Can someone please explain to me how this is considered justice?
The state Supreme Court has thrown out the conviction of a Bridgeport man who was found guilty of sexually assaulting a severely handicapped woman.
Justices ruled, 4-3, that despite evidence that the 26-year-old woman cannot speak and has little body movement, there was no evidence she could not communicate her refusal to have sex with the defendant, Richard Fourtin Jr.
She cannot speak, but there’s no evidence she can’t communicate? WTF is going on here?
Fourtin, 28, was convicted in 2008 of attempted sexual assault and sentenced to six years in prison.
The woman, who was not identified in court, has severe cerebral palsy, has the intellectual functional equivalent of a 3-year-old and cannot verbally communicate, according to court documents.
The ruling centers around the state proving that the victim was physically helpless at the time of the attack, which is defined as ‘‘unconscious or for any other reason is physically unable to communicate
unwillingness to an act.”
However, defense lawyers argued that there was evidence she could communicate by biting, kicking, screaming and gesturing.
Oh, OK, so if she doesn’t do that then she’s fair game. And if she’s got the capacity of a 3-year-old and cannot properly communicate her resistance, does this make it OK to rape 3-year-olds? This is just beyond sick.