Rule of lawlessness

“Palace of Injustice” suits it better

If the previous post wasn’t enough, there is a newly released report that confirms this fact: We don’t like laws very much.

The Rule of Law Index 2012 (made by the  NGO World Justice Project) finds that Venezuela isn’t just the worst law-abider in Latin America. We’re also rock bottom in government transparency, regulatory enforcement and fundamental rights.

We’re not better in corruption and security. In both areas, the country was ranked 14th out of 16 countries.

The crowning achievement is that our criminal justice system is the worst of the 97 nations reviewed in this report. After all, in nine out of ten cases the accused don’t go to trial here.

The two Luisas (along with the People’s Ombdusman) should be very, very proud of this.

89 thoughts on “Rule of lawlessness

  1. OT – despite all the lawlessness which is all Chavez’s fault (sic) the 16 D election will still go ahead. How many states will the oppoistion win this time? Last time it was 5. There’s a good chance that tehy will hot win any – but I will give them just ONE – Miranda and that is not safe.

    Any other guestimates? Come on you optimists.

    BYW – Venezuela being 94% urban in just crap. It manes that fewer than 2 million people live in the countryside which is hardly believeable.

    Finally of you don’t like it here go and live abroad in Spaon, Portugal or Italy, for example.. You can come back any time. The Bolivarain Constitution guarantees it.

  2. Measured National IQs are negatively correlated with social trust, crime and war. Also no true democracies exist below a national IQ level of 90.
    Data here:

    https://lesacreduprintemps19.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/intelligence-a-unifying-construct-for-the-social-sciences-richard-lynn-and-tatu-vanhanen.pdf

    Some discussion here:
    Western countries get dumber by the day

    http://www.d-intl.com/articles/international/2012-09-20/western-countries-get-dumber-day

    Argentina 92.8
    Bolivia 87.0
    Brazil 85.6
    Canada 100.4
    Chile 89.8
    Colombia 83.1
    Costa Rica 86.0
    Cuba 85.0
    Dominican Republic 82.0
    Ecuador 88.0
    El Salvador 78.0
    Guatemala 79.0
    Haiti 67.0
    Honduras 81.0
    Jamaica 71.0
    Mexico 87.8
    Nicaragua 84.0
    Panama 80.0
    Paraguay 84.0
    Peru 84.2
    Portugal 94.4
    Puerto Rico 83.5
    Spain 96.6
    United States 97.5
    Uruguay 90.6
    Venezuela 83.5

    Even if IQ is only 60-80 percent hereditary, what hope can there be for Venezuela where one third of the births are from teenage mothers?

    Re: Western countries getting dumber, witness cities in he US consider de-criminalizing domestic violence to save money:

    http://theweek.com/article/index/220089/legalizing-domestic-violence-topekas-terrible-plan-to-save-money

    You can’t make this up.

      • I think you sadly have a point. I am concerned about the accumulation of expensive to treat disorders which modern medicine allows, as well as the strong evidence that modern society is leading to a falling IQ among all of mankind. People need to be aware of these problems, and work towards solutions such as genetic counseling, family planning and hopefully in a few decades genetic engineering. Anything else is inhumane.

        But presenting it in possibly racist terms as LT does is stupid, and counter productive, since these problems exist for all mankind…

        • We are all scared of the possible consequences of bringing in nature into the realm of the crime debate. But despite the danger of misinterpretation I want us consider the importance of IQ for society (especially for crime statistics). And as a mother, the importance of commitment over many years to furthering the IQs of our children. When I lived in Venezuela I read a terrible book about crime in the barrios and how children abandoned by their mothers develop into stunted personalities that never ever recover. The book was written by religious people but it said that for these stunted criminals, redemption (in the catholic religious sense) was impossible. My reaction was negative. How could religious people write in terms of an enternal condemnation, nothing more un-crhistian. But later I read other books that convinced me of the truth of this conclusion. The book was titled Y salimos a matar gente. . This problem of abandoned children, IQ and crime is like global warming, once we have created it it will be with us for many generations.

