Showing posts with label Dept of Justice. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Dept of Justice. Show all posts

January 18, 2017

Is Julian Assange Ready for Extradition or Was this another Lie?

 A lawyer for Julian Assange has indicated that the WikiLeaks founder is ready to face extradition to the US after Barack Obama commuted the sentence of US army whistleblower Chelsea Manning.

 When will the US government stop persecuting whistleblowers? Assange Vs. Manning

[Assange is not your typical hacker and more or whistle blower. There is a difference between whistle blowing and stealing information from people’s computers.  Since Assange has hacked-stolen information from people without their knowledge he is more of a hacker than whistle blower. Also some of the information has been classified as ToP Secret and the understanding among intelligence agencies has been that he probably cost some agents their life’s and others to be neutralized in their positions. Chelsea Manning never divulged Top Secret information, just secret. He never put anyone life’s in danger, except maybe his own.  It is suspected that his connection with Assange convinced him he was doing the right thing. He was a very young computer IT with lots of problems dealing with his sexuality. We actually don’t know if he was black mailed by Assange or someone else to give the information to Assange. Assange who has been described as a man without a conscience by some and a stooge by Putin has felt bad for Manning and proposed to turn himself in if Manning was released.  He is no fall guy, He knows Trump likes him(as even quoted him) and there is a chance he might be pardon or not prosecuted in the US. I think he is wrong on both counts because his crimes are just too many and then there is the American Presidential election in which it is believed he meddle in the US election by releasing information provided by Russia’s Secret Service and helped Clinton in no small way to loose the election. Still with Trump’s there are no guarantees.] adamfoxie*blog

Assange has been holed up at the Ecuadorian embassy in London since claiming asylum there in 2012. He has refused to meet prosecutors in Sweden, where he remains wanted on an allegation of rape, which he denies. He has repeatedly said he fears extradition to the US on espionage charges if he leaves the embassy, though at the moment the only public extradition ruling against him comes from Sweden.

Assange welcomed Obama’s decision to free Manning, who passed 700,000 documents, videos, diplomatic cables and battlefield accounts to WikiLeaks. “Your courage and determination made the impossible possible,” Assange said in a statement thanking campaigners for their efforts to get her released.

He did not mention a pledge made last week that he would agree to US extradition if Obama granted clemency to Manning:

But Melinda Taylor, who serves on Assange’s legal team, said he would not be going back on his word. “Everything that he has said he’s standing by,” she told the Associated Press.

The WikiLeaks Twitter accounted also suggested its founder was ready to go to the US:

The White House insisted on Tuesday that Assange’s offer to submit to extradition if Obama “grants Manning clemency” did not influence the US president’s action.
“The president’s decision to offer commutation was not influenced by public comments by Mr Assange or the WikiLeaks organisation,” the White House official said. “I have no insight into Mr Assange’s travel plans. I can’t speak to any charges or potential charges he may be facing from the justice department.”

In his statement, Assange said Manning should never have been convicted and described her as “a hero, whose bravery should have been applauded not condemned”.

Assange went on to demand that the US government “immediately end its war on whistleblowers and publishers, such as WikiLeaks and myself”.

Another lawyer for Assange, Barry Pollack, did not address whether Assange intended to come to the US.

“For many months, I have asked the DoJ to clarify Mr Assange’s status. I hope it will soon,” he said in a statement. “The Department of Justice should not pursue any charges against Mr Assange based on his publication of truthful information and should close its criminal investigation of him immediately.”

The justice department has never announced any indictment of Assange and it is not clear that any charges have been brought under seal. The department, in refusing to turn over investigative documents sought by Manning under the Freedom of Information Act, has acknowledged that the FBI is continuing to investigate the publication of national security information on WikiLeaks arising from Manning’s disclosures.

“That investigation concerns potential violations of federal criminal laws, in the form of serious threats to the national security, and the investigation continues today,” department lawyers wrote in a court filing last year. “From the terms of her request, it is clear that Manning seeks to obtain documents concerning that investigation.”

