For those stumbling upon this story months later, there is new evidence that suggests that this was in fact a forcible rape, not a “rape of deception”. At the same time, it is unlikely that the Kashur will be re-tried; thus, we may never know what transpired. I think it is important to consider the possibility that Kashur’s attorneys did indeed bully the victim’s attorneys into accepting a plea, based on her sexual history. Nevertheless, my stance on the judge’s verdict–given that he had limited knowledge of the facts–stands.
A recent case in Israel has stunned and baffled many; as the story goes, a young Arab man introduces himself as “Dudu” (his family nickname, but also a comment nickname for David) to an Israeli Jewish woman on the street. Shortly thereafter, they have sex, at which point he ditches her while she’s still getting dressed and leaves. According to most news sources, upon finding out the man was in fact an Arab and not a Jew, the woman called rape.
I’m incredibly sensitive to rape charges, and particularly, have advocated in the past to release the burden of proof from the victim (meaning instead that the perpetrator would have to prove that he didn’t commit the crime). I’m also incredibly sensitive to the issue of calling a woman promiscuous in rape cases; women who have had multiple sexual partners are very often devalued as defendants in rape cases, deemed to have been “asking for it.” In any case, in the below, I am working from the assumption–provided to me by the Israeli media and the victim’s testimony–that this “rape” did not involve force and is in fact solely deemed rape because the man was not up front about his ethnicity.
That said, my issue is not with the defendant (who, for all we know, may have actually been raped). My issue is with the logistics of the case, and particularly with the judge’s ruling.
The judge, Tzvi Segal, stated that a rape conviction could be upheld when:
“a person does not tell the truth regarding critical matters to a reasonable woman”
The judge also stated:
“If she hadn’t thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have cooperated.”
The implication here is that the defendant thought that the man slept with only a few minutes after meeting was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, and that, had she known he was of a different race, she never would’ve considered intercourse. Perhaps more importantly, the court seems to have ruled that a reasonable Jewish woman would not have had sex with an Arab, presumably based solely on the fact of his ethnicity alone.
Problematically, much of the media coverage has implied, through headlines, that the man lied to the woman by saying that he was Jewish, when based on his testimony, it was actually a lie by omission. Morally dubious? Perhaps, but when you jump into bed with someone five minutes after meeting them, you should reasonably expect that a whole lot of information has been omitted. You are unlikely to know your partner’s line of work, his marital status (the man was also married, incidentally), even their HIV status.
Given the general consensus in Israel on intermarriage (the latter half of Robert Mackey’s Lede Blog post today gives a good description), perhaps our man is simply being held as a scapegoat, a warning to Arab men that choose to get involved with Israeli women. Or perhaps Israelis are finding other means, given this morning’s news item about an Arab man attacked for simply talking to a Jewish woman.
9 replies on “Israeli Court Calls Lying for Sex Rape”
[…] the rest here: Jillian C. York » Israeli Court Calls Lying for Sex Rape Share and […]
[…] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Jillian C. York, Hisham. Hisham said: Jillian C. York » Israeli Court Calls Lying for Sex Rape http://goo.gl/BSJx […]
The whole situation blurs the line between rape (which I deem as one person being forced to have a sexual relationship) and consensual sex. The story given in the plea bargain is unbelievable – I cannot believe that the woman involved wanted two things simultaneously: a long term relationship and also a quickie in a stairwell with a man she had just met.
The fact that he was married (hence, according to the judges, not intending to have a long-term relationship) is reversible as long as divorce is legal, and does not preclude a long-term relationship. Immediate sex in a stairwell does, however, tend to mean that the relationship is going nowhere. The judges ignored that fact when they accepted the (ridiculous) plea bargain. This – along with conditions that makes such encounters commonplace in Israel’s “dating”, with the Israeli police generally ignoring such complaints – is another demonstration of the extent to which the Israeli legal system is an agency of its racism.
A Palestinian viewpoint:
Such cases happen from time to time… and through the story you can see that there is something missing, as if it is well fabricated to reach into a logical conclusion (the “savage” arab raper is in prison for raping a “poor” jewish woman) not only that, but this arab is also a “thief” as he stole her MP4. I dont believe the whole story for the following reasons:
1. A friend of mine, who is living in Ramallah is married to a “israeli” jewish girl (she’s originally German). I used to visit them repeatedly in their home and I heard their story personally from a “first person mouth”: They got into hell to get married. They knew each others at work as they worked together. they loved each others and decided to get married. When their story was discovered, the guy was taken to jail and tortured to leave her. She was summoned to the police repeatedly and interrogated. The interrogators tried to force her to tell them that the “savage” Palestinian raped her. “just tell us that he raped you or forced you and then leave everything to us” the interrogator told her. She refused, simply because she loved him and wanted to marry him… if she surrendered to the Shabak’s pressure, the would have tortured him forever and everybody will be convinced (with the help of the fabricated story and the scandalous media) that this “savage” arab have been misleading this poor girl and raped her forcefully and repeatedly … they would add spices that he took her to Ramallah forcefully (after lying to her that they are going to a hostel in a settlement, for example) and they made gangbang with his friend ….bla bla.
