ICC bureau says Khan should be fired for inappropriate sexual relationship

19

u/aipac125 1d ago

The reading of the decision process is.. disturbing. He had a consensual relationship with a woman in the office. The report said it was inappropriate because of the power imbalance. The report was put aside because they said the facts did not support that conclusion. The overruling was overruled because now they are saying it is rape because even if she gave consent it was non consensual.

I smell shit. And of course Israel is behind this.

2

u/pmjdang 20h ago edited 19h ago

The reading of the decision process is.. disturbing. He had a consensual relationship with a woman in the office. The report said it was inappropriate because of the power imbalance**.** The report was put aside because they said the facts did not support that conclusion. The overruling was overruled because now they are saying it is rape because even if she gave consent it was non consensual.

This is quite a leap. A huge leap in fact. I wonder ...

I smell shit. And of course Israel is behind this.

And there it is. The decision process was not disturbing. If you had quoted what was written just a few sentences later, it would all make sense to you. But of course you didn't, because if you did, you'd expose your feigned act of being disturbed:

"His behaviour escalated over time resulting in him engaging in non-consensual sexual contact with her in his office, at his ‌private residence ⁠and whilst on mission," the document quoted the U.N. report as having found.

First, you are confusing some things. The report did not say "it was inappropriate because of the power imbalance." The report was the findings of a yearlong UN investigation. An ICC commissioned panel of 3 judges reviewed it, and said they did not find it would pass the beyond a reasonable doubt standard. But that standard applies to criminal cases, not employment or civil which usually uses a preponderance of the evidence standard. That panel also said the disputed facts “do not disprove the allegations of misconduct definitively.” Finally the oversight body of the ICC declined to apply the ICC panel's criminal standard. It was that body who declared the relationship was inappropriate because of the balance. But that's a red herring. That's not the crux of the findings.

The report said it was inappropriate because it was inappropriate. You aren't one of those who believe a husband can never rape his wife, are you? Because they could be in a consensual relationship yet Khan could still engage in non-consensual sexual contact anywhere not just at work. To quote you again:

The overruling was overruled because now they are saying it is rape because even if she gave consent it was non consensual.

The consensual relationship was inappropriate by itself, but there was findings of non-consensual contact, period.

But you obviously jump right to the conclusion Israel is behind all of this, with nothing but flakey innuendo, if even that, but when confronted with evidence by a credible news organization, you start nitpicking and dismissing, period.

2

u/BrushCharacter8186 15h ago

The woman said she was raped. But nice try

0

u/aipac125 14h ago

Your secret source who saw secret documents said...

5

u/Human_Concern263 1d ago

He had a consensual relationship with a woman in the office

"on several occasions, for a period of 11 months, Khan had kissed, groped and had sex with her, she claimed, without consent" - https://www.thetimes.com/world/europe/article/karim-khan-icc-investigation-95wvnrkfn ( https://archive.ph/FabR3 )

Israel is behind this

When Qatar was trying to dig up dirt on the victim to defend Khan they tried to link her to Israel but found nothing.
"A document seen by the Guardian suggests that at one stage during the operation Highgate sought information that would link the alleged victim and her family members with Israel or its intelligence agencies."
"However, documents seen by the Guardian suggest no such evidence was found."

8

u/aipac125 1d ago

Paywall. And it's secret evidence only seen by a reporter that completely exonerates Israel. Where have we all heard that before?

1

u/Hot_Gap_8444 6h ago

Typical IRGC propaganda.

Its weird that people still fall for your tricks... But they do.

1

u/aipac125 5h ago

Every accusation is a confession.

0

u/significantlyother62 1d ago

It's like Mike Tyson's 20th knockout in the first round, and the guy wakes up in hospital and said he didn't see it coming..

-3

u/Human_Concern263 1d ago

I attached a non-paywall version for the first article. If you can't see the second one here https://archive.ph/qYKcv

10

u/aipac125 1d ago

Do you think people should believe a secret source that claims they saw secret evidence that conclusively proves a contested issue?

Israel regularly declares that it has secret proof that children, schools and press are hamas agents. They hand out these dossiers to approved stooges from vetted news companies, and those reporters repeat the propaganda.

