to be shocked at the sentencing in the Gayle Newland case?

[hackmum]

Eight years seems excessive to me. This is the woman who had sex with a female friend while pretending to be a man. Story here:

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/nov/12/gayle-newland-sentenced-eight-years-prison-duping-friend-having-sex

The sentencing guidence indicates GN is a very dangerous woman. Extremely calculated. Not the first time she's deceived someone like this. It mentions the court did request she was examined by mental health experts who seem to have reported back that whilst she has some serious personality issues, she is not currently mentally unwell. Basically, they seem to be saying she's evil (for want of a better word) and her sentence is long to keep her away from the public.

The judge also mentions that the affect on the victim is an aggregating factor which basically increased the length of her sentance.

Stopping What do you think victim blaming is?

stoppingbywoods probably believes it's blaming victims that she approves of.

Yes I think I might define victim blaming in different terms. I'm tired of wondering what victims were thinking when making choices that were clearly reckless, for fear of it seeming like I don't think the offender got what they deserved. (I'm quite happy for offenders to get what they deserve but would like to see consistency in that area as I actually find this sentence quite offensive to the victims of other, arguably more serious crimes for which the perpetrators have received nothing like as long).

I don't believe we are ever likely to live in a society where we don't have to protect ourselves and take responsibility for our own safety, so we have no right to live as though we do. Of course offenders shouldn't be out there but they are and we have to deal with it. We need a way to talk about that and if saying anything vaguely critical about another woman's choices is victim blaming (when those choices have turned out badly), then I think there's a need for us all to grow up and confront it head-on.

If I was the victim here, I wouldn't want to be ridiculed but I would also be happy to admit I made a mistake, for the purposes of encouraging others to learn from my mistakes and hopefully stay safer in future.

You really don't have to wonder what victims were thinking - at all. It's simply none of your business and is only useful in court for trying to work out what happened, not for discussing culpability. This is a serious crime because of the length of time GN maintained the deception for, the degree of deception involved (not just posing as a made up person to seduce the victim, but also insinuating herself into the victims life as a best friend) and the fact she's tried similar before. It wasn't impulsive, it required, on the part of the criminal, sustained motive and in depth planning. This is what makes her crimes particularly worrisome - the lengths she will go to to achieve her ends. It isn't the victim's decision making that makes a long sentence justified, but the criminal's.

There are plenty of sentences that are too short. But this sentence wasn't extended or made longer because the victim made choices that made her vulnerable. The sentence given was at the start of the normal range for the crimes she was found guilty of.

You still haven't said how you would define victim blaming. Though you were adamant that you aren't doing it.

Do you think that the victim's internal thoughts are none of the judge's business? Because we could say that none of this is any of our business, couldn't we.

Indeed, I've said that I don't think it's the victim's fault that the perpetrator committed this crime and her actions in no way justify or diminish what has happened. (Though in this particular case it might be argued that if you put a blindfold on you are deliberately relinquishing knowledge for the purposes of sexual satisfaction so there might be a mitigating factor there - but that's specific to this case). So if a woman's underwear was held up in court by the defence and he was given a shorter sentence because she 'asked for it', that would be victim blaming. If she had walked down the middle of the high street in nothing but that underwear at 3am, I believe it would also be appropriate to talk about her choices. Because while people should, in an ideal world, be able to do this, we live in a world where they simply can't and no amount of jail time for anyone else is going to make this a responsible choice.

I was surprised by the length of the sentence, but i do think it was a particularly nasty case given the extent of deception. GN seems a very dangerous individual and perhaps she will now realise she has to change. Perhaps. More likely to wallow in self pity though

Very odd that the complainant having agreed to keep a blindfold on for 100 hours is not in some way responsible for that decision and consequences. Why did she want to be blindfolded? Was it a sado-masochistic activity she was wishing to participate in?

Seems a harsh sentence to me if the complainant was consenting to this weird kind of sex. Ok it was a woman and not a man. She was deceived. But can't help but think if you choose to be blindfolded then you're part responsible.