but (as I heard the story from both) after two years of torture, and strong pressure from the Shabak, what saved her finally is her supporting family…. they tried to use her family to put more pressure but her family was supportive specially after seeing how strong her love to him…. Finally they got married, and live in Ramallah now.
2. The interracial marriage in this “Holy” but damn land is a big risk for both sides… and usually the jewish girl got married to a Palestinians specially if she is convinced of her right to chose, and mostly the girls are pro-Palestinians… to take Neta Golan (whom I never met, but respect) as an example… and precisely for this “pro-palestinianzm” the Shabak puts all that pressure !!
3. I know that the rape punishment in “israel” is some 7-15 years !! How come this “savage” Arab raper got out with only 18 months? that other than the “theft” that all the Arabs are “thieves” in the zionist media and Literature… if you dont believe me, just read one story for the most popular “israeli” writers to see how the Arabs are portrayed !!
4. Why the case ended with a deal? What is the role of the Shabak (or to be precise the Yassam, and you know what Yassam means.. it is not a police) in this case …. How much pressure was put on the woman to play the game? How much pressure was put on the guy to agree? Probably they told him: “You have no choice, either you play the game or the matter will be serious and you will eat it… just cooperate with us and you will get only 18 months instead of 7 or ten years” !! The Yassam was there from the beginning and it was their case !!
5. Again, the zionists want to prove to their girls and to the world, as the
Israeli and world media enthusiastically covered a peculiar verdict
, that the Arabs are not only savage rapers, but also thieves as they would beat the poor girl who was bleeding and steal her things !!
I simply dont buy the whole case !!
Sami I understand that finally the true story coming out is upsetting for you given the mileage that “racist law” story got but that is not reason to cut and paste the same BS everywhere.
This is a clear cut open and shut case. The woman was found bleeding and naked on the roof of a building site. There was forensic evidence. Not a single person bothered to check up on this story until an actual journalist did and shock horror found out the rapist was lying about his rape.
Kudos should go to the author of this blog for doing a tiny bit to backtrack on taking part in the global media second rape of this woman as some racist slut, no matter how reluctant and meally mouthed the retraction is. I note she is not willing to convict Mr Kashur despite the fact is clearly lying about the incident but had zero problem convicting the woman and Israel based on a wholely false and mendacious claim by Gideon Levy that just happened to pander to her and other people’s biases…. Would love to see an honest blog post about WHY she accepted this story without even blinking.
This is not a unique story… it happens repeatedly against the arab natives as I wxplained …
Racism !! Funny…. Now, in Jerusalem our houses are demolished (even those houses built before israel was born) by the approval of the zionist Hight Court of “Justice” at the time they (the zionist) build illigally on the Palestinian stolen land and against the International Law…. there is a law in israel but it is a RCIST LAW !!!
Yeah it is also racist when they demolished that jewish neighbourhood of Tel Aviv? Or the illegal outposts built by the settlers? Or illegal buildings by Jews in Jerusalem.
Glad to see you sticking up for rapists… Guess “We are Rapists now” is the new cry? Hizbollah apparently not radical enough for you?
Danny,
To be clear, I’m going on the American principle at the moment of “innocent until proven guilty”, even though I think he’s probably guilty. Much of this has to do with the fact that the verdict has not been translated into English, and I don’t read Hebrew, so the only retraction I can make to my original post is based on what someone told me on Twitter.
That said, I did not convict the woman, I convicted the judge. His statement: “If she hadn’t thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have cooperated.”
That is, in or out of context, a despicably racist statement. And as a woman, I know that you do not make a decision about a long term relationship based on one night in bed (which was the implication at the time).
I think my post explains quite well my feelings on the story as it was reported. And my feelings on that hypothetical story remain the same. Now that the truth is out, however, I plan to write another post, as soon as I have access to more information in my native language.
Ok so it was fine to convict Israeli justice system and the woman in the case not knowing any of the facts but suddenly when it turns out to all be complete fabrication, you are all open-minded? Did you bother to check the facts when you wrote the original post – obviously not but hey you were in good company, virtually no one bothered to when they parroted the rapist’s lies and Gideon Levy’s lies.