A 22-year-old Dutch woman who reported being drugged and raped during a holiday in Qatar ended up being jailed herself for “illicit consensual fornication” and being “drunk in a public place.” The woman, identified only as “Laura,” has been in jail since March 14, and on Monday was handed a one-year suspended sentence, three years of probation, and a fine of about $823.

Protestors feared Laura, 22, would get sentenced to years of prison in Qatar, but Monday’s ruling means she can finally go home as she will be deported back to the Netherlands as soon as possible. A court official told Al Jazeera that the sentence was lenient, adding: “Had she been a Muslim woman, she would have received at least five years in jail. No one can get out of such charges here in Qatar.”

The case has given rise to strong reactions on social media under the hashtag #freelaura:

Dutch woman faces prison after being raped in Qatar for having "extramarital sex" – this needs to be covered by int'l media asap #freelaura

— Manya Koetse (@manyapan) June 11, 2016

Really #Qatar?! And u wonder why I have NO interest in exploring parts abroad. This! When ur jailed 4 reporting ur own rape #FreeLaura Smdh

— Kween Ka$h (@Kweendom) June 13, 2016

The Syrian man accused of raping her, Omar Abdullah al-Hasan, was sentenced a punishment of 100 lashes for extramarital sexual acts, plus 40 lashes for drinking in public, a severe crime in Qatar and other Muslim countries. He admitted to having had sex with the woman but not that it was by force. He was not charged with rape, and the subject didn’t even come up during the court hearing.

Laura was reportedly out at a hotel bar with a friend when she had a drink that made her feel strange. She said she woke up the next morning in a room she didn’t know, realizing she had been raped and probably drugged. When she went to the police, they arrested her.

The Dutch Embassy was involved at an early stage and has been in close contact with Laura and her family. Yvette Burghgraef-van Eechoud, the Dutch ambassador in Doha, said to CNN: “We will do everything we can to get her out of the country as soon as possible to where she says she wants to go.”

Another reason why we shouldn't play football in #Qatar. It's not safe for women! #freelaura

— Devi Boerema (@DeviBoerema) June 11, 2016

Qatar is set to host the World Cup soccer tournament in 2022, something that has led to protests among human rights activists concerning the death of migrant workers, corruption, and more. It has also caused concerns about how the country will deal with beer-loving soccer fans–and how fans will deal with strict sharia laws.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Dutch Woman Jailed In Qatar After Being Raped To Be Sent Home appeared first on Law Street.

It’s an annual tradition that always draws big crowds of protestors–the dog meat festival in Yulin, in southern China. On Friday, animal rights activists from around the world, joined by celebrities like Carrie Fisher, handed over a petition with 11 million signatures to the Chinese Embassy in London, in an attempt to stop the festival from taking place. The habit of eating dog meat is nowadays widely criticized in China, with activists saying pet dogs are stolen from their owners, treated with cruelty, and that the phenomenon is an “embarrassment to China.”

This backlash may be  due to the Westernized and increasingly young population of China–previously having pets was seen as too elitist, particularly under Mao Zedong’s rule. Today, having dogs as pets is more and more popular, and dying your dog’s fur to make it look like a panda is a huge trend.

so this is a panda dog…and I didn't know they were real…and I'm buying one… pic.twitter.com/xOFr61DD9P

— jules (@juliawrightt__) May 29, 2016

What seems morally impossible for many Westerners is actually a cultural-historical tradition dating back thousands of years for the Chinese. About 30 million dogs are slaughtered for their meat every year in Asia, and activists say more than a third of that number is in China alone. In the southern parts where the summers get scorching hot, dog meat is believed to help you keep cool. And as many other animals are said to help your health–tiger for potency, shark fin soup for showing off wealth, bird nests for better health in general–different dog parts are said to be good for different ailments.

No matter how traditional, many old-fashioned delicacies are illegal in China. In 2014 a Chinese businessman was sentenced to 13 years in jail for hiring poachers to kill tigers, so that he could drink their blood and eat their penises, which he believed would make him more potent. Three tigers died and were eaten before the police found out after another man filmed one of the killings with his phone.

Here's an idea. Why don't we stop eating meat altogether?
Yulin Dog Meat Festival 101: All You Need to Take Action https://t.co/4mp6TljGJK

— Kimberly Ventre (@KimberlyVentre) June 10, 2016

In the U.S., selling meat from cats and dogs is illegal–but personal consumption is actually legal in 44 states. The big problem is the treatment of the animals. A representative for the animal advocacy group Born Free USA told Consumer Affairs:

According to the tradition, if you scare the dog before it dies it makes the meat more tender. Dogs are either hung, electrocuted, or beaten to death while cats are boiled alive. The inhumane treatment of animals for the sake of a cultural tradition can no longer be justified in civilized society.

