425k, yours for ****** an undercover cop

[otolith]

Breadvan72 said:

I disagree. The woman has not changed her mind. Her unwillingness to sleep with an undercover policeman existed before, during and after the sex. Her consent was vitiated by deception.

If it were her unwillingness to sleep with a complete and utter bd, who managed to conceal his nature until after he had done the deed, would that be rape?

Or if she were a racist, and he concealed that he was mixed race?

Does whether withholding the information makes consenting sex become rape depend on some test of reasonableness of the objection? A person doesn't need a reasonable explanation in order to withhold consent at the time.

It seems to me that this interpretation of rape infantilises women, diminishes the crime of rape, creates a moral hazard and leads to very difficult legal judgements.

[anonymous-user]

Case law discussed here:-

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual...

[Thorodin]

As in so many other cases of legal stretch, it seems the definition of rape has been illogically widened to take in a variety of (and no pun intended here) no-man's-land border line cases, possibly as a result of pressure from feminist groups and camp followers who see an imbalance in favour of men following alcohol fuelled encounters. I've no doubt there is a suitably vague definition in the statute which enables Judge-lead growth. The understandable pressure to see more cases being reported has had the unfortunate result of some of those charges being phoney, the ensuing outcry of course having the effect of discouraging genuine victims!

[otolith]

Breadvan72 said:

Case law discussed here:-

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/p_to_r/rape_and_sexual...

"In reality, some deceptions (such as, for example, in relation to wealth) will obviously not be sufficient to vitiate consent."

So it is essentially up to the court to decide whether the woman's reason for saying that she would not have consented had she known the truth is a good one or not, despite a person being free to decline consent at the time for any reason or none at all? I'm not really comfortable with that. And why not wealth? It's certainly a reason people have sex with others with whom they would not otherwise choose to - seems a highly subjective judgement, and one which hinges unpleasantly upon whether the woman's motivations (and by implication her character) are considered acceptable.