Separately, the FBI is also investigating Russian meddling through hacking in the US presidential election. Hacked emails from top Democratic officials and Hillary Clinton campaign aides were posted on WikiLeaks in the final weeks of the presidential race.

With the commutation coming just days before Obama leaves office, any decision on whether to charge or seek to extradite Assange will now fall to the Trump administration.

July 6, 2016

No Charges! Extraordinary Political Case Extraordinary Non Political Man


Law enforcement officials tend to inhabit a universe that is both binary and terse: prosecute or don’t prosecute. Let the facts in the indictment speak for themselves. No further comment.

So the remarks by FBI Director James B. Comey accompanying his announcement that he would not recommend bringing charges against former secretary of state Hillary Clinton were, as he acknowledged, “unusual.” Indeed, that word scarcely captures what happened. Comey’s comments were an extraordinary, important and, on balance, justifiable departure from normal practice. Clinton may not be better off for them, but the country is.

The decision not to bring charges was the correct one, but a simple announcement to that effect would have deprived the public — deprived voters who are being asked to choose a president — of any understanding of the judgment underlying that determination. It would have kept hidden from public view information that is insufficient to support criminal charges but that many voters may deem relevant to their assessment of Clinton’s fitness for the presidency — and that they can test against Clinton’s own, often contradictory account.

Some Democrats will grumble privately — they already are — about Comey’s commentary, even as they publicly celebrate the announcement that Clinton is effectively in the clear. Some Republicans will assert, without justification, that it shows Comey somehow taking a dive for Clinton; it took no time for Donald Trump to tweet that the outcome represented further proof that “the system is rigged.”

Actually, it showed evidence of a system under stress — a presumptive presidential nominee facing criminal jeopardy; an investigation conducted under the tense deadline of an impending election; an inevitable cloud of partisan distrust made even darker by the unfortunate tarmac meeting last week between Bill Clinton and Attorney General Loretta Lynch.

Comey took this bad situation and — acting on his own — made it better. “They do not know what I am about to say,” Comey said of his colleagues at Main Justice.

Let us count the ways that Comey’s behavior was extraordinary:

That he made the statement at all, given that charging decisions are left to the prosecutors, without an interim assessment by investigators — even the FBI director himself — preemptively asserting that “no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case.”

That he provided a synopsis of both the facts of the case and the legal analysis underlying his no-go conclusion that previous prosecutions presented situations involving “clearly intentional and willful mishandling of classified information; or vast quantities of materials exposed in such a way as to support an inference of intentional misconduct; or indications of disloyalty to the United States; or efforts to obstruct justice.”

And that he engaged in extensive editorializing: Clinton and her colleagues “were extremely careless in their handling of very sensitive, highly classified information.” Seven of the email chains concerned such top-secret, sensitive information that “any reasonable person in Secretary Clinton’s position, or in the position of those government employees with whom she was corresponding about these matters, should have known that an unclassified system was no place for that conversation.” Here I become slightly queasy about Comey’s self-appointed truth-teller role. But I understand the impulse: to err on the side of tough assessment even as he declines to recommend charges.

There’s more. Comey took a barely disguised slap at President Obama, noting that “there were many opinions expressed by people who were not part of the investigation — including people in government — but none of that mattered to us.”

Gee, what people could Comey be referring to? Maybe the one who asserted in April that “I continue to believe that she has not jeopardized America’s national security”? (Note that Comey said “it is possible that hostile actors gained access to Secretary Clinton’s personal email account” and in fact penetrated “the private commercial email accounts of people with whom Secretary Clinton was in regular contact from her personal account.”) 

Comey undercut Clinton’s self-congratulatory assertion that her team provided all work-related emails from her private server, observing that the FBI unearthed “several thousand” additional such emails. 

And he suggested, rather pointedly, that the decision not to prosecute might not be the end of the matter, raising the prospect of yanked security clearances or other “administrative sanctions.”