          • Excuse me,
            But having children is no excuse for presenting as serious research a patently racist article where the main concern of the author is that most children in Danish schools wont be white in a few years.

            • The use of the term racist to stop people from discussing sensitive topics is a fascist strategy. Sensible people recognize that the immigration problem in Europe is essentially religious and the most scandalous aspects of this problem are the promotion of cousin marriage and general misogyny, which entail terrible genetic and crime statistics (especially horrible genetic defects which were unusual becoming common place and a drain on tax payers, explosive number of gang rapes, gential mutilation, honor killings etc). The management of this condition is not racial at all and there is no solution, the condition can only be managed. Latin America is lucky not to have this condition.

              • You are posting as something valid an article where someone is clearingly stating that one race is genetically superior to another, I think is fair to assume that you share the author´s conclussion, which is kind of the text book definition of racism. If calling a text book definition racist racist is fascist, then call me Benito Mussolini.

              • Your problem is with immigration an cultural issues, yet you bring supposedly biological reasons (that are not stated as this by the original authors) to give power to your arguments.

    • I’m not a social scientist, but I thought IQ tests were completely debunked about 50 years ago. My understanding is that they were shown to measure nothing except how well people did on IQ tests. Anyway, Phillip Rushton is dead but his legacy lives on, evidently.

      • IQ tests were never “completely debunked,” it was just made clear that by themselves they are not an absolute indicator of potential in any individual. Statistically, they do show a solid correlation that holds up over time in large groups. I don’t agree with LT’s fatalism, but I think we can all agree that education (which influences IQ) plays a role in the success of democracies. But I agree it makes no sense to set immigration policy on an individual’s IQ, which is a poor test in any individual, rather on a person’s merits, drive and love of their new adopted country.

        Also, social welfare is great and humane, but to address the lack of selective pressure generated by modern medicine and the social safety net we will need alternative ethical solutions. Family planning so parents have the resources to educate their children, genetic counseling and hopefully in a few decades genetic engineering. To ignore this fact and allow unnecessary suffering in mankind is itself inhumane.

        This discussion is really OT though!

    • IQ tests are bunk, they only measure how well you can take an IQ test. They’re not objective the same way Newtonian physics are. Latin America’s pretty screwed but we’re not innately dumber than the developed nations of the world, only unlucky in our political fortunes.

      • Not quite, IQ tests time and again demonstrate to be measuring something, and they measure that “something” very well. What has been debunked is that the something they measure is Intelligence, as people understand that term.

        This has been corroborated many ways. One of the most interesting examples I can think of right now are that married couples have a statistically significantly high chance of being within 30 points of standard IQ test scores from each other. Another example, my favorite example, is that dolphins tend to spend a considerably more time dedicated to low IQ people while in a pool with groups of people.

        By the way, strictly speaking SATs are IQ tests.

        Clearly, intelligence is something we all seem to perceive about others and even animals, though no one can pinpoint exactly what it is. IQ tests produce scores that are very highly correlated with this thing that people perceive, but, of course, you’re free to focus on its failures.

        • Oh, definitely. IQ tests measure something and they do it very well. I suppose what annoys me is when people take it to be a measure of intelligence and a universal one at that. Intelligent people are obviously intelligent even without a test and dumb people are, well, dumb. I do subscribe to the theory of multiple intelligence though, and IQ and SAT do a poor job of that. I remember a girl back in uni who scored excellent marks on the SAT and is top of her class in law school. She thinks Norwegians come from a country called ‘Norwegia.’ I fervently wish IQ could somehow measure that.

          • “She thinks Norwegians come from a country called ‘Norwegia.’”

            You may want to reconsider your example. Firstly, because you seem to be addressing ignorance rather than intelligence. One can be extremely knowledgeable yet dumb, or extremely intelligent yet ignorant.

