"Rape By Deception"...

You have to give it to the Israeli courts, they will be creative in their jurisprudence if it means protecting some absurd sanctity of Jewishness and purity. If you tell lies and mistruths or you misrepresent something, like who you are for example, you might be guilty of deception. But to say you are someone you are not, or to lead someone to believe you are someone you are not, seemingly gets you in a position where you can be guilty of rape by deception.

In essence, if you embellish your personal story to get laid, then you get laid and the other person finds out that you are not who or what you say you are, then you are guilty of raping that other person because they would not have willingly engaged in sexual relations with you if they had known the truth.

This brings us to the case of Saber Kushour. It is a story I came across as I plough through the news online. I found this story at The Guardian here. The article is based solely on the account of Kushour.

The story is a sad tale because Kushour is a married father of two, and irrespective of the outcome of the case he acknowledges that his stupidity has harmed his family.

Kushour is an Arab Israeli who speaks fluent Hebrew without an Arab accent, and obviously passes for a Jew in some circumstances. Perhaps he now wishes that he did not in hindsight. Kushour has been sentenced to eighteen months in jail for the rape by deception of a Jewish woman.

The sex was consensual at the time and lasted a mere 15 minutes. Kushour's case is on appeal and attracting considerable attention in Israel for the underlying racist nature of the sentence and what this says about justice in Israel, and perhaps what is morally acceptable to Israelis in general.

Why has Kushour been sentenced to prison? This is a crude tale, an adulterous tale, where a single Jewish woman propositions a married Arab Israeli man and then has sex with him on a rooftop. To be fair the Jewish woman does not know that Kushour is married. But, Kushour is married and seemingly figured it was a good idea to avail himself of an opportunity to have a casual sexual encounter that his wife would never find out about. Unfortunately for Kushour, the Jewish woman when she found out that Kushour was really an Arab Israeli and not a Jew she lodged a police complaint claiming that she never would have had sex with him if she had known he was an Arab Israeli and not a Jew.

So, what was the legal reasoning of the judge, Zvi Segal, in this case that would allow a decision like this to be reached:

'Judge Segal conceded that it was not "a classical rape by force". He added: "If she hadn't thought the accused was a Jewish bachelor interested in a serious romantic relationship, she would not have co-operated. The court is obliged to protect the public interest from sophisticated, smooth-tongued criminals who can deceive innocent victims at an unbearable price – the sanctity of their bodies and souls."' (from the Guardian).

The problem with this reasoning is that the woman was clearly not thinking about the sanctity of her body or soul when she engaged in the consensual sexual activity. The reality is she picked a man up off the street and then had sex with him on a rooftop. The judge has seemingly gone above an beyond in constructing his decision based on the need to protect the public interest from smooth talking criminals.

It would seem that Kushour's crime is that he suggested to the Jewish woman that he was a bachelor interested in a long-term relationship. In addition to the failure to be explicit in saying to the Jewish woman. "before we have sex you should know that I am an Arab Israeli, are you still interested in proceeding with our sexual encounter?" However, it must be pointed out that the Jewish woman did not ask about Kushour's lineage either.

The judge has then decided that the Jewish woman would not have 'co-operated' if she had known that Kushour was not a bachelor, and presumably she definitely would not have proceeded had she known he was an Arab Israeli. Yet, I would argue that the simple fact that she picked this man up while he was out buying cigarettes and then had sex with him on a nearby roof suggests that she was not all that interested in a period of courtship, marriage, and then sexual relations.

Kushour might be an adulterer but he is not a rapist.

Note:
If I can find what the appeal court decides in this case I will add a postscript to this post. If the appeal court upholds this decision it will be interesting to see if anyone tries to argue and introduce it in other jurisdictions.

A Report on the Banality of Evil

I am currently reading "Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil" by Hannah Arendt. I am reading the Penguin Classic version that was originally published in 1963 and the reprint that I have from 2006. I have been wanting to read it for some time, and I finally managed to get a copy from Barnes & Noble when I was in the US in late March.

What first intrigued me about Eichmann was the international law implications of his kidnapping from Argentina and subsequent trial in Israel. The idea that Eichmann was nothing more than a functionary in an evil system is also an interesting way to examine the holocaust; evil perpetrated by ordinary men and women (primarily men).

The reviews of the book are best described as mixed, with some all for the Arendt account and others highly critical of her approach and use of "facts". I guess I will make my own judgment on these issues once I have finished reading the book.

Anyway, I will add a postscript once I have finished. I should also take it of my list of books that I wished I owned seeing that I now own a copy.

Heirs of the Knights Templar

Most people probably had never heard of the Knights Templar before Dan Brown wrote the Da Vinci Code and those that had heard of them were probably academics with an interest in the field or conspiracy buffs looking to find traces of the Holy Grail and perhaps long lost heirs of Jesus living somewhere in France. However, the Knights Templar might again rise to prominence as a recently filed law suit in Spain is suing Pope Benedict XVI and the Catholic Church for some 100 million euros.

The law suit is premised on the idea that the Catholic Church misappropriated the assets of the Knights Templar when the Order was dissolved by Pope Clement V in 1307. Aside from seeking the cash, the suit also aims to have the Catholic Church restore the good name of the Knights Templar who were at the time alleged to be heretics, devil worshippers, and sodomizers.

The Order of the Knights Templar was founded in 1119 and functioned as a band of Christian warriors that protected pilgrims on their way to and from the Holy Lands, specifically Jerusalem, during the Crusades. However, the Order fell foul of the then King of France, Philip IV, who it has been alleged owed considerable sums to the Knights Templar. The accusations brought were seen as the perfect means of avoiding paying the debt and expropriating some of the Templar wealth.

One of the many conspiracy theories is that even though the Templar were dissolved as an order in 1307 they did not disappear forever. In fact, the assertion is that they went underground and continued to practice and pass down their traditions and beliefs. This has never been proven however it would seem that the group that has brought this action, Association of the Sovereign Order of the Temple of Christ, would have the courts believe that they are descended from the original Knights Templar.

The most likely cause of this suit is that the Vatican has been taking steps to rehabilitate the name of the Knights Templar. Last year the Vatican published a book, Processus Contra Templarios, that included a series of documents that were supposedly secret or if they were not secret wrongly filed away in the Vatican Library and only recently discovered. These documents include a parchment known as the Chinon parchment. The Chinon parchment shows Pope Clement V absolving the Templar of their crimes. Nevertheless, the ruling to disband the Templar remained in place.

The Templar's last Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, was burned at the stake along with many, many other Templar, the majority of whom had confessed to their "sins" under torture. The picture is of de Molay being led to the stake.

The chances of the current claimed incarnation of the Knights Templar are not likely to succeed in this claim unless they can furnish some irrefutable proof that they are in fact directly descended from the original Knights Templar. Most pundits believe that this is just not going to happen. Yet, it makes for fun and educational reading.