Comey proved his independence during the George W. Bush administration when, as deputy attorney general, he headed off White House officials’ efforts to persuade John Ashcroft to reauthorize a domestic surveillance program while the then-attorney general was recovering from surgery in a hospital intensive-care unit. On Tuesday morning, Comey proved the point again. He is no team player, which in this setting is no criticism — it is a high compliment.

June 24, 2016

The History of Guantanamo Bay 1901-Today


May 5, 2016

Justice Dept. to Weigh in N.Carolina Bathroom bill

Image result for bathroom whites only

 “The More things change the more they stay the same”


The U.S. Department of Justice is joining Bruce Springsteen, Paypal, and the NBA in weighing in against North Carolina’s HB2, the controversial law that—among other conditions—mandates that transgender people use the bathroom conforming to the gender on their birth certificate, rather than the one which they associate, in state buildings, and bars cities from enacting ordinances to require transgender-bathroom accommodation.

In a letter to Governor Pat McCrory on Wednesday, the Justice Department said that HB2 violates Titles VII and IX of the Civil Rights Act. In the letter, first reported by The Charlotte Observer, Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Vanita Gupta notes that Title VII of the law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of gender, and that courts have interpreted that to include gender identity of transgender people. The letter (via WRAL) states:

H.B. 2 … is facially discriminatory against transgender employees on the basis of sex because it treats transgender employees, whose gender identity does not match their “biological sex,” as defined by H.B. 2, differently from similarly situated non-transgender employees …

H.B. 2 places similar restrictions on access to restrooms and changing facilities for all public agencies in North Carolina. By requiring compliance with H.B. 2, you and the State are therefore resisting the full enjoyment of Title VII rights and discriminating against transgender employees of public agencies by requiring those public agencies to comply with H.B. 2.
The department demands that McCrory respond by close of business on May 9 that he will remedy the violations, “including by confirming that the State will not comply with or implement H.B. 2.”
The Atlantic

August 29, 2015

I hate to Defend but ‘Homeland Sec.’ Dons’t have real Crime to Pursue?

 I don’t think Homeland Security was formed to pursue male prostitution. There is something a lot more important to do or is it they don’t know where the real criminals are? Slow times at Justice Dept.? This is the Justice dept. headed by the appointee of the President? Is this a GOP administration already, did the elections come and go already and I forgot to vote? I hate I have to defend these millionaires scum bags but on this issue they should be left alone!  (Adam Gonzalez)                                                                
 Male Model
Who could have seen this coming? President Obama sent out the enforcers from the Department of Homeland Security to crack down on adult, consensual sodomy! (quote: Bryan Fischer)
Homeland Security must be itching for action—so to speak—because instead of monitoring terrorists or, like, keeping our borders safe, they instead decided to shut down a niche gay escort website.

On August 25th, federal authorities raided and froze bank accounts associated with, a nearly 20-year-old website that offered sex workers a platform to safely promote their work. Seven current or former employees were arrested and charged with the promotion of prostitution, including the chief executive, Jeffrey Hurant, 50.

“As alleged, attempted to present a veneer of legality, when in fact this Internet brothel made millions of dollars from the promotion of illegal prostitution,” said Kelly T. Currie, acting United States attorney for New York’s Eastern District, in a statement.

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I did watch Julia Roberts and Mel Gibson in ‘Conspiracy Theory,’ so I know a shady move when I see one.
The thing is, nothing in the federal authorities statement says anything about protecting the workers of the “brothel.” Where are the victims here? Just whom are the feds protecting, besides upholding archaic laws that they can choose to not enforce? In fact, it appears that’s exactly what they’ve been doing. The FBI reported data that showed a 50 percent drop in prostitution related arrests between 2004 and 2011, even though it continues to be a billion-dollar industry. It’s not as if these sex workers all suddenly got jobs at Starbucks.

