Support NeoGAF

[Pandemic]

A three-judge panel at the Court of Appeal unanimously ruled on Thursday to release ten-pin bowler Noor Afizal Azizan on probation in the statutory rape case, overturning a lower court's decision to jail him.

In his decision one of the three judges agreed with Noor Afizal's lawyer that, according to national news agency Bernama, "public interest would not be served if Noor Afizal was sent to jail as he had a bright future".

The Joint Action Group For Gender Equality, which comprises six prominent women's groups, in a statement received yesterday, urged the judiciary to clarify its decision.

"We are troubled that the perpetrator's potential for 'a bright future', presumably derived from his status as a national athlete, was used as one of the grounds for sentencing," it said.

"On the surface, the judgment appears to hint at the application of a double standard by implying that anyone with the right 'credentials' can commit a crime, and get away with a rap on the knuckles," it added.

Other Malaysians also expressed outrage on social networking sites such as Twitter.

"Is ok to rape now in Malaysia if u could show the judge that u have a #BrightFutureRapeOK ahead," one user posted Sunday.

But Noor Afizal's lawyer, Hisyam Teh Poh Teik, said the Court of Appeal, whose decision is final, had merely sided with an initial court verdict, releasing Noor Afizal, that had taken into account all the factors.

"Noor Afizal is not a criminal," he told AFP. "There was no force, no violence, nothing whatsoever... and he owned up after the incident."

Noor Afizal pleaded guilty to having sex with the girl at a hotel in 2009 when he was 19.

A district court had initially released him on a 25,000 ringgit ($7500) bond for five years of probation, taking into consideration that the girl had agreed.

But a high court subsequently sentenced him to five years in prison. In Malaysia the age of consent is 16 so the act is considered statutory rape.

http://www.news.com.au/world/rapist...jail-in-malaysia/story-fndir2ev-1226448745491

The girl was 13 years old, thoughts? I thought Malaysia was a strict country, with the death sentence and shit?

 

[itsgreen]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.
(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)
It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.
Let me clarify: 13 if too young to have sex if you are 19. But to call it rape on the same level as a violent rapist is different.
So not judging him as a violent rapist would be fine by me.

 

[Phoenix]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.

(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)

It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.

Again to me it's wrong, but no rape.

So not judging him as a violent rapist would be fine by me.

You don't think that statutory rape is rape?

 

[Darklord]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.

(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)

It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.

Again to me it's wrong, but no rape.

Dude, it's 13! That's virtually a kid. If she was 15 it would be pushing it to use this excuse, but 13? Hell no. I don't think it's as bad as a forceful rape but still fucked up.

 

[Ein Soph Aur]

.

 

[itsgreen]

You don't think that statutory rape is rape?

I am not quite familiar with that term. Is that when an you have sex with an underage person?
To me 13 and 19 is still kind of within limits... that age difference is big, but it isn't pedophile big. They both wanted it. He should have known better.
Is it right? No. Should it be punishable? Yes. But it isn't rape rape... that's all I am saying.
So in this case, no I don't think it was rape. (If I understand the story correct).

I am by no means an apologist, but crimes aren't always black and white. They are greyscale.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

"Noor Afizal is not a criminal," he told AFP. "There was no force, no violence, nothing whatsoever... and he owned up after the incident."

This reasoning is frighteningly common, and often used when it comes to non-statutory rape.

It looks like he was subsequently sentenced to five years anyway so this is a non-story.

 

[Watch Da Birdie]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.

(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)

It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.

Thirteen-year-olds, Dude.

 

[tino]

They also allow 4 wives. Why do you bother with this thread?

More proofs that nowadays people only obsess with pedos and nothing else.

 

[Coins]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.

(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)

It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.

Again to me it's wrong, but no rape.

So not judging him as a violent rapist would be fine by me.

A 13 year old knows what's happening? With a 19 year old??

Disgusting!

 

[Willkiller]

This thread will go places...

 

[smoothj]

 

[Pandemic]

But does a 13 year old girl really know right from wrong, in this case, having sex..?

 

[Gucci Messiah]

13 is way too young

 

[SteveWinwood]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.

(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)

It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.

Again to me it's wrong, but no rape.

So not judging him as a violent rapist would be fine by me.

And we're off!

 

[Wubby]

You don't think that statutory rape is rape?

Feels like we had this thread recently? Didn't it involve Dennis Hoppers son or something?

 

[itsgreen]

Thirteen-year-olds, Dude.

Yeah it is too young... but to say rape = rape is something else.

 

[Shameless]

The only person that should be allowed to present a prosecution in these cases should be the victim. I'd certainly expect a 13 year old to be able to decide whether they thought what happened was wrong or not.

 

[Dizzy]

At 19 he thought it was a good idea to have sex with a 13 year old? that's messed up.

 

[siddx]

A 19 year old having sex with a 13 year old is rape. And sick. A 13 year old is a child, barely into puberty.

 

[Riggs]

The only person that should be allowed to present a prosecution in these cases should be the victim. I'd certainly expect a 13 year old to be able to decide whether they thought what happened was wrong or not.

