Forum Settings
Forums

Husband cuts off rapist's penis after seeing his own wife being sexually assaulted near their home in Ukraine - and now faces a longer sentence than her attacker

This topic has been locked and is no longer available for discussion.
 
#1
Oct 21, 7:23 PM

Offline
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 1770
The husband, 27, saw the attack taking place just yards from his home in Kharkiv
Dmitry Ivchenko, 25, dragged the woman into the bushes and attacked her
The husband found him and sliced off his penis to end the brutal assault
The rapist faces five years in jail while the husband could face eight

A husband has chopped off the penis of his wife's rapist after seeing her being attacked yards from their home in Ukraine.

The 27-year-old husband was on his way home when he saw the horrific episode in Shevchenkovo, a village in the eastern Kharkiv region.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7583121/amp/Husband-cuts-rapists-penis-seeing-wife-assaulted-near-home-Ukraine.html

The husband should be release while the rapist deserve longer jail term.
Modified by Gorochu, Oct 22, 5:27 AM
My Wife is a Demon Queen
 
#2
Oct 21, 7:25 PM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 25397
That's stupid, shouldn't that be self defense?


 
#3
Oct 21, 7:41 PM
Bmob Yrrehc

Offline
Joined: Aug 2009
Posts: 5385
Hoppy said:
That's stupid, shouldn't that be self defense?

Technically no since, if my understanding of self defense is correct, at least for the US, you can only deal as much damage as your attacker. But, "self defense" cases are seemingly often treated like "fair use" on YouTube, so it's a dice roll that more or less depends on the jury to say if the self defense claim holds water or not. Feel free to fact check me, though.

Even so, I still agree with your sentiment in that this is bullshit. The husband is retaliating on behalf of his raped wife. And I think it's fair to assume that someone don't have to get raped in order to know that the emotional toll of someone getting raped is greater than a rapist getting their genitals cut off. ...well, unless you're a part of Ukraine's judicial system apparently.
 
#4
Oct 21, 7:46 PM

Offline
Joined: Feb 2017
Posts: 2664
"The husband found him and sliced off his penis to end the brutal assault"

10/10 article. The husband had no way to stop the attacker but to slice off his penis which requires precision, time and the rapist to be completely neutralized. Makes sense.

Hoppy said:
That's stupid, shouldn't that be self defense?


Rofl, no.

"The husband then attacked the rapist by punching him on the head before grabbing his Swiss army knife and chopping Ivchenko's penis off.

'The husband lost the ability to control his actions. He did not understand what he was doing.' "
 
#5
Oct 21, 8:11 PM

Offline
Joined: Oct 2014
Posts: 322
>Ukraine
kek

Prosecutor Tetiana Vasileva commented: 'The rapist said that he was dumped by his girlfriend a week ago. On the day of the incident, he drank a litre of vodka. He is refusing to say more so far.'

mein guy is gucci if all goes well. Key word here is "could", thing is a court can't just ignore a a Tort just because the husband was the hero of the story. It'll likely get dismissed or be reduced to compensation.

 
#6
Oct 21, 8:13 PM

Online
Joined: May 2018
Posts: 983
This man should get a medal lmao, why is Ukraine cucking?
 
#7
Oct 21, 8:16 PM
Offline
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 48813
i lol at this news, but damn this kind of news is expected on poor 3rd world shit holes like where i live though
 
#8
Oct 21, 8:17 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 1058
Hoppy said:
That's stupid, shouldn't that be self defense?


No BUT you what you CAN plead is temporary insanity. Like if a group of people broke into your home and murdered your entire family, and then when you walked in the door they all immediately started to run away; if you shot them all to death in a fit of rage you'd probably get away with it in court even though it wasn't out of self defense (at least here in America and rightfully so). It would be what's known as a crime of passion.

And frankly the man in the story who defended his wife is a hero. The punishment for rape SHOULD be getting your dick getting chopped off (as well as your balls) not to mention having to pay the victim to cover some of the permanent psychological damage you inflicted not to mention you should have to serve at least a few decades in prison as punishment where if we're lucky you'll end up getting raped yourself. As far as I'm concerned an eye for an eye AND THEN SOME (you forced your decision on somebody else, even steven isn't enough). Murder and Rape are two crimes where we should really be going all out on those who commit them.
 
