Another one of my stupid annoying questions...
Discussion
After having a chat with my training partner in the gym, and talking about some stuff that has been in the news...
Two gay men go to a bar on a date. Both get very drunk and can't remember the evening. The next day they wake up together. They both go to the police and say they can't remember what happened and can feel that something did - have they both committed rape on each other? If so are they both charged with rape? Thus the victim also being a perpetrator?
I'm not picking on homosexuals because of any prejudice, it was just what came up. And it sort of works in this example.
Two gay men go to a bar on a date. Both get very drunk and can't remember the evening. The next day they wake up together. They both go to the police and say they can't remember what happened and can feel that something did - have they both committed rape on each other? If so are they both charged with rape? Thus the victim also being a perpetrator?
I'm not picking on homosexuals because of any prejudice, it was just what came up. And it sort of works in this example.
TurricanII said:
Not an expert, but sounds like one of the thousands of rape cases that go nowhere every year due to lack of evidence.
Yes but in my ridiculous and stupid example there is CCTV of them both stumbling around not able to walk - and the taxi driver says they were both paralytic in the back of the cap. Neither were possibly in a position to give consent... 
Depending on timescales, forensics via a medical examination would be the first port of call. Much like when two people accuse each other of assault, whoever reported it first might initially be considered the aggrieved, and the other's claim would be treated as a counter-allegation. The victim would be interviewed on video in place of a written statement, and the suspect would be arrested and interviewed. Other lines of enquiry might include CCTV and witnesses for wherever they were prior to the incident - what was their behaviour like etc. Victimology is also a consideration - what else is known about each of them. I suspect that without some convincing evidence to substantiate one account over the other, the job would go nowhere.
Edited to say:
Just seen your CCTV/eyewitness update. Medical/forensic evidence would be significant. If that suggests they could both be the perpetrators, then there's very little chance of it going anywhere, as to secure a charge CPS would need to be convinced there was a realistic prospect of conviction.
Edited to say:
Just seen your CCTV/eyewitness update. Medical/forensic evidence would be significant. If that suggests they could both be the perpetrators, then there's very little chance of it going anywhere, as to secure a charge CPS would need to be convinced there was a realistic prospect of conviction.
Edited by JulianHJ on Sunday 11th January 10:29
JulianHJ said:
Depending on timescales, forensics via a medical examination would be the first port of call. Much like when two people accuse each other of assault, whoever reported it first might initially be considered the aggrieved, and the other's claim would be treated as a counter-allegation. The victim would be interviewed on video in place of a written statement, and the suspect would be arrested and interviewed. Other lines of enquiry might include CCTV and witnesses for wherever they were prior to the incident - what was their behaviour like etc. Victimology is also a consideration - what else is known about each of them. I suspect that without some convincing evidence to substantiate one account over the other, the job would go nowhere.
Interesting - I know I am stretching reality to the extreme here. But lets say they both walked into different police stations at the same time. All the evidence is there that each had sex with the other. And both admit they have no memory of the night before... So evidentially there is enough to prove they both had sex - and by admission neither can remember what happened. To add, so you can better understand the law as it stands;
Sexual Offences Act 2003 said:
1 Rape
(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
As you can see from the law above, someone is not raped if the other person reasonably believes that they consented (even if in reality they did not consent).(1) A person (A) commits an offence if—
(a) he intentionally penetrates the vagina, anus or mouth of another person (B) with his penis,
(b) B does not consent to the penetration, and
(c) A does not reasonably believe that B consents.
(2) Whether a belief is reasonable is to be determined having regard to all the circumstances, including any steps A has taken to ascertain whether B consents.
photosnob said:
Interesting - I know I am stretching reality to the extreme here. But lets say they both walked into different police stations at the same time. All the evidence is there that each had sex with the other. And both admit they have no memory of the night before... So evidentially there is enough to prove they both had sex - and by admission neither can remember what happened.
In a nutshell, insufficient evidence to charge either party - how could anyone say what really happened if the participants don't recall it?JulianHJ said:
In a nutshell, insufficient evidence to charge either party - how could anyone say what really happened if the participants don't recall it?
Yeah - thats kind of what I was getting at... In the news recently there has been a lot of talk where the victim was unable to say anything about it due to a lack of memory. This seams to be a strange topic to talk about on a public forum unless the person starting the thread was gay and was worried as this has happened to him.
Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
allergictocheese said:
I could make an educated guess that the conversation began on the subject of Ched Evans then took a blokey turn to exploring extremes in the principles...
Probably. In which case the answer is "If a jury of our peers decided it was rape, then it was rape." That's what juries are there for after all.
btcc123 said:
This seams to be a strange topic to talk about on a public forum unless the person starting the thread was gay and was worried as this has happened to him.
Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
No, he's trying to be a smart arse, as he's got a bee in his bonnet about the Ched Evans rape case that's grabbing the headlines. His view on that thread (in the Football section) is that the footballer was guilty only because it was M/F sex whereas had it been M/M sex then nothing would've happened. Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
The gym scenario is no more than him emphasising how masculinely macho male he really is, especially with his current steroid abuse.
btcc123 said:
This seams to be a strange topic to talk about on a public forum unless the person starting the thread was gay and was worried as this has happened to him.
Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
No, he's trying to be a smart arse, as he's got a bee in his bonnet about the Ched Evans rape case that's grabbing the headlines. His view on that thread (in the Football section) is that the footballer was guilty only because it was M/F sex whereas had it been M/M sex then nothing would've happened. Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
The gym scenario is no more than him emphasising how masculinely macho male he really is, especially with his current steroid abuse.
davepoth said:
Probably. In which case the answer is "If a jury of our peers decided it was rape, then it was rape."
That's what juries are there for after all.
I have been on two juries in recent years. Both cases were of a sexual nature, and both juries had a majority of middle-aged women. I cannot reveal what was said in the jury room, but both men were found guilty. I would be very worried if I found myself as the accused under such circumstancesThat's what juries are there for after all.
btcc123 said:
This seams to be a strange topic to talk about on a public forum unless the person starting the thread was gay and was worried as this has happened to him.
Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
Normal Perhaps there is something wrong with me as when I go to the gym or pub with a male friend we would be talking about cars,motor sport,football,womens bums and boobs etc.Please tell I am normal.
LoonR1 said:
No, he's trying to be a smart arse, as he's got a bee in his bonnet about the Ched Evans rape case that's grabbing the headlines. His view on that thread (in the Football section) is that the footballer was guilty only because it was M/F sex whereas had it been M/M sex then nothing would've happened.
The gym scenario is no more than him emphasising how masculinely macho male he really is, especially with his current steroid abuse.
Don't just make stuff up. I've said nothing about male/male sex in that thread (where incidentally you have posted more than me, which is odd as I have "a bee in my bonnet"). And I've said explicitly that I've not used steroids in years. Don't let the truth get in the way of making your point though. The gym scenario is no more than him emphasising how masculinely macho male he really is, especially with his current steroid abuse.
I don't mind being called a smart arse - but not by you. You seem like a particularly obnoxious and nauseous individual so I'd appreciate it if you didn't respond to my posts/threads in the future. You never have anything good/positive to say ever, and you are just a horrible, nasty messed up person.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff