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?

Pire

 

I have no idea of the justice system in UK.  I do not know why the sentence was so little.  I do not know at which ages people are considered "adults".  Is it 18, 20, 25 etc....?  I do not know why there are so people in prison.  I do not know whether or not UK is soft on criminals..  I do not know....

I am not saying specifically he would be free, I am saying that his story did not make sense either.  I personally would have been able to swallow his story if he claims that there had been a consensual affair between the two but for him to claim that NOTHING ever happened, he was obviously hiding something.

As far as sentencing, we are not told what the punishment may be, plain and simple.  I do not know what he will be sentenced to and will not know until he is sentenced.  I am thinking that even if he gets 1 year for each sentence, that is 76 years.  It will be a life charge since he is 42 now.  Does it really make a difference if he gets 76 or 350 years?  A life sentence is a life sentence....

And 76 years is the minimum?

I do not know what the minimum is....I was using 76 years as a "1 year per charge" guess...  I am only going by what the newspaper said was what he was looking at.

Pire

Let me ask you this and I am truly not trying to be rude...

If the victim was your daughter, mother, sister, aunt, cousin, or good friend, would you be questioning  the length of the possible sentence?  Would you be ready to send him away forever if you were somehow personally involved?

Rape cases are often lost because of the concrete evidence as semens. That's why they recommend to go for the physical check-up asap. But it can't happen in all the cases. But as you see, that kind of evidence is not possible in this case. But there're number of other facts which can be linked together to convict this rapist. There might not be a forced entry; it might just have been submissive/blackmails. Since the girl was looking for/ having bf;  and she moved out; for me, it shows that she wanted to get over with this adopted father. But this rapist still wanted to continue and didn't allow her having any other relationship and made her go to cops. If you read the original article again, you'll notice that she reported the case not after she ended her relationship with this rapist, but after this rapist came hunting for her even after her move-out. For me, it DOES make sense. She tolerated as much as she could. How many more YEARS do you think they need to spend before convicting this rapist? Sooner he's behind the bars, safer the society is. For me, the DILIGENCE doesn't increase automatically by spending/working longer.

I do agree with you that this thread has been educative. As someone posted the link for another sexual offender, Mr. Sharma, whom ANA lists proudly. In his case also, nepali people didn't believe and more than FIFTY NEPALESE sent the letter supporting him, but the court convict him any way.

Are you proposing that jury needs to be examined by a psychiatrist before sitting in this trial? For me, our country is not less biased with sex; the only difference I observe is closed and open societies. In the current issue of Sadhana, there's a following article about incests taking place in nepalese society; 

http://www.newsofnepal.com/sadhana/2065/sadhana183/garpariwar.htm

the only difference is they don't go to report or are often scolded, suppressed and ridiculed by the society when they speak. I don't think we're doing less by questioning the characters of the victim here. Victim had the burden of proof in this case; victim was also examined by a psychiatrist as jurors mentioned to prove that she's not insane. But the rapist didn't have to go to a lie-detector test. 

"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."

That is exactly what these sexists tell when they discriminate for wages among the sexes. These days, female actresses are also doing the stunts, and there may be the movies with the actresses playing the lead roles. But it doesn't count. RULE IS A RULE.

I don't know about brick kilns; I'm talking about the day-laborers for constructions works. Sometimes, women do more work than men; but again rule is a rule; and they argue women do less work. I don't remember the numbers, but I don't count the difference as less. As I mentioned among actors and actresses, it differs by 4-5 times; that's what I read in interviews given by actresses in papers. Would you still consider that as RELATIVELY less?

Allysma,

The meaning of justice is not what you would do if the 'victim' were your sister. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Those whose sisters are wronged want the extreme sentence and those whose sisters are accused want the most lenient sentence. As a judge, you don't want to be either. You want to see the facts, and be disattached to all kind of emotions.

I have nothing but the highest degree of sympathy for the victim, Allysma. God bless her, and if wrong has been done to her, she deserves kudo for coming out, reporting the crime and taking it to the conclusion. But I think every crime has a condign punishment.

So, when you judged this case, Alysma, if you put yourself on the shoes of the victim, then you made a grave error. You were supposed to be dispassionate. Nispriha, as they say in sanskrit. You have given a lifetime of prison to someone, and you will have to live with questions like mine for the rest of your lifetime. I am sure you will always ask yourself whether you made a right decision. It is you who have to live with the consequence of your decision, not me. It is you have the burden to defend your decision, not me. Suppose, you hear of the same crime committed by a white man in Nebraska tomorrow, perhaps more heinous, but he is sentenced to five years in prison by white jury there, then it will be you who will have to justify your decision, not me.

So, my answer to your question is I won't be hypocrite. I am a normal man, and I have all emotions god has given to me. If my sister is wronged, and I am convinced of that, I would want the sick bastard to be in jail for as long as possible. But civil societies throughout the world have a system; it is not what a victim want that is called justice.

Now, here is one thing: you knew that you wrote this sentence

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

and then

 "..I am not saying specifically he would be free,"

you know you changed your statement quickly. Under a gruelling questioning, it is normal for a man to change statements once in a while and be inconsistent. So, if someone is sent to jail for 350 years for one statement, then I am not sure what to say about it. I also thought your sentence

"Does it really make a difference if he gets 76 or 350 years?  A life sentence is a life sentence...." was a flippant. At least, in Nepal, it does. First , there are several ways one can work to reduce their sentence. Model prisoners earn prison sentence reductions periodically. So, if it is 76, one can still hope to come out, smell the air of Lake Tahoe before his death. If it is 350 years, that probability is less.

Best wishes to you. I still want to believe that as a jury member, you did all you could to reach a verdict that was just. God bless you if you did everything justly, and I am sure your reward is in heaven.

Wow this thread is gonna burst in length. I thought this was a straight-forward case of an incestual sex with a minor - rape or consensual is the question. I am no law pundit, hence I am not gonna advocate for a convict who already had an 'incestual sex' with a minor (that's quite clear). Now it is not gonna tickle my hormones of sympathy for the convict if he did NOT commit rape. Incestual sex with a minor is no less a crime than rape in my book. And I think American judicial system thinks likewise (But again, I am no law pundit)

What is Pire's point though? Seems like he's trying a bit hard here to prove his point. Or may be Ajay Dev'gan is his favorite actor- I would not know. 75 years of prison or 250 years of imprisonment- there is not MUCH difference practically. Semen test- sure. But what would you do to someone who hit and ran and managed to escape law for few months but later found to be guilty of the crime (hit) through other sources? He might escape hit and run but not the crime (hit) which he committed and against which evidences were found intact.

PS I am not sure if 'incestual sex' is a right terminology. Sounds a bit redundant but I am using it anyways for the lack of a better term or for the lack in depth of my knowledge.

Pire

I misspoke..  had he admitted that there was a consensual affair between them, he could be free and clear of all charges after she was 18.  Even if it was consensual before 18, a crime was still commited.  He would not be free and clear of those.

We completely kept our personal lives and emotions out of that deliberation room. I did come home everyday and hug my family and not let my kids out of my sight.....

He committed these crimes against his daughter and because a child was involved, the sentences for those are more extensive than those charges for after she was 18.  If the Judge decides to run sentences concurrent, maybe he will have an opportunity  to get out someday. 

And it's NOT a 'consensual' sex anymore if one of the parties involved is a minor - it's a STATUATORY RAPE (although laws may vary across the nation, from state to state but I think it's true in CA at least)

Yes the crime of Statutory Rape with a minor is clear from the recorded phone call. It is fair for him to get punished for statutory rape but the rape accusations after she turned 18 is doubtful.

Sid

Sidster

She still lived in the family home and was going to school (high school and some of the time college) after she turned 18.  She had no means of moving out and had no where else to go.  She had no other family here. When she finally had the money and the strength to move out, she was continually harrassed as well as her friends.  The events after she moved out is what finally gave her enough motivation to go to the police.

