Why is he crying? Laura Huteson death

I'm a vet and when I was in large animal practice I used to do jugular cutdowns to place IV cannulae in dehydrated calves quite often (just cutting through the skin and loose connective tissue to reach the vein, not cutting into the tough wall of the vein itself). Even with a new No 22 scalpel blade it takes a bit of doing and several strokes. Even in dogs, doing thyroid or tracheal surgery or biopsies in this region you have to apply a fairish amount pressure to get through the skin- let alone any deeper- and it usually takes a few strokes. The carotid artery is even deeper and thicker walled than the jugular. There is pretty much no way you could sever them without trying quite hard to do so. There is no reasonable doubt that would make me believe somebody could do it to themselves by rolling on a knife, or that somebody else could do it to them without intending to at least deeply wound them (and realistically intending to kill them).

Two other facets of this case bother me. One being that torture porn is so "normal" that it is considered reasonable to assume that the average woman would like and consent to this stuff. Another is the obssession with "innocent until proven" guilty...which leaves the woman- or her advocates if she has been killed- having to prove non-consent rather than the man having to prove consent.

So, for example, in the Ulster Rugby rape case the woman could not prove to the jury's satisfaction that she had not consented to a spit roasting from men she had only just met, and one rough enough to leave her vagina lacerated - the laceration itself obscured by the pool of blood in the images of the forensic exam- and still bleeding the next day. The statement "Well she didn't say no" (rather than "she said yes") was enough to get one of the men off the charges because that was enough; he didn't have to prove consent.

Graham Dwyer's conviction was probably only secured because the text records from Elaine O'Hara's phone showed that she had explicitly requested that he not kill her....ie proof enough that she would not have consented to being stabbed hard enough to risk death, and that she believed that he may have intended to kill her. If the phone records had not been retrieved he probably would have used some combo of "she wanted it, the more dangerous the better she liked it" and the "fucktrance, couldn't help it, didn't notice, never intended it" defence, and he might have got a conviction for a lesser charge and a lighter sentence.

This is where porn and the legal system have got us....where men can get away with acting out a real life snuff movie.
.

Great post Chatty
Why would not noticing make him LESS culpable and responsible for his use of a knife held at her throat? That claimed lack of attention and (or certainly admitted lack of care - who knows what his actual motives were and if they were even that ‘benign’) surely should make him MORE culpable as PP have said?

Indeed. It makes NO sense whatsoever. Unless of course, one is grabbing at any excuse for lethal male sexualised violence against women?

It really has to stop. No 'sex game gone wrong', no manslaughter charge on the table - straight out murder. Sick of the ridiculous sentencing.

Pornographers have complained that viewer demand is such, that there is no where more to go short of killing a woman. That is how bad it is.

Gaskell pleaded guilty to manslaughter through gross negligence. There was no trial.

There is a good article from a Hull online newspaper outlining why he was charged and sentenced for manslaughter rather than murder.

www.hulldailymail.co.uk/news/hull-east-yorkshire-news/jason-gaskell-handed-six-year-1885607

That's fantastic wewantjustice - reads really well

You’d think if a judge can believe a woman would have consensual knifepoint sex with someone she has just met, he could accept some men have a fetish for snuff.

This.

Right, latest draft:

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. (8 characters left)

Any more feedback?

Great rant post ChattyLion

We only have the evidence of what Laura Huteson said by the person who drove a knife into her throat (and lied about how her throat was cut in the first instance - she rolled onto the knife - and only changed his story later to a 'sex game' gone wrong.

He murdered her.

The woman was raped and murdered and he's going to prison for 3 fucking years. If you wanna get away with rape, just murder them too and label it as "sex game gone wrong"

It is indeed a message to violent men to rape and kill for sexual gratification and then to claim sex gone wrong. I would add, how did the cocaine and alcohol get into her blood stream?

Telly it’s about it apparently being basically fine and quite understandable that a man ’doesn’t notice himself’ stabbing or slitting a woman’s throat.. because the man is so absolutely occupied in getting his rocks off.

