T Nation

Cultural Time Bomb?

This is the guys advocate saying this!


Gang rapist’s attacks unavoidable, says lawyer
By Natasha Wallace
October 12, 2005

A violent gang rapist should have been given a lesser sentence partly because he was a “cultural time bomb” whose attacks were inevitable, as he had emigrated from a country with traditional views of women, his barrister has argued.

MSK, who, with his three Pakistani brothers, raped several girls at their Ashfield family home over six months in 2002, was affected by “cultural conditioning ? in the context of intoxification”, Stephen Odgers, SC, told the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal yesterday.

MSK, 26, MAK, 25 and MMK, 19, are appealing against the severity of their sentences after they were found guilty of nine counts of aggravated sexual assault in company - a crime carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment - against two girls, aged 16 and 17, in July 2002.

MSK and MMK were jailed for 22 years, with a non-parole period of 16? years, and 13 years, respectively, and MAK for 16 years (12 years non-parole).

Court orders prevent them being named. They are yet to be sentenced for other rapes.

AdvertisementMr Odgers said “new evidence” showed MSK had a “mental disorder” at the time of the rapes and had stopped taking his medication - supplied by his father, a general practitioner.

He also said Justice Brian Sully had made a “clear error” in sentencing them to an extra six years on two counts, rather than one - referring to an act in which MMK withdrew his penis and took off the condom and then continued to rape one of the girls.

“It was the same victim, it occurred in the same location, there was no relevant difference in the nature of the act. The time gap between the offences was minimal,” he said. Mr Odgers said a forensic psychologist, David Greenberg, had diagnosed MSK with “atypical compulsive obsessive disorder”.

MSK said: “When I stopped taking medication, I never had any idea in my mind that I would be committing these problems. If anything happened, it would happen accidentally, but I was commanded to do these things.”

After a special hearing, a judge concluded earlier this year that MSK was not mentally ill - the same conclusion reached by pre-sentence psychology reports in 2003.

Mr Odgers said the new evidence showed that he had a disease, which, combined with alcohol and the cultural conditioning of “a society with very traditional views of women”, was “clearly a factor in the commissioning of these offences”.

“The applicant was a cultural time bomb,” Mr Odgers said. “It was almost inevitable that something like this would happen. His culpability is lessened because of that combination.”

Professor Greenberg’s report concluded the disorder did not lead MSK to commit the rapes. He also said he may be malingering.

The father, who said at the trials that he was with his sons on the night of the rapes, told the court he had diagnosed MSK with schizophrenia.

“He told me ? Satan come to him and tell him different things. He told me that sometimes even the green grass whisper to him.”

He refused to place his hand on the Koran when sworn in because he said he had not washed.

A spokesman for the Director of Public Prosecutions, Nicholas Cowdery, said he was unable to confirm whether the father would be charged with perjury over evidence he gave at the trials.

The appeal, funded by Legal Aid, follows their unsuccessful appeal against conviction, which failed when they took it to the High Court. The Court of Criminal Appeal has reserved its decision.

What a load of crap! If you were in their country and commited a crime there would be no excuses made for you! The assholes knew that this was a crime in this country and did it anyway! Case closed! Put them away!

Good call. On the average sentences for rape tend to be too short, in this case they seem fair and sufficient (if you can say that). Legal details aside, the “cultural” as well as the medical argument seem to have failed, and the lawyer is obviously just grabbing for straws. Justice seems to have been served.


Just one more reason to hate lawyers. Well, this one anyway.

What do you call 200 lawyers at the bottom of Sydney Harbour.

A good start.

[quote]aussie486 wrote:
What do you call 200 lawyers at the bottom of Sydney Harbour.

A good start.


Good one.

I agree that if an American or Americans had committed this crime in Pakistan, they would be subject to Pakistani law, which is as it should be.

I think a better sentence would be for them to get kicked in the nuts everyday for the next 16 years. By an American woman soccer player wearing steel-toed maryjanes.

from pakitstan myself, if this had happened there the villigers would have lynched them.

the usual thing would be chopping of there bits and sticking them (bits) in the rapists mouths!

i think they got off lightly :frowning:

shame, it has nothing to do with culture…

The Lawyers argument is fair. It is his/her job to defend them to the best of his/her ability within the confines of the law.

There is nothing immoral about presenting evidence of mental illness, and there is nothing wrong about contending that the two acts really constituted one act.

It is up to the judge to decide on the arguments.

The lawyer never argued that because they thought rape was okay that it actually was okay, just that the conditioning had contributed to his action due to his mental illness.

You are permitted to crack the shits when their sentences are shortened.

Guess what I’m studying at university.

Maybe their daddy can slip 'em some Astroglide, where they’re going! Good riddance!!!

so if that guy’s not on medication, he rapes evey girl he sees? nah…bullshit.

good thing i’m culturally conditioned to kick the fuck out of those assholes…