Seriously ....

You will get shit on for this. But I have to agree.

omg you want to fuck 13 year olds!!!

I knew it was wrong when I was 19 but whatever shit storm inc.

 

[Daydream Sequence]

Teens having consensual sex shouldnt be rape, but 13...damn. 19 is old enough to know that 13 is just wrong.

 

[maquiladora]

Just leaving to one side the debate about age and rape for a second, the guy was released on probation due to a bright future in ten-pin bowling?!?!

 

[SquiddyCracker]

The only person that should be allowed to present a prosecution in these cases should be the victim. I'd certainly expect a 13 year old to be able to decide whether they thought what happened was wrong or not.

Nothing to do with what they think is right or not as they are still at a stage where they will seek out short-term pleasures without regard of long-term consequences.
They are so much more easier to manipulate at that age, enough for there to be a need for society to step in and ensure that as few people as people do precisely that.

Deviant cases do not matter in this regard, before we get into a discussion of how some older people are immature while some younger people are mature for their age.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

I am not quite familiar with that term. Is that when an you have sex with an underage person?
To me 13 and 19 is still kind of within limits... that age difference is big, but it isn't pedophile big. They both wanted it. He should have known better.
Is it right? No. Should it be punishable? Yes. But it isn't rape rape... that's all I am saying.
So in this case, no I don't think it was rape. (If I understand the story correct).

I am by no means an apologist, but crimes aren't always black and white. They are greyscale.

Ya, we're all positive you've never heard of statutory rape ever. Keep trolling man.

 

[Riggs]

Nothing to do with what they think is right or not as they are still at a stage where they will seek out short-term pleasures without regard of long-term consequences.
They are so much more easier to manipulate at that age, enough for there to be a need for society to step in and ensure that as few people as people do precisely that.

Deviant cases do not matter in this regard, before we get into a discussion of how some older people are immature while some younger people are mature for their age.

Good point but America is overboard in so many ways.

Ya, we're all positive you've never heard of statutory rape ever. Keep trolling man.

Uhm you seem like the troll here.

 

[Unicorn]

Nobody fucks with the Jesus.

Perfect because he was a sex offender hahaha

 

[itsgreen]

Ya, we're all positive you've never heard of statutory rape ever. Keep trolling man.

No trolling. We aren't all native speakers of English. So not every word or concept is familiar to me.

 

[Nevasleep]

The only person that should be allowed to present a prosecution in these cases should be the victim. I'd certainly expect a 13 year old to be able to decide whether they thought what happened was wrong or not.

So all you have to do is groom the 13yo, buy her a few gifts......and everything is A-OK.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Good point but America is overboard in so many ways.
.

Perhaps, if we're talking about AoC of 17-18 years with no Romeo&Juliet age exceptions of 2-3 years.
But if you have the AoC at 16, and someone younger than that have sex with someone over 18, I don't think it's going overboard to view the older person as a perpetrator of a crime.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Good point but America is overboard in so many ways.

Uhm you seem like the troll here.

Oh, please explain how a poster claiming a 19 yr old having sex with a 13 yr that is considered statutory rape isn't actually "rape rape" isn't an inflammatory post. I'm really curious.

No trolling. We aren't all native speakers of English. So not every word or concept is familiar to me.

You claiming it's not real rape by saying it's not "rape rape" is pretty disgusting.

 

[Riggs]

Perhaps, if we're talking about AoC of 17-18 years with no Romeo&Juliet age exceptions of 2-3 years.
But if you have the AoC at 16, and someone younger than that have sex with someone over 18, I don't think it's going overboard to view the older person as a perpetrator of a crime.

Agreed obviously 13 is way fucking young. Big difference between 18 and 17. Some country AoC is 15 that is to young. Nevermind 13, just sometimes we over protect but better then letting something bad happen I guess.

 

[itsgreen]

Oh, please explain how a poster claiming a 19 yr old having sex with a 13 yr that is considered statutory rape isn't actually "rape rape" isn't an inflammatory post. I'm really curious.




You claiming it's not real rape by saying it's not "rape rape" is pretty disgusting.

Oh than we basically just disagree. When I think of rape I think of forced penetration against someone's will. Again I don't think this story is right. I just don't think having consensual sex with a 13 year old is the same as what I described. So no I don't think this case is the same as rape rape. Crime is a greyscale kind of thing and should be judged that way, that's basically the point I wanted to make.

 

[Shameless]

Perhaps, if we're talking about AoC of 17-18 years with no Romeo&Juliet age exceptions of 2-3 years.
But if you have the AoC at 16, and someone younger than that have sex with someone over 18, I don't think it's going overboard to view the older person as a perpetrator of a crime.

If 16 is deemed okay, then why isn't 15? It's just an arbitrary cut-off point for legal purposes. I'm not trying to defend the guys actions either.

 

[SquiddyCracker]

If 16 is deemed okay, then why isn't 15? It's just an arbitrary cut-off point for legal purposes. I'm not trying to defend the guys actions either.

