AIBU to be angry that it's now ok to sexually assault overweight women?

[WithTwoGiantBoys]

Today Paul Gasgoine was cleared of sexual assault after he admitted forcefully and sloppily kissing a complete stranger on the lips. He somehow successfully argued that as the woman was a "fat lass" there was no sexual desire in his action, he was just cheering her up after some other prat had commented on her weight. I an FURIOUS that this decision erodes women's bodily autonomy, nobody should have to put up with a drunk man's attempted pity snog just because she is overweight.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-50068077

It was the jury that let him off. The system put him there!

what a nasty piece of work

Just seen an advert, he will be on Good Morning Britain next week.

@hormonesorDHbeingadick
He wasn't found guilty of anything in this case and was free to go.

It's absolutely shocking.

As a fat lass, I am appalled. And disgusted. But not surprised.

YANBU.
It's not even a fact that the woman in question had been insulted, leading to Gascoigne's gallant behaviour in attempting to give her some confidence. The prosecution claimed there were no witnesses to her being insulted, so his so-called 'defence' of his actions is even more suspect. Once again, women are expected to put up and shut up and be grateful for the attention.

I sat on a jury many years ago and was astounded that so many of the other jurors twisted and interpreted wrongly the evidence and what the judge said.

It was embarrassing and very frightening. The correct result was made but my god it took hours to convince some of them to only consider the facts and not add their theories to it.

I would hate to be reliant on a jury.

MarieG10 it was at Teeside court.

I disagree that it doesn't matter what kind of kiss it was. You will never convince me a small peck on the cheek is sexual assault

Agreed. My DH was asking me what I thought and I said well it depends whether he tried to shove his tongue down her throat or not. A peck on the cheek, not very welcome but I wouldn't go to the police about it. Would have been tempted to give him a slap, actually.

And yes, trying him in the north east was a bit silly.

The people on that jury are morons.
Another bad day for women in this country.

I live in the north east, everyone I know think he's a wanker.

Such arrogance that he thought a disgusting kiss from him, the great Gazza, would be enough to boost her confidence. Total shite.

It was a sloppy kiss on the lips.

But it really doesn't matter. He had no right to touch her in any way. She had not invited a kiss, she did not consent to a kiss. She was kissed on the lips by a creepy drunk man (she had no idea who he was incidentally) against her will. And he has passed this off as ok because this is what the entitled prick thinks he can do to cheer up a "fat lass."

I know he passed it off a a 'peck' which our ears expect to hear followed by 'on the cheek', but it was on her mouth, and 'sloppy'. The fact that he claims to have been doing a 'fat lass' a confidence-boosting favour should not surprise us. Interesting that the argument in his defence was about his feelings, not hers.

If someone can weasel out of sexual assault by saying their feelings weren't sexual, we need a clearer definition or different label.

I think the day he turned up with chicken and a fishing rod to a police stand off with a killer was the day the north east thought Tosser.

timeywimey Agreed. My DH was asking me what I thought and I said well it depends whether he tried to shove his tongue down her throat or not. A peck on the cheek, not very welcome but I wouldn't go to the police about it.
It was not a 'peck on the cheek' though, was it? Would you be happy with a drunk man kissing you on the lips to 'cheer you up' - which he apparently did not deny - because it's not as bad as him attempting to 'shove his tongue down [your] throat'?
This argument is reminiscent of the one that there is 'bad' rape (stranger up dark alley) and 'not so bad' rape (girl was drunk/may have given rapist some attention earlier in the evening, etc).

There really is no excuse at all for a man forcing unwanted attention on a woman at all.

I haven't been following this at all but words actually fail me.

Why on earth does he think being kissed by some gross old man would cheer anyone up? 'I kissed a fat lass' in his words wtaf....?

So this means then a man can basically do whatever he likes and as long as he claims that the motive wasn't sexual that's okay? Surely the only possible defence to any sort of sexual assault is that it was accidental (on a packed train or something) which this clearly wasn't. It's about violation not the motives of the abuser.

Utterly shocking

A jury of people like you and me have heard all the evidence that was admissible and decided it could not be proved that this was a sexual assault. I've been a jury member and can see how they had to end up there.

The fact that Paul Gascoigne has a history of domestic violence, racism, drunkenness and appalling judgment and seems to think giving a girl a kiss she hasn't consented to is a better way to support her than having a verbal go at the blokes who fat-shamed her is, sadly, neither here nor there in this case. Unfortunately 'not guilty of the charges as brought but guilty of being a very sad excuse for humanity' isn't a verdict a court jury can bring. But it's clearly the verdict of a lot of people, and the fact the CPS was willing to take it seriously enough give it a punt is (in my view) at least one step in the right direction.

Like he was doing her such a favour
My God, it's no wonder they call rugby the gentleman's game.

I deal with a lot of cases like this at work and for a more “minor” sexual assault ie sexual assault by touching, it’s often just impossible to convince a jury beyond all reasonable doubt that the touching was sexual. This is the definition of the offence and so one of the points to prove. We often charge them with a common assault or a public order offence instead as it’s easier to get a conviction.

I’m not saying it’s right at all by the way. It was a smart defence from his team as it introduces just enough doubt in the jury’s mind. That’s the way our legal system works 🤷🏼‍♀️

There really is no excuse at all for a man forcing unwanted attention on a woman at all.

This. If a woman should just accept and tolerate an unwanted kiss from a man, where does that leave you? If it's OK for an individual man to force a kiss on you (as long as no tongues) then presumably any and all men can. I think when those that think it's OK follow their logic and realise that, potentially, they are saying they'd tolerate getting slobbered on by umpteen men in the space of a short tube journey they'd realise it's very far from OK. Zero tolerance for all things related to unwanted sexual attention is the only sensible target to aim for. Anything less is defeatist.

Wasn't the crux of this whether there was a sexual element behind it. And in this instance the jury found there was not? So the intent wasn't sexual. It was an unacceptable drunken act with a different intent.

I don't think the jury are saying it's ok. They were asked to find if his intent was sexual, and they found it wasn't.

Clearly what he did was not acceptable, however I don't think we can assume it was sexual based on nothing more than media hype.

Extrapolating it to say it's now ok to sexually assault over weight women I think is a bit much.

YANBU

@MarieG10. I live up there in Newcastle and that rubbish, people here don’t still consider him a semi-hero, they consider him a washed up joke

I live up there in Newcastle and that rubbish, people here don’t still consider him a semi-hero, they consider him a washed up joke

It's a strange assumption that people who live in the north east can't assimilate the facts as any other group. He is a washed up joke and I would personally assume anyone with any sense would see that regardless of where they live