Unlocking the Mysteries of Legal Jargon: How AI Legalese Decoder Can Clarify Phrases like ‘Not Elevate and Not Minimise’
- May 26, 2024
- Posted by: legaleseblogger
- Category: Related News
Speed-Dial AI Lawyer (470) 835 3425 FREE
FREE Legal Document translation
Try Free Now: Legalese tool without registration
## Understanding the Complexity of Different Offenses
I recently came across a comment made by a moderator discussing the importance of addressing all offenses without placing certain ones on a pedestal while also acknowledging their severity. This brings up an interesting question – are some offenses, especially those involving physical contact, inherently more serious than non-contact offenses?
When it comes to different types of offenses, the nuances and implications can vary greatly. The impact of contact offenses, such as assault or harassment, can be significantly more harmful and traumatic compared to non-contact offenses like theft or vandalism. The nature of physical interaction in these offenses often leaves a lasting emotional and sometimes physical scars on the victims.
Considering this complexity in the legal realm, it is crucial to have tools that can help decipher the intricate language and implications of legal documents. This is where AI Legalese Decoder comes in handy. By utilizing artificial intelligence technology, this tool can analyze and interpret legal jargon, making it easier for individuals to navigate and understand the complexities of various offenses. With its assistance, individuals can make informed decisions and better comprehend the severity of different offenses, especially those involving physical contact.
Speed-Dial AI Lawyer (470) 835 3425 FREE
FREE Legal Document translation
Try Free Now: Legalese tool without registration
### The Problem with Legal Jargon
Legal documents are notorious for being full of complicated and confusing language. This can make it difficult for the average person to understand their rights and responsibilities when entering into a contract or agreement. The use of legal jargon can create barriers to access justice and can lead to misunderstandings and disputes between parties.
### How AI Legalese Decoder Can Help
The AI Legalese Decoder is a revolutionary tool that uses artificial intelligence to simplify and clarify legal language. By inputting a legal document into the decoder, users can receive a translated version that is easier to understand and digest. This can help individuals make informed decisions and protect their rights without having to rely on expensive lawyers or legal experts.
### By using the AI Legalese Decoder, individuals can gain a better understanding of their legal rights and obligations. This can empower them to navigate legal documents confidently and effectively. Additionally, the decoder can help prevent misunderstandings and disputes by providing clear and accurate translations of complex legal language. Overall, the AI Legalese Decoder is a valuable tool for promoting access to justice and improving legal literacy among the general population.
Speed-Dial AI Lawyer (470) 835 3425 FREE
FREE Legal Document translation
****** just grabbed a
(Not a SO, just my two cents) I think the point is people should focus more on their own personal journey rather than look to something worse than what they did to feel better about themselves.
For example, if I murdered someone, I shouldn’t just say “well yeah killing one person is bad, but atleast I didn’t kill 10 people.” For every crime you can find one a degree worse, but you should instead focus on your own shit because if you deflect you’ll never learn or grow, you’ll just claim moral superiority.
Two part answer since I’m wordy AF.
The rule is; “No excuses, minimizing, or victim blaming.”
One of the only reasons we are allowed this space is because we have very strict rules. You’ll notice there are no other active RSO groups here. The rules we have and the fact that we strictly enforce them is why.
This group is public, and we are not exactly well liked by most people (usually because they don’t really understand what the group is, but there are other obvious reasons) so we do have to be extra careful.
When people here say things that even allude to making excuses, minimizing, or victim blaming, people screenshot it. They post it in other groups, they make YouTube or tiktok videos or post them on other social media.
People see that and become enraged. They don’t come read more or try to understand anything, they just become enraged (their feelings may be misguided but are understandable – 1 in 4 people have been a victim and 86% of their abusers are never prosecuted, so there’s a lot of built up hurt and a lot of people who never got justice for what happened to them.)
People being enraged by those comments leads to the group being trolled (which means we have to spend every minute of several days removing some of the most vile and nasty things you’ve ever read), and to the group being reported over and over and over again.
It’s hard to cover every single thing that falls under those categories, but I’ll try to give you a rough idea.
Below are examples and the reasons those things are problematic.
Examples of excuses:
– “It’s not my fault _____”
– “I don’t know how I could be expected for know she was only 14.”
– “She started it.”
– “I only did it because of depression.”
– “I only did it because I was young and dumb.”
– “My wife wasn’t paying attention to me.”
– “It was an accident.” Sex crimes are not to be referred to as accidents here. Accidents are slipping on a patch of ice, hitting one of those yellow poles in a drive thru, spilling a drink, etc… Committing a sex crime may be a really poor decision, a terrible thing to do, a regrettable action, etc… referring to it as an accident makes people think you’re comparing it to failing a test.
