Guilty or not?

catalina_francisco

Happily insatiable always
Joined
Jul 29, 2002
Posts
18,730
Is this genuinely a case of non-consensual abuse, or a slave who decided for whatever reason she wanted out? I'm interested to see what others think. Is difficult to assess without all the facts, most importantly, how she came to be free of him and lay charges which could lend much to her situation and motivation, especially with her family contacts. Thought it interesting with the discussions we have here in relation to TPE, extremes, and limits etc. (http://www.thecouriermail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,8813512%5E421,00.html )

Slave case man's brutal past
By Geoff Wilkinson
28feb04
VICTORIAN slavemaster Graeme Slattery terrorised at least a dozen men, women and children during a decade of depravity, it can now be revealed.

Victims of the sadistic abalone poacher have told the Herald Sun they were so paralysed by fear they could not escape his extraordinary power and influence.

Slattery, 42, was found guilty yesterday of 42 offences against a woman he treated like a slave.

A County Court jury at Ballarat deliberated for four days before convicting him of 10 counts of intentionally causing injury, eight indecent assaults, 22 assaults, one count of threatening serious injury and one of blackmail.

The offences included forcing the woman to drink motor oil, eat cow manure and snails and perform other disgusting acts.


"Robin", the woman beaten and degraded by Slattery between 1996 and 1999, last night thanked the jury for restoring her faith in people.

"It's an incredible world . . . you live with a mad man for three years, then you find out there are people who really care for you," she told the Herald Sun.

"I take pleasure in simple things now, like taking a bath, and I take each day with happiness."

Slattery, who pleaded not guilty, was acquitted of 21 other charges, including rape.

He showed no emotion as the jury foreman read the 63 verdicts. Neither did his wife and eldest daughter.

Julie Slattery was in court supporting her husband each day of the three-week trial. As she left the court on Wednesday she blew him a kiss and said, "Bye, spunk".

The jury of nine men and three women did not know Slattery had already pleaded guilty to assault, false imprisonment and fraud charges involving other victims.

The Herald Sun has spoken to three women who were bullied, beaten and humiliated in similar fashion by Slattery.

Robin said she was so frightened of Slattery's threats to harm her family she could not complain to a brother, who is a policeman, or another brother and sister who are ex-members of the force.

The jury was told that Robin was beaten almost daily during almost 12 months in Slattery's Warrnambool garage, which had no cooking, heating, washing or toilet facilities.

She was underfed, forced to go to the toilet in a bucket and hosed down on the lawn every few days while the Slatterys and their six children lived inside the house.

The guilty verdict included charges of forcing Robin to drink urine and eat Slattery's faeces.

Slattery, a former undertaker, sign writer and professed martial arts expert, has been remanded in custody since his arrest on June 26, 2001.

It can now be revealed that during his long reign of terror, which began in the late 80s, he also:

MADE a young man working for him sleep on a factory floor, fed him rice and noodles and hosed him down every few days.

FORCED the 19-year-old and an older male employee to work up to 70 hours a week without pay in the fibreglassing factory while using their ATM cards to steal their dole and pension payments.

ORDERED one of them to sand skin off the other's forehead with an electric sander to punish him for scratching a boat.

MADE the two men batter each other into submission in bare knuckle fights for his amusement.

MADE them sexually abuse each other in front of him and his friends.

FORCED them to make fraudulent loan applications which netted him more than $50,000.

Another of his female victims was frightened into submission after Slattery threatened to get bikies to scare her elderly mother in her home at night and have her two teenage sons raped by AIDS-infected associates.

During that woman's 18 months of intimidation and abuse, Slattery:

THREW her into the middle of Port Phillip Bay at 2am and took off in his boat because her 16-year-old son had not collected enough abalone for him.

RISKED the boy's life by making him dive despite being a chronic asthmatic.

PUSHED the woman out of a car on the Hume Highway at night, 60km from her bayside home and drove off.

STOLE presents from under the tree in her neighbour's home on Christmas Eve.

Another of Slattery's victims was a businessman he conned into fraudulently borrowing $1.34 million.

Slattery got nearly half the money and left the man destitute, sleeping on a park bench and facing a jail sentence.

Robin told the jury at Slattery's trial she made about 10 trips from Port Fairy to Melbourne for him with illegal abalone during the summer of 1996-97.

She said the abalone was sold for an average $25,000 a trip.

The jury was told Slattery called her "toe rag" and ordered her to have the word tattooed on her shoulder.

