Rape as therapy?!

[dick27]

I did search to if this had been discussed already and couldn't find it.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cw99e1vpe58o

Woman wins civil rape case against therapist

'The High Court heard he said his penis was "like a laser beam" that could "burn up trauma" during the £750 session.'

I'm shocked and horrified on so many levels.

'Barristers for Mr Lousada, who now lives in Germany, said he had previously engaged in penile penetration with about "30 to 40" clients.'

That's astonishing in so many ways.

Well done Ella Janneh for her persistence.

Agreed and agreed.

Please tell me this utter pervert is not allowed to practice in Germany.

Many years ago I heard that there was a therapy centre in London that was exclusively for people who had been abused by therapists. I found this utterly shocking at the time and hard to believe, even though the person who told me was highly credible.
Brava to Janelle for bringing justice. I hope her life going forward is nothing but happiness.

Sorry, hayfever brain. I meant Ella.

WTF.

Thats all I can say.

Cdr Kevin Southworth, who leads on public protection, said: "We strive to deliver the best service we can and take allegations of rape and sexual assault seriously, so it’s concerning whenever we hear that someone feels let down.

Where has Kevin Southworth been living?

Home Office-held data for the year to September 2021 show that a mere 1.3% of the recorded rape offences that have been assigned an outcome resulted in a charge or summons.

The judge continued: "Having listened with care to the defendant giving evidence in this case, I am satisfied that the scale of his confidence in his own abilities was such that his perception of reality became clouded by his sense of self-worth."

I'm satisfied that he needs going over with a metal pipe.

That's vile. I remember a 'spiritual healer' a few decades ago with a predictable variant on the laying-on of hands. These men. ugh.

Oh, it's the Met. Maybe that's where the complaints went wrong...

This case is horrific and deeply shocking.

Ella is incredible for pursuing this.

Really important to note that the traumatic response of "freeze" was mentioned. I've not seen it in a court case before. It is SO common for women to react with freeze or appease to threatening situations with males. Especially if the woman has already been victim to an attack by a man.

The reason in the other trauma responses - fight and flight - are often impossible due to the power imbalance between men and women. They might even put us in more danger. Freeze/ appease is our nervous system trying to keep our body alive.

This is why women don't often fight back. This is why women sometimes "choose" to go along with certain scenarios rather than make a fuss.

The implications of this ought to be understood by all men who care about consent. It is relevant to personal, medical and legal scenarios especially.

What I find confusing about this case is this part

"The court previously heard that Ms Janneh did not ask for or consent to the use of penile penetration as a "therapeutic technique"."

Does this suggest that, had she consented, this "therapeutic technique" is absolutely fine??
I mean, this is "therapy" for victims of sexual assault - how can it ever be acceptable? Surely it's an abuse of power?

Loads of them pretending to be new age gurus as well. Delusional and beyond vile. Any setting where they can abuse the vulnerable.

Brave lady, though.

His website is still up and the testimonials are creepy beyond words.

A male friend of mine was foreman on a jury for a rape trial, they convicted.

Anyway, discussing this more widely down the pub one night he said he couldn't understand how anyone would want to rape someone because who would want to have sex with someone "who is crying and screaming".

I said "women often don't cry or scream when they're raped"

He looked astonished. ASTONISHED. Had no concept.

Which is concerning in terms of his own concepts of consent, but even more so that he'd sat on a rape trial and was unaware of this.

This was precisely my thought. Surely it is illegal for a therapist to have sex with a client even if they consent? It is an abuse of power. Obviously this poor woman did not consent, but the argument that they couldn’t prove that and so couldn’t convict is asinine.

This is what the article says about proof:

'Ms Janneh brought civil action against Mr Lousada, where cases are ruled upon on "the balance of probabilities", as opposed to criminal prosecutions, which require a higher standard of proof "beyond reasonable doubt".

This meant she needed to prove that it was more likely than not that she did not give consent to the sexual activity, rather than prove that Mr Lousada did not reasonably believe that she did not consent.'

I don't totally understand that, & if anyone can shed any light that would be interesting.

This might be helpful - if the claimant has to prove assault and battery rather than rape as defined in the sexual offences act then perhaps the defence of reasonable belief under that legislation is not available to the defendent in a civil case, though lack of consent by the claimant needs to be shown to be more probable than not.

In respect of civil proceedings for the sexual assault or abuse itself, the claim will generally fall under the more broad headings of the torts of assault and battery (also known as trespass to the person). Any unwanted touching of one person by another will fall under these headings.

https://www.saunders.co.uk/news/as-a-victim-of-sexual-abuse-or-sexual-assault-can-i-sue-the-abuser/

I'm sure an actual lawyer will come along and say whether my guess is correct or not.

This is awful . It is also a reminder that there is no category of people that is above suspicion of sex crime. None.

This seems at the heart of so much make abusive behaviour. This quote would work in pretty much every situation.

In civil law the test is lower - it's whether on the balance of probabilities something has happened. For criminal it's beyond reasonable doubt.

For a criminal offence of rape to result in a guilty verdict you would need to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the offender did not reasonably believe that they had consent for the act. This can be almost impossible to prove (as evidence by our tiny rape conviction rate)

The civil charge he was found guilty on involved proving that it was more likely than not that she didn't consent - I'd imagine that would be much easier to prove, I'd expect written consent forms for a start for any kind of intervention like this (not that I consider it an intervention), the fact that he apparently regressed her to a childlike state first indicates that she didn't consent.

So criminal rape would involve proving he knew he didn't have consent.

The civil case she brought meant showing it was more unlikely than not that she consented.

Very different thresholds.

Thanks @letthegamesbeginagain Yes, it was this bit that I was having trouble with:

'So criminal rape would involve proving he knew he didn't have consent.'

I was wondering how one could prove what was in someone else's mind.

It's that he could not reasonably have believed he had consent.

So to take an extreme example, if someone was heard yelling no and stop, and had obvious injuries from physically fighting, you could say there was no way the rapist could have reasonably believed there was consent. It's not about proving what was in his head, but about what could reasonably have been believed.

(I'm aware you don't need to fight back or yell for help in order for it to be rape, I was just using an example of something obvious)

And yet I'm sure we've all seen defences of 'rough sex play' & 'all women say no when they mean yes'.🙄

Not disputing what you wrote, just acknowledging how many hurdles there are to getting justice.

'Barristers for Mr Lousada, who now lives in Germany, said he had previously engaged in penile penetration with about "30 to 40" clients.'

Do we think 30 to 40 women consented to penile penetration as therapy???

Agreed - that's why I added the bit about people hearing her yelling to stop. Depressingly it felt like the only way I could make my example something that would be likely to be convicted.