            Secondly, because though your example demonstrates the person’s ignorance, it also demonstrates a very intelligent generalization from other cases of word derivations. Given that you mention her high marks in SATs and especially from law school which in USA requires LSATs which are all about logic, I would bet it’s not a coincidence that she is scoring high; my bet is she is intelligent.

            This reminds me of the forward of a MENSA society book that mentioned a problem a professor gave his class: to determine the cooking time of a 10lb beef loaf in a 400deg oven so that the center reached 175deg. One student spent all night coming up with complex scientific formulas finally producing one that given any oven temperature and loaf weight would produce the number of minutes it would take to have the center reach any desired temperature. Another student went to the supermarket and purchased a 10lb beef loaf and put it in a 400deg oven and timed how long it took. A third student called his mom and asked, “Mom, how long does it take to cook a 10lb beef loaf to 175deg in the center in a 400deg oven?”

            All intelligent. IQ tests measure all three pretty well, but none of the three perfectly. I like the sound of Norwegia.

            • “I like the sound of Norwegia.”
              Then you go ahead and hire that lawyer to defend you in court for whatever.
              I wouldn’t be as liberal as to go along with the pretty sound of what is patently false. The woman studied law not poetry, ET.
              Jeesh. Comeflor, anyone?

              • syd, I’m not sure from your comment if you agree or disagree that someone who is ignorant of “Norwegian is to Norway” can be considered intelligent if their best guess is taken from cases like “Armenian is to Armenia”.

                In fact, I’m not sure if you agree or disagree on the distinction between intelligence and ignorance, as per this case.

                I’m also not sure how studying law makes one target for judgement based on knowledge of names of countries. Isn’t that ironically exemplifying what the original comment was about, using irrelevant tests for reaching conclusions about intelligence?

                As to hiring her as a lawyer, I rather hire one that makes an intelligent guess than one who would look like a deer caught in headlights when they don’t know an answer. If she were my lawyer, not only would I be confident that she would learn the names of any country relevant to my case, I would be confident that she would be intelligent enough to know which ones are relevant.

                I’m least of all sure as to why you would side against someone with high marks in class and standardized tests, given your past flagship of education. Are you suggesting that this one lack of knowledge rules her out as intelligent? Rules her out as a good lawyer? Rules her out as well-educated?

                I’m also not sure why my appreciating this person’s kind of intelligence would make me a comeflor, but I’m not surprised that a post by you would have to include a personal judgement of the one posting instead of any counters to any of the relevant matters being discussed. Does that say anything about your intelligence? About your psyche?

                Jeesh, indeed.

              • ET: You have waaay too much time on your hands for the all cagey-ness you employ to defend yourself and your ideas, god forbid anyone should disagree with hypersensitive you. And no, the use of the Polish language did not come up in the comments by ElJefe.

              • syd, you project onto me being the one with too much time on my hands and being hypersensitive when it was you who addressed me first to add nothing to the subject matter, sidestepping every question, and instead attempting to diminish me and someone else I don’t even know. lol

                About the polish, are you suggesting that I rule out the girl having a polish source in her environment without any further information? Would that be the action of a critical thinker?

                The ironies.

    • I read your first link, do you? Seriously racist stuff. Not better than what stand in the ’30s in german books, sadly. What is your IQ, may I ask?

  3. Sure, Intelligence is a factor for many things and of course it has a genetic component. But there are a lot of other things that affect IQs, poorly nutrition, lead in wall paint, pesticides, lack of stimulation. That make comparing IQs from Canada with Venezuela or Bolivia not a “smart” thing.
    And IQ is only the “hardware” put the wrong “software” and you have Nazi-Germany, for example.
    Teenage motherhood is a problem of his own, no need to mix it with IQ.

    • “And IQ is only the “hardware;” put the wrong “software” and you have Nazi-Germany, for example.”

      Hear hear! Surely here there is consensus.

  4. I’d like to measure the IQ’s of people who believe the Venezuelan opposition when they say Chavez is going to take their kids away.

    I’d like to see how low your IQ has to be to believe a former judge who said she got pregnant from a rape in jail at the age of 46.

