WTF Sht's Fcked Up and Bullsh*t - a "Who Cares" thread for news

Isabeau · Jan 23, 2021

I don’t even know what to add as a comment.

Innula Zenovka · Jan 23, 2021

Isabeau said:
I don’t even know what to add as a comment.

I don't understand the report.

It begins by describing how

The young Ottawa woman lives in fear of her rapist and is sometimes too afraid to go outside.

Some four years after she was raped and beaten by Mathew McAuliff, she still struggles to think about it because it makes her feel as if she’s drowning.

However, it then goes on to describe how he was sentenced for sexual assault causing bodily harm (biting her on various parts of her body), which seems the appropriate charge for which he fell to be sentenced.

In an earlier article, the same newspaper described the assault thus:

McAuliff was convicted in May 2019 of sexual assault causing bodily harm in connection with a 2016 attack on a teen.

“(McAuliff) gratified his need to inflict pain by engaging in extreme acts of biting the complainant’s breasts and inflicting severe and extreme bruising on her thighs through beating, punching and kneeing her,” Ontario Superior Court Justice Calum MacLeod said in his 2019 ruling.

“He ignored her protestations and pleas to stop. He induced her not to scream or leave the room by threatening to make it worse,” the judge noted.

She begged McAuliff to stop and was told if she screamed or tried to run, he’d “really get mean,” court heard.

However, while that's clearly a serious sexual assault (an assault committed with a sexual motive or for the purposes of sexual gratification) which clearly caused immense and lasting psychological harm, and physical harm sufficient to cause permanent scarring, thus adding to her mental anguish, since the sight of the scars on her body is a constant reminder of the attack, it's not a rape, which has to involve his penetrating her in some way.

Was the rape dealt with separately, or is the reporter simply confused about the crime for which the defendant fell to be sentenced?

It's important, because if the Canadian sentencing range is anything like the British one, then 4 years is a generous, but nevertheless defensible, sentence for a charge of sexual assault in the circumstances described (though a prompt guilty plea might explain the apparent leniency) but if it's part of a violent rape, then it's far too low.

Was the rape dealt with at a separate sentencing hearing? That wouldn't happen in the UK and I doubt it would normally happen in Canada either (the two legal systems have very similar principles, including that of totality, which would demand that they be dealt with together), and since he absconded while awaiting sentence for the sexual assault, I find it difficult to believe he'd already been sentenced for the rape and then nevertheless granted bail while awaiting sentence on the lesser charge.

Has he, in fact, ever been convicted of raping her, or anyone, or is the report simply inaccurate?

bubblesort · Jan 23, 2021

Larry King died.

He definitely slowed down as he got older, but I loved him on CNN, years ago. He wrote the only self help book I ever liked... How to talk to Anyone, Any Time, Any Where. I read it in middle school, when I was painfully introverted, still adjusting to transferring a new school, and adjusting to living in America (I grew up in the UK). King's book helped me develop into a much more extroverted person (a lot of people probably don't like that, LOL) To this day, I still love talking to strangers, because of that book.

Jolene Benoir · Jan 23, 2021

bubblesort said:
Larry King died.

He definitely slowed down as he got older, but I loved him on CNN, years ago. He wrote the only self help book I ever liked... How to talk to Anyone, Any Time, Any Where. I read it in middle school, when I was painfully introverted, still adjusting to transferring a new school, and adjusting to living in America (I grew up in the UK). King's book helped me develop into a much more extroverted person (a lot of people probably don't like that, LOL) To this day, I still love talking to strangers, because of that book.

Of note is that the cause was Covid.

Isabeau · Jan 23, 2021

Innula Zenovka said:
I don't understand the report.

It begins by describing how
However, it then goes on to describe how he was sentenced for sexual assault causing bodily harm (biting her on various parts of her body), which seems the appropriate charge for which he fell to be sentenced.

In an earlier article, the same newspaper described the assault thus:

However, while that's clearly a serious sexual assault (an assault committed with a sexual motive or for the purposes of sexual gratification) which clearly caused immense and lasting psychological harm, and physical harm sufficient to cause permanent scarring, thus adding to her mental anguish, since the sight of the scars on her body is a constant reminder of the attack, it's not a rape, which has to involve his penetrating her in some way.

Was the rape dealt with separately, or is the reporter simply confused about the crime for which the defendant fell to be sentenced?

It's important, because if the Canadian sentencing range is anything like the British one, then 4 years is a generous, but nevertheless defensible, sentence for a charge of sexual assault in the circumstances described (though a prompt guilty plea might explain the apparent leniency) but if it's part of a violent rape, then it's far too low.

