The technical arguments and callous language used to choose Kesha’s case will be familiar to every woman who’s brought a charge of sexual assaultTo the non-legal intellect,Keshas court case is eminently reasonable. She would like to be unshackled from a decade-old contract tying her to producer and collaborator Lukasz Gottwald (aka “Dr Luke”), a man she says has drugged, or raped and psychologically abused her from the time she was 18. Specifically,she would like to be freed from working with his company Kemosabe, a subsidiary of Sony, or explaining in a recent injunction request: I know I cannot work with Dr Luke. I physically cannot. I don’t feel safe in any way.” (Gottwald has consistently denied all allegations.)
It doesn’t grasp a legal genius to determine that even whether proving she was raped is an impossibility,she should be taken very seriously when she says she feels unsafe working with this man. But the legal intellect presiding over her most recent case disagrees because, as it turns out, or there are a million legal reasons why her personal story cant be heard in any meaningful way. That her attorneys were beholden to these rules,stuck making a legal argument that didn’t reflect the severity of what she says happened to her, is an indictment of our justice system and how we handle rape survivors.
Continue reading...
Source: theguardian.com