Luminita Perijoc is a rapist. She raped a man twice, then stabbed him when he couldn’t preform for a third time. This is very interesting because Luminita Perijoc is a rapist. She isn’t accused of assault. She has been convicted. There is no presumption of innocence since she has been found guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. Luminita Perijoc is a rapist.
The question I’m asking isn’t if she is guilty, but how this is getting reported.
These are the reports of her conviction from page 1 of a Google Search. So how do they report it? Only two of five reports bring themselves to call a convicted rapist a rapist. Two of these stories say she forced him to have sex, but refuse to call it rape. One of the reports denies her agency as the rapist by saying he refused to have sex, not that she forced him.
This version of the report claims that the rape is because ” If the taxi driver had more of a libido, none of this would have happened.” So When some one gets raped multiple times then stabbed, it’s not because the rapist is a violent criminal. It’s because the victim didn’t have enough libido. What kind of outrage and media fire storm if a reported said something like this about a female victim?
On a side note, her sentence was 5 years. It was reduced to 4 based on her drug abuse. This is well within the rage of normal. It’s actually dead on average. The only point of interest is that drug abuse was considered a mitigating factor rather than an aggravating one. If a man had committed rape due to roid rage, this would have been an aggravating factor. It would have been used to justify a longer sentence not a shorter one.