      • Did your sister also complain of hot flashes? Because Afiuni did… Thanks for demonstrating how brilliant you all are…

    • ¿Quién lo diría? El gringuito izquierdista trasnochado usando los mismos argumentos de los republicanos para descalificar a una mujer, diciendo, sin pruebas, antes de una investigación formal o sentencia de un juez, que una mujer que fue violada miente. Das asco

      • Hard to investigate a rape that supposedly occurred more than two years ago genius. Just one more reason why you have to be “very special” to believe a person who waits two years to accuse someone (who? well, she won’t say) of raping you. And then make the accusation through the media… provocan risa…

        • El hecho que no se pueda investigar no significa que no pudo haber ocurrido genio, una cosa es lo que se pueda probar en un Tribunal y otro lo que paso en verdad. Me imagino que serán muchas las migajas que te tiran en venezuelanalysis para que vengas a trollear acá y abandones cualquier tipo de verguenza y compasión humana.

          • Of course it could have happened. A lot of things could have happened. But smart people don’t usually believe empty accusations unless there is some kind, any kind, of evidence. And they tend to not believe outlandish accusations that are fairly improbable. This is the difference between smart people, and, well, you all…

            • En la mayoría de los casos de violación la única evidencia es la declaración de la mujer, porque la evidencia física desaparece sólo horas después de que ocurrió el ataque y los violadores tienden a no hacerlo en frente de multitudes (algo que sabe la gente inteligente). Por eso la gran mayoría de las violaciones que ocurren quedan sin castigo. Sin contar el miedo y la vergüenza de denunciarlas. Por ello muchos violadores y reaccionario usan argumentos como los tuyos (descalificar a las víctimas porque son de mediana edad )Pero bueno si no te das cuenta de la repugnancia de tu comentarios das lástima, de como la posición que asumes contradice muchos de los postulado sobre genero que tu ideología supuestamente defiende, imagino que más puede las babas que derrama por Chávez y el dinero que te pagan por escribir esos articulitos que nadie se molesta en leer.

              • Right, which is why you guys were all over the accusations of rape against Nixon Moreno, right? Oh, whoops, bad example…

              • Tu no sabes lo que yo dije pensé u opiné sobre el caso de Nixon Moreno, nunca he sido del tipo de persona que inmediatamente descalifica a una mujer que acusa a un hombre de violación antes de que por lo menos una investigación o un juez exonere al acusado. No te preocupes chamo, yo so que los hacks de tercera que deshechan las universidades americanas tienen que comer también, sigue trolleando y cobrando los chequecitos

              • “persona que inmediatamente descalifica a una mujer que acusa a un hombre de violación antes de que por lo menos una investigación o un juez exonere al acusado.”

                One small problem here. She hasn’t accused anyone, and she refused to make the accusation formal, so there’s no way a judge can exonerate anyone. How convenient huh?

                Just because a woman claims that she was raped doesn’t mean everyone must automatically believe her.

              • No tienes porque creerle, pero tampoco significa que haya que ir a un foro público y esconderse cobardemente detrás del anonimato del internet para ofenderla, pero ese tipo de sutilezas como que te eluden a ti. Y el hecho que personas de la oposición desestimaran las denuncias de la mujer que alegó que Nixon Moreno la violó no hace menos cobarde e hipócrita tu comentario, te hace igual o peor que ellos, es como una excusa de niño de kinder.
                Chamo tu no o vienes acá desinteresadamente, eres parte de la red de propaganda internacional de este gobierno, parte de tu trabajo es venir a trollear acá y varias veces lo has hecho bien y le has callado la boca a unos cuantos, pero hoy de pana te hundiste en un pozo de mierda.

              • Actually, I come here because I can’t believe people like you actually exist. People who are so fucking dishonest, even with themselves, that they can’t admit reality while staring it in the face.

                I’ve already admitted that Afiuni’s accusations could be true. Yet you can’t bring yourself to admit that it all could be a lie. You simply can’t be honest, even with yourself.