– “It shouldn’t be a crime anyway.” – and maybe it shouldn’t. I will never think that a 16 and 18 year old engaging in sex that they both want to have should be criminalized – but it is. However, when people see someone say that something shouldn’t be a crime without enough context they 100% assume that you’re saying raping children shouldn’t be a crime. Doesn’t matter what you’re actually referring to, that’s what they read because they’re already expecting the worst.
Examples of victim blaming:
– “the victim lied…” – that may be true but you’re not saying it here because it’s not going to be perceived the way you mean it. Ever. Under no context is it okay to say here, that’s a conversation to have with your attorney.
– “Why would she have dressed like that if she didn’t want to ______?”
– “She didn’t tell me she was 14.”
– “She sent me the picture, I posted it on the dark web because she was a b*tch and deserved it.”
Anything that’s disparaging about a victim is going to be removed. Period. Doesn’t matter if it’s true or it isn’t, it’s not staying. There’s no reason to say it.
Examples of minimizing:
– Probably the most common is referring to a sex crime as a mistake. “It was a mistake” – any and every time you refer to a sex crime as a “mistake” the post or comment will be removed. A “mistake” is defined as “an error” “a goof” or “a slip up” Messing up on a test is a mistake, eating so much cake that you feel sick is a mistake, forgetting your moms birthday is a mistake, hitting “reply all” on an email is a mistake…. Referring to committing a sex crime as a “mistake” absolutely enrages people. Imagine telling a victim, “oops, sorry, didn’t mean to…” because that’s what they hear.
It’s a decision. It’s an action. It’s a crime. It’s whatever else you want to call it that accepts accountability. Any and every time it is referred to as a mistake it will be removed.
– “I didn’t have any victims,” is a common one. There are exceptionally few sex crimes that do not have victims. Arguably, they all do. So you cannot say that here, especially without any context. Period. Ever. I don’t care if you’re the exceptional rarity where there may actually not technically be one, you don’t get to say “I didn’t have any victims” here. Not everyone knows your story and saying things like this absolutely enrages people.
– “There were no victims,” when referring to CSAM. Yes, there were. We aren’t going to get on board with saying there weren’t. Every underage person in those photos were victims. Period. One of the biggest and most common things that gets us in trouble is when people say that.
Arguably, you could say that there’s no victim if a 17 year old willingly, knowingly, without being asked, without coercion, sends a photo of themselves to someone 18+ and the person who is 18+ gets arrested for it. But people who don’t know your story don’t know your story. They picture you having downloaded hundreds or thousands of videos of kids who are anywhere from babies to young teens being raped and m-bating to those. That’s what people think every single time. So you cannot state that you had no victims.
Imagine you’re standing in a room filled with victims of CSAM. Would you stand there and say, “Watching CSAM is a victimless crime”? – I mean, I really hope you wouldn’t. If you did, I’m sure you’d face some pretty ugly repercussions.
So, before you post / say things – think about these things:
– If you were standing in a room filled with rape victims, would you say it?
– Would you say it the way you just said it to someone you know was brutally raped?
– If you were speaking to a group of people who were horribly abused and violated as children, would you say that the way you just did?
Because you’re posting it in a public group. Those people ARE reading it so you ARE saying it to them.
– Are you giving enough context where a victim of a sex crime won’t feel like you’re saying it’s their fault?
– Are you being accountable for your actions? You
– Did you accept responsibility?
– Does it sound like you are making excuses?
– Did you provide enough context where it doesn’t look like you’re saying something that’s harmful to others?
– Are people going to understand what you’re saying?
There is a tendency to think that contact offences are more serious than csam offences, and in some ways I can get on board with that. In my opinion it’s easy for people to forget about the humanity of another person when they’re separated by a screen – look at how many people would tell someone on Facebook to go kill themselves, for example. The course I completed explained the mechanism behind this in terms of the brain. There are many people who do this who wouldn’t be able to commit contact offences because they wouldn’t be able to ignore someone’s pain when confronted with it right there next to them.
However, all sex offences hurt someone (I’m excluding ridiculous things like peeing in public, car sex in a secluded location, an 18 year old having sex with a 17 and 11 month old etc). And csam has a victim/s. They may not be getting hurt RIGHT NOW, but they were hurt, and they are re-victimised every time someone watches the stuff. There are pictures of me out there on the internet somewhere, and it used to put me in a very dark place when I thought about someone getting off to my trauma. I’ve had a lot of therapy now, and it doesn’t take me to that place anymore. But there are people out there who don’t have access to that, or are too traumatised for it to work, or they’re still being traumatised. It’s not less serious. Contact offences may be indicative of a lower capacity for empathy, but it’s not less serious. I do not allow minimisation from my husband. I understand he needs to feel he’s not a monster, however there are other ways to achieve that than belittling the effect of his offences.
