How could people tolerate a rapist being in such a Nepali conference? Either boycott the conference, where rapists like Ajay Kumar Dev are the members and terrorists like NEPE are giving some talk or, Just thrash these people out of the convention and make the convention enjoyable and knowledgeful. Whats your say guys?

I totally agree with you, Guitardaku.

I started posting yesterday. To be fair to this Isaac, I also have bias, bias against white christians living in central california or other valleys: I think they treat their women shabbily, I think they are ignorant about other cultures, they are racist and missionaries type, they are excited to go to war and that they don't go to good schools for college (and they are so unsafe about themselves, they are so suspicious of their neighbors that they keep gun at home all the time). Women there want to marry too early , and get devastated if they don't before college. I have these ideas because I haven't been there, haven't mixed up with people, and that's what I hear in bay area.

Like you said, there is no way I would associate myself with Ajay when he comes out of jail. If it was even 30 years , I would have assumed the guy would come out at 70+, unable to impose on any girl at the time, and would not have worried about it too. But 70-250 years? Without any "concrete" proof of rape? Based on one sentence he said during a conversation? That's all I care.

Scratch what I've written concerning the Brahminical view.  I know that many people no longer believe in this, and this sentence does not convey my stand on the matter.

Oh, and I'm agnostic, half-Korean, and half-Spanish, so stop trying to insinuate that I'm some evil White Anglo-Saxon Protestant (aka WASP).  I'm also a female.

Pire,

When you first wrote doubting the verdicts made by Juries in this country, i thought you were insane. But as Isaac jumped into this conversation i am willing to think again on your writing.

Imagine Jury filled with Isaac alike who are set with the crappy prejudgment in their head. I doubt if there was any discussion on whether there it was a RAPE or not. It is clear that there indeed was incestuous relationship between the father and the daughter but the accusation of RAPE is doubtful.

Is it really logical to think that there was a RAPE in a motel near the house. Why would the victim show up at the motel alone if she was getting raped by the suspect before as well? Was she thinking she was not going to get raped that one time????

Your questions on the level of punishment for the crime in this country should be another discussion. I believe each country has a right to justify punishment in their own standards but your points does raise a valid questions as how effective the Jury was for the verdict when the ranges for Consensual sex to Rape is 100 years apart.

Sid

Pire, if you read earlier comments from the jurors from this trial, you would have seen that there was A LOT of evidence that convinced the jury.  Only ONE of the pivotal points was the ENTIRE conversation with the victim.  Why don't YOU do a little research?  Or better yet, ask one of the jurors as I'm sure he/she has been following this thread closely.

Isaac,

Almost all societies, most definitely American societies, are patriarchal societies. I dont think what you are writing makes sense at all. You are just a biased person, and the sooner you disabuse yourself from these wrong views, the better it will be for you.

Should we talk about Dalit now? Is this the right place? Ok,  Our country has caste system, and we are ashamed of that. We have a constitution that doesn't recognize it. Societies have transformed however. Hindu priests have waged campaigned against it throughout millenium. A Hindu brahmin reformist priest (famous pundit Pokhrel) was killed a few years ago by Maoists because he was popularizing the religion and reforming it too. but Think about it, in Americna south, blacks--who also are christians-- were treated so badly even though they were christians, they were lynched, barbequed, their head kept at stake, asked to go to separate church and schools. To treat fellow christians that way, is not that a caste system at its worst? White Christians still don't befriend blacks, they avoid them, get furious if their women go with them. White males in redneck areas don't like women who marry people of other background and tend to hold bias against them. And jury system? Look at OJ Simpson case: when whites were in majority, he lost, and when blacks were majority, he won--isn't that what happened? So much for a faith in jury system.

 

Isaac,

I trust you. Now, tell me, can there be "only one of pivotal points"? One pivotal point is pivotal point. There can not be several pivotal points.

I have had conversation with one of  the jurors sometimes ago in this forum. I trust her and I am sure she tried to be fair. But I want to verify--as one former American president said , "Trust but verify". And this verification process gets muddy.

Bob,

You are right that the difference here is minuscule and that has to do a lot with the prosperity. Without prosperity that minuscule difference grows to be a monstrous difference. We saw how good the women rights were in this country during KATRINA. In chaos people come down to becoming animals and in our country chaos is an everyday thing.Human beings pretty much behave the same way if things are normal. We see less of women rights abuse here in this country because prosperity has made a woman possible to get out of the oppression and start a new thing. Unfortunately in Nepal that is not an option for each and every woman.

