-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
Neymar accused of rape
- Thread starter jbug617
- Start date
- Status
Well, it's missing ONE aspect of a crime as defined in any respectable Roman law derived system in the world (including Brazilian law), but only because it hasn't gone to trial yet. Please assume everything below relates to Roman law systems.
Anyone that has a passing knowledge in Law knows that the definition of a crime is : an act or an omission that violates a predefined code of conduct (aka the criminal code) and that is fully punishable under law, as in it was not committed in self defense, under necessity or during strict duty. These are the three aspects of any crime (I've condensed the first two in the first sentence).
As for the exceptions to the punitive responsibility: (Edit: which can only be accounted for during trial OR exceptionally by the DA before starting the trial - and even then it has to be homologated by the judge)
* Strict duty basically means you are an officer of the law and are expected to behave in a certain way, even it means violating a code of conduct. (Not the case)
* Necessity means you should not be expected not to behave in a certain way , often because of the circumstances surrounding your act. Say stepping on another person to flee a life threatening fire. (Not the case again)
* And self defense is pretty self explanatory: to repeal an injust threat or direct violence to your or someone else's rights. (Neymar's hope). However, it has to be proportional to the threat/violence or else you are responsible for using excessive force. Also, it has to be reasonable, as in, was it the best alternative.
Anyway, this woman was accusing Neymar (as far as I know) not on social media , but from filing a police report. At first sight, it seems to me that Neymar, unreasonably, used his social media presence to discredit her, (edit: while not making it sure she couldn't be recognized) instead of presenting his "evidence" at the same venue she used to 'attack' him (excuse me for this, I'm trying to be as clear as possible while not using my native language). Thus, it seems to me that those using the self defense card have not noticed that one key aspect of the institute is (possibly) missing from the equation.
Edit: Neymar obviously violated article 218-C by not completely blurring / suppressing victim's details before going public with it. It's a fact. Is his action punishable tho? (aka was he acting in self defense? Was it reasonable and proportional to the threat?) Doesn't seem so. End edit.
I'm also pretty sure Neymar's attorney's are absolutely not ignorant to this fact , but after weighting the public's opinion and his legal possibilities, opted for the public discourse way. His image is at stake and, honestly, that's his most relevant asset, even if it risks a criminal conviction later on.
As I said, English is not my native language and it's even harder to argue about my professional knowledge, specially considering I'm preaching about Roman derived law system in a place where common law is overwhelmingly used . But those are the first things that came to my mind after giving it a thought.
Last edited:
Thanks for that insight, was a very good read.
Indeed you might be right when you say they probably opted for him disclosing the conversations to be the best course of action.
In the edit part of her name was shown and when scrolling the blur didn't follow fast enough one part of her body (breasts). I still have no idea how a judge would interpret this since it appear to be only a mistake on the edit, instead of something it was done on purpose.
Perfectly put out, and I think most will be able to understand the points you are making here. Thanks for taking your time to post that.
Purpose (or lack thereof) is simply not relevant to this particular crime (CP 218-C). The key aspect here is the lack of consent and the public nature of the release, which are (I guess) not debatable.
The way I see it, the only relevant discussion to be had is about self defense or not. A crime was (apparently) committed, only thing left to see if he's is punishable for it or if there's an exception to his punitive accountability.
Anytime!
The CP 218-C is clear cut and dry that it's not about animus, so it doesn't really matter if he has exposed her thinking it'd be excusable as self defense. The court of public opinion isn't the court of law, and his actions exposed this woman, her body, her face, her name and her kid's name. Like you, I don't work currently in the criminal field of Brazilian law, but the virtual crime aspect of this debacle is quite easy to discern what happened, and I don't think self defense would stand in a court at all in this particular case. There were ways for him to show the text messages without showing her images or name at all if he was more careful, then there wouldn't be even a crime investigation on this particular fact.
One thing I'm not quite sure of is if the fact that's what he did is actually coded in the first paragraph of CP 218-C (previously had an intimate relationship with the victim, adding 2/3 to the sentence) allows him a sursis or not, since he is a first-time offender (if we do not take into account a rape condemnation) and the legal penalty is 1-5 years. What do you think?
It's always good to find a fellow Era member working in our legal system in this crazy times, haha.
[
Well, I honestly don't think the self defense line will be accepted, not because it is not applicable to this particular crime - after all, self defense is applicable to every type of crime, since it pertains broadly to criminal accountability and not criminal conduct -, but because it was (perhaps) used unreasonably and disproportionately in this specific case.
Regarding the first paragraph of article 218-C, despite the law stating that either intimate relations or revenge porn animus is enough to increase the maximum jail time, I'm positive I've been seeing precedents conditioning its incidence to the simultaneous presence of both. I think that's the safest bet, so the DA would have to potentially prove his intention, which frankly is quite hard to do, particularly because it's the main part of the criminal accountability exception argument regarding the caput crime, which will be hammered on by his attorneys.