She gave evidence that she had been made to bang her head against walls, poles, trees and concrete paths, punch herself in the ears, run naked across roads and perform naked hand-stands for the amusement of Slattery and his diving mates.

Sobbing in the witness box, she said Slattery had turned her into a complete zombie.

Slattery did not give evidence and no defence witnesses were called.

The jury was told Robin's son and daughter, then aged 5 and 3, were also brutalised by Slattery.

The boy, now 13, gave evidence that Slattery had flushed his head in a toilet, made him lie down while he poured water down his throat, and forced him to dig a pole set in concrete out of the ground with a small garden trowel.

Prosecutor Peter Faris, QC, said outside court after the verdict that the public of Victoria should be proud of the excellent job Warrnambool detective Fred Hughson had done assembling the case against Slattery.

Mr Faris also thanked Slattery's victims for having the courage to come forward.

Slattery will be sentenced at a later date.

Several of Slattery's victims told police that one of his favourite expressions was, "It's all over red rover".

And yesterday, for the latter day slave master, it was.



Catalina
:rose:
 
This is really hard to judge, because you're right...we don't have all the facts.

It is interesting the way it reads though. The language of the article is all about "victims" and all the wording implies nothing had any consent.

I think perhaps some of the individuals involved with him might have begun their involvement with a genuine interest in submission, but then it went beyond anything they imagined or expected.

From what I read, it does seem that some of the things seemed "extreme" and not with the best interest of his "slaves" in mind, but then again....if they agreed on those limits, who is to judge what is too extreme?
 
I don’t know much about “24/7 TPE but I think what he did was not suppose of it.
Or let me phrase it diffrent it wouldn't be for me.

Two things he not obligate to is, "Proper Care of his charge" and what is about "safe and consensual".
Does this not apply for a 24/7 TPE relationship?

So yes in my eyes he is gulity but this my opinon..

:rose:

Anna Sue
 
Anna Sue said:
Two things he not obligate to is, "Proper Care of his charge" and what is about "safe and consensual".
Does this not apply for a 24/7 TPE relationship?

I would like to know the answer to this, too. I have never been in a 24/7 TPE relationship, so do the "proper care of his charge" and "safe and consensual" concepts not apply?

Those were the concepts that sprang to mind for me as well. Thanks for verbalizing it for me Anna Sue. :)
 
from InnerDarkness

Those were the concepts that sprang to mind for me as well. Thanks for verbalizing it for me Anna Sue.

You are welcome...:)

:rose:
Anna Sue
 
Thanks ID and Anna Sue. I would have loved a bit more detail on the circumstances of how it came to be in the first place and how charges were laid etc. As usual, the media has gone for the sensationalist approach and not given a clarity to both sides. Given the reputation of the Victorian Police Force, it did raise questions for me when the victim was the sister of 1 memeber and 2 former members. Wouldn't they have missed her or something if she was held captive for that length of time?

In relation to TPE, if it were legitimate in the beginning and this was what she had agreed to, I would support the upholding of the agreement as long as it didn't breach any of the terms, but that is my opinion and is not for everyone, nor protected by law. Undoubtably, from the reports some of the duties required of her were extreme, and not something I would relish, but also I am aware some agree to such things in the heat of submission only to find in the cold hard light of day it is not what they want in reality.

Catalina :rose:
 
You have a good point InnerDarkness. But would this qualify more as extreme sadism more than a regular bdsm M/s relationship? Those are some mighty extreme acts but we "see" stuff like this out there -- life imitating art, life stranger than fiction. What line fascinated me the most, was "Slattery turned me into a zombie" -- did she really relinquish all her will? Is this TPE gone south? Was this really a slave relationship? At first reading this, Slattery appears to be a typical sadistic abuser. The acts repellant and horrific -- but yes, who are we to judge -- it is not mainstream, but wow, what an interesting precedent this will make. Guilty? Probably...torte? Not sure...
 
to everybody

So but what is about "Proper Care" and I believe that are people out their that like this kind of stuff but shouldn’t he respect still human rights.

Sure the news paper only show the “ bad” site which makes money but still I think something is a little off..


:rose:
Anna Sue
 
Yes, this is a very difficult case. What I find personally to be extreme, might be very acceptable if a person had submitted to it or agreed to it as Catalina pointed out. And if she had agreed to it in the beginning and then changed her mind, was there no longer the option to get out? So many facts aren't included in the story.

