A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
that was a shocking article, I had no idea that went on in Brazil.
A Brazilian court’s decision to acquit a 35-year-old man accused of raping a 12-year-old girl—arguing that they were “two young lovers” united by “a consensual emotional bond”
Some 34,000 Brazilian girls under the age of 14, mostly poor and Black, declared themselves as “married” in the census
I couldn't tell from the article. Does the Brazilian justice system work differently than I expect? It just says he was initially convicted, but then exonerated. Does that mean the charges were thrown out for lack of evidence, procedural missteps, or something of that nature? Or was it dismissed because the judges disagreed with the law? Or am I completely misreading/misunderstanding the whole thing?
Hi. Brazilian former lawyer here.
It was because the appeals court judges disagreed with the law, basically. See, any sort of sexual encounter with a person under 14 is considered statutory rape in Brazil, but the judges decided to base their decision on the "regular" rape article, which requires some kind of violence, drugging or deception.
To be perfectly clear, this is not and never was up to them. If a conduct matches a criminal type, which this one absolutely does, the judge does not have the authority to ignore it because it doesn't match some other arbitrary type. You don't get to walk free from murder because you didn't rob a newsstand while murdering. This decision was entirely illegal and will be reversed, especially now thay the media is aware. I just hope the disgusting pervert judges who wrote it are expelled from their jobs as well.
It surprises me that the judge(s) don't seem to care if their decision is reversed. In Canada it's somewhat frowned upon for judges to seemingly take the law into their own hands, only to be reversed at a later date.
The rapist in this case has ties to large drug cartels. It's not unthinkable that the judges do too and were told to let him off the hook. Either that or they're pedos themselves, but there's definitely something very strange going on that hasn't been made public.
I find the thought of judges deciding guilt or innocence horrifying. That it would lead to unthinkable outcomes in the US. Jury trials are one of the most important freedoms ever extracted from the ruling class.
Judges appointed by politicians/other bureaucrats would lead to very bad faith, cynical people being appointed, or elected. The judges in the US are quite corrupted for the prosecution. They pretend to believe the prosecution and cops, and support direct violations of the bill of rights that no reasonable person would think are not violations. They by and large are cynical and think the Republic is already dead, it's only the citizens that either don't know it, or are contesting it. For all of their faults, you want them deciding guilt and innocence before old boys appointed by the network.
I may be wrong but I think judges are not elected nor politically appointed in Brazil (I think the exception is the supreme Court). They are like other public jobs that you have to pass an exam and compete with other candidates.
In Brazil, only crimes against life such as murder or manslaughter are put before a jury.
Well that is good at least the most serious ones are. The UK was the birthplace of modern jury trials, and they cancelled them for charges up to 3 years in prison. Their "left" politicians under labor did it at that, (after the tories did up to 1 year in prison in 2020,) after they sabotaged the workings of the courts to create backlogs, and used the backlogs as en excuse to cancel jury trials.
Most of west europe has them to lesser degrees than the UK and US and the like.
The two people who down voted this are: A) confused about what the down vote is supposed to be for, or B) pedos.
Wait'll you hear about usa's controversy!