Assuming he gets the full first paragraph treatment, I honestly don't know a thing about his credentials to weight in on the possibility of his jail time surpassing 2 years. I'd say for first time offenders with work, known address, non violent behaviours, probably minimum time, which would make him (barely) eligible. Sorry if I don't know if he is or not a first time offender, no idea really.
Edit:
I'd like to reinforce my reply to this specific part or your reasoning:
Well, I honestly don't think the self defense line will be accepted, not because it is not applicable to this particular crime - after all, self defense is applicable to every type of crime, since it pertains broadly to criminal accountability and not criminal conduct -, but because it was (perhaps) used unreasonably and disproportionately in this specific case.
Regarding the first paragraph of article 218-C, despite the law stating that either intimate relations or revenge porn animus is enough to increase the maximum jail time, I'm positive I've been seeing precedents conditioning its incidence to the simultaneous presence of both. I think that's the safest bet, so the DA would have to potentially prove his intention, which frankly is quite hard to do, particularly because it's the main part of the criminal accountability exception argument regarding the caput crime, which will be hammered on by his attorneys.
Assuming he gets the full first paragraph treatment, I honestly don't know a thing about his credentials to weight in on the possibility of his jail time surpassing 2 years. I'd say for first time offenders with work, known address, non violent behaviours, probably minimum time, which would make him (barely) eligible. Sorry if I don't know if he is or not a first time offender, no idea really.
Edit:
I'd like to reinforce my reply to this specific part or your reasoning:
You're right as in animus has nothing to do with article 218-C. It has everything to do, however, with the exemption of criminal accountability / self defense. Since one is being given as a justification to the other, animus is intrinsically attached to the verification of the criminal accountability in this case.
Last edited:
Agreed completely, but like I said, I don't see any court of law finding reasonable his response to something he was accused in a police report with images of an woman he had an intimate relationship with. He could do his defense without showing her images, it's incredibly disproportionate, and regardless the fact that I agree that his team of lawyers weighed on this before the video, it was an incredibly bad call. What I mean that it doesn't requires animus was in the sense of needed to be seen as "revenge" to qualify as crime, I can't really see a scenario where showing naked pictures and the name of the woman he is been accused of rape to 119 million of people at least could possibly be seen as self defense against a rape accusation.
With that said, I think a DA could quite successfuly make a case for the first paragraph of 218-C: first, what is revenge? Revenge is to make an act to counter something that an agent feels it's been wronged by the one he or she applies revenge to. As Neymar says himself in the video, "he will expose everything about the intimate moments" he had with the woman. One can say that it's for self defense, but is it really? He was accused of rape, so his reaction is to expose her sextings, name and her kid's name? He might think consciously that this isn't revenge. But at least to me, it's quite clear that it's connected with the presumption that once she was so into him, she was sending him sextings all the time, then what she said couldn't possibly be anything but a set up. I do think that in this case, both the two qualifiers for the first paragraph are there: intimate relationship with the victim and revenge porn, in the sense he had the idea that showing what he sent to him absolves him somehow. The agent that is practicing the crime might not have a full conscious understanding of the reason of what he has done, but the consequences to the woman are quite clearly the consequences of revenge porn.
Last edited:
blurred images exclude revenge porn intent, show degree of effort to protect her intimacy. Her side will argue that's not enough and still constitutes a crime, his side will argue that nu-uh, also self defence. Some reasonable arguments on both sides. They'll court fite. If she loses the rape charge, she'll almost certainly lose this too.
A very interesting analysis on Neymar's behavior on his video.
I only think the creator should have used other videos of Neymar speaking in public for a baseline, but very very interesting analysis.
And for those who already judged him as a rapist, dont worry, the video doesn't come to the conclusion hes neither innocent nor guilty.
I only think the creator should have used other videos of Neymar speaking in public for a baseline, but very very interesting analysis.
And for those who already judged him as a rapist, dont worry, the video doesn't come to the conclusion hes neither innocent nor guilty.
The pictures weren't all blurried. Showing 'degree of effort to protect her intimacy' and still exposing her breasts (not blurried), a full frontal picture of her naked ass (only partially blurried), her face, her name and not to mention her kid's name in a private chat she had with him and without her consent falls under the CP 218-C. Anyone that analyzes the video throughly would find that at some points, all of that was shown. She "won't win" a criminal case of being victim of revenge porn because as we know a case like this will be a subject of a public criminal action, and it will be handled by a D.A.. What he did, clumsily or not, it still falls under CP 218-C.
