Would You Believe Police say Austrian man raped daughter, fathered 6 children--merged

[gagged_Louise]

The latest news seems to be that Josef F. got public subsidies for building the cellar where he was later to jail his children. He applied for money to "build an underground wartime shelter" (!) and received eq. of about 3.000 bucks. *rolls eyes*

[mkemse]

The latest news seems to be that Josef F. got public subsidies for building the cellar where he was later to jail his children. He applied for money to "build an underground wartime shelter" (!) and received eq. of about 3.000 bucks. *rolls eyes*

If the governemt there nly realy knew what was going on, lapse in judgement buy the Gov.?? Unless he was under suspition over the years for something, there is no way to know what he was plannig to do, inthis day and age a bomb shelter is not enough to cause suspition apparently. just suprised the governemnt would pay for it, but each country operates differentl

[denuseri]

so we all might be able to get the government to fund any dungeon construction we may intend?,,well of course not for the same reasons as the aforementioned

[denuseri]

now we just have to get goverment subsdidies for bondage gear ,,winks

[Venom]

Fritzl's oldest daughter has given an interview today; it will be broadcasted in Austrian television during this or the next week...

[mkemse]

It will be interesting to see what she says, how she looks ect

[fetishdj]

I think this subsidy thing may be something unique to Austria (for bomb shelters?). In Britain you are more likely to get funding if you claim it is for an outsider art project

[gagged_Louise]

Many of the student fraternities in this town (in Sweden) received subsidies in the fifties and sixties for cellar spaces that might work as bomb shelters (at the time their buildings were expanding overground too). Those areas, of course, have never been used as wartime shelters, but they've found use as cozy, smoky club rooms and student-run discos.

[Rubberwolf]

"I agree, Rubberwolf: that is an interesting point.

There's another thread here where we take note of the fact that the House of Lords regards S/M acts as illegal, and we should all realise we are walking a thin line.

Speaking as Devil's Advocate for just a moment, what's the difference between a father imprisoning and abusing his daughter, and a Dom imprisoning his sub, and abusing her. I could suggest some answers, but I'll leave that to others (but, remember, you cannot confer legality upon an illegal act - such as false imprisonment, or incest - by consenting to it.)"

In responce to MMI last week.

Never the less, consent must be central to any defence of the BDSM lifestyle and it is this that separates us from such people who would pick a stranger off of the street and subject them to imprisonment and abuse.

There is no defence as far as incest goes. Even if consent is stated, it is very hard for a family member to argue, with a parental or similar, when they tell you that this is normal, or if you don't do this Mummy/Daddy will go to prison.

However, in BDSM, I feel that the house of lords do not actually understand the nature of the crime. Grissham, from CSI mused about one case where he reasoned, quite rightly, that the apparent sub/victim was actually controling the situation. This being the case, rather than giving consent, the sub is actually using the dom as a means of self abuse.

Damn this is too deep for this time of night. Time to go and ponder this over warm milk and cookies.

[mkemse]

"I agree, Rubberwolf: that is an interesting point.

There's another thread here where we take note of the fact that the House of Lords regards S/M acts as illegal, and we should all realise we are walking a thin line.

Speaking as Devil's Advocate for just a moment, what's the difference between a father imprisoning and abusing his daughter, and a Dom imprisoning his sub, and abusing her. I could suggest some answers, but I'll leave that to others (but, remember, you cannot confer legality upon an illegal act - such as false imprisonment, or incest - by consenting to it.)"

In responce to MMI last week.

Never the less, consent must be central to any defence of the BDSM lifestyle and it is this that separates us from such people who would pick a stranger off of the street and subject them to imprisonment and abuse.

There is no defence as far as incest goes. Even if consent is stated, it is very hard for a family member to argue, with a parental or similar, when they tell you that this is normal, or if you don't do this Mummy/Daddy will go to prison.

However, in BDSM, I feel that the house of lords do not actually understand the nature of the crime. Grissham, from CSI mused about one case where he reasoned, quite rightly, that the apparent sub/victim was actually controling the situation. This being the case, rather than giving consent, the sub is actually using the dom as a means of self abuse.

Damn this is too deep for this time of night. Time to go and ponder this over warm milk and cookies.

The differnce of her father and a Dom/sub is that a Dom/sub relationship will have a safe word, and a Dom will not keep his sub locked up in a sound proof room with no windows ect for 24 years, plus there is a fair chace he will not impregnate her, what her father did was incest a Dom/sub relationship usualy does not involve relatives

[fetishdj]

However, the legal issue of consent is still murky and it is impossible to consent to anything that will harm you apart from approved medical procedures. So, if a Dom and sub couple were brought under the radar of a police investigation they will rarely assume consent and treat it like any abuse/rape/GBH case depending on circumstances. You can have a contract signed and witnessed by several lawyers, the Queen and god himself and a judge would still not accept it as legally binding.

[mkemse]

However, the legal issue of consent is still murky and it is impossible to consent to anything that will harm you apart from approved medical procedures. So, if a Dom and sub couple were brought under the radar of a police investigation they will rarely assume consent and treat it like any abuse/rape/GBH case depending on circumstances. You can have a contract signed and witnessed by several lawyers, the Queen and god himself and a judge would still not accept it as legally binding.

True but never the less a Dom is probably not going to keep his sub in a windowless sound proof room for 24 years as happened here and they will have asafe word which i am sure her father never gave her

[fetishdj]

Oh yes, definitely. The trouble is that law courts will never listen to that as a defence.

[denuseri]

ahhh the grey area of consent,, dom sub even it can crose the line into criminal acts, i know first hand, as for father child,, ewww please, no question in my mind