#9
Oct 21, 8:18 PM

Offline
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 2722
That is one less repeat offender though.
It is not very productive to have crimes of this nature be severely punished.

I can see you


 
Oct 21, 9:27 PM

Offline
Joined: Aug 2017
Posts: 92
He was witness to the horror of his significant other being sexually assaulted. Loved one being hurt, sanctity of marriage desecrated, and only a few yards from their home no less. I cannot imagine any self respecting man to not retaliate violently at this grave offense.
Prison and castration was too easy on the rapist.
 
Oct 21, 11:39 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 31892
What's the point in trying act like this is completely justified? It's understandable can be counted as temporary insanity maybe but not excusable to point of acting like it's a normal reaction to mutilate someone. Law needs to be fair and logical not based on nothing more than emotional outbursts which clearly would lead to inconsistency and inequality in application of law. Just because he is facing a potential sentencing doesn't mean that is what he will get.
Modified by traed, Oct 21, 11:59 PM
 
Oct 21, 11:46 PM

Offline
Joined: Mar 2011
Posts: 3000
He had to touch that thing, ew. On a serious note, I would go for the trial in his shoes (husband). I mean, who would convict or atleast truly consider the sentencing for him as justified. I also have no idea on the cultural viewpoints of such in that region of Ukraine: is it a strong believer of eye for an eye, turn the other cheek?
 
Oct 22, 3:06 AM

Offline
Joined: Sep 2018
Posts: 1472
The attacking is lucky he didn't get beat to death as that's a perfectly normal reaction. Hopefully the Husband gets away with it because things like this is where the law doesn't really cover what happened.

I would argue self defence as doing that meant the guy couldn't carry on with his attack if the husband got overpowered. It would be a lot harder to justify it if the guy went home got a knife and then did it.

 
Oct 22, 4:50 AM
Forum Moderator
Online
Joined: May 2014
Posts: 2290
Kyotosomo said:
Hoppy said:
That's stupid, shouldn't that be self defense?


No BUT you what you CAN plead is temporary insanity. Like if a group of people broke into your home and murdered your entire family, and then when you walked in the door they all immediately started to run away; if you shot them all to death in a fit of rage you'd probably get away with it in court even though it wasn't out of self defense (at least here in America and rightfully so). It would be what's known as a crime of passion.

And frankly the man in the story who defended his wife is a hero. The punishment for rape SHOULD be getting your dick getting chopped off (as well as your balls) not to mention having to pay the victim to cover some of the permanent psychological damage you inflicted not to mention you should have to serve at least a few decades in prison as punishment where if we're lucky you'll end up getting raped yourself. As far as I'm concerned an eye for an eye AND THEN SOME (you forced your decision on somebody else, even steven isn't enough). Murder and Rape are two crimes where we should really be going all out on those who commit them.


Yeah, i was about to say, the husband is just giving him the punishment he deserves.
We can be happy, when the cicadas cry.
 
Oct 22, 6:24 AM

Online
Joined: Feb 2015
Posts: 626
Dmitry Cleavejunkoff

:P
 
Oct 22, 11:58 AM
Forum Moderator
Endless Dreams

Offline
Joined: Oct 2018
Posts: 630
Thread Locked

Daily Mail is not a reputable source, and as this thread touches on the topic of sexual assault, it violates Rule 7.a. of Current Events.

Controversial/sensitive topics liable to incite rule violations (trolling, flaming, abuse) must:

a. be sourced from a reputable English-language media outlet (e.g. New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, Scientific American)
This includes, but is not limited to, topics relating to: gender, sexual orientation, race, xenophobia, religion, abortion, sexual assault, immigration, hate groups, political ideologies, controversial public figures/leaders, etc.
This is your story now.
This might be the last chance,
for all is fleeting;
'tis naught but a dream.
An unending one.
 
This topic has been locked and is no longer available for discussion.
Top