So why now? Why, when just last week it announced a scholarship program to help escorts get an education? And why, when leading health organizations and first world countries across the globe are advancing the decriminalization of prostitution, is the United States still focusing their attention on the purveyors of sex and not the system that forces the victims of illegal sex work into the shadows, or sometimes caskets?

Let’s put the actual sex workers into perspective.

The men that advertised their services on did so on their own free will, working as free agents on a public platform that offered them guidance, respectability, and a community. Without and other sites like it, these men are forced onto the streets or into the shadows, on their own. Statistics show that street workers suffer more violence, often turning to pimps for protection, only leading to more violence and possible sex trafficking. The visibility of their profile on freed these sex workers from the violence of pimps and the sex trade.
This isn’t about a website or even money, this is about sex phobia and shame.
Just what about two consenting adults making an agreement to have sex where one party receives compensation is so wrong? We pay our dog walkers, our massage therapists, hell, I even once bought dinner for a friend in return for him shaving my back. Prostitution laws have a long and sordid history, too much to get into here, but just like our thinking on LGBT rights, marijuana laws, abortion, assisted suicide, and many more have all evolved, why are we still so focused on outlawing sex for money?

Because we’re a patriarchal culture that refuses to think of sex in a secular way. Our Judaic-Christian background won’t let us want sex, need sex, just for the fun of it. Guess what? In case you’ve never had it, sex is really, really fun, and even therapeutic (as I experienced during chemo).

Adam Ramzi, an adult film performer with a masters degree in clinical LGBT psychology, says, “In fact, it’s often therapeutic and healthy for its customers and clients. It’s a transaction that benefits both the buyer and the seller in ways that most people don’t see… Raiding a service that provides its clients with sexual and emotional relief they otherwise would not have is an unnecessary use of resources and security.”

Decriminalization of prostitution is a workers’ rights issue.

“Sex workers are one of the most marginalized groups in the world who in most instances face constant risk of discrimination, violence and abuse,” said Salil Shetty, secretary general of Amnesty International, in a statement.

When sex workers are able to legally disclose their work, as they can in Germany and a number of other countries, they are allowed to receive government services that all workers are afforded: police protection when something goes wrong, health services, taxation benefits, even union representation. And because prostitution is legal, customers can use credit cards, lowering the chance of violence with an anonymous illegal encounter. was the closest thing male sex workers had to legalization and protection, and now the feds have made the decision to take away that protection, and potentially thrust these workers into violent encounters or incarceration that could impact their lives for years to come.

“Arresting people who are taking agency over their own bodies and earning a living only creates this cycle of violence in which they find it harder to leave sex work when they need/want to,” says Danny Cruz, 30, a sex worker and activist. “Having a prostitution charge on a criminal record is a huge barrier to mainstream employment and sex workers who were previously arrested for this end up turning to sex work to pay fines, court fees, etc. it’s a vicious cycle built by people who think they are “rescuing” us by arresting us. I’d rather skip that rescue.”

Could this be because of the Ashley Madison leak? Or maybe a gay bias?
Let’s get real, never tried very hard at hiding what it really was doing. Advertising that escorts exchange money for time spent together, and if sex happens that’s between the escort and the client, is a thinly veiled way of promoting sex for money. Or could it have been an awesome, in-your-face, statement of independence on the current state of legalized sex shame from state and federal officials? Regardless, it’s surprising that after nearly 20 years of basically blatant promotion of prostitution, the feds decide to raid now, just mere weeks after the Ashley Madison leak.

Coincidence or not, there’s a renewed focus on sex shaming, and the feds are joining the shame bandwagon. And because targeted a niche and largely marginalized clientele, gay men, with profile langage detailing everything from penis size to personal fetishes, what better way to steer attention away from federal officials emails contained within the Ashley Madison leak? Just like George W. Bush used the issue of a federal amendment banning gay marriage during the 2004 presidential campaign, could people within the federal government be using the raid to sensationalize the news away from other distracting Ashley Madison related nuggets of news?

I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but I did watch Julia Roberts and Mel Gibson in Conspiracy Theory, so I know a shady move when I see one.