Was the rape dealt with at a separate sentencing hearing? That wouldn't happen in the UK and I doubt it would normally happen in Canada either (the two legal systems have very similar principles, including that of totality, which would demand that they be dealt with together), and since he absconded while awaiting sentence for the sexual assault, I find it difficult to believe he'd already been sentenced for the rape and then nevertheless granted bail while awaiting sentence on the lesser charge.

Has he, in fact, ever been convicted of raping her, or anyone, or is the report simply inaccurate?

I have a hard time understanding any of it.

Rose Karuna · Jan 23, 2021

Isabeau said:
I don’t even know what to add as a comment.

Mark my words, this guy will get out of prison in four years and move on to becoming a serial rapist and/or serial killer. Biters are kind of like arsonists, they can't seem to stop themselves. Biting and fire starting are two of the signs often displayed by sexual sadists before they become serial killers. Also, men who are abusive to their partners and include strangulation and/or biting in that abuse often end up killing the partner.

Note: I'm not talking about vampire cosplay, I'm talking about savage biting.

Innula Zenovka · Jan 23, 2021

Isabeau said:
I have a hard time understanding any of it.

Me too.

I've now re-read the earlier report at

Ottawa rapist in lockup after skipping sentencing hearing and evading police for months

Mathew McAuliff, 31, was arrested Tuesday afternoon and is scheduled for a court appearance Wednesday.

ottawacitizen.com

and I'm completely baffled.

Yes, he apparently did rape her, both vaginally and orally, but the way it's reported seems to make that secondary to the lesser charge of sexual assault.

From the Ottawa Citizen of August 12, which opens by telling us that

McAuliff was convicted in May 2019 of sexual assault causing bodily harm in connection with a 2016 attack on a teen.

However, later on in the article, we learn that

In his May ruling, Ontario Superior Court Justice Calum MacLeod said “(McAuliff) gratified his need to inflict pain by engaging in extreme acts of biting the complainant’s breasts and inflicting severe and extreme bruising on her thighs through beating her, punching her and kneeing her.

“He ignored her protestations and pleas to stop. He induced her not to scream or leave the room by threatening to make it worse.

“Finally, he engaged in vaginal and oral penetration … without consent.”

So the vaginal and oral rape are reported almost as an afterthought, which is how the sentencing remarks seem to treat them, and nowhere can I find any reference to his being convicted of rape, only sexual assault and biting.

On the facts as I understand them, it sounds to me as if he raped her at least twice, and also beat and bit her repeatedly so badly as to leave permanent scarring so, assuming Canadian and British law and charging practice are broadly similar (which generally they are), I'd have expected the court to treat the incident as a very serious rape, with the biting treated as one of the many aggravating factors.

Using UK sentencing guidelines, based on the minimal information to be found online about the case, he'd probably have been looking at around 15 years as a minimum, depending on whether he entered a guilty plea and, if so, how early, though the whole thing reminds me of a case in which the defendant ended up receiving a life sentence with a minimum of 30 years as a dangerous offender, since when the police came to investigate the initial complaint it transpired he'd similarly raped several other women he'd met online.

There's so much missing from the Ottawa Citizen's reports (which are all I've been able to find) that the story just doesn't make sense as reported.

Myradyl Muse · Jan 23, 2021

Rose Karuna said:
Mark my words, this guy will get out of prison in four years and move on to becoming a serial rapist and/or serial killer. Biters are kind of like arsonists, they can't seem to stop themselves. Biting and fire starting are two of the signs often displayed by sexual sadists before they become serial killers. Also, men who are abusive to their partners and include strangulation and/or biting in that abuse often end up killing the partner.

Note: I'm not talking about vampire cosplay, I'm talking about savage biting.

Four years seems so grossly minimal for the traumatic damage this monster inflicted - sexual, physical, emotional. It doesn't even begin to address his level of dangerousness. At his current age, I'd bet tons that she is not his first victim nor his last. So repeat danger is likely here.

Innula Zenovka · Jan 23, 2021

Myradyl Muse said:
Four years seems so grossly minimal for the traumatic damage this monster inflicted - sexual, physical, emotional. It doesn't even begin to address his level of dangerousness. At his current age, I'd bet tons that she is not his first victim nor his last. So repeat danger is likely here.

It makes sense, in general, for sexual assault under some circumstances, which is what he fell to be sentenced for.

But what makes no sense is his being convicted of rape, which formed part of the same attack as did the biting and kicking, and the rape and assault being dealt with separately.

What should normally have happened is that he'd either be charged with rape, massively aggravated by the biting and kicking, or that he'd be charged with both rape and sexual assault, but they'd be sentenced together, with no separate penalty for the lesser charge.

I just don't see the chain of events between his being convicted of rape and sexual assault, and then jumping bail, and finally being sentenced but only for sexual assault.

Something's missing.