Having said that, I do not believe prison is the way forward in dealing with non-contact offences. Contact offences have an in-person victim who may be helped by seeing their perpetrator do time. Non-contact offences, especially ones with a low level of images, I believe would be better dealt with in the community, with courses and therapy, and large fines to pay for this. I also believe these things should be part of the sentence for contact offences.
Because PFR’s have a bad habit of minimizing their own actions as not that bad because such and such crime is worse.
Sure objectively both legally and morally some may be considered worse than others, but most of the time pointing this out is intended to minimize your own actions and guilt.
Essentlly don’t act like your crime was any less severe then anyone else’s. Fact is, you fucked up and did something that is disgraceful. As for minimizing, don’t sugar coat your fucking crime. I keep it simple, I was 19 and fucked a 15 year old girl. It was wrong, it was bad, it caused damage. I’m not going to tell you that she had more tattoos then me, her nipples, clit, and bellybutton were pierced, and I her parents gave me permission to have her out that night………You see what that is doing? It’s the truth, but it makes it look like what I did was not so bad, and tbh not really my fault. Puts this crime in a light that what I did was not so bad, I have excuses, my victim is not innocent that for sure…………… minimizing is bullshit.
This is IMO
Hope this helps.
I have some anecdotal experience with this specific concept.
My crime was hands on. I molested my little sister from 5-10 years old. I was 8-13. I was adjudicated at 13. Sent to inpatient treatment for adolescent boys then aged out of foster care.
I spent the next 15 years in any out of prison and jail for registry violations, white collar crimes, and parole or probation violations for substance abuse.
My last parole, I had to do outpatient treatment for sex offense. Hadn’t reoffended and it had been 20 years since I completed my original inpatient treatment.
It took a few sessions for me to break the habit of separating myself from the guys in group. I felt different, in my minds eye, I was a kid compared to these grown men. And I hadn’t reoffended so I was not very enthusiastic about being in group in the first place.
My therapist and I worked on self worth and the like quite a bit. She helped me realize how important it is for me to have a positive self esteem. Like I couldn’t be good for everyone around me, if I wasn’t good for myself.
I started shedding that feeling that I was somehow better than the guys in group. I had a lot of insight and experience those guys in group could learn from. They got to see some of the struggles we go through after treatment. I got real personal int there and worked a lot with my struggles after release and recovery.
A few months after completion I finished parole as well, and my daughter moved in with me permanently. I went back to the group on last time to tell the guys about her coming and how different and difficult that was. Got to show them some of the joy that can be achieved.
I was bitter about having to do the group before, now I’m very thankful. It helped shape my self worth, helped me get better.
That’s the goal of this group imo. Community. I never had this in my 20-30s. I felt so alone. I still feel peerless at times. Like I’m navigating uncharted waters. But I have this place to come and blow off steam, rant, or to comment and help when I can.
We couldn’t exist if we didn’t adhere to these rules. It makes it more therapeutic here, for us, and others. I’ve gotten a chance to speak to a few victims who have read my posts and reached out.
I have a relationship with my sister I molested. We raised our daughters together. I’m a single dad. Those are things that don’t really happen for us. I’m very thankful and grateful for the support this therapeutic community provides.
Many are pointing out that CSAM is not victimless because of the people used to make it, but it’s worse than that. CSAM normalizes sexualization of children and burns it into aroused brains. This increases the risk of more victims. That’s why even AI generated CSAM is not really victimless.
There should be no registry period. It does not enhance public safety. If it does anything it decreases it. Any registry reformer that starts well yeah we will allow the registry for these offenses if you take it away from these is missing the point.
The data, studies, research, and common sense suggest that the registry is just a form of punishment. Nothing else.
It was deemed to be a civil penalty law by the Supreme Court because of the bogus “frighteningly high” quote that was used as a basis to keep it. If the court had ruled it was punishment then the whole registry would be unconstitutional.
Who gets to choose which offenses are “registry worthy” and which ones are not? Non contact crimes are still sex crimes. The victim is either in whatever you downloaded to look at or watch or you tried to make contact and was arrested before doing so. They are not “victimless” crimes.
The registry needs to be abolished. No residency restrictions, restrictions on places you can travel, work, etc….internet identifiers, and on and on…..Have not saved one victim from a sex crime.
People who want to commit a crime are not going to be deterred by restrictions. They lump everyone into one bowl.
Like saying the death penalty was supposed to be a deterrent for murder. Has not worked out very well.