Many in the LGBT community are feeling a deep sense of personal bias. Performer Justin Bond posted on Facebook, “I think that to many in our community this feels like a throwback to when the police raided gay bars in the 50s and 60s….This invasion of a consensual hook-up site which is run for and by members of the LGBT community feels like a real slap in the face after gentrification…”

In a perfect world…

Prostitution would not only be legalized, but it would be regulated and taxed, guaranteeing the workers and the purveyors security, safety, and accountability. It’s really that simple.

The reality is it is not. The feds can shut down, but that’s not going to solve anything. Another website, or app, will be created and the oldest profession in the world will grow older. Instead of focusing on sites like, the feds should look to the ever growing international sex trade that’s happening all around us, in addition to the exorbitant number of trans men and women forced into sex work because of discrimination elsewhere, many of which are getting murdered. Because targeting a young man with a nice body using it to make a dime in a legit and safe way on a harmless website is like arresting the mother of a little girl selling lemonade on the corner for child slave labor.

Story appeared on Fusion
H Alan ScottH Alan Scott

July 20, 2013

Ex CIA Chief Who Detained and Tortured Egyptian Innocent Doctor } USA Allows Him to Escape back to US } Same Justice for Snowden? NO Way

Cases like this is what makes me sick when I watch or hear an official of the uS many times the President preaching about the rule of International law. What Law? I depends how strong you are and crime or no crime does not matter just the politics in the case if the public is aware of the case.If the public is not aware then expediency and secrecy takes over.      {Adam}
Panama on Friday allowed a retired CIA station chief wanted in Italy for his role in the 2003 abduction of an Egyptian Muslim cleric to leave for the United States, permitting the former U.S. intelligence agent to avoid an Italian jail cell.
Robert Seldon Lady, the former CIA station chief in Milan, had been arrested earlier in the week as he attempted to cross into Costa Rica from Panama.
Panama offered no explanation for its decision to authorize Lady’s release, but Italy’s foreign ministry said it respected Panama’s action in a sign that none of the countries involved cared to reopen one of the most controversial incidents of the Bush administration’s prosecution of its war against terrorism following the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks.
“It’s my understanding that he is in fact either en route or back in the United States,” State Department spokeswoman Marie Harf said at a daily briefing in Washington.
Lady, 59, was convicted along with 22 others for the abduction of Osama Moustafa Hassan Nasr, an Egyptian cleric who U.S. officials said was recruiting radical Muslims for jihad in the Middle East. Nasr, widely known as Abu Omar, later turned up in an Egyptian prison, where his lawyer said he’d been repeatedly tortured.
Lady’s detention brought to the fore an issue that leaders in both Italy and the United States had sought to keep out of the limelight.
“It’s a sensitive issue, and it is a source of embarrassment to the two countries. We cooperate on all kinds of things,” said Michael Calingaert, a visiting scholar and expert on U.S.-Italian relations at the Brookings Institution, a Washington think tank.
Late last year, Italy’s top appeals court upheld a nine-year sentence for Lady, although if he were to return to Italy a sentence reduction would mean he would only serve six years.