The victim blaming in this thread is horrific.

The complainant didn't consent to sex with her female best friend, it really is as simple as that.

No it isn't. Or the defence would have had no case.

When you wear a blindfold, you are voluntarily role playing a 'victim' for the purposes of sexual gratification. Problem is, you are bound by the limitations that a real victim would have - you give the person control over you and you can't see what's happening. That's your choice. It does seem odd to complain afterwards that you couldn't see what was happening...

I don't see anything in the case that says she was wearing a blindfold for sexual gratification. From the case it sounds like she wore the blindfold to try to make her boyfriend more comfortable because of his anxiety.

There does seem to be a twang of homophobia and slight misogyny about this case. The victim consented to heterosexual intercourse and technically received that. She wasn't raped or forced at the time but clearly enjoyed the experience and requested more over a considerable amount of time. Newland didn't force her to engage in what either of them would consider 'lesbian' acts but clearly provided her with what she demanded albeit in the guise of a man. The other girl obviously felt that she had met a person she was comfortable being intimate with. Then she discovers the identity deception and cries sexual assault. This sounds like someone ashamed and embarrassed at their own stupidity and gullibility and determined to deflect any responsibility. Yes, Newland should be culpable for the identity deception but I think the assault charge is dubious. I read a few accounts of this and didn't see any mention of the victim being 'vulnerable' in the sense of mental incapacity. She was quoted as saying she was desperate for love. As for Newland, she had a history of psychological issues including obsessive compulsive disorder and sexual identity concerns. This reminds me of the teenager Gemma (was it Barker) whose case was very similar. Poor girl did the same thing - trying to give her best friend the perfect boyfriend she wanted - and in spite of being on the autistic spectrum she too ended up in prison accused of being a dangerous sexual predator. My partners sister had Aspergers and displayed a lot of very obsessive behaviour that could be viewed as calculating and involved a lot of detailed planning etc. It seemed bonkers and sometimes very inappropriate to those around her but it was part of her condition. I don't believe that Gayle Newland is a dangerous rapist who meticulously planned the horrific assault of her best friend. I think she's a very confused and vulnerable young woman who should not be serving 8 years.

She agreed to one kind of sex, but was groomed very elaborately and tricked into a very different kind of sex.
"Yes" doesn't mean permission to do every sexual variation with that person.

If another woman was blindfolded and thought she was having sex with a woman and a dildo, but it was actually a man, then that would be a similar offence.
So noone here is being homophobic.
Crime statistics show men commit 98% of sexual assaults, partly why this case is v v unusual.

It doesn't matter if the person only realises the deception after the 10th time it happens and enjoyed it on the previous occasions.
This victim was still sexually assaulted 10 times

Oh and for the poster referring to a victim walking in the street in her underwear:
If a victim gets blind drunk and staggers down the street naked, that's no reason to give a rapist a lighter sentence. The rape remains 100% his fault.

Best friend knew she didn't want to sleep with her. Knew she wanted a man. Pretended to be a man to sleep with her. How is this anything other than a cruel deception? You can't dress it up as some kind of philanthropic yet misguided act of affection.

My reference to a "philanthropic yet misguided act of affection" was in relation to the case of Gemma Barker whose behaviour was remarkably similar and who was diagnosed as being on the autistic spectrum. I was suggesting that the calculated and meticulously planned nature of the deception could be attributed to someone with such a condition. I totally appreciate all your points and if it were my own child I would of course be horrified. But, I think it's all too easy to get bound up in the more sensational language of the case and apply a one-size-fits-all conclusion of pre-medititive rape. There are clearly psycho-sexual issues with both parties and the case is further complicated by the gender-specific nature of it. Intimate interactions between women, whether straight, lesbian or bisexual, are very different from those with men (these relationships are far more emotional rather than purely sexual) and I think we should be careful not to judge them with the same criteria. I'm not excusing Newland from her involvement, merely saying she clearly has psychological problems with obsession and a warped sense of reality. I hope she receives the necessary treatment.