                You all are simply incapable of seeing your own errors. Just look at Quico, finally erasing all his bookmarked websites after 9 years of getting it wrong over and over and over again. It is simply fascinating…

            • ” But smart people don’t usually believe empty accusations unless there is some kind, any kind, of evidence. And they tend to not believe outlandish accusations that are fairly improbable. This is the difference between smart people, and, well, you all…”

              In three years that Afiuni has been incarcerated they have not found “some king, any kind of evidence” of the money that Afiuni supposedly received for freeing Cedeño, and yet, she has been incarcerated without a trial.

              What were you saying about smart people , GAC?

              • There’s no need for evidence of the money, because that’s not the only crime she is accused of. Whether or not she received money, she followed illegal procedures and facilitated the banker’s escape from justice. Always funny to see who you all choose for your “victims.” A corrupt banker who stole millions, and the judge who helped him make it to Miami so he could freely enjoy his millions. Poor victims of the rrrrrrregimen.

              • Normally, what happens if a judge follows irregular or “illegal” procedures is there is a stay of the order and an appeal. WTF??????

              • Yes, I’m sure in the US if a judge helped a prisoner escape from the courthouse and flee the country they would simply let that judge go free. How stupid are you guys?

            • “Actually, I come here because I can’t believe people like you actually exist. People who are so fucking dishonest, even with themselves, that they can’t admit reality while staring it in the face.”

              I guess that just shows how empty and shitty your life is then. If this is what you spend your time doing, then I really do pity you.

              Que bolas,GAC, das lastima verdaderamente!

        • Jerry Sandusky feels your pain GAC. Let me guess, there is a mechanism in the female body which prevents pregnancies arising in the case of rape…you didn’t mention that one now, did you? Whatever. You are scum. Not even interesting scum.

          • yes, because questioning sacred truths that are based on zero evidence is scum. When a woman claims she was raped we must all simply bow down and accept her world as the sacred truth. Like I said, it takes a “special person”…

            • GAC, read up on it. There will be no independent investigation under this administration- the people tasked with potentially launching an investigation and prosecution on her behalf were casting doubt on the allegations publicly the moment they were published. Scumbags of your ilk. Mercenaries.

              As to why a JUDGE being held in a GENERAL PRISON POPULATION on patently trumped up grounds would not publicize her rape while in said prison… well, you are a fucking idiot if you can’t get your head around that one.

              And if you don’t consider the account of the woman evidence, then may I suggest you would do well as counsel in say, the 15th century.

              • There’s nothing to investigate. Afiuni refuses to say who, when, or where any of this happened. What exactly are the investigators supposed to do? Hire a psychic?

    • Keep it classy, dude. You know why rape victims don’t come forward or wait years? Because of people that try to cast doubts on whether their attacks even happened. I’m not going to try to appeal to your sense of morality because you’ve already proven how warped yours is. Feel free to respond with any combination of ‘stupid’, ‘right-wing’, ‘oligarchy’, ‘paranoia’ or ‘IV Republic’. In fact, mix all of them together if you like.

      • Sure, and there’s a change that a monkey will fly out of your ass too, but not a very good one.

        The likelihood that a 46-year-old woman who complained of hot flashes would get pregnant from a single sex act, let alone a rape, are EXTREMELY slim. Not impossible, but definitely something that is so unlikely that any reasonable person would have serious doubts about believing such an accusation. Of course, “reasonable person” is the catch here.

        • Get a clue,

          What numerical value do you associate with “EXTREMELY slim” and where do you get your number? From what I have read, rape and consensual sex have nearly the same pregnancy rate. Do you have any biological basis for believing the rate would diminish for rape?

          Besides, it’s not about whether there is reason to doubt, but whether there is reason to believe. A statement was made regarding a crime which by law should be investigated regardless of a victim’s pressing charges, yet the prosecution seems to imply that they won’t investigate. Are we to understand that you support the sidestepping of an investigation, or do you support that, as per the law, an investigation be carried out?

