Anyway, in the end I just banged me little gavel.

Let me ramble about legal systems in the west for a bit. Ok, I've got no academic knowledge of the subject and if anyone feels that I'm being a complete twat, you know, just say so. But I've been thinking about this for a while. Not too long ago I was following the documentary on Michael Peterson, the writer who was eventually commited of the murder of his wife. This despite the fact that a lot of key technical evidence (like the duh! murder weapon) was mysteriously non-existant. I'm not in any way going to put forward my opinion (if indeed I hold an opinion) on whether or not he was guilty. However, one of the main points the prosecution made was that Mr Peterson was bisexual, he formed ephemeral and purely sexual relationships with men he met on the internet, this proving in the amazing world of prejudist people that he didn't love his wife, thus proving his killing her. Like I said, I don't particularly give a damn as to whether or not he was guilty, but I'm slightly surprised that his sexuality became such a key argument in the trial.

And now the whole of Sweden are holding their breath for the outcome of the trial on the woman and her lover who may or may not have killed the woman's 10yo son, but either way definetly dumped his body in a lake. Personally, I hope they both burn in hell, but that's not the thing. My vague concern is how their interest in BDSM sex have become evidence in this trial, supposedly proving that they tortured the boy prior to death. In this case, I actually do hope they both get convicted, because they were both in situations where they could've stopped this from happening, but didn't. But I still think that it's worrying that their interest in BDSM is concidered evidence. Now, if either of them had previously expressed interest in torturing young boys, preferably related to them, then fair enough. The evidence as far as made public talks about sexual relations between two conscenting adults.

So, basically, if I ever have to stand trial for anything (hopefully not though), should I worry that my sexual preferences will come up as evidence? We're daily fed with the notion that everything is normal as long as no one gets hurt, but apparently that's only true to a point. If a guy stands accused for peadophilia, will it be used as evidence that he likes adult women dressed in school uniforms? I don't know if I'm being the Devil's advocate here, but it just seems that it's weird how things are perfectly normal and accepted, and certainly extremely private, until the point where we have to defend ourselves, not only against a crime commited, but defend our entire personality. No?