this post was submitted on 30 Apr 2025
138 points (98.6% liked)

News

29127 readers
5127 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Felix Rojas, 44, arraigned after video showed him performing sexual acts on unresponsive passenger

Authorities in New York have charged a man with attempted rape after surveillance video taken showed him performing sexual acts on an unresponsive passenger who was later determined to have died.

Police have been looking for suspects in the case for weeks, after footage captured two different people robbing the corpse of a man on a train traveling from Brooklyn to Manhattan, one of whom allegedly sexually violated him.

Felix Rojas, 44, was arraigned on Tuesday, three weeks after authorities said he abused the male victim inside a subway car. Rojas, who was arrested on Sunday, has also been charged with attempted grand larceny.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] gAlienLifeform@lemmy.world 10 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The dead also can't have their consent violated and feel that particular psychological trauma which I think is the real root of what makes rape such a particularly awful thing.

Fair enough, but when someone commits an arson not knowing someone's in the building and that person dies it's still murder, and it doesn't seem right that defendant knowledge matters in one situation and not the other.

I'd say if the alleged conduct here is true it should be charged as attempted rape and punished the same as an actual rape, so this is kind of a semantic thing, but it's something I feel pretty strongly about. I just think that it dilutes our understanding of what rape is and why it's so horrible to call something rape when it doesn't happen to a living creature.

[–] hikaru755@lemmy.world 1 points 12 hours ago

I mean... The post explicitly says "attempted rape" and never just "rape", so isn't it doing exactly what you're asking for then?

[–] Reyali@lemm.ee 10 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

From the details given, it’s not clear if the person was dead or only unconscious at the time of the assault and it’s not clear whether the attacker knew either.

I’m not clear on your second point; you say that it doesn’t seem right that defendant knowledge matters in one case and not the other. So if:

  1. Defendant commits arson not knowing they kill someone in the building > call it murder
  2. Defendant sexually violates a body not knowing if they are dead > don’t call it rape?

It seems like not calling it rape is what would apply a double standard here based on defendant knowledge.

Our society treats bodies as an extension of a person; for example, we do not harvest organs from a body if the person didn’t consent to be an organ donor while they were alive.

Your focus on the victim’s suffering as what determines the severity of the crime seems problematic to me. If a victim doesn’t let being raped destroy their life, do we not punish the rapist as severely? We distinguish between manslaughter and murder based on pre-meditation and intent, even though the victim is still dead in both cases, and similarly I think that focusing on the attacker’s actions and intent should be the key factor in calling their actions rape.

If the defendant were going to a morgue or funeral home and defiling bodies, I may feel differently but given the timing here it feels way too grey to not treat it as rape.

FWIW, I’m coming at this conversation as a rape survivor myself. I know the level of mental devastation it can cause. And personally, I don’t think that treating the sexual assault of someone who may or may not have been dead yet (and if they were dead, had been so for no more than 30 minutes) as rape takes anything away from the severity of the crime or my experience as a victim of it.

And anyway from a semantic perspective, according to the article it is being charged only as attempted rape.

[–] spooky2092@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 points 2 days ago (1 children)

The dead also can't have their consent violated and feel that particular psychological trauma which I think is the real root of what makes rape such a particularly awful thing.

By that logic, you can't steal from the dead because they no longer own the property. Because the act of stealing is taking something that belongs to someone else.

[–] CmdrShepard42@lemm.ee 4 points 2 days ago

By that logic, you can't steal from the dead because they no longer own the property. Because the act of stealing is taking something that belongs to someone else.

This is incorrect as your property is transferred to someone else upon your death, so it's still theft.