Last edited:
face and name are irrelevant, since a matter of public record from the moment she pressed the rape charges, and by themselves arent enough to incur sanctions from 218c. If a pic is partially blurred, it aint full frontal. Showing a kid's name aint an offence in itself, so i dunno why you keep repeating that bit. She most likely wont win, even if she hires a lawyer to assist the parquet, because her case is weak and his defence has mitigating factors. The best she's got is, as you mentioned, the breast pic, which, sure, would normally be enough to fill 218c. Penal law usually doesnt look at stuff in a vacuum tho, so.
The way you are talking, you are implying that it only "look at stuff" in a vacuum against the victim, and even if I am not a lawyer that works in the criminal field know that's not how it works. Neymar's posting naked images of the woman that he had an intimate relationship with, exposing her image, name and making it completely easy to identify her falls under the CP 218-C. Period. I have absolutely no doubt about that, and contextualizing that he made it possible to identify her by showing her face, her name along with her breasts will certainly be deciding factors, since a crime doesn't happen in a vacuum either. "Self defense" by exposing an woman's naked body isn't really a measured and reasonable thing anyone could argue for.
Then perhaps you should remember the bit where criminal law errs on the side of the accused? (in theory, anyway)
And yet thats almost certainly what will be argued if it comes to a trial. Probably successfully too.
But hey, i might be wrong.
Of course we all know that, innocent until proven guilty. But the materiality of what Neymar did with the exposition of the images are easily traceable. Her face shows up. Her breasts shows up. Partially her ass shows up. CP 218-C is quite clear cut and dry, if he wanted to defend himself by showing the messages, the measured and reasonable response would be transcribing the texts and only that. What's more, there is this:
The accuser is doing everything though the proper channels. The one trying to use public opinion against her is Neymar, not her. The CP 218-C case in the other hand though is clearly cut and dry and even Neymar's father admitted that they prefer to commit "a virtual crime" than stand with the rape accusation. Exposing an woman's body on a social media account with 119 millions followers because she filed a police report against you is absolute ridiculous and wouldn't hold as a self defense argument in no civilized country. Brazil has many problems, our judiciary too. But we are not barbarians, and I don't see how anyone with judicial knowledge would buy into the "self defense" argument once faced with the information that the woman's body, name and face were all exposed by him on that video. It makes me sick in my stomach.
Last edited:
How can you say this with a straight face when we have logs of her wanting to release the story/video to public saying she wants to end his career and the Lawyer being the one to stop her from doing that explaining it was a bad idea. Angry or not, saying she would attach herself to PCC to kill Neymar is NOT going through the proper channels.
BTW, it seems the case about the self admitted rapist CR7 was retired........., So in the end, resulted in nothing(Link is in Brazilian-Portuguese)
To add more, Brazil president has declared his support for Neymar because he's a good boy and he hopes he can give a hug on him before the game because of that difficult moment
Was only moved to a different court due to the 180 day deadline running out, because Ronaldo is dodging the papers:
Grotesque
What, I know Bolsonario is a major douche but giving support without knowing all the facts... DAMN
He really is just a caricature of an human being.
What is happening here? Weren't both having sex and he became being aggressive? Why are they clothed? WTF???Apparently this is the screenshot that the girl sent to a famous tv show here in Brazil (the show will probably air the whole video or at least an edit of it?)
Supposedly this is in the second meeting... when he got there and saw she was recording.
Also Neymar lawyers are contacting dermatologist to defend that her bruises (the pictures that she took herself and attached to the medical report) are scars from treatment of stretch mark removal by lasers. And googling those kind of scars my mind blown comparing to her pictures....
Its not looking good at all for her....
Apparently this is the screenshot that the girl sent to a famous tv show here in Brazil (the show will probably air the whole video or at least an edit of it?)
Was he being aggressive towards her before this to justify having a camera recording in what cleary seems as an effort to catch someone?
There is a guy that comes into the bar that will break out into tears talking romantically about Ronaldo.
He will always be innocent to a degree.
No idea, her story is not linear... first she says that they were having sex and he started being agressive and that she recorded it all.
after they had sex and he hit her, she sent him a picture of her buttocks that was red (like if he had slapped her) saying she wanted more, and that next time he will get a more wild version of her or something along those lines.... next day she proceeds to almost beg for him to come see her again.
Now the video is supposedly from the second meeting at the hotel... you can clearly see shes wearing clothes...
I think it was Neymar`s father that told the press that when he got that he noticed the smartphone recording and that she pushed him into the bed... so yeah, its very very confusing so far....
She's live on an interview at SBT network.
She's saying that he was slapping her and at first it was ok. She said stop and he stopped, said he was sorry and then resumed. Then they changed position and he kept slapping her. (Holding her) She then left afterthat.
She also says that she asked for condoms which he didn't have but they had sex without .
