Another "game gone wrong"

[tobee]

apple.news/AGIvgMfSaR6mC2mOg-50Sfw

I feel like this is just getting worse and worse.

How was it “gross negligence” when he tied her up and covered her mouth deliberately?

Deliberate violence that directly leads to a death shouldn’t get a pass just because the killer says it was consensual.

I guess the amendment that was passed to prevent this kind of defence doesn’t, in fact, prevent it?

That’s horrifying.

Deliberate violence that directly leads to a death shouldn’t get a pass just because the killer says it was consensual.

No, I agree. They can't ask her if she consented, can they?

Alcohol always seems to be involved in these cases. This is why I'm tee-total.

Why are they saying for sure it was an accident?

If there was lots of really good evidence she was really genuinely into this then maybe.

But there's no hint of that.

Fell asleep?
Ran away?

Erm.

Poor woman.

Lol yes because

People who don't drink never do stuff like this
People who drink always do stuff like this. Everyone in the whole country including my mum who is in her 70s and enjoys a small sherry
Etc etc

Nothing to say about this actual case then apart from that's why you don't drink (although I dont think it says the victim had been drinking).

What an odd response.

I read the news and notice in almost every single crime that involves violence or theft etc there is always alcohol involved, or alcohol+drugs.

edit: Yes, I think couples who want to play BDSM games should ensure at least that the one who is "dominant" and tying the other one up etc should take responsibility which includes staying sober.

I don't want to call for a ban on BDSM (which wouldn't be very enforceable and wouldn't go down well with all the couples who do engage responsibly) but if you happen to be drunk you shouldn't be tying up someone else and covering their mouth.

And just to be clear, I'm not blaming the alcohol itself, I'm blaming him for thinking this would be a suitable activity to engage in while drunk.

although I dont think it says the victim had been drinking

It doesn't, but he was.

So you are teetotal and would only go out with another teetotal person then I'd guess. That's fine obv but in loads of these cases we have no way of knowing if it was a 'sex game gone wrong' or if he just tied her up and murdered her. Or tied her up sexually tortured her and murdered her. The no booze won't help women in the second scenario.

Alcohol is positively correlated to all kinds of crimes. To the point that if we could make one change that would have a huge effect across the board, it would be changing the nation's drinking habits.

The mantra of the BDSM community is "safe, sane and consensual." The "sane" apparently refers to the fact that nobody should be under the influence of drink or drugs during the act. "Consensual"- it is really important that participants have a safeword (or if they are gagged, some other way of communicating that they want to stop). "Safe" hopefully means that people take sensible precautions in general so that nobody gets seriously injured or SUFFOCATES TO DEATH.

So even if they were into BDSM, it should not be a get-out clause or earn him a milder sentence.

But as many others have said, it could just be a convenient excuse for someone who gets off on murdering women in a specific way.
Have there ever been any women who have used the "rough sex defence" after their partner has died? I would be surprised.

I don't now recall the sentence the killer of Natalie Connolly got:

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3456679--TRIGGER-WARNING-Powerful-message-from-a-midwife-re-the-murder-of-Natalie-Connolly-TRIGGER-WARNING

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/womens_rights/3459232-We-Cant-Consent-to-This-all-the-sex-game-gone-wrong-defences

www.mumsnet.com/news/mumsnet-joins-we-cant-consent-to-this-campaign

Makes me think of Neville Heath.