Why is he crying? Laura Huteson death

February 2018 Edinburgh, 21 yo Hannah Dorans is strangled by Frazer Neil (25) - with his defence being "Fifty Shades of Grey sex game wrong". He's convicted of murder and will serve at least 19 years.
The High Court in Edinburgh heard Ms Dorans, of Midlothian, had finished the four-year relationship just two weeks before but Neil could not accept she had another partner. He lured her to the flat in February 2017 and sexually assaulted her before strangling her with a cord.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6442189/Controlling-manipulative-thug-jailed-life-strangling-ex-fiancee-death.html
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-edinburgh-east-fife-46386389

I've found 2 gay men using this defence - and absolutely zero heterosexual men dying at the hands of their female partners in "sex game gone wrong"/"rough sex"

A couple more cases:

2001 Wiltshire, Gill Barter is murdered by Darren Maslen, accused of murdering his partner at their Market Lavington home told a court this week she died after a kinky sex session went disastrously wrong. He used a stun gun on her, after drugging her. Life sentence with min term 18 years.
www.gazetteandherald.co.uk/news/4089837.Family_s_dismay_as_Devizes_killer_s_sentence_is_reduced/

2015 London, Marta Ligman. Thomas Kocik is convicted of murder.
In his defence, Kocik, who is Polish, claimed he found his girlfriend dead at their flat after days of amphetamine fuelled bondage sex sessions.
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3336449/Violent-controlling-forklift-driver-murdered-girlfriend-dumped-body-canal-suitcase-jailed-18-years.html
www.murdermap.co.uk/pages/cases/case.asp?CID=544712015&VID=1175&Case=Body-in-a-suitcase:-Marta-Ligman

How often hetersexual men die during “risky” sex games because I can’t think of one case from the news?

Nah, me neither, if anything they seem to die from self-aphyxation gone wrong. (Or a heart attack in bed with prostitutes...)

These cases are horrific and very very worrying as evidence of a trend toward violent and degrading sexual practices being promoted as the norm. I have no doubt that there are many many proponents of BDSM but I think you would find that almost no women with those interests practice them with strangers because of the risk involved.

Two of these cases I know a little about - Chloe Miazek and Mandy McDonald.

The Chloe Miazek case was very odd indeed as his assertion that the strangulation was consensual was accepted based almost entirely on her ex partners statement that she had enjoyed it with him in the past.

The Mandy McDonald case was incredibly sad and one I think about quite often. She was a mother of two who was killed by her husband in an incredibly violent and degrading way. Added to which he dumped her body (the mother of his two children) in a wood and left her there for 6 days. He had penetrated her with such force using a foreign object that her bowel was ruptured. She was 4ft 10 - an absolutely tiny woman.

As many other above have said I think porn culture has a huge amount to answer for - I had reason recently to look at a popular free porn site, and there were virtually no videos of normal consensual, mutually enjoyable looking sex. It was almost exclusively women being hurt, 'fucked' and debased.

Sorry, but I don't believe that anyone is stupid enough not to realize that stabbing someone in the neck will probably kill them. If he'd run someone over with his car, backed up over them, drove forward again, and kept repeating a few dozen times, would this judge have said "well obviously you didn't intend to run them over"?

That's a good long sentence. Thank goodness for some sense.

I've read this disgusting case this morning. And the murderer was out on licence

29 years is a good sentence. Now just need to make sure that the clueless Parole Board don't release him too soon.

Actually - Richard Bailey has been given a min term: 29 years for murder of Charlotte Teeling. Judge's full sentencing remarks are below

www.birminghammail.co.uk/news/midlands-news/richard-bailey-murder-sentencing-every-15141295

I was having a think last night about Charlotte Teeling and what to do with this list of women, murdered by men who then claim they died as a side effect of consensual rough sex, always through strangulation.

I'm not sure how aware judges, barristers/solicitors, police, and definitely juries are that women frequently die (often with men they've just met) through strangulation and that the men claim the women asked for it.

I wonder if the number of women who ask randos to strangle them after a night out is somewhere close to zero, so this defence should probably never work.

Does anyone know about such matters?

