Deddy Verdict raises questions about home abuse, power and coercion Sexual assault news

The Mogul Sean “Deddy” Combs was crowned, more than seven weeks after auditing in the intensive media and a certificate of celebrity sex concerts fueled by drugs.

But under the wonderful details, defenders say there are fast food on how to understand sexual violence – sometimes tolerance – within the criminal justice system.

On Wednesday, a federal jury made a divided resolution.

I found combs sinner From the transfer of individuals to engaging in prostitution, but not guilty of the most stable issue about whether he has participated in sex trafficking or avoiding flying girlfriends and sex workers to the parties he organized.

The representatives of the prosecution described the activity of compass as a “criminal institution” that benefited from money, authority and physical violence to force previous friends on abusive conditions.

The divided judgment, in turn, is divided into what the issue means to contempt #METoo MovementThat appeared in early 2010 to bring accountability for cases of sexual violence.

For Emma Katz, a home abuse expert, the jury’s decision indicates that there are still gaps in a general understanding of sexual violence. This understanding, as it confirms, is necessary to assess the behaviors that accompany abuse and coercion in the long run, especially among intimate partners.

“I think the ruling like this will be a good day for the icon from the perpetrators,” she told Al Jazerera. “It seems that the jury has concluded that you can be a victim, a survivor, whose president is superior to you in the hotel corridors and controls your life, but you are not coercive by him.”

She added: “Many of what the perpetrators do enable them to get rid of ill -treatment – and what makes the abuse of their treatment is very horrific and sustainable – it has not been recognized and disappeared from the image in this ruling.”

“Failed” decision

How the jury reached its decision is still unknown.

But the public prosecutors were assigned to prove what is not reasonable to doubt that compass used “strength, fraud or coercion” to force his friends to have commercial sex.

The case was largely focused on the testimony of two women: the singer Cassandra “Cassi” Vinterora Fine and a woman who was only identified by the name “Jin”. Both were identified as previous friends of mothers.

He argued that Combs used his financial influence, violence and extortion threats to force Ventura and other women to perform sex during the parties known as “rhythm operations”.

The evidence of March 2016 monitoring included the Combs that overcame Ventura in a hotel lobby and then pulled it away. Vinterora gave herself The horrific certificate In the trial, saying that she felt a “besieged” in a course of abuse.

She explained that the course involves regular threats and violence, including “Dos” rains on her face in the 2009 incident.

But it seems that the defense arguments throughout the procedures were affected by the jury, according to Nima Rahani, the former public prosecutor.

The defense staggeredly admitted that Comles was offensive to Ventura, and the monitoring footage showed. However, Combs attorneys confirmed that there is no evidence that he had returned Ventura in committing sexual acts against her will.

“Home violence is not sex smuggling,” the Los Angeles Times quoted the defense lawyer, Tini Giragos, as saying.

“The big question in the case is: If you were subjected to sexual abuse or assault, why did you stay with your aggressor for more than a decade?” Al -Rahmi said. “I understand the psychology of abuse, but jury does not necessarily buy it.”

Al -Rahmani has a large -scale evaluation that the “failed” prosecutors “who follows sex from the case.

This included how public prosecutors dealt with a series of messages from Ventura, which referred to the affection of rain and active participation in sexual situations, which Al -Rahmani noticed was not revealed until the interrogation of the defense.

According to experts like Katz, this behavior can be common in abusive relationships, as the aggressor expects “happiness” to avoid physical, financial or psychological repercussions.

“It will never surprise me to see one of the victim’s survivors send love texts and enthusiastic texts of a person who said that he offends this, because this is all an integral part of home abuse,” Katz said.

“A stigma on criminal justice”

From Katz’s point of view, the judgment emphasizes the truth of what happened since the emergence of the #Metoo movement.

While #Metoo helped harass the workplace on a large scale, the general public is still struggling with the complexity of intimate partner violence.

“I think the audience has shown more willingness to consider how to harm someone by one of his acquaintances, a business colleague, a person who rents them for a job,” Katz said.

In contrast, the abuse of intimate partner is constantly raising questions to cancel the victims such as: Why did someone stay with an abusive partner?

“There is still a lot of shame when I chose this person,” Cats explained. She added that the thinking process is often: “It cannot be so bad if it remains in the relationship.”

But home violence experts indicate the complexity of invisible factors. Mal treatment can have psychological consequences, and the aggressors often try to use power over their victims.

Children, housing conditions and financial conditions can also prevent survivors from leaving and seeking help. People with such abuse may also be afraid to escalate violence – or take revenge on their loved ones – if they leave.

Experts, however, say it may be difficult to clarify these concerns in court. However, on Wednesday, Ventura’s lawyer, Douglas Wigdor, hit a positive tone about the results of the COMBS experience.

In a statement, he said that the legal team of Fentura was “pleased” with the ruling and that her testimony helped to ensure that Compass “had recently been responsible for a federal crime.”

“He still faces a lot of time in prison,” and Wigdour pointed out. The accusations of transferring prostitution, each of which holds a maximum of 10 years.

Many Vintera and others have also praised their experiences.

The ruling “shows that even when Power tries to silence the truth, the survivors pushing it to light”, and raising our voices, which is the group of invitation in the workplace, on the social media platform x.

Fatima Jose Griffs, head of the National Women’s Center in Law (NWLC), has reported that Vintera and Jane’s certificates were achievements in itself.

She said: “progress forward and search for accountability takes extraordinary courage and no jury can take it away.”

Others were less optimistic about the ruling of the jury. Arisha Hatch, temporary executive director of UV radiology, a gender-justice organization, described the ruling as a “crucial moment for our judicial system”-not in a good way.

“The rule of today is not just a stigma on the criminal justice system that has failed for decades to hold the aggressors accountable, such as Didi,” he said. “It is also an indictment for an incredible culture in which women and victims of sexual assault.”