Italian prosecutors _ who built their case around triangulated cellphone signals, an Italian CIA asset who helped carry out the kidnapping, and other extensive evidence to lay bare the U.S.-led abduction _ said they were not surprised that Lady would escape from Panama to the United States.
The U.S. government seeks to keep active and retired CIA agents out of foreign jails and will “exert pressure in all directions to make sure that does not happen,” Milan prosecutor Ferdinando Pomarici said Friday, according to the Italian ANSA news agency.
Lady, who abandoned a retirement home near the Italian Alps and fled Italy before his conviction, has apparently been crossing several international boundaries while on the lam.
He appeared at Paso Canoas, a jungle-strewn crossing at the border between Costa Rica and Panama, at 9:30 a.m. Thursday, said Andrea Quesada Villalobos, spokeswoman for the Costa Rican Migration Department.
“When his information was put into the system, an Interpol alert appeared for us, a red alert, so we immediately contacted the Costa Rican Interpol office,” Quesada said, referring to the international criminal police body designed to track down criminals fleeing from country to country.
“The Interpol agent said that we couldn’t detain him in Costa Rica, so what we did was deny him entry and return him to the Panamanian immigration office,” she said.
Quesada said Lady arrived on foot and alone, and was handed off to Panamanian authorities.
Panama and Italy do not have an extradition treaty.
In contrast, the United States and Panama maintain close security ties developed last century when a U.S. military presence guarded the Panama Canal that divides the country. The U.S. government returned the canal to full Panamanian control in 1999.
In a sign of that cooperation, Panama last weekend impounded a North Korean ship and discovered hidden weapons aboard buried under bags of brown sugar. Cuba later claimed ownership of the weapons, including two MiG-21 fighters, nine disassembled rockets and 15 MiG engines, saying they were old and to be refurbished in North Korea.
Other factors also might have played into the decision. Panamanian President Ricardo Martinelli has had a troubled relationship with Italian prosecutors, who are investigating whether a huge Italian defense firm, Finmeccanica, paid bribes to the Panamanian government for the purchase of helicopters, radar systems and the construction of prisons. Martinelli, who has an Italian passport and was close to former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi, has denied any graft offer. No contract was ever signed.
The extent of the secret U.S. policy of abducting terror suspects and moving them from one country to another, a process known as extraordinary rendition, has never been fully revealed.
In February, the Open Society Justice Initiative, a liberal advocacy group, published a report saying 54 foreign governments had collaborated with the CIA to abduct and move at least 136 known victims, usually to third countries where torture would be freely used during interrogations.
Nasr, who had lived in Yemen prior to moving to Italy, spent four years in an Egyptian prison but was never charged with a crime. His attorney said that he lost partial sight in one eye because of abuse by his Egyptian jailers.
Attorney General Eric Holder said in August 2009 that the U.S. government would not abandon the practice of rendition but would seek assurances from the receiving nations that they would not employ torture.
McClatchy national security correspondent Jonathan S. Landay contributed to this report.
Email:; Twitter: @timjohnson4