          As to defining the reasonableness of a person based on the conclusion of one side rather than on the openness to facts and arguments, well, that just says something else about a person, doesn’t it?

          • The chances of getting pregnant with a single sex act are very slim even for healthy young adults. The stars have to align on so many levels, there is only about a 24 hour period in which a woman’s egg is available for fertilization, and that’s just the beginning. Sperm have to make it to the destination, the fertilized egg must travel down the fallopian tubes and successfully implant itself in the uterus. This is basic stuff you should have learned in middle school.

            Now, when talking about a 46-year-old woman who has signs of menopause, its pretty likely that she wasn’t producing an egg at all, or irregularly at best. You do the math. It is extremely unlikely.

            As for the investigation, there’s absolutely nothing that can be investigated. The supposed victim won’t even say who allegedly raped her, nor will she say when or exactly where it happened. Yet you all fall for it… redonditos…

            • By the way, statistics say that the probability of getting pregnant from a single sex act are between 3 and 5 percent. After the age of 40 women are 50 percent less likely to get pregnant and decreasing from there on. So where does that leave us for a woman of 46? Again, you can do the math.

              • That’s for a woman of 40. A woman of 46 is even less likely. Anyone who thinks a 1 or 2 percent chance is “likely” obviously has no clue what the word “likely” means.

                But you’ve proved my point beautifully. You have to be really stupid to believe the accusation on face value, with absolutely no evidence to back it up. Thanks once again Torres, you never let me down.

              • By the way, that’s 1 or 2 percent only IF she is still ovulating. If not, it is ZERO percent. A very likely scenario at age 46.

              • Get a clue, there is a difference between “reasonably likely” and just “likely”. Used alone, likely means more than 50% chance of occurrence. Reasonably likely means that it is not so unlikely that its occurrence would go against reason. A 2% probability would be a godsend of likelihood for a casino gambler, or a nightmare for a person not wanting to get pregnant…

                You keep showing your true colors, Get a clue; I’m glad to help you do that.

              • Get a clue, you just proved that you without any help could come up with something that the prosecution could have investigated, which contradicts your previous use of the word “absolutely”. I would agree to include verifying conditional as part of the investigation. Would you agree to support an investigation?

              • Get a clue, clearly, any alleged rape would have had to have happened before that. See? Even you can narrow down the dates. An investigator should be able to do better than us. Do you support that they follow the law and start an investigation?

              • This was after she had already left the prison, moron. Christ, you don’t even know the most basic facts of the case, yet you believe every word… This is precisely why I say it takes a “special person” to fall for this nonsense. Once again, I feel like I’m talking to a 4-year-old…

              • Why do you say I believe the case? I’ve just said that a rape allegation must be investigated, BY LAW. You keep avoiding the question. Do you support that law, or do you suggest that the government sidestep the law?

              • Estás diciendo que como la posibilidad de embarazo en una violación es baja, entonces toda mujer que alegue quedar embarazada producto de una violación es una mentirosa? Ese es tu propuesta? O que en el caso de Afiuni, ella es mentirosa porque la probabilidad es 1,5 a 2,5? Cómo es eso distinto de la patraña de la violación legítima? Tu mamá y las mujeres de tu familia imagino se deben sentir muy orgullosas

              • I’m not saying she is a liar. I’m saying her story shouldn’t be believed without evidence to support it, because it is extremely unlikely.

                You all, on the other hand, think it is outrageous to even QUESTION her story, even though she won’t even say who, when, or where.

                The whole point was to show how dumb you all have to be to fall for this. My work here is done.

              • Get a clue: “I’m saying her story shouldn’t be believed without evidence to support it, because it is extremely unlikely.”

                Leaving out the word extremely because we already have a measure, 2%, which is not extreme at all, I agree. We should not believe her story without finding evidence to support it, but you seem to also be saying that we should disbelieve it until evidence is found. That would be just as wrong. The reasonable thing is to take things at face value, investigate for supporting evidence, then decide what to believe or disbelieve.