What is this?

Snuff is what it is.

You’d think if a judge can believe a woman would have consensual knifepoint sex with someone she has just met, he could accept some men have a fetish for snuff.

This is a man who gets off on nearly killing women, he literally orgasms to pretending to kill them. That's a known, undisputed fact.

Of course there's no evidence she didn't consent, she's dead. She had also been drinking vodka and taking cocaine, can anyone consent to risking their life under the influence? Of course not.

Like Bowl I have some experience of human dissection at uni and its not easy to just accidentally slip and sever somones jugular and carotid artery. He murdered her, he'd met her that evening and he murdered her.

What's so sickening is this almost jolly discussion of sex games, like it's a totally understandable, unavoidable accident to slit someone's throat during sex. That dying is some unforseen consequence of strangling someone and holding a knife to their throat. "Poor man is a victim of sex game gone wrong and now he has to go to prison" it's almost "I could see this happening to me".
The woman was raped and murdered and he's going to prison for 3 fucking years. If you wanna get away with rape, just murder them too and label it as "sex game gone wrong"

NothingOnTellyAgain the strangling was earlier - she told another woman who was in the house with them about it.

“After the other couple left to get cigarettes at 2am, a woman, Alicia, came back and asked Ms Huteson, also of Hull, what was wrong.

Ms Huteson, the court heard, said Gaskell had strangled her during sex, but she had “safe-worded” him to get him to stop.

She couldn’t breathe and she didn’t think he would stop, but he did.

The couple who were with Ms Huteson and Gaskell left at 5am, with Alicia making Gaskell promise he would look after Ms Huteson.”

This is sick, any man can just rape and kill a woman and then argue that she consented!! How can anyone not see the massive gaping hole in that defense? Can her family appeal?

Hear hear ChattyLion well said!

I would put money on this man doing the same thing again.

Other men will follow his example too, knowing they will get a reduced charge and a light sentence, especially if they shed a few tears to gain the sympathy of the judge and jury.

This sacred fuck phase thing - is this related to something the defence or judge said? I feel like I'm missing some info.

This case has really upset me..I just can’t find the words to express how I feel.

Thank you to you all for being so articulate and proactive.

Only Man enters this sacred uninterruptable fuck-trance that renders him incapable of normal adult responsibility.

This, this, this.

Not a rant, Chatty - a fabulous post.

PP posted this quote:

"Ms Huteson, the court heard, said Gaskell had strangled her during sex, but she had “safe-worded” him to get him to stop.

She couldn’t breathe and she didn’t think he would stop, but he did."

Said it was from the mirror but I can't see it on the article?

This seems to imply that she was able to tell what had happened before she died - anyone got any further info?

Just reading the mirror version.

This is weird:

"Sentencing, Judge Jeremy Richardson QC said Gaskell “repeatedly took colossal dangers and risks when indulging your sexual fantasies"."

What risks was he taking? He preferred women and so his partners would generally have been smaller and weaker than him. He enjoyed strangling / knifing them. What was the risk for him?

Is the judge referring to the risk of causing death to his partner or being prosecuted? Under the circs this is a very peculiar application of the word risk, to my mind.

Let’s hope this fucker can’t find a way to erase his past, eh?

MASSIVE FUCKING RISK TO WOMEN AND GIRLS.

Fro m the longer report:

"In this case it was clear Gaskell did not intend to kill Laura which put him in the category of involuntary manslaughter."

On what basis are they making this statement?

Also, that he obviosuly poses no risk to the public. I would say this man poses a massive fucking risk to women and girls but hey what d I know..

Not at all, Chatty, I agree with everything you wrote and am heartened by the way you expressed it.

Completely agree that, utterly horrifying though it is to have to go there because of the climate created by vile misogynists pursuing their kicks, children and young people need to be told.

"I gather the drawcard in all of this, is a 'promised' (to men) uber orgasm as the woman dies with him inside her"

What is this?

Sorry to rant.