Judge Branded "Distasteful" for Saying Drunk Girls Are Vulnerable

A JUDGE sparked anger after appearing to suggest tragic student Karen Buckley “put herself in a vulnerable position” by drinking too much.

District Judge Nigel Cadbury made the “distasteful” comments the day after the body of the Irish student was discovered in Glasgow.

He was speaking at the sentencing of a woman who assaulted a reveller in a booze-fuelled fight outside a bar in Worcester.

Leanne Roberts, 21, told police she could not remember punching her victim because she had drunk too much.

The judge said he was concerned young women were placing themselves in danger by getting drunk.

He said it was “very, very worrying” to see drunk girls putting themselves at risk while out clubbing.

Judge Cadbury then went on to compare the situation to the killing of Miss Buckley, who disappeared after a night out on April 12.

Her friends have told police she had a few drinks but was not drunk when she vanished.

He said: “I find it incredible that young people can get so drunk that they don’t even know who they’re with.

“One only has to think about the horrible situation in Glasgow to see how serious this could have been.

“It’s very, very worrying how young girls put themselves in such very, very vulnerable positions."

Women's campaigners yesterday (Weds) slammed the judge, accusing him of making the “perpetrators of crimes invisible.”

Sarah Green, Acting Director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said the comments were damaging.

“He seems to be perpetuating the idea that young women drinking alcohol put themselves at risk of attack,” he said.

“Even if it is not meant, this implies that sexual violence is in some way inevitable and it is women's responsibility to avoid it.

“It makes the perpetrators of these crimes all but invisible.

“We have to get beyond this focus on women's behaviour regarding rape and shift it to the men who choose to commit these crimes.

“Because violence against women is not inevitable.

“We must start asking - who commits rape and why, what motivates them.

“Who do they target, why are they often confident they will get away with it, and what can we do to deter it?”

Worcester Magistrates’ Court heard married mum-of-one Roberts punched a woman outside Lloyds Bar in the city on March 22.

Prosecutor Owen Beale said she was “swaying and bouncing off doors” before launching the unprovoked attack.

“She said she had been out with friends had had two cans of cider before she went out, when she had shots of sambuca and cocktails,” he added.

“The next thing she remembered was being at the charge desk at the police station.

“She didn’t remember anything after about 10.30pm and couldn’t understand why she would have done it.”

Roberts was given a six-month community order, made the subject of a curfew and ordered to pay her victim £200 compensation.

Judge Cadbury added: “There is a drinking problem because she (Roberts) can’t remember what she did.

“That is a problem. I am sure you are now aware of how vulnerable you made yourself.”

The case was heard less than a week after Miss Buckley disappeared in the early hours of April 12 sparking a huge police search.

Her body was discovered at High Craigton Farm on the outskirts of Glasgow on April 16.

Alexander Pacteau, 21, has appeared in court charged with her murder and attempting to defeat the ends of justice.

http://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/incoming/karen-buckley-judge-sparks-fury-5564590

How anyone can see the Judge's comments below as anything other than common sense is incredulous.

I find it incredible that young people can get so drunk that they don’t even know who they’re with.

“One only has to think about the horrible situation in Glasgow to see how serious this could have been.

“It’s very, very worrying how young girls put themselves in such very, very vulnerable positions"

Girls that get drunk (though apparently not in the case of Buckley) and go home with strangers undoubtedly put themselves in a very vulnerable position. PC gone mad.

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

Arkasia

Truth these days has little place in social justice. Emotions take precedence.

Reply 2

username521617

But what he says is true - why do people continue to ignore this? If you choose to get black out drunk in public places, you are opening yourself up to a lot more risks. If somebody gets totally hammered and wonders off a bridge, we are inclined to place some responsibility on the victim. However, if somebody gets hammered and wonders into dangerous situations with other people, it's suddenly no longer appropriate to consider their choices a contributing factor, despite it actually being the case.

It needs to be understood that encouraging people to be more responsible is not the same as excusing the perpetrators of their crimes. By saying "you probably shouldn't have done that" one is not actually saying "the person who committed the crime isn't to blame." People become too defensive in this regard, putting their emotions before their sense of logic, and dislike the notion of having to consider the implications of their own actions.

Educate people in ways to help improve their own personal safety, enforce the law so that people are protected from threats, and teach people not to be threats. All three of these things combined are the most sensible, logical approach to tackling issues of public safety, and to encourage the first does not erase or detract from the latter.

Reply 3

DiddyDec01

It's just some crazy feminists looking for someone else to blame other than themselves.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 4

Babada Boopy

The thing with a lot of women is they don't realise their actions have consequences, the world is a dangerous place they must be careful in. Decades ago they weren't able to get drunk alone with strange men but now they are and don't understand that they got rid of the helpless woman thing, they are now responsible for their own actions.

