rb@cci632.UUCP (Rex Ballard) (10/02/86)
In article <1817@mmintl.UUCP> johnmill@mmintl.UUCP (John Miller) writes: >In article <485@weitek.UUCP> robert@weitek.UUCP (Robert Plamondon) writes: >>In article <946@tekigm2.UUCP> jimb@tekigm2.UUCP (Jim Boland) writes: >> >>[The discussion revolves around the withdrawl of permission for sex at the >>last possible moment] >> >>>If permission is withdrawn, regardless of when, it becomes and issue of >>>one forcing himself on the other. In my book, that is rape. >>Now for the "turn black and white morality into shades of gray" question: >>If you were on a jury, and rape had a mandatory death penalty, would you >>send the guy to the electric chair? >> Robert Plamondon >There is such a thing as justifiable homicide. Is it just possible that >there is such a thing as justifiable rape? > ---johnmill There are several degrees of homocide, ranging from 1st degree murder to involentary manslaughter. How many degrees of rape exist. I remember one of the "statutory rape" laws being that a minor could not be in a car with an adult if he/she were not wearing shoes. Until the age of consent was lowered, in Colorado, it was a punishable crime for a person over 21 to do much of anything with a person under 21. Perhaps if there were degrees of rape, all potentially carrying punishments, the usual defence tactics. In some states, it is grounds for dismissal if: The victim gives verbal consent then withdraws it. The victim consents, or appears to consent, during/after the act. The victim enjoys, or appears to enjoy it. The victim accepts any sort of consideration, before, during, or after the act. The victim expresses sexual interest in the perpetrator. If the victim accepts consideration, be that dinner, money, a sale involving commission, or even a promise of consideration, the victim could face charges of prostitution. In cases of stutory rape, none of these conditions apply, however it is not uncommon for the judge to excercise much more latitude in sentencing. Some states have changed the charge from rape to sexual assault, with the various rules of evidence for degrees of assault. In this case, threatening to sexually assault someone is a punishable crime, just like threatening to break someone's knee-caps. If the victim has reason to believe the perpetrator will carry out his threat, the minimum penalty is a restraining order at the expense of the defendent (about $500). Even in this case, however, the issue of consent and contributary acts apply. If someone threatens you, and you counter-threat, even an actual assault may not be prosecutable. Dale Tooley, once district attorney of Denver Colorado, recalled an actual case where a woman was tied up, sexually assaulted, beaten with a chain, and hung by her legs out a third story window, yet the charges against the perpetrator were dismissed, because she admitted to him prior to the assault, and to the court during the trial, that she was willing to have sex with him. Because he had paid for several drinks beforehand, it was considered consent and prostitution. Someone was flamed for poor taste about the joke where 50% of the rape case were prostitutes who didn't get paid. Legally, most reported cases that are not prosecuted are not prosecuted because the "legal definition" of prostitution applies, but the victim was either not "paid", or not "paid enough". The victims of this "legal sandwich" are virtually always women. Male victims of rape cases (usually homosexual rape), often are not homosexuals and the issue of consent, especially consent for consideration, doesn't come up. On the brighter side. Marriage, or promise of marriage is loosing it's validity as consideration. Colorado prosecuted the first successful marital rape case several years ago, and the verdict has been upheld. The evidence was overwhelming. The husband would literally beat the wife into sexual submission, the wife had attempted to get out of the relationship, the husband had even thwarted this through emotional blackmail. Perhaps if prostitution laws were either revoked or modified to allow certain types of consideration to be excluded, and the sexual assault and consent laws were altered to be more specific about types of consent, especially for consideration, legitimate cases of date rape could be prosecuted. Date rape is different from revenge rape or anonymous rape. It can be at least as damaging, and at least as traumatic. In this case, the identity of the perpetrator, and the act itself can be proven. Unfortunately, contributory negligence, prostitution, and/or prior consent can also often be proven sufficiently to be grounds for dismissal of charges. In cases of "date rape", the punishments shouldn't be as stiff, especially for first offenders, as the other types. The not-so-hypthetical example given above might legally be defined as rape, but it might also be legally defined as prostitution, or at least sex with prior consent. The crime could be reported by either the man or the woman, but it is unlikely that either would be convicted. Similar examples. The client who closes a deal with an account representative recieving commission on the deal and insists on sexual favors might get away with it. The girl who lets a man take her to his apartment, might be considered to have given implied consent. Even a sexually explicit remark meant as an insult, could be construed as sexual consent. Are these laws fair? No. They are meant to protect men who might misinterpret interest for consent. They are meant to protect men from women who solicit and accept non-sexual favors given because sexual favors were offered. In general, both the rape, and prostitution laws have been carefully worded to appear to protect women from men, and in effect, protect men from women. Are you enjoying this Cheryl? Isn't it about time these laws were changed? Sex is not subject to the normal protections of contract law. If it were, consent could be revoked, consideration would be an obligation, and clearer definitions of rape could be drawn. If one fraudulently collected money for a promised service, that would be clearly a tort, and possibly criminal fraud. If one fraudulently collected services without giving consideration, that would also be a clear violation of civil and criminal law. Does this mean all sex should be subject to contractual obligations? No, just as one can give jewelry, money, or services to someone, one could give sex. Sex, and sexual laws, are the ultimate in sexism. There is more demand for sex with women than there is for sex with men. There may be women who will pay for sex with men, and men who will pay for sex with men, but there are a lot more men who will and do pay for sex with women. Men don't always pay cash, but they often do give some sort of consideration in hopes of getting sexual consent from a woman. Engagement rings are quite common.
garry@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (Garry Wiegand) (10/02/86)
In a recent article rb@ccird2.UUCP (Rex Ballard) wrote: >Dale Tooley, once district attorney of Denver Colorado, recalled an actual >case where a woman was tied up, sexually assaulted, beaten with a chain, >and hung by her legs out a third story window, yet the charges against >the perpetrator were dismissed, because she admitted to him prior to the >assault, and to the court during the trial, that she was willing to have >sex with him. Because he had paid for several drinks beforehand, it was >considered consent and prostitution. If this is really the essence of the case, I'd vote for pouring drinks over the judge/DA/state legislature, beating 'em with a chain, and hanging 'em upside-down out of a third story-window. Till the blood gets to their heads. If they have heads. garry wiegand (garry%cadif-oak@cu-arpa.cs.cornell.edu)