Pire

After seeing what I saw in the court and hearing what I heard, would it bother me to see him spend the rest of his life in prison..  NO.  If he does get out someday, he will have to live next door to someone.  As a mother, do I want a convicted child rapist living next door to me?  NO.

And before you ask, No, this was not something I thought about in the deliberations while coming to our verdicts.

If she was raped for all these years why didnt she talk to someone? Her mom as I know is very understanding woman. She could have talked to other Nepali who came to her house. She could have talked to anyone. She was attending College and I know she is smart enough to know what was happening to her for all those years. Which I am not able to understand is that she waited for so many years to come forward. We all are taught in High School /College about abuse. She would be protected.

Dance Zone, let me tell you most victims of sexual abuse  just stay quiet because of social stigma and people like you who think it is right to ridicule the victim. Imagine to tell other people your own dad rapes you. It takes lots of courage , and it is a fact . Nothing would have happened had she told...they would have just tried to keep her in Nepal just like they did..

Allysma,

What I say below has nothing to do with Ajay. Just a general observation, and I hope you will try to read it without associating with this specific case.

---

I find an answer in your reply about why there are so many people in jail these days. Look, not only convicted child rapist, I don't want any liar, thief, robber, adult rapist, foul mouthed etc next to my door. But that doesn't mean I have to lock him up in the jail for all his life.

American societies have gone through this change: 100 years ago, people were sent to jail to rot there. Chain gangs were regular ; a gritty expose film, I am a fugitive from chain gang (1932), a Paul Muni starrer, had vividly portrayed the life in jail at the time. Perhaps due to these movies and other publicity,  then, suddenly, a pang of conscience struck common people, and people thought convicts should be sent to jail so that 'they can be reformed there and sent back to the society as an useful person'. It was the era when tough jails like Alcatraz etc became very unpopular in America and were shot down. Now, again, people have become cynical and prisons are overcrowded. This is a far cry from UK and Nepal--where people recoil from sending people to jail for the long term. The rest of the world has been so different from the USA that if you see the ranking of countries who send people to capital punishment, USA ranks along side such pariah states as Iran, North Korea , China and so on. USA has become a state of cynical citizens, who are suspicious of everybody, even their neighbor, and who believe that man's actions and whims are incorrigible no matter what lesson you teach him..

I wish you could read this news that came out today in a Nepali newspaper. http://www.nayapatrika.com/newsportal/cover_story/you-can-improve.html

This is a story of a man who robbed a bank, and was sent to jail. After jail, he goes to a village and starts a cooperative and a school. This reform is a major news in a national newspaper. It probably shows undying optimism people have in another people in Nepal, and it is significant because we are about to forgive thousands of guerillas/army personnels who might have committed murder in the past.  Before 1996, when Maoists brutality started, Nepali society was so peaceful that murderers were thought to be rare, and murders were thought to be occuring mostly accidentally; incidentally, the highest punishment a man could be given was 20 years, and lots of time, it counted days and nights as separate, so 20 years tend to be 10 years, actually. Even the most brutal rulers, Rana rulers, didn't dare to give capital punishment; when they killed four martyrs in 1940 AD, they were willing to waive the punishment if those people had apologized.

I won't make a value judgement on which system is right. But as Jesus himself once said, something along the line,   'let he who hadn't sinned cast a stone first'.., I start out with the assumption that we all are weak and are liable to commit some kind of crimes , in some kind of circumstances, in our life.  And that no matter how hard we be on criminals, no matter what our wishful thinking is, this world won't be free of them.

It was nice conversing with you. Have a blessed life, and I have a new week to start, lots of works to do which I didn't do in the weekend, and won't be back.

Dance Zone

She was threatened regularly that if anyone found out, she  would go back to Nepal and the family would break up.  You say her mom would have been understanding?  Why then was it that when she told her mom about it, her mom has not spoken to her since?  Her side was never told to her mom, her mom shut her out and never even tried to get her side....