And as malcah_ms pointed out, we DO see this all the time....a lot in fact. But when the media gets ahold of it...watch out! Just the language alone in this article (and in so many articles detailing far less "extreme" cases or situations) paints a picture that might be completely off base.

it is no wonder that people don't understand BDSM
 
Re: to everybody

Anna Sue said:
So but what is about "Proper Care" and I believe that are people out their that like this kind of stuff but shouldn’t he respect still human rights.

I do have to wonder if there was something missing that we don't know about. The conditions seemed harsh to me, but again...if they were agreed on...I don't know.

The thing that bothered me was the actions towards the children. I don't think children have any place in this.

And the way his wife and daughter were...it made me wonder if this was a whole family affair.
 
InnerDarkness said:
I would like to know the answer to this, too. I have never been in a 24/7 TPE relationship, so do the "proper care of his charge" and "safe and consensual" concepts not apply?

Those were the concepts that sprang to mind for me as well. Thanks for verbalizing it for me Anna Sue. :)

For me, these terms are subjective to the people involved in the relationship. If a sub/slave agrees to be chained in a dungeon for example, do we want it then to become something which is not considered OK because it is not acceptable by those who may be only interested in light D/s? I can imagine a person agreeing to the relationship as reported, someone who fantasises in the extreme realm, but then at some point decides they do not want it after all. The proper care element then becomes, do you go by what was agreed to initially, or what was desired after reality became too much?

The SSC element also can be subjective. If consent was initially given, especially if she relinguished all rights of her free will, then anything within the stated agreement is consensual, and if totally TPE, that scope can be wide. The safety element is also difficult to determine, especially when elements of disgust cloud our feelings. Some things may be repulsive and vile, but not necessarily considered unsafe by some. And of course, of it was a case of the victim wanting out, possibly traumatised, and unable to admit to the original circumstances for any number of reason, is it fair to have him charged and imprisoned to support her claims? It is tricky and one situation many in the lifestyle can find themselves facing.

Catalina :rose:
 
The thing that bothered me was the actions towards the children. I don't think children have any place in this.
And the way his wife and daughter were...it made me wonder if this was a whole family affair.

This so true, I think too that you shouldn't involve children in it.

The family must know about it I think he couldn't hide it not that I think he did.


:rose:

Anna Sue
 
Thanks so much for offering that explanation! I do agree that each relationship is built and rebuilt based on the two (or sometimes more) people involved in it. I guess because I am not one of those who would likely ever find myself agreeing to anything as "extreme" as things mentioned in this article, or to things I have read about, I would be one who would feel safe that my Sir would not harm me. I see some of the things in that article as Harmful.

My thing is this though....I always heard (and practiced) that complete and honest communication with my partner was key to everything else in the relationship, including building trust. If I had wanted something very extreme and beyond "light" D/s and bondage and agreed to it, only to discover I didn't TRULY like it, or could not mentally, emotionally or physically handle it...it would be MY responsbility to tell my Sir, we would discuss it and then it would be OUR responsibility to fix it. If that was what we decided. It seems that this case might have had no communication, and if it did...the sub either did not verbalize her concerns, or felt she could not. Just my thought.
 
malcah_ms said:
You have a good point InnerDarkness. But would this qualify more as extreme sadism more than a regular bdsm M/s relationship? Those are some mighty extreme acts but we "see" stuff like this out there -- life imitating art, life stranger than fiction. What line fascinated me the most, was "Slattery turned me into a zombie" -- did she really relinquish all her will? Is this TPE gone south? Was this really a slave relationship? At first reading this, Slattery appears to be a typical sadistic abuser. The acts repellant and horrific -- but yes, who are we to judge -- it is not mainstream, but wow, what an interesting precedent this will make. Guilty? Probably...torte? Not sure...

I have little doubt he is an extreme sadist, and though it is not what everyone is into, is still part of the lifestyle...and sadist does not mean abuser necessarily. And maybe she was one who felt she was an extreme masochist, someone who craved toi be degraded and treated this way. And the questions abound. I find the zombie line strange as if she means as in brainwashed, then where did that change to a point she was capable of making a complaint and laying charges? Brainwashing does not just dissappear.

Is it she means she found herself in such a submissive state, or driven by her needs, she agreed to his terms believing they were what she craved? Which once again raises concerns for those in relationships where they have gained consent, in that if their partner/s change their mind, they can then move the responsibility to the Dominant on the grounds they were unaware of what they were agreeing to. I would love to find out more about the actual details.

Catalina :rose:
 
Re: Re: to everybody

InnerDarkness said:
I do have to wonder if there was something missing that we don't know about. The conditions seemed harsh to me, but again...if they were agreed on...I don't know.

