Guest W***ledi*Time Report post Posted September 9, 2010 It has now been revealed that the original story was a fictional one, agreed to as part of a plea-bargain: Rachel Shabi reports for The Guardian, 8 Sep 2010: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/08/rape-by-deception-plea-israel Fresh details have emerged in the case of a Palestinian man an Israeli court convicted of "rape by deception" after he was accused of posing as a Jewish man in order to have sex with a Jewish-Israeli woman. The case caused international outrage when it was first reported, in July, but now an Israeli newspaper has reported that the conviction was the result of a plea bargain over a violent rape. Ha'ir, a Tel Aviv weekly and part of the newspaper group that owns Haaretz, published extracts from the victim's unsealed testimony. It also reported that the prosecution had agreed to the reduced charge of "rape by deception" because of the victim's confused account and concern at facing another court appearance.... This week, Ha'ir reported that, according to her testimony, the woman had met Kashur on a street in West Jerusalem and chatted with him for a few minutes before he invited her into a nearby building, claiming it was his workplace. Asked why she had agreed, she reportedly told the court: "I looked for someone to put my trust in." Once inside the building, the woman says she was raped and then left naked and bleeding.... The prosecution, it is claimed, agreed to the plea bargain that reduced the charge to rape by deception in order to prevent a long cross-examination of a traumatised victim. Ha'ir also reports that the woman had filed 14 previous complaints, mostly for sexual offences, some of which did not result in convictions owing to lack of evidence or because of questions around the veracity of the complaint. The prosecution was concerned that Kashur's legal team would question the women over all these cases in court. Describing the reduced charge, deputy prosecutor Danny Wittman told Ha'ir: "Plea bargains never match the original narrative of the plaintiff, because the two sides have to bridge the gap between them and reach an agreement. In this case, we gave up on the 'forcible' element and agreed to a rewriting of the indictment, according to which the defendant had sex with the woman with her consent ... obtained with deception." Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
