A Brutal Crime in Warsaw: Immigrant Woman Found Raped and Murdered
Liza died in the hospital, where doctors fought for her life for several days. She died because Dorian beat and raped her, strangled her, and then left her unconscious and “without vital functions” at the scene. Sam took a streetcar home to Warsaw’s Mokotow district. He had prepared for the robbery; he had a firepit and a knife. Dorian S. is Polish, Catholic, white male. Pictured here in a beige coat, black scarf, with a cross around his neck.
I would like the fact that Dorian S., and every other rapist, belongs to the privileged majority in this country to be recorded. For the sake of order, for the sake of statistics, for the sake of awareness of a public that is constantly frightened of migrants. Who is Dorian S.? A Pole. A citizen of Poland.
Liza was a refugee from Belarus. She came to Warsaw to seek safety.
There were people passing by who were not sure that a rape was about to take place in the gate, on the steps at 47 Zurawia Street. They thought it was “homeless people having sex.”
How do you recognize rape? In Polish law, the provision that rape is recognized by the fact that the raped woman screams, fights, protests, and the rapist, in addition to raping, still beats. But there is, after all, among Polish adages that when a woman says “no,” she thinks “yes,” so there could always be the perverse possibility that the victim’s screaming encourages her abuser to do more.
We are still waiting for a change in the definition of rape. The idea is to consider any sexual intercourse not freely and knowingly consented to as rape, simply put. I hope that no politician will propose a referendum on this issue. Changing the definition will not only have an impact on sentences handed down, but will sensitize the public, possible witnesses who, understanding that rape is rape, will not hesitate, but will immediately pull out the phone and call 112.
The change in traffic law, stating that it is the pedestrian who has priority in the lanes and the driver is obliged to stop when seeing a pedestrian approaching the crosswalk, has proved revolutionary. Suddenly, drivers are able to slow down in front of the crosswalk, and there are far fewer casualties than when the culprit may have been the one who “rammed into the lanes” while the speeding driver could not stop.
The same will happen with the change in the definition of rape. Potential rapists will understand that they will not break out easily, that it is not the victim who will have to explain why she did not scream. And witnesses to the rape will also know that the law does not give the rapist more ways to shrug off responsibility, put it on the victim, shame her, intimidate her, and manipulate witnesses.
The rape committed by Dorian S. is perfectly reflected in the wording of Art. 197 of the Criminal Code: “who by violence, unlawful threat or deception brings another person to sexual intercourse.” There was violence, not just sexual, because sexual is not enough according to this provision. There were threats, there was rape. Nevertheless, people who passed by the scene did not take out their phones, but left after the rapist vulgarly demanded it. The provision doesn’t work because it leaves wickets for broad interpretations, involving at least three actors in a rape situation: the rapist, the raped and the one who will be able to check how much the woman defended herself.
If Liza had survived, we would probably be reading about what she was wearing, why she was walking alone, why at that hour, and whether it was clear that she didn’t want this “sexual intercourse” and was calling for help, or maybe she had alcohol in her blood – any of this information could be used against her. The court and the media would bend over all the circumstances, and we would still know little about Dorian S.. Neither the name, nor the face, nor why he took a firepit, a knife and left the house to lurk in the gate of the street. Crane with intent to rape, kill. Was he planning, was he just concerned about Liza, or was he ready to attack anyone who happened to be passing that way? And this should be the subject of study: what makes a person ready to inflict pain on another person, to take life, to rape.
If Liza had survived and become pregnant as a result of rape, the public would have begun to question whether she should have the right to an abortion. Now that there has been a change of power, wouldn’t the proposal in this case, which would have gone to the prosecutor’s office, have lain untouched, would it have gone to the friendly media, which would have started a lament over conception and over the innocence of the zygote? Would the prosecutor’s office have acted quickly, or would the Abortion Dream Team, without waiting for the prosecutor, have helped Liza?
If Liza had survived the attack, we would have learned a great deal about Liza, because the law, with its enabling broad interpretation of the rape provision, opens the door to this, or rather breaks the windows, violating the privacy of the victim, whose actions begin to be followed by the entire country.
However, Liza is dead. And her death in a way exposes the rapist. It makes vague provisions no longer protect him. And so be it. Let’s focus on him, Dorian S. – and let that be the ultimate argument for changing the law. Let the rapists not feel that they can rape, beat, leave and go home peacefully, convinced that the victim can be silenced, that the case will not be published, because they are protected by their – white men, Poles, Catholics – privilege.