The dog meat festival in Yulin is scheduled to start on June 21, but activists hope it will not be a tradition for much longer.

Emma Von Zeipel

Emma Von Zeipel is a staff writer at Law Street Media. She is originally from one of the islands of Stockholm, Sweden. After working for Democratic Voice of Burma in Thailand, she ended up in New York City. She has a BA in journalism from Stockholm University and is passionate about human rights, good books, horses, and European chocolate. Contact Emma at EVonZeipel@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Largest Ever Petition Against China’s Annual Dog Meat Festival Launched appeared first on Law Street.

To blog about such a controversial topic like the use and possession of guns in the United States is something I want to tread carefully with. Everyone is entitled to his or her opinion surrounding the debate, but this week I could not help but question the legality of guns when coming across two particular cases.

On Thursday, Don Spirit killed his six grandchildren, aged from three months to 10 years old, and his daughter before turning the gun on himself. Spirit, whose case has been described as a murder-suicide, was someone who had already been involved in the criminal justice system. According to Fox:

In 2001, Spirit pleaded guilty to a charge of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, after he fatally shot his 8-year-old son in the head in a hunting accident. Spirit, who also was convicted in 1998 for felony possession of marijuana, was sentenced to three years in prison for the shooting.

The details of the investigation are still in the very early stages, so it is hard to understand the motive — if there was one — the facts surrounding Spirit’s mental health, and his relationship with the victims. Aside from knowing these facts, I cannot help but wonder how Spirit even managed to have a gun after being convicted of a shooting in 2001? Gun accessibility legislation for ex-convicts really needs to be reconsidered in light of this case.

What I feel a lot of people fail to recognize is that the most common method of suicide in the United States is through the use of guns. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), in 2011 there were 39,518 deaths by suicide. An overwhelming amount of these deaths (19,990) were the result of firearms.  If we are a country that aims to protect our citizens and the rights of others, surely we should look out for ourselves just as much? If we have such easy accessibility to the weapons of our choice that could end our lives, should we not reconsider the laws surrounding them? Do not get me wrong, I am more than aware that the black market for firearms is an ever-growing underground business, but if we cannot efficiently manage the legal selling and keeping of licensed handguns, we have no hope to stop the illegal sales and handlings.

My point needs to be extended to the safety of those living with others who have access to guns. On the same day as the tragic deaths resulting from Spirit’s heinous act, a fifth grade boy was arrested in Michigan after being found to have stolen his grandfather’s pistol. Not only was the boy found with the gun, but he had also created a list of names in the back of his homework book of people he allegedly planned to harm. As a result of this discovery, the boy has been suspended from school for ten days, and could face possible expulsion. Again, this could be my criminological thinking coming out, but I cannot help but wonder whether this punishment will actually solve the problem of what the boy intended to do? I certainly do not think he should be given jail time, or any formal sentence, but I do think that he needs to be aware of just how serious his actions were. Why? Because if he is not aware of it, what is to stop him doing it all over again, and just being more careful.

I fear that in a culture where are part of normality, when conflict arises in such intense situations, sometimes the only resolution seems to be in the form of violence via the use of weapons. I personally do not think this reflects on the attitudes and actions of those involved in this violence, I think it is the instinct that they have been taught their entire lives, to protect themselves in an extremely lethal way. In order to enact firmer laws that protect our safety, we have to start working on understanding the reason for such laws. As someone who is British, and not used to the debate on the use of guns, one of the main things I have come to realize is that it is a right for US citizens to own a gun, and by restricting this right through legislation, essentially the country contradicts all it stands for. As hard as it is to stand back from what an entire population believes in, more awareness needs to be raised toward the consequences of guns, not just for now, but for the future.

—

Hannah Kaye (@HannahSKaye) is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes.

Featured image courtesy of [Auraelius via Flickr]

Hannah Kaye

Hannah Kaye is originally from London, now living in New York. Recently graduated with an MA in criminal justice from John Jay College. Strong contenders for things she is most passionate about are bagels and cupcakes. Contact Hannah at staff@LawStreetMedia.com.

The post Two More Disturbing Gun Cases Beg the Question When Will We Change? appeared first on Law Street.