The thing that bothered me was the actions towards the children. I don't think children have any place in this.

And the way his wife and daughter were...it made me wonder if this was a whole family affair.

Have to agree...children should not be subject to these relationships, consensual or not.

Catalina :rose:
 
to catalina

Everything what you said maybe right I am not the person to judge that.
I am open to everybodys own kink so what they do is their business.

What this article shows to me and makes a bad reputation on everybody who is involved in The BDSM scene how you can mistreat humans and overstep boundaries and oversee if this is “ really “what a “ Slave “ desire.

The whole article is controversy the only think what I would get out of it,
First when you have any desire to do something like this.

Check yourself if this is really what you want and second with whom you do this kind of commitment.



:rose:

Anna Sue
 
InnerDarkness said:
My thing is this though....I always heard (and practiced) that complete and honest communication with my partner was key to everything else in the relationship, including building trust. If I had wanted something very extreme and beyond "light" D/s and bondage and agreed to it, only to discover I didn't TRULY like it, or could not mentally, emotionally or physically handle it...it would be MY responsbility to tell my Sir, we would discuss it and then it would be OUR responsibility to fix it. If that was what we decided. It seems that this case might have had no communication, and if it did...the sub either did not verbalize her concerns, or felt she could not. Just my thought.

I agree. I know for us there is always an effort to keep communicating about needs, and my ability to handle what he expects. He does take into acount what I say, whether I feel I can do something or not, but he also reserves the right to expect me to continue if he does not see it as a significant risk. That is part of our TPE agreement and understanding, and with that right, he accepts full responsibility if he makes the wrong decision. I daresay, if the type relationship described in this story were consensual though, there would have likely been less desire by both to have much leniency and care applied. It is not what everyone wants, but some into extremes want that complete control and degradation with no soft edges. If it was this way, she may well have felt unable to express her concerns, or be listened to with the possibility of change.

Catalina :rose:
 
Re: to catalina

Anna Sue said:

Check yourself if this is really what you want and second with whom you do this kind of commitment.



:rose:

Anna Sue

Most definately. I sometimes talk, or type, until I am blue in the face trying to bring this point home. Is surprising the amount of people who still don't see it as necessary though...until they find themselves in such a situation which I figure is usually too late by then.


Catalina
:rose:
 
Once again...

I also keep going back to the language in the article itself...look at how all those words were capitalized as if we need them to point out to us how "bad" they are.

personally, being ORDERED, FORCED, PUSHED, or MADE to do something isnt all that bad *wink*
 
from catalina

I sometimes talk, or type, until I am blue in the face trying to bring this point home. Is surprising the amount of people who still don't see it as necessary though...until they find themselves in such a situation which I figure is usually too late by then.

Oh I have pretty good idea why people don’t want to listen but then I would highjack this thread. :D

So I keep this for myself ;) :)


:rose:

Anna Sue
 
Re: Once again...

InnerDarkness said:
I also keep going back to the language in the article itself...look at how all those words were capitalized as if we need them to point out to us how "bad" they are.

personally, being ORDERED, FORCED, PUSHED, or MADE to do something isnt all that bad *wink*

Maybe the reporter is a closet, frustrated sub or Dom who just coudn't help emphasising the words uppermost in their mind..or elsewhere. :D

Catalina :rose:
 
Anna Sue said:
from catalina



Oh I have pretty good idea why people don’t want to listen but then I would highjack this thread. :D

So I keep this for myself ;) :)


:rose:

Anna Sue

Feel free to...I love discussions which explore the realms...and it is sometimes difficult to not go off on tangents. :)

Catalina :rose:
 
catalina_francisco said:
Feel free to...I love discussions which explore the realms...and it is sometimes difficult to not go off on tangents. :)

Catalina :rose:

some of this forum's best discussions have come from tangents LOL!!
 
from Catalina:
Feel free to...I love discussions which explore the realms...and it is sometimes difficult to not go off on tangents.

Ohh me and my big mouth:D

No but seriously what I learned about people and about myself, you can try to reason with people but to change or give a good advise and that they follow will not happened very often.
You can try to be a role model but if somebody takes the advice is his or her own choices, and they are a lot of people they not always chose wisely.
But on the other hand making mistakes is important to learn and to grow.
Its is very hard to find the right way to bring people to listen what you have to say but I think you can speak more through actions and so they stil think they make they own decision and don't fell threaten to make a choice what was not their own.

Okay I stop now my rambling, I hope I get out what I wanted to say…

:rose:

Anna Sue
 
Back
Top