When I state NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG have attacked my PERSONAL IDENTITY----AKA, IDENTITY THEFT---- where a person who is GOOD, MORAL CHARACTER is portrayed as opposite through various means-----this is a description of SEXUAL ASSAULT as it pertains to a citizen's fundamental rights to PHYSICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL integrity-----WELL-BEING.
When NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG work so hard to create VOICE BITES knowingly being used to create FAKE video/voice streams attached to non-CONSENTING VICTIMS of illegal surveillance of inside apartments/homes to include capture of stages of undress ----ie. PORNOGRAPHY----this can be used to identify NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG knowing these illegal surveillance acts are CRIMINAL. If one tries to falsify CONSENT then one knows those actions are ILLEGAL.
Sexual assault violates the victim’s fundamental rights, including the right to physical and psychological integrity and security of the person (p. 22).
'However, protection of individuals’ physical and mental
integrity is a primary duty of states, which should be implemented through the criminal law',
The statement above moves this fundamental right of protection from SEXUAL ASSAULT away from only INTERNATIONAL CRIMINAL COURTS----but makes it clear it is a DUTY of SOVEREIGNS NATIONS to protect these human rights via CRIMINAL LAW.
Many of the articles I including in today's DEPOSITION are taken from AMNESTY INTERNATIONAL HUMAN RIGHT JUSTICE ORGANIZATION and INTERNATIONAL CRIME COURT---ICC.
In order to incorporate human rights law and standards in its practice, the Court’s interpretation of the definition of the crimes should address the behaviour and actions of the perpetrator, and how this affects the victim’s ability to exercise free and genuine choice, that is, to enjoy his or her human right to physical and mental integrity and sexual autonomy, without discrimination. The Court’s deliberation should not just address the victim’s purported ‘consent’ in isolation.
All references to the term ‘consent’ within the Elements of Crimes must be interpreted consistently with a fuller, more accurate and human-rights based understanding of the word
consent–that a consensual decision is a decision made without force, threat of force, coercion, or taking advantage of a coercive environment.
Where evidence of force, threat of force or coercion is present, there should absolutely be no additional element of law of consent for the prosecution to prove.
There are two time periods in NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG illegal surveillance pornography in this case. First, the target does not KNOW that this illegal surveillance is happening------then, at some point that target discovers these pornographic actions and are left to decide how to escape exposure. I discovered and immediately worked to eliminate exposure/compromise inside my home-----but, as well, the victim of these kinds of sexual assaults inside homes must consider two things. First, do I allow these attacks to force me to VACATE my home? Second, if I VACATE my home I know there will be a next person who is SEXUALLY ASSAULTED----and conscience does not allow one to open this door for a next victim.
ALL THIS MUST BE CONSIDERED WHEN COURT CONSIDERS WHETHER VICTIM WAS UNDER FORCE, COERCION, TAKING ADVANTAGE OF COERCIVE ENVIRONMENT TO MEET TERMS OF 'FAILURE TO GIVE CONSENT'.
I want to distinguish between a more common determination of SEXUAL ASSAULT-----that being RAPE-----vs what I have been victim which is illegal surveillance pornography inside my home and one case that will include BUSINESS TOILET CAM activities.
Whereas a defense may deem SEXUAL ASSAULT as having to include PHYSICAL PENETRATION----PHYSICAL TOUCH by perpetrator-----US and international law recognizes SEXUAL ASSAULT can occur without any physical contact-----
'agreement to sexual contact of both or all parties to that contact, whether or not such sexual contact involves penetration'...............whereas the definition of other kinds of sexual violence is potentially extremely wide, due to the variety of methods chosen by perpetrators to commit these crimes':
With the soaring online pornography sites I know as many these pornography posts often have not been captured via PHOTO----or VIDEO-STREAM with consent-----while knowing these kinds of PORNOGRAPHY are indeed classified as SEXUAL ASSAULT.
'The ICTR continued:
“Sexual violence is not limited to a physical invasion of the human body and may include acts that do not involve penetration or physical contact. Sexual violence covers both physical and psychological attacks directed at a person’s sexual characteristics.”'