March 31, 2013

NY Senator Calls to an End to Solitary Confinement for Gay and Lesbians

SchumerLast Tuesday, United States Senator Chuck Schumer (D-NY) wrote a strongly-worded letter to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) Director John Morton urging him never to use solitary confinement simply because a detainee is gay or lesbian.  Immigration Equality commends Senator Schumer for recognizing that solitary confinement is a grossly inhumane and improper means of housing vulnerable gay and lesbian immigration detainees.   We urge both Senator Schumer and Director Morton to ensure that such recognition extends equally to transgender detainees, who are among those most commonly subjected to torturous forms of solitary confinement out of misguided concerns for their protection.
In his letter, Senator Schumer accurately remarks, “[p]articularly troubling is the reliance on solitary confinement as a means of cordoning off certain inmates, such as gays and lesbians, who may be at risk in the general detainee population. This would seem to amount to inflicting punishment in the name of offering protection.” Under the pretext of safety concerns, ICE far too often places LGBT detainees in forms of solitary confinement that are indistinguishable from harsh disciplinary practices for violent and dangerous felons.

One of Immigration Equality’s clients, a transgender woman named Marta (not her real name), was housed alone in a ten square foot cell at a Louisiana prison for 23 hours a day without access to phones, recreation, or human contact.  After she described to detention staff the distress her prolonged isolation caused her, Marta was put on suicide watch with security checks at fifteen minute intervals that further stripped her of her dignity.  Although Immigration Equality was able to secure Marta’s release from detention, many other LGBT detainees continue to languish for months on end as she did, without any meaningful way to challenge their solitary confinement.
Immigration Equality continues to recommend that ICE cease its practice of detaining LGBT immigrants, who are at increased risk of harassment, violence, and sexual assault in confinement settings.  If ICE is to detain LGBT immigrants, we agree with Senator Schumer’s stance that “[a]bove all, solitary confinement at ICE detention facilities must always be a last resort. It should never be imposed on at-risk non-citizens such as gay and lesbian detainees; ICE should find better methods to protect them.  For LGBT detainees, a variety of far more humane alternative-to-detention programs can provide superior methods of ensuring that they appear for their court hearings.  These alternatives, which may include electronic ankle bracelets, telephonic check-ins, and community-sponsored supervision go much further to protect LGBT detainees than do agonizing forms of solitary confinement.  These alternatives also more closely align with immigration detention’s nature as a form of civil, rather than criminal detention.
Immigration Equality urges Senator Schumer and Director Morton to remember that solitary confinement is inappropriate for transgender detainees, just as it is for gay and lesbian detainees.  Because detention facilities traditionally classify individuals according to their sex assigned at birth, many facilities customarily attempt to mitigate transgender detainees’ risk of victimization by immediately placing them in solitary confinement.  Given the damaging physical and mental health consequences of prolonged solitary confinement for LGBT individuals, Immigration Equality supports Senator Schumer’s position that ICE should take action to limit solitary confinement “to no more than 14 days except in the most extreme circumstances,” and that legislative reform must include protections against solitary confinement for vulnerable LGBT detainees.

January 7, 2012

New Rape Law Includes Men } 'It is revised to include penetration with any body part'

Attorney General Eric Holder says the new definition will lead to a more comprehensive statistical reporting of rape nationwide.
Attorney General Eric Holder says the new definition will lead to a more comprehensive statistical reporting of rape nationwide.

  • The old definition of rape was established in 1927
  • It defined rape as a man forcibly penetrating a woman through her vagina
  • It is revised to include anal penetration with any body part or object
  • Authorities say the change in the law will lead to more comprehensive reporting of rape
  • St. Sebastian has historically been depicted as both a religious icon and a figure of covert sexual fantasy
    Male Rape: The Emergence of a Social and Legal Issue
Washington (CNN) -- The Justice Department announced Friday that it is expanding its decades-old definition of rape to include attacks against men.
Now, any kind of nonconsensual penetration, no matter the gender of the attacker or victim, will constitute rape.
The crime of rape will now be defined as "penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim," the Justice Department said.
Attorney General Eric Holder said the new definition will lead to a more comprehensive statistical reporting of rape nationwide.
"These long overdue updates to the definition of rape will help ensure justice for those whose lives have been devastated by sexual violence and reflect the Department of Justice's commitment to standing with rape victims," Holder said. "This new, more inclusive definition will provide us with a more accurate understanding of the scope and volume of these crimes."
An FBI advisory panel recently recommended the revision to the longstanding definition, which was established in 1927.
The law then defined rape as "the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will." That meant that it was only an act of rape if a man forcibly penetrated a woman through her vagina. It excluded oral and anal penetration; rape of males; penetration of the vagina and anus with an object or body part other than the penis; rape of females by females; and non-forcible rape.
The revised definition includes any gender of victim or perpetrator. It also includes instances in which a victim is incapable of giving consent because of mental or physical incapacity, such as intoxication. Physical resistance is not required to demonstrate lack of consent.
"Rape is a devastating crime and we can't solve it unless we know the full extent of it," said Vice President Joe Biden, author of the Violence Against Women Act. "This long-awaited change to the definition of rape is a victory for women and men across the country whose suffering has gone unaccounted for over 80 years."

Amazon SearchBox Use it for All Meerchandise

The Forest Needs help

Summer Athlete

Adamfoxie Blog Int.

Adamfoxie Blog Int.


Relief World Hunger

Taylor Made 2016 Family Clubs

Click Here To Get Anything by Amazon- That will keep US Going

Amazon EcHo

Blog Archive/White No# Stories per Month/year

Popular Posts

Everyday at the Movies

Orangutans ARE Part of the Forest

The Gay Man in You♥ or Him