How did this get to court?

[JagLover]

No wonder the rate of convictions for 'rape' is so low.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/kent/7964085.st...

[gingerpaul]

There must be more to the CPS's case than that surely?

[G'kar]

No consent = Rape.

Stupid bd should not have gone anywhere near her if she was that pissed.

[DamoLLb]

Because of the ambiguity of the matter and the possible retraction of consent after it was implied? With out knowing the full facts, but that is what I would guess at.

[JJCW]

G'kar said:

No consent = Rape.

Stupid bd should not have gone anywhere near her if she was that pissed.

Harsh imo, its very unlikely he was stone cold sober himself.

Soon as she cried rape he shouldn't cried rape himself. That would've made an interesting court case!

[JagLover]

G'kar said:

No consent = Rape.

Stupid bd should not have gone anywhere near her if she was that pissed.

Two people get legless together and end up sleeping together. Woman cries rape afterwards, does that make it so?

Many men have slept with women with beer goggles on, that doesn't mean they can claim rape in the morning. It's getting to the stage that a man should have a consent form ready to be signed before any casual encounter!

[G'kar]

IIRC, the law was changed recently. It may have been in response to a Security Guard who had a go on a pissed girl passed out in the corridor of a university a year or two back.

Not saying I agree with it, but it's a reason to be careful in such situations.

[shoggoth1]

The fact that the accused gets named yet she does not is awfully 'fair' - especially for something like this.

[DamoLLb]

G'kar said:

IIRC, the law was changed recently. It may have been in response to a Security Guard who had a go on a pissed girl passed out in the corridor of a university a year or two back.

Not saying I agree with it, but it's a reason to be careful in such situations.

It was at my old uni Aberystwyth. She retracted her consent after giving it under the influence. I dont know how long that judgement will stand.

[GTIR]

As far as I am concerned you should never have sex with a woman if she is pissed (not tipsy), especially if she is unconscious through alcohol, and more so if you hardly know her. Full stop.

If you do your a prat.

[ukwill]

GTIR said:

As far as I am concerned you should never have sex with a woman if she is pissed (not tipsy), especially if she is unconscious through alcohol, and more so if you hardly know her. Full stop.

If you do your a prat.

what about if you are both w@nkered (as in this case?)

[JRM]

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

If they drank 5 bottles at dinner, him and the other woman must have had 4.5 of them themselves. Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

[deckster]

JRM said:

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

I took that to mean at the time she was tested, ie the morning after. Agree that if they have extrapolated back to the night before then yes she could only have been mildly tipsy.

JRM said:

Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

You would hope so. At the moment though I wouldn't say it's looking good for him - although he seems like a genuine enough bloke, if a little naive, lack of a 'No' does not equal 'Yes' and the courts have a history of siding with the woman in cases like this.

[gingerpaul]

JRM said:

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

If they drank 5 bottles at dinner, him and the other woman must have had 4.5 of them themselves. Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

When the blood sample was taken. Could easily have been 12 hours between the first drink and the blood test, and probably more. She must have been plastered. No mention of the blokes alcohol level though.

The trouble is that the bloke's life will be destroyed whether he's convicted or not. If it's a case of her word against his then he must get aquitted because the is reasonable doubt.

If the law says that she must agree to have sex rather than just no say no then there must be millions of rapists out there. How many people ask their wives and girlfriends to confirm that they want to have sex on this particular occasion? Do they get it in writing?

[DamoLLb]

gingerpaul said:

JRM said:

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

If they drank 5 bottles at dinner, him and the other woman must have had 4.5 of them themselves. Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

When the blood sample was taken. Could easily have been 12 hours between the first drink and the blood test, and probably more. She must have been plastered. No mention of the blokes alcohol level though.

The trouble is that the bloke's life will be destroyed whether he's convicted or not. If it's a case of her word against his then he must get aquitted because the is reasonable doubt.

If the law says that she must agree to have sex rather than just no say no then there must be millions of rapists out there. How many people ask their wives and girlfriends to confirm that they want to have sex on this particular occasion? Do they get it in writing?

Its called implied consent. Up until 1991 (IIRC) you couldn't rape your wife, marriage was consent in its self! If your missus says no, then no means no!

[elster]

Ah that is nothing.

My friend is in court shortly for "sexual touching" or something like that.

He pinched a friends arse and she reported this to the police.

Oh yeah this is the 4th time she has done this to a variety of people. Absolutely disgraceful, this is a woman he has known for many years.

[esselte]

DamoLLb said:

gingerpaul said:

JRM said:

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

If they drank 5 bottles at dinner, him and the other woman must have had 4.5 of them themselves. Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

When the blood sample was taken. Could easily have been 12 hours between the first drink and the blood test, and probably more. She must have been plastered. No mention of the blokes alcohol level though.

The trouble is that the bloke's life will be destroyed whether he's convicted or not. If it's a case of her word against his then he must get aquitted because the is reasonable doubt.

If the law says that she must agree to have sex rather than just no say no then there must be millions of rapists out there. How many people ask their wives and girlfriends to confirm that they want to have sex on this particular occasion? Do they get it in writing?

Its called implied consent. Up until 1991 (IIRC) you couldn't rape your wife, marriage was consent in its self! If your missus says no, then no means no!

Yes but the question is if she doesn't actually say "yes" does that mean "no"? (with regard to your wife I mean...well not your wife as such but...oh you get the gist...)..

[G'kar]

elster said:

Ah that is nothing.

My friend is in court shortly for "sexual touching" or something like that.

He pinched a friends arse and she reported this to the police.

Oh yeah this is the 4th time she has done this to a variety of people. Absolutely disgraceful, this is a woman he has known for many years.

Then pinching her arse was a little silly, non?

[GTIR]

ukwill said:

GTIR said:

As far as I am concerned you should never have sex with a woman if she is pissed (not tipsy), especially if she is unconscious through alcohol, and more so if you hardly know her. Full stop.

If you do your a prat.

what about if you are both w@nkered (as in this case?)

Never!

Its just not worth the risk, and anyway surely you should have more respect for the lady you are with?

I have been in this situation before, and even in my wkered state I was man enough to realise it was not right.
Next morning mind we were at it like rabbits!

And it wasnt even easter, although I did have some chocolate....

[DamoLLb]

esselte said:

DamoLLb said:

gingerpaul said:

JRM said:

Hang on, she was twice the female drink-drive limit - isn't that the equivalent of 2 glasses of wine??? How could she have been THAT drunk after so little alcohol.

If they drank 5 bottles at dinner, him and the other woman must have had 4.5 of them themselves. Always more to the story than the papers report though IMHO

When the blood sample was taken. Could easily have been 12 hours between the first drink and the blood test, and probably more. She must have been plastered. No mention of the blokes alcohol level though.

The trouble is that the bloke's life will be destroyed whether he's convicted or not. If it's a case of her word against his then he must get aquitted because the is reasonable doubt.

If the law says that she must agree to have sex rather than just no say no then there must be millions of rapists out there. How many people ask their wives and girlfriends to confirm that they want to have sex on this particular occasion? Do they get it in writing?

Its called implied consent. Up until 1991 (IIRC) you couldn't rape your wife, marriage was consent in its self! If your missus says no, then no means no!

Yes but the question is if she doesn't actually say "yes" does that mean "no"? (with regard to your wife I mean...well not your wife as such but...oh you get the gist...)..

Its called implied consent. i.e the action of the person giving consent is considered by their actions as opposed to express consent, where it would have to be in writing or actually stated.