February 2018, Charlotte Teeling is murdered by a man with 171 previous convictions, including many for violence "exclusively against women". They met in a "convenience shop" after she'd been a nightclub and he claims she died accidentally during 'rough sex' after asking him to 'pull her hair', 'slap her' and 'choke her'.
www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/charlotte-teeling-murder-mum-sex-13234273

Judge Patrick Thomas, QC, ruled that the murder involved “sexual or sadistic” conduct and told him: “You told the police that Charlotte asked you to squeeze her neck. Even if that were the case — and I do not accept that it was — it is manifest that she did not consent to being injured, let alone killed.

“I find that you were applying force to Charlotte’s neck for your own satisfaction and that you covered her mouth to prevent her crying out.”
www.thetimes.co.uk/article/charlotte-teeling-killer-had-171-convictions-s9dnrt7d6

Murder conviction, life sentence with the minium term still to be decided.

Bravo Judge Patrick Thomas.

This is haunting me.

I’m away from home at the moment but we need to find a way to enshrine a negation of the defence of consenting to permanent harm during sexual activity.

Drinkfeck, anlaf and others, this is such important work. Thank you

www.gov.uk/ask-crown-court-sentence-review

WeWantJustice

Several cases have been reported, of men being found not guilty of murder, after women died during sex. They claimed the dead women had consented to dangerous, life-threatening acts which ended in their accidental deaths.^

The presumption should be that the duty of care we all have to each other in every situation in life, does not suddenly disappear in sexual situations; that it is not possible to consent to be killed during sex; that "sex play gone wrong" should be an aggravating factor in sentencing, not a defence, that dead women cannot give their version of events; and that sexual pleasure is not a good enough reason to be negligent with someone else's safety^.

WeWantJustice

Several cases have been reported, of men being found not guilty of murder, after women died during sex. They claimed the dead women had consented to dangerous, life-threatening acts which ended in their accidental deaths, despite the force needed to kill.

WeWantJustice
Maybe after women died during sex would be less accusatory?

Yes, I don't know why "after killing women during sex" is contentious, that was the most neutral I could make it. I'll have a think about how to reword.

WeWantJustice

^Several cases have been reported, of men being found not guilty of murder, after killing women during sex. They claimed the dead women had consented to dangerous, life-threatening acts which ended in their accidental deaths, despite the force needed to kill. The women were not there to gainsay them. (No characters left)

The presumption should be that the duty of care we all have to each other in every situation in life, does not suddenly disappear in sexual situations; that it is not possible to consent to be killed during sex; that "sex play gone wrong" should be an aggravating factor in sentencing, not a defence, that dead women cannot contradict their killer's version of events; and that sexual pleasure is not a good enough reason to be negligent with someone else's safety or to get away with murder.^

I think perhaps the first sentence was contentious "after killing women during sex"...
The second paragraph looks good to me. Must surely be able to get a more watertight wording through? Otherwise it looks like lots of letter writing.
We need a journalist/newspaper to take this up.

I didn't make any reference to any specific cases in the petition.

So I guess I just have to wait until there aren't any of these cases going through the courts.

I may be waiting a long time.

CCTV shows woman kissing and cuddling murder suspect in 'rough sex' case - The Independentapple.news/AMlPkK_vHRZymMXWroIBTBw

What the actual fuck???

Almost every case is the same.

"Honestly, she consented to rough sex! A woman I had never met before that night told me she had rape fantasies! It was an accident, Your Honour!"

Depressingly, there is always a case like this going through the courts.

But there's likely to always be a case of this type going through the courts! Did you cite one that's currently under appeal?

I'm really sorry about this. Can it be edited and references to specific cases removed for another try?
This is so important, it's not til you read a thread like this with many cases referenced that you can get an idea of the scale of the problem. Truly shocking.

Petition people came back to me:

"We rejected the petition you created – “Abolish the defence of consent and accident, for killing someone during sex”.
It included confidential, libellous, false or defamatory information, or a reference to a case which is active in the UK courts.
We cannot accept this petition because there is currently a case about this issue being considered by the UK courts.
We only reject petitions that don’t meet the petition standards:
petition.parliament.uk/help#standards
If you want to try again, click here to start a petition:
petition.parliament.uk/petitions/check
Thanks,
The Petitions team
UK Government and Parliament"