonable given the circumstances.
However, some legal experts say that the lenient verdict is not unreasonable given the circumstances.
Yaniv Nahman was originally indicted on three charges of rape, attempted rape two counts of indecent acts and dozens of instances of invasion of privacy. Police also suspect Nahman drugged the women, but because this could not be proven by lab testing, it was not included in the indictment.
Before the evidentiary phase of the trial, Nahman reached a plea bargain with the prosecution in which the indictment was significantly changed, and included only one count of a forced indecent act and one count of rape. Nahman pleaded guilty to carrying out forced sexual acts on a woman with whom he had been in a sexual relationship for years before the incident.
One complainant refused to testify in court and problems with the evidence emerged with regard to another woman’s complaint. [...]
Dr. Dana Hadar Danzig Rosenberg of Bar-Ilan University agreed. “Any case of rape is very serious. But when one reads the verdict, one must understand that it has to relate to the specific case…If I were the judge I would have given a harsher sentence, but this is not an extreme case, considering that the offender was in jail for six months and underwent rehabilitation. From the perspective of the victims I actually think that jail is not the solution. Sometimes an apology and compensation are more significant.”
The prosecution said it would appeal the sentence.
The prosecution said it would appeal the sentence.
Pay compen$ation, get out of jail.
ReplyDeletehad he raped the daughter of someone important, either a politic or religious "celebrity", would the sentence be the same?
ReplyDeleteFrom the news: " the judges said there was further room for leniency because of the police’s actions during the investigation, in which they released Nahman’s identity and a photograph of him (...) destroyed his “good name” and reputation"
From another news site: one of the judges "Zion Kapah was criticized in 2003 (...) his decision to release a man accused of indecent acts with minors to house arrest (...) "She had a promiscuous character," the judge said, claiming that the girl initiated some of their meetings and even enjoyed them, despite being only nine years old."
one of the judges, Zion Kapah, has already a history of leniency by accusing a 9 year old girl to seduce and commit prostitution with a 30 year old man in their first meeting. that explains a lot about this judge.
What does the Torah and Halacha say the punishment should be for rape? The Torah and Halacha should be our barometer and yardstick.
ReplyDeleteNonsense. The Gemara says in Sanhedrin that the court would apply whatever punishments they felt appropriate for any transgression. What it says in the Torah is the minimum, the monetary restitution that must be assessed in any case.
ReplyDeleteYou are calling the Torah and Halacha nonsense?!? You are amongst the wrong crowd, then! The Gemorah is part of the Torah and if the Gemora instructs us we follow.
ReplyDeleteThe Mechaber wrote a Shulchan Aruch on Halacha and it deals with rape. We absolutely must use Halacha as our barometer and yardstick. And the S"A is the place to find out what the halacha on how to punish a rapist.
Wrong. There is no halakha on how to punish a rapist. The halakha on how to punish a rapist is set by the Sanhedrin of any particular era. The fact that we are lacking the ability to do this does not mean that whatever minimal financial payments are assessed today based on the S"A is the "proper" punishment. In addition, it is definitely a requirement under the mitva of "dinnim" that applies to benei Noach that they should set up courts that punish these crimes as they see fit.
ReplyDeleteThe mitvah of "dinnim" that applies to bnei Noach that they should set up courts that punish these crimes as they see fit only gives them the mandate to judge other bnei Noach. Those "dinim" prohibit them from judging bnei Yisroel, who they are required to allow to only be judged in dinei Torah.
ReplyDeletesource?
ReplyDeleteI think that point is obvious. Is there a source otherwise? I believe not.
ReplyDeleteHalacha wants Jews to be judged by din Torah based on the laws in the Torah not to be judged based on non-Jewish laws in non-Jewish courts.
So you are saying that anyone who reports a murderere, rapist or pedophile to the police is violating the Torah?!
ReplyDeletethe above are required to be taken to a beis din to resolve the issues instead?!
I referring to theoretical halacha, not how it is applied to a specific case or type of case.
ReplyDeleteThe type of cases you are describing sound like emergency cases/rodef where you can use extrajudicial means, such as the non-Jewish authorities.
שו"ת הרשב"א, חלק ג, סימן שצג
ReplyDeleteעמדתי על כל טענות הקונדרס הזה, ורואה אני שאם העדים נאמנים אצל הברורים, רשאים הן לקנוס קנס ממון או עונש הגוף, הכל לפי מה שיראה להם, וזה מקיים העולם. שאם אתם מעמידין הכל על הדינין הקצובים בתורה, ושלא לענוש אלא כמו שענשה התורה בחבלות, וכיוצא בזה, נמצא העולם חרב, שהיינו צריכים עדים והתראה. וכמו שאמרו ז"ל: "לא חרבה ירושלים אלא שהעמידו דבריהם על דין תורה". וכל שכן בחוצה לארץ, שאין דנין בה דיני קנסות, ונמצאו קלי דעת פורצין גדרו של עולם, נמצא העולם שמם, וכבר קנסו ז"ל קנסות במכה את חבירו ביד... ומכל מקום, הברורים צריכין להתיישב בדברים, ולעשות מעשיהן אחר המלכה, ולהיות כונתם בכל עת לשמים.