The BILL CLINTON/MONICA LEWINSKY ----I DID NOT HAVE SEXUAL RELATIONS WITH THAT WOMAN--------was a FALSE FLAG-----promoted again by our US FAKE NEWS media. Whether ORAL SEX or PORNOGRAPHIC SEX------if no consent was given----if the victim had no ability to stop these attacks-----this is still considered SEXUAL ASSAULT. Lewinsky case was different. She claimed sexual assault in workplace ----Lewinsky's case was one of POWER being COERCIVE----but Lewinsky did have the ability NOT to perform ORAL SEX. Lewinsky's case was WORKPLACE and POWER OF EXECUTIVES over employees AKA workplace sexual harassment----whereas I am victim of home invasion -------sexual assault without consent through technology ----NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE with cameras and microphone capture of devices placed inside apartment and or devices like TV, RADIO, SMOKE DETECTORS, LIGHT BULBS-----being standard products inside everyone's home.
'as stated in the Triffterer Commentary, “Sexual violence is a term broader than rape. The term is used to describe any kind of violence carried out through sexual means or by targeting sexuality”'
above, note 8: paragraph 688)
INTERPRETED CONSISTENTLY WITH HUMAN RIGHTS LAW AND STANDARDS
The human right of equality and non-discrimination in the enjoyment of physical and mental integrity requires that there should be equality in weight given to the free and full
In its General Recommendation 19, (llth session, 1992), paragraph 7,The Committee on the
Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Wom
en identified gender based violence, including rape and sexual violence, as a form of discrimination, and stated that:
agreement to sexual contact of both or all parties to that contact, whether or not such sexual contact involves penetration.
The use of force, or threat of force or coercion, by the
perpetrator makes it impossible for the victim to exercise their right to physical and mental integrity, and therefore their sexual autonomy.
Rape is a particular kind of sexual violence, where the definition is confined to the act of penetration of the body, whereas the definition of other kinds of sexual
violence is potentially extremely wide, due to the variety of methods chosen by perpetrators to commit these crimes:
as stated in the Triffterer Commentary, “Sexual violence is a term broader than rape. The term is used to describe any kind of violence carried out through sexual means or by targeting sexuality”
(Otto Triffterer Commentary on the
Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court”
Hart Publishing, 2008, page 214).
According to the ICTR in the Akayesu judgement, sexual violence, which includes rape, is considered “any act of a sexual nature committed under circumstances that are coercive.”
(Akayesu, above, note 8: paragraph 598).
The ICTR continued:
“Sexual violence is not limited to a physical invasion of the human body and may include acts that do not involve penetration or physical contact. Sexual violence covers both physical and psychological attacks directed at a person’s sexual characteristics.”
above, note 8: paragraph 688)
However, the aspects of coercion and violation of sexual autonomy are common to both the definition of rape and the definition of sexual violence, and are of relevance to the investigation and prosecution of both crimes.
The terms “sexual contact” “sexual act” and “committing sexual acts” shall be used in this document to describe the physical acts through which crimes of rape or sexual assault are committed, in order to identify the physical conduct without making assumptions about whether it was sought or unsought, therefore identifying it as either legal or criminal activity. The use of this term is to allow a description in the text of the physical acts which occurred, while reflecting the reality that rape and sexual violence is not “sexual intercourse”(a term which implies agreement by the participants). The use of this term allows a clear differentiation to be made between conduct which is criminal, and conduct which is protected behaviour under human rights law, when it is actively wanted and agreed to by the participants.
For a comprehensive overview of the issues, see
“Sexuality and human rights” a discussion paper, published by the International Council on Human Rights Policy, 2009.
last accessed on 20 April 2010.
I want to be clear about FEEDBACK from NOSY NEIGHBOR while using illegal surveillance for PORNOGRAPHY ----the repetition of phrases like------SHE LIKES POSING FOR ME--------SHE ISN'T POSING FOR ME ANYMORE------SHE IS POSING FOR HIM NOW-------
This idea POSING as selling CONSENT has a long history tied to PROSTITUTES and COURTESANS for example -----who would pose for artists-----who would laze around a royal chamber in whatever undress-------I am clear -------SEXUAL ASSAULT through pornography is NOT POSING. FEEDBACK as well told me I appear SLEEPING in PORNOGRAPHY which is course what I WAS DOING. SLEEPING while captured on pornography is not POSING.
'A consideration of whether an individual was able to exercise sexual autonomy, by contrast, takes into account the overall dynamic and environment surrounding those sexual acts and how these had an impact on the victim’s ability to make a genuine choice'.