                But you are calling this latter stance idiotic and worse, while demonstrating that it is you at fault. I do question her story, so at least when addressing me, you need to stop saying I don’t. The difference is that I see questioning as the root for investigation, whereas you seem to be suggesting that nothing be investigated even if by LAW the government is required to investigate.

                So, do you support opening an investigation?

            • There are things that can be investigated, at the very least checking the logs of all men entering and leaving at the times and on the dates in question. That throws out your “absolutely”, which is the word choice of an unreasonable nature.

              As to whether the victim cooperates or not is by law independent to whether the investigation should take place. And it’s not a matter of falling for it or not, it’s a matter which you keep sidestepping:

              are you supporting the law that states that the prosecution should look into the matter, or are you suggesting that they ignore the law in this matter and not investigate further?

              • Again, you aren’t very bright Torres. Afiuni refuses to say when this happened, so there goes your suggestion to “check the logs.”

                So, I’ll ask again, what should they investigate?

            • Get a clue, she doesn’t, BY LAW, have to say anything regarding dates or anything else for the matter to be investigated. Rape is a different kind of crime. Besides, she’s been under government holding, so they should be able to determine if there were any men in the vicinity without her help. Do you support that an investigation be started?

            • Get a clue, you are back to projecting on the not brightness thing. The government can investigate if during her whole stay any men had access to her. They can interview other people to see if they saw or heard anything. The key is that the LAW protects her from having to cooperate in ANY way for an investigation to be started. Do you support the law, or are you suggesting that it be ignored?

              • They already have interviewed fellow inmates. Not one of them believed Afiuni’s story, because you have to be an idiot to believe it, plain and simple.

            • Get a clue, so now you are suggesting that the law only be followed if I provide you with what should be investigated? It shouldn’t matter but I already said, start by determining if the allegation is even possible, by looking for windows of opportunity, for starters, as well as the biological component you yourself mentioned. Given your condition is met, and that the law says so, do you agree the law should be followed and an investigation started?

            • Get a clue, do you have to be an idiot to suggest that the government not follow the law with regard to starting an investigation? Are you suggesting the law be ignored? Don’t worry, I’m not holding my breath for you to grow up and answer a direct, “reasonable” question.

              • I already answered. Just as soon as you can give a reasonable answer to how they could possibly investigate something when the victim won’t say who, when, or where.

                I’m going to go show up at the Ficalia tomorrow, and tell them all that I was raped two years ago. But when they ask who did it, where it happened, and when, I’m going to refuse to give any of that information, but demand that they investigate. Sounds reasonable huh?

            • Get a clue, your scenario of going to claim that you were raped to then refuse cooperation may seem unreasonable, but that is the basis of the law requiring that an investigation be opened: rape victims are not expected to be reasonable. Besides that, it was not Afiuni shed public light on this, so your scenario is unfair to her. To answer your scenario, however, I say the Fiscalia needs to investigate even if you offer no further information. I would start by trying to figure out why you would come to the Fiscalia if you were not going to cooperate. My investigation would discover this set of posts on this blog and would determine that you were only doing it to prove a point.

              See how the investigation thing works? Do you agree that the law should be followed and the rape investigated? Or do you suggest that they sidestep the law? You have not answered this, at least not without a conditional. Straight up, dude. Do you?

  5. You are impressing Get a clue,
    you must go to Venezuela and stay at a for a couple of days, then you can tell us here, how lovely your fellow inmates were to you… you don’t need to tell them you are actually a judge…
    see here how lovely they normally are:

    http://www.ultimasnoticias.com.ve/noticias/actualidad/sucesos/reos-descuartizan-a-violador-de-nina-en-carupano.aspx

    You remember me of my fellow pinochetistas friends, who were denying all the “communist lies” about his hero… sadly you are not any better at this…

  6. you may also take a book about biological variability and one about statistics with you and discuss this with your fellow inmates…

  7. My brother suggested I might like this website. He was entirely right.
    This post truly made my day. You can not imagine just
    how much time I had spent for this info! Thanks!

Comments are closed.