Reply 5

PopaPork

And rightly so

As a society we should know when finding someone who is vulnerable the thing to do is NOT RAPE them :rolleyes:

Odd that in 2015 some still don't get this.

Reply 6

TurboCretin

"He seems to be perpetuating the idea that young women drinking alcohol put themselves at risk of attack."

Well, that idea deserves to be perpetuated, doesn't it? It doesn't alleviate the blameworthiness of the attacker's actions.

Interested to see some female posters' views.

Reply 7

The_Internet

But she would be vulnerable as would a guy though guys are probably less likely to be raped

If i leave my door open, then my house is vulnerable to someone "breaking" in

Reply 8

Schrödingers Cat

Original post by The_Internet

But she would be vulnerable as would a guy though guys are probably less likely to be raped

If i leave my door open, then my house is vulnerable to someone "breaking" in

Missed opportunity to say "breaking and entering" :rolleyes:

Reply 9

Babada Boopy

Original post by PopaPork

And rightly so

As a society we should know when finding someone who is vulnerable the thing to do is NOT RAPE them :rolleyes:

Odd that in 2015 some still don't get this.

Becuase there will always be people whot commit crimes and take advantage of vulnerable people. It doesn't matter how good society is, there are always disturbed people.

Reply 10

XxSophie01xX

I'll be the first female post. Totally agree with the judge's comments, and as others have said, assigning responsibility to the victim does not alleviate the blame a perpetrator should receive and how wrong their actions are.

Once we become adults, we are completely responsible for ourselves (unless it's been medically noted that one has some sort of learning difficulty, etc). Drinking, taking drugs, etc induces a SELF-INFLICTED vulnerability. If you get yourself into a precarious situation (and I think there is definitely an element of bad luck to this if you do indeed happen to meet a complete nutcase who wants to murder you) you are still responsible because you willingly put those harmful things in your system.

Can't really see how anyone can justify otherwise.

Reply 11

PopaPork

Original post by Babada Boopy

Becuase there will always be people whot commit crimes and take advantage of vulnerable people. It doesn't matter how good society is, there are always disturbed people.

so as a society do we cower because of the actions of a few or do we fight wrongdoing and make sure wherever possible people are safe?

Reply 12

Babada Boopy

Original post by PopaPork

so as a society do we cower because of the actions of a few or do we fight wrongdoing and make sure wherever possible people are safe?

We fight it, by educating people not to put themselves in dangerous situations

Reply 13

the bear

Of course if it had been Mrs Justice Cadbury nobody would have raised an eyebrow

Reply 14

kka25

I find that lady's comment distasteful.

Reply 15

PopaPork

Original post by Babada Boopy

We fight it, by educating people not to put themselves in dangerous situations

going out for a drink with friend should NEVER be classed as a dangerous situation.

Reply 16

Smonnie

Isn't it an assault case he is specifically mentioning, anyway. So it's the women's rights groups linking it to rape.

Reply 17

Babada Boopy

Original post by PopaPork

going out for a drink with friend should NEVER be classed as a dangerous situation.

It doesn't matter what you 'feel' it should be, it is how it is. I'm a man and I have to stay wary when going out drinking in case of being mugged, attacked, my drink being spiked etc, alcohol gives people an opportunity to take advantage of others.

Reply 18

Calum.McManus

This has always been a touchy topic but I have to agree with what most people are saying here. If you had a daughter you would tell them not to go out wearing something revealing, you would tell them not to drink to much ect ect. But why would you do that? because their safety is more important to you than some stupid sense justice.

When you are drunk you are vulnerable regardless of gender and if people want to link this to other crimes than the ones brought up on the OP then realise that people who commit such crimes are not sane people, being drunk in no excuse but you could have told Jack the Ripper to not murder in school yet he still did it. If someone is damaged enough to commit such crimes telling them not to won't stop them.

So instead of complaining about how it's a breach of your rights to not be able to wear what you want to drink as much as you want, how about thinking of your own safety? The same way you don't walk down a dark ally at night that have a group of people with their hoods up at the end of it.

In every aspect of your life you have to defend your self whether that be from a physical attack or just some insurance company trying to rip you off.

Protect your self and the people you care for or prepare to get hurt, welcome to the real world.

Reply 19

miser

Well, distasteful or not, it is true that if you're drunk you're more vulnerable.

That doesn't mean people shouldn't get drunk, but people should be aware of the risks and then exercise what they feel to be the appropriate level of caution. That being said, even if someone is totally incautious and consequently they're assaulted, it's still only the attacker who's at fault.

If someone never uses a bike lock, their bike will probably get stolen. But they don't deserve their bike to be stolen, as if naivete or trust in the community were somehow moral faults.