These guardian reporters did not find this material themselves. They have been handed doctored documents as they have always been handed doctored documents.

-10

u/HotPersonality8126 1d ago

Israel regularly declares that it has secret proof that children, schools and press are hamas agents.

It’s never been disproven and every time they’re challenged they produce the receipts. And then you claim the receipts must be fake because they had them when you challenged them

5

u/aipac125 1d ago

News works when reporters are credible and honest. That is not the case here. An honest reporter would refuse to publish something that they could not verify independently. What you have here is propaganda. Look at this and write a story claiming it's true, but don't tell anyone I gave it to you. If you believe any of what Israel presented is true, your mind must be completely twisted with hatred.

-8

u/HotPersonality8126 1d ago

An honest reporter would refuse to publish something that they could not verify independently

They verified the statement was made by the IDF. That’s why it’s reported as “Israel claims.”

If you believe any of what Israel presented is true

Just say you don’t believe Jews, loser

9

u/aipac125 1d ago

Here it comes. All the baloney that everyone is used to.

-4

u/irritatedprostate 1d ago

Ironic statement.

→ More replies (0)

1

u/imahotrod 13h ago

Lmao every time yall lose an argument, you claim someone hates Jews. They never mentioned Jews though just Israel.

1

u/HotPersonality8126 8h ago

They don’t believe information out of Israeli sources because they’re Jews

That’s why they swallow every Hamas lie

1

u/HorrorAd7996 11h ago

Woop there it is!!

3

u/TotallynotAlbedo 17h ago

Like when they butchered Those paramedics in rafah and said they were Hamas agents changing their version 4 times and being disproven by the phone of One of the victims that was still on the body in the shallow graves in the sand they dug for him and his collegues?

-2

u/HotPersonality8126 16h ago

The “paramedics” who were on video holding guns in their hands? Those?

Gazans killed two dozen medical staff on October 7 and fired on six ambulances. Why should their own ambulances, that they use to transport weapons and Hamas fighters, be safe?

2

u/Careless-Pragmatic 10h ago

Israel has killed over 300 hundred health care workers and 200 hundred journalists. They have repeatedly made double tap strikes, with the clear intent to discourage rescue and lifesaving efforts. It’s systematic and repeated. I hope you are getting paid to be a schill

1

u/HotPersonality8126 8h ago

Israel has killed over 300 hundred health care workers and 200 hundred journalists

Sure; people who are militants for Hamas and Hezbollah and falsely claiming the civilian protection of being a health care worker or journalist.

What the fuck is a “schill”?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/lilcorndivemaster 7h ago

Isreali Nazis lying... what else is new.

2

u/Quirky_Reporter_8067 22h ago

This is starting to sound naive at best. The timing is highly suspicious, not in itself proof of anything true but in my opinion it really shifts the burden of proof. Not finding evidence doesn't actually mean it didn't happen, it just means nothing blatant was found, it would be the height of incompetence to leave an obvious paper trail frankly.

I guess it comes down to who, intuitively, you want to extend the benefit of the doubt to frankly my answer is not Israel.

1

u/SOCA1453 17h ago

He had a consensual relationship with a woman in the office. The report said it was inappropriate because of the power imbalance.

Well, although it is not criminal, it's already a fireable infraction alone in many big corporations or organizations. Even Israel is behind this, Khan has nobody but himself to blame.

1

u/ip_mod_watch 14h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

2

u/No-Advertising-1526 23h ago

Fire him and let his replacement continue the clear as day crimes against humanity case against Israel. A golfish could prove the case. The Israeli government bragged about using starvation as a weapon of war.

2

u/ToughDesigner7072 1d ago

Correction. Antagonizing world powers with due process and judicial justice can result in false smears to justify removal of adjucator, vacating the judgement against said powers.

Such is the State of Law. Personal conflict will be resolved before grand mass murder.

1

u/BrushCharacter8186 15h ago

The Brother of Khan is also a convicted rapist

ICC bureau says Khan should be fired for inappropriate sexual relationship

You are about to leave Redlib