If 15 is okay, why not 14?
If 14 is okay, why not 13?
If 13 is okay, why not 12?

Of course it is an arbitrary cut-off point, but that doesn't make it less important to follow.

 

[Pandemic]

This thread will go places...

Hmmm, note taken for future references..

 

[Gaborn]

Yeah that is not a real rapist imo.
(If I understand it correctly, they had consensual sex)
It's not right, but it is not rape. Their age difference was 6 years... And a 13 years old kind of knows what's happening.
Let me clarify: 13 if too young to have sex if you are 19. But to call it rape on the same level as a violent rapist is different.
So not judging him as a violent rapist would be fine by me.

... I think Roman Polanski might be a GAFer. This is DISGUSTING.

 

[itsgreen]

... I think Roman Polanski might be a GAFer. This is DISGUSTING.

Ok maybe the 'not real rapist' thing weren't the right words. When I think of rape I think of someone forcing him or herself upon someone else against the others will.

This doesn't match that description. You could still call him a rapist but have to acknowledge that it isn't the same thing.

 

[Emerson]

... I think Roman Polanski might be a GAFer. This is DISGUSTING.

I really think the language barrier here is causing problems and some of this is overreaction.

It seems to me that this poster was unaware of the term "statutory rape" prior to this thread, and is saying that to him the term "rape" refers to violent rape. He's also saying that violent rape is a worse crime than statutory rape, and to equate the two (in his [mis-]understanding by using the word "rape") is unfair.

Of course, statutory rape is rape, but that's just his misunderstanding from not having heard that term before. He isn't saying anything like that this is an okay thing to do.

 

[Riggs]

I really think the language barrier here is causing problems and some of this is overreaction.

It seems to me that this poster was unaware of the term "statutory rape" prior to this thread, and is saying that to him the term "rape" refers to violent rape. He's also saying that violent rape is a worse crime than statutory rape, and to equate the two (in his [mis-]understanding by using the word "rape") is unfair.

Of course, statutory rape is rape, but that's just his misunderstanding from not having heard that term before. He isn't saying anything like that this is an okay thing to do.

Not taking everything to the extreme. Nice job!

 

[Shameless]

You guys should note that 12-14 is the age of consent in much of continental Europe, Japan and South America

 

[SquiddyCracker]

Ok maybe the 'not real rapist' thing weren't the right words. When I think of rape I think of someone forcing him or herself upon someone else against the others will.

This doesn't match that description. You could still call him a rapist but have to acknowledge that it isn't the same thing.

Yeah, I think it's important to keep in mind that GAF's visitors come from all over the world.

With that said, the whole "rape=someone forcefully having sex with you against your will" sentiment needs to go away.
It can still be rape even if the victim doesn't have a single visible mark on them.

 

[Zaraki_Kenpachi]

Not taking everything to the extreme. Nice job!

You haven't been in many rape threads where people defend it because it's not "real rape" (whatever that means) but sure, make passive aggressive comments instead.

 

[.la1n]

Thirteen-year-olds, Dude.

Should have been first post. Well played.

 

[Wazzim]

... I think Roman Polanski might be a GAFer. This is DISGUSTING.

Sure it's disgusting in America and Germany (barely) but it's totally normal in Spain and Japan.

You only think it's disgusting because of the legislation (and thus culture) of the country you grew up in.

 

[JHall]

That man should have his dick cut off before they release him back into the public. Thirteen years old is fucking sick.

 

[Emerson]

You haven't been in many rape threads where people defend it because it's not "real rape" (whatever that means) but sure, make passive aggressive comments instead.

There is absolutely some of that sentiment here and it needs to go away. Equally bad is much of GAF's inability to see things as shades of gray. I agree that violent rape is a worse crime than statutory rape. But it is not a logical extension of that to say that statutory rape is okay. Some people believe that and that's wrong. Just as commonly, people overreact and impose that latter opinion on the person expressing the former.

 

[Riggs]

Yeah, I think it's important to keep in mind that GAF's visitors come from all over the world.

With that said, the whole "rape=someone forcefully having sex with you against your will" sentiment needs to go away.
It can still be rape even if the victim doesn't have a single visible mark on them.

Ya when I hear the word rape I think violent forceful rape. Have to remind myself its not just that.

Also Emerson good post.
So much black and white on this forum sometimes. Not just gaf that's life in general though. Shades of grey I like that term.

 

[MrToughPants]

Dude, it's 13! That's virtually a kid. If she was 15 it would be pushing it to use this excuse, but 13? Hell no. I don't think it's as bad as a forceful rape but still fucked up.

Anecdotal but...when I was a substitute every time I had grade 8 classes (13-14 age group) the female students would often talk about fucking and sucking amongst each other (openly)...loud enough for everyone else including me to hear. When I was 13-14 quite a few of the girls my age were already active with older guys, rarely with guys their own age group, and by grade 10 most are already fucking except the introverts/nerds.

 

[Milchjon]

Thirteen-year-olds, Dude.

This fits so perfectly in so many ways. Awesome.