A period of what I describe as BODY ELECTRIC saturation of my apartment with surveillance device FEEDBACK had as a goal allowing me to KNOW these pornographic surveillance had been happening without my knowledge-----and creating saturated FEEDBACK is a step towards INTIMIDATION/HUMILIATION with goals of forcing a victim to RUN ----to LEAVE THAT APARTMENT OR HOME. The goal of NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG is continuous turnover of victims to capture ---new faces and bodies bring more profit on pornography sites----they can't keep the same person in capture----
TO BE LAWFUL, SEXUAL ACTS MUST BE AGREED TO BY BOTH PARTIES EQUALLY
An individual’s sexual autonomy is an aspect of physical and mental integrity, the core human rights value protected by the criminalization of sexual violence. Unfortunately, however, sexual autonomy is frequently conflated with narrow views of ‘consent’ under domestic criminal law which do not capture the reality of how acts of rape and sexual violence are committed, and this misunderstanding affects how such acts are treated in criminal investigations, prosecutions and in criminal judgments.
Sexual autonomy and consent are two distinct concepts. The concept of ‘consent’ as used in domestic criminal law imports a notion of individual choice, typically without a consideration of the reality of abuse of power (whether evidenced through physical force, or other forms of coercion) and other factual
conditions that may prevail before, during and perhaps after the sexual acts in question. A consideration of whether an individual was able to exercise sexual autonomy, by contrast, takes into account the overall dynamic and environment surrounding those sexual acts and how these had an impact on the victim’s ability to make a genuine choice.
Women’s right to equality before the law is frequently violated in domestic criminal jurisdictions because their evidence is distrusted. Women, therefore, have been treated unequally in that their right to freedom from sexual coercion by a perpetrator is extremely limited. In domestic jurisdictions, rape and sexual assault laws have often put people in terms of a ‘proposer’ of sexual acts, and the ‘acceptor’ is deemed to consent to the act unless their resistance is made clear, especially by using physical resistance. This is contrary to an approach to the criminal law which incorporates the human right to equality.
As stated in an intervention to the European Court of Human Rights in the case of M.C. v Bulgaria,
"The equality approach starts by examining not whether the woman said 'no', but whether she said 'yes'. Women do not walk around in a state of constant consent to sexual activity unless and until they say 'no', or offer resistance to anyone who targets them for sexual activity. The right to physical and sexual autonomy means that they have to affirmatively consent to sexual activity."
In this case, the European Court of Human Rights noted
that “the development of law and practice in that area [of the crime of rape] reflects the evolution of societies towards effective equality and respect for each individual’s sexual autonomy” and also made it clear that
One more point today looks at BUILDING OWNERS finding themselves captured unwillingly by NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG by remote illegal surveillance by camera and microphone of their building and devices inside that building.
Common law from several centuries protect property owners---it generally entailed physical trespass and/or property damage------against the OWNER'S WILL BY FORCE.
“In the sixteenth century, the common law of theft protected an owner’s property only when a wrongdoer physically removed it from the owner’s possession, against the owner’s will and by force.
Over the centuries what is legally described as PROPERTY RIGHTS OF BUILDING OWNERS has extended to TECHNOLOGY CAPTURE------to include the actions happening to me in this case of NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG. The devices inside my home remotely captured ---the devices installed in my home by people other than the BUILDING OWNERS----the duplication of BUILDING AND APARTMENTS keys to allow open-door entry by NOSY NEIGHBORS AND THE GANG into a building owned by someone else-----as happened in this case----this is all ILLEGAL ATTACK ON PROPERTY RIGHTS------it is an illegal ATTACK ON IDENTITY----AKA, IDENTITY THEFT------for those UNWILLING building owners.
'It punishes virtually all interference with property rights without the owner’s genuine consent'.
That's a HARD ----NO says FEEDBACK regarding a citizen wanting to have their building used for NOSY NEIGHBOR AND THE GANG illegal pornography surveillance.
Shippers and servants who made off with property entrusted to them and scoundrels who obtained possession under false pretences could not be prosecuted, and the law of theft didn’t protect intangible interests or immovable property at all. As commerce and the nature of valuables became more complex, the law evolved, slowly at first, to fill the intolerable gaps, although many of them survived into the early twentieth century. Today the law of theft protects property owners comprehensively. It guards against embezzlement by employees and dispossession by fraud, and it protects intangible items of value such as debts, property rights, trade secrets, and most recently, computer software. It punishes virtually all interference with property rights without the owner’s genuine consent.