Her explanation to keep chatting with him is that at first she didn't realize she was raped. When she did realize that he violated her she kept talking in order to lure him to meet her again. (Hence the video recording on the second meeting)
So far her version is sound. Now we wait for Neymar's version.
She's saying that he was slapping her and at first it was ok. She said stop and he stopped, said he was sorry and then resumed. Then they changed position and he kept slapping her. (Holding her) She then left afterthat.
She also says that she asked for condoms which he didn't have but they had sex without .
Her explanation to keep chatting with him is that at first she didn't realize she was raped. When she did realize that he violated her she kept talking in order to lure him to meet her again. (Hence the video recording on the second meeting)
So far her version is sound. Now we wait for Neymar's version.
also i think there's an important distinction, i think we can take allegations seriously and not throwing . a victim under the bus without deciding an outcome without investigations and trials commencing
The video was released
Just a small cut, we need the rest for sure.
But the 1 min released, they get into the room, they lay on the bed and you can listen she giving Neymar a sounding slap.
Neymar - No, not like that, I dont like that
Girl - You will hit me today
Neymar - No, cut it
He proceeds to leave, she then start hitting him over and over saying that he hit her the day before, and left her all alone in the bedroom.
Yeah, thats too staged to be from a girl whos traumatized in my opinion. She hit him hard so he would fought back and she would get that on camera.....
Just a small cut, we need the rest for sure.
But the 1 min released, they get into the room, they lay on the bed and you can listen she giving Neymar a sounding slap.
Neymar - No, not like that, I dont like that
Girl - You will hit me today
Neymar - No, cut it
He proceeds to leave, she then start hitting him over and over saying that he hit her the day before, and left her all alone in the bedroom.
Yeah, thats too staged to be from a girl whos traumatized in my opinion. She hit him hard so he would fought back and she would get that on camera.....
Last edited:
I did in the post above, but when they lay on the bed she suddenly out of nowhere deliver a huge slap ( I would presume in his face) and he then proceed to cut all and try to leave.
urgh i don't know
that " you hit me and left me all alone" ..... might not be rape, but i dunno
look let's just wait for authorities to figure this thing out
Another translation for reference, this is more or less what I could understand.
The calm part, very hard to listen:
Neymar: like what?
*First slap*
Neymar: Noo no no no don't hit me like that no.
Girl: No? Are you going to hit me? No? Are you going to hit me, huh? no?
*She gets up, starts to hit Neymar*
Girl: But I'm gonna hit you. Do you know why? Do you know why I'm gonna hit you? Do you know why? Because you assaulted me yesterday.
Neymar: calm down
Girl: Yesterday you left me here alone...
The calm part, very hard to listen:
Neymar: like what?
*First slap*
Neymar: Noo no no no don't hit me like that no.
Girl: No? Are you going to hit me? No? Are you going to hit me, huh? no?
*She gets up, starts to hit Neymar*
Girl: But I'm gonna hit you. Do you know why? Do you know why I'm gonna hit you? Do you know why? Because you assaulted me yesterday.
Neymar: calm down
Girl: Yesterday you left me here alone...
THANK YOU.
Constantly trying to imply that the alleged victim points aren't sound and implying shit like "she was coached' for an interview it's incredibly disrespectful to her.
In the interview, she is saying that she did go to meet Neymar because she wanted to have sex with him, but when they started making out and he started slapping her, at first it was ok, but then it got harder and she asked him to stop. He apologized and they proceeded to making out, and then she says she asked if he brought any condoms, he said that he didn't have it, and then she told him that nothing other than making out would happen, because she didn't have it either. She says that she thought that he understood because while he didn't say anything, she thought that his silence meant that he understood that nothing but making out would happen, at least not without the condoms. She says he turned her and forced himself into her, pounding and beating her ass violently. She said no. She asked him to stop. He didn't comply. She says that she entered in a state of shock, because he didn't have to do that. She wanted to have sex to him, that was the reason she accepted to go to Paris and met him. But he didn't need to be violent with her and rape her, he didn't need to violently spank her. She seems genuinely sincere and I believe she is telling the truth on what she is telling.
She says that once she realized how stupid and violent he was with her, once she realized that she had ask him to stop but he didn't, she kept talking to him to confront him personally for what he did to her, she wanted to lure him to the hotel so she could confront him about what happened in the other night.
This woman like she says, could find different ways to get money if she wanted. She didn't need to make these things up. I feel like people are vilely trying to discredit her and I'm pleased to notice others are worried about that as well.
I will try to find a versions with subtitles to post here, its way too much dialogue for a fast transcription.
Last edited:
yeah this translation, it doesn't look good for neymar with this one
Holy shit at this thread and the one person trying to constantly paint an alleged victim of rape in a bad light.
She was the one that filmed the video, and that's pretty much what I hear she saying as well.
She was the one that filmed the video, and that's pretty much what I hear she saying as well.
- Status