 

Pire

You dont want him living next to you when he gets out, then who does he live next door to?  He has to be someones neighbor when he finally gets released.  The next best thing, leave him in prison then noone has to worry about having this child rapist next door to them.

Pire -
I can only sit back and half-laughingly laud your empathy towards convicts/criminals. I believe I am not being judgmental here. Your take on this case, and the very mention of the incident where you let the minor who hit your car escape from law make me believe that you tend to act on emotions. I am of the belief that one should let the law comes into action wherever and as much as possible rather than taking actions based on your intuitions. Laws are made to HELP people. Hence they should be used at maximum (wherever and whenever possible)

The US jurisprudence is one of the "strongest" and "stringent" among its counterparts across the globe. [Please note the double quotes to emphasize that these two words are complimentary here]. It does not impose its laws upon people only once/when they commit a crime/offense. It's transparent and readily available for information unlike some of the laws in other countries. Laws on sex with minors and rape are no exceptions. As a responsible citizen, one should be aware of the protective seals and traps the system of law offers. There is a very little or no room for compassion in the US jurisprudence as I see. And that is the very reason for its strength.

Allysma,

"She still lived in the family home and was going
to school (high school and some of the time college) after she turned
18.  She had no means of moving out and had no where else to go.  She
had no other family here. When she finally had the money and the
strength to move out, she was continually harrassed as well as her
friends.  The events after she moved out is what finally gave her
enough motivation to go to the police"

This statement is hard to believe in a country like this.It doesnt take 6- 8 years for one to move out of the house. It would have been one thing if things were done in captivity. Like what the Austrian Father did to his daughter. A 18 year old is smart enough and has enough accesses to look for help. If this had happened one or two times this would have been one thing but 500 times at different locations?????? hmmmm that begs doubt.... Why would she even go to the motel nearby the house??? why would she even meet him there???? Didn't she know her father's motive after, lets say the 400th time??? some say that the father bribed her few times....if you agree to sleep for money, even if it was just once, doesn't that negate the remaining 499 rapes????

I do not have any sympathy to Ajay as he seems to make this choice in full conscience. I hope that he gets punished for the crime he has committed and not the ones that he has not. And if the US laws says 70 - 250 years for a Stuatory Rape, let it be that. Each country has its own law and convict will be punished per its law.

Sid

Sidster

I actually agree with you in some ways.  Keep in mind that all of the charges which were listed with dates after she moved out were all hung jury.  He was not found guilty on any of those.  I for one argued that she made choices after she moved out and put herself in a position that was not smart.  Although, she did not meet him at the motel, he drove her there (with the promise of going to a park to "talk").  All of the guilty verdicts were all while she still lived in the home.  Also, he began bribing her with money to come back home and sleep with him for money after she moved out.  Not to mention, that after she moved out is when he threatened to discontinue paying for her schooling.

Sidster,

"This statement is hard to believe in a country
like this.It doesnt take 6- 8 years for one to move out of the house.
It would have been one thing if things were done in captivity."

Please keep in mind that we nepali or nepali-Americans teenagers are very much different in making decision then the real American teenages who grow up here. We Nepalese are surrounded with many issues. It would not take 1 minute to report the crime to authority but who is going to believe this without evidences. Also, look at the consequences if it can not be proved.

RmNY,

If a seventeen year old Mexican girl who doesn't speak English can cross the border illegally, work at taco bell, survive herself and support the parents back home making wages below the minimum wage, you are saying that a Nepali Girl who came to this country when she was 15, went to HS here, has lots of AMERICAN friends, families, and sympathizers, kept getting suffered for years after turning 18????

Makes you want to question whether she was really forced? Or did she just let it ride as long as it worked out for her as well .......and as soon as it stopped working out for her she went to the court?????

It just seems that she had many choices to avoid the abuse after she turned 18 and yet she chose not to do so.

And if you are a teenager yourself. Please keep in mind that you have lots of options unlike what the victim thought in this case.

Sid