Yes in India woman was elected as a head of the state. Indira Gandhi had it easier with her father's background but more than that it was the willingness of people to vote for a woman to lead the country. Imaging if Hillary had won the primaries, would she have been elected as a president in this country. Lets forget about the national election, didn't she loose primaries because she is a woman. American men would rather vote a  Man instead of a women.

Sid 

Isaac,

Uma Singh's case shook the whole country--but you misunderstand the case. Her murder was not perpetrated by govt. As it turned out (If I understand the case correctly), her brother's wife hired goons to kill her because of a quarrell with property.

We may be a poor country-- and chaotic--but we take it quite seriously when a women is killed. I hate the Maoists because they were so bloodthirsty, but even they spared women. (My uncle was forced to flee from his village, but aunt never left the village.) The country was shaken when Maina Sunar was killed by army, even at the height of insurgency. Rape/killing of women shocks us; it is the worst of the crimes. Sure, it is only one aspect of women rights-they need to be equal in lots of other fields, but like others here pointed out, the country is transforming. Parents are proud of their daughters, and daughters too have started to keep their sirname even after their marriage.

Govt hasn't harrassed women rights activists yet. At least, I don't know any of such cases, and I have talked to many of them. I think women activists such as Aruna Uprety, Renu Rajbhandari or Sapana Pradhan are very well respected in our society.

I think Amnesty sometimes does valuable job, but lots of time, it too operates under the western stereotype, that Nepal is a country where anyone who speaks for equality, women rights etc are oppressed. Just like you. I am sure you have well intention, but you can't shake off the stereotype you have been inculculated with, can you?

Sidster and Pire

While I will not even begin to comment on rights of woman in Nepal since I have no clue and absolutely no knowledge of what goes on in Nepal, I can comment on the case.  That I have knowledge of...

 

I assure you both, we looked into the possibility of a consensual love affair between Ajay and the victim.  The problem that we kept running into no matter which angle we went was this...  the ENTIRE defense strategy was that the was never a sexual relationship between Ajay and the victim.  Based on the evidence, we know that a sexual relationship occured.  If the relationship was consensual, wouldn't the defense had been that there was a relationship after she was 18 and it was consensual?  There would have been no crime since she was 18 and he would be free and clear.  Since he claimed that nothing ever happened and everything was a story made up in her head, it was hard to buy that it was consensual....  Not to mention that we found it odd that when she suspected she was pregnant, she went to him.  They did a test together in his work office and then he took her to a clinic..  Of course, this does not prove he was the father (he wasn't found guilty of the charges relating to pregnancies) but it does seem odd.

 

 â€œhow do you know this is not the time? I am
just curious. As far as I am concerned, it could be the exact time when a bias
is occured.”

I don’t know
it the same way as you don’t know it. If you talk about the probabilities, it
can be probable for everything. But the evidence can not lie.

I say, there
is no probability that jurors are racists. FYI, the jurors are concerned about
the facts and evidence rather than emotions. You’re the one who want’s to
meddle with emotions on top of facts.

“This
is where I am surprised. No evidence, but one sentence said in a heated
conversation established beyond doubt that a man deserves to be in jail. And
that sentence was about "consent", right? Is this the whole proof
behind this lengthy sentencing?”

What kind of evidence
or definitve proof or concrete evidence you’re looking for? Are you interested in
seeing a tape of incestual sex between them? Disgusting! What consent are you talking
about? Don’t you see any crime in having incest; don’t you see any crime in having
sex with a minor? What are you trying to advocate here?

At one point,
you guys want to make him a conservative devoted hindu father; and at other time,
you say he has been americanized. I don’t see juors having to regret. There is
an evidence and many facts exist that points that this rapist is a rapist.

I say, there’s
no equality of sex in Nepal.
Women were accused as witches in Americas,
but in Nepal
they ARE being accused and they ARE being burned.

“Hindus don't condone violence on women.”

If you don’t consider brutal rapings, burnings, chopping, and beatings
as violence, I’ve nothing to say.

“Nepal may be
inching well ahead of America
by now. â€œ

If you’re writing a piece of fiction, I again have nothing to
say.

Pire, you
actually admit you’re a biased person, and you see everyoneelse as the same.

"I hate the Maoists because they were so bloodthirsty, but even they spared women." 

Issac - other than mistaking the Brahminical world view for Nepali culture and somehow getting Hinduism mixed up along the way with the caste system thrown in for good measure, what exactly is your stand in the matter? Let me tell you, madam, the Brahmincal world view does not define Nepali culture or Hinduism, but yes, it does have a particularly disgusting take on the caste system. May be you have a different view. Do continue to try and amuse us - and excuse us for being sooooo patriarchal!

"Sure, it is easy to file a rape case here, but we don't have wage differentiation in Nepal, and female college graduates are more than half of a graduating class in China. And of course, our recent 33% female parliamentarian provision in Nepal makes us ahead of America in granting rights to women."

Lakhe,

Where did you find me saying "incest" is not crime?

--

Btw, your tone is not appropriate. Try writing it again in a better, neutral tone, and I will respond to you. Otherwise, you can talk to yourself or throw mud at me from sideways in this thread while I ignore you.

Lakhe,

Where did you find me saying "incest" is not crime?

--

Btw, your tone is not appropriate. Try writing it again in a better, neutral tone, and I will respond to you. Otherwise, you can talk to yourself or throw mud at me from sideways in this thread while I ignore you.

Lakhe,

Where did you find me saying "incest" is not crime?

--

Btw, your tone is not appropriate. Try writing it again in a better, neutral tone, and I will respond to you. Otherwise, you can talk to yourself or throw mud at me from sideways in this thread while I ignore you.

You never said incest is not a crime. What kind of concrete evidences are probable to exist in these cases? DNA or any other forensics can't be obtained since it is old. So what else are you really looking for?

Lakhe,

I was upset because you thought I was sick and was looking for tape. NOT. Here is what I was thinking:

Often, rape cases are proved on the basis of semen test or other evidence found in women's clothes. The girl who is raped should report to police as soon as it happened. In this case, where we are talking about 500+ times of rapes, there got to be more concrete evidence of forced entry. I wondered when did the victim report the case: to me, it seems she reported the case after the two stopped having any relationship. When he was raping her hundreds of times, she didn't report the case, but when he stopped , she reported the case. This doesn't make sense. Again, it may be because of victim's own helplessness; she might be under a lot of duress. It is also possible that when she thought enough was enough, and moved out, hoping these would be the things of the past, Ajay demanded that relationship be continued, which forced her to go to the detective. But there has to be evidences corroborating one way or other.Detectives normally spend lots of time in preparing a case like this against an individual. Where is that diligence?

You see I admitted being biased; I could do so because I am not in a jury, I am not sending a man to jail for 250 years. My first two movies in the USA were "Chinatown" and "Cider House Rules", both of which had American father having incestous relationship with their daughter. The third one was "American Pie". This country, I thought, was so obsessed with sex that anything could happen here. Again, whatever my bias, I do have the right to initiate my inquiry in this case.

Regarding wage differential: How many actresses/actors are there in Nepal? What fraction of total labor force does that constitute? Also, do they have the 'same' job? I think actress has different role than actors, no? If a film has female dominant story with a male sidekick, one can assume she will fetch more--but I am not sure. My observarion is based on my own experience--I am a farmer and brick kiln owner. Male khetala and female khetala for the same work got the same amount of money in my region. And farmers constitute an absolutle majority of workers. But again, I was not talking in absolute term. When I said there were no wage differentials, I should have said "there are relatively less wage differentials". I was not in a binary world, I was not talking about whether it exists or not, but by how much does it differ.

============

Alysma,

"There would have been no crime since she was 18 and he would be free and clear. ."

I am surprised. So, you are saying if he had admitted of having relationship in the past, he would be free? And even though there were only circumstantial evidence of such relation, you wanted to send him to jail for so long? you think it is appropriate sentence? I would love to see your take on this news and my questions below:

 

http://www.nepalnews.com/main/index.php/news-archive/19-general/409-three-nepalis-jailed-in-uk-for-manslaughter-violent-disorder.html

 

and compare 70-250 years sentence to Ajay. (I understand that the verdict of jury means Ajay may get 70-250 years in jail, but judge decides about it.)

 

Here are my thoughts:

 

1. Which crime is more severe? Can we even compare crimes?

 

2. Is UK soft on crime or is US tough on crime? Is US now a safer place? What is the fundamental difference in UK and USA that results in such a difference in crime? Would american jury member who sat on Ajay's jury have given similar sentence to those men in that crime?

 

3. Why is there are about 700 per 1 00 000 people in jail in USA while 100+ in the rest of the world? Are americans more criminals? Are american juries tougher?