New rape law allows change of mind

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Japher


Get your stopwatch out!

The whole law is absurd.

Each case is different:

"No, stop"
"What, ok."
"No I'm kidding."

One hour later

"I can't believe you rapped me! I said stop!"

Following the letter of the law!

Except for the part about saying she was kidding, thus negating the withdrawl of consent. So, following the letter of the law, if she tried to have him thrown in prison, she would go to jail for a false claim of rape.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

If she says no while they are, then, per your definition, RIGHT THEN, it's rape. It's already too late. The man is guilty (he's still inside her when consent is withdrawn). Guilty. Bang. Done.

BINGO! Che, please answer this. If you say that consent for sex is withdrawn at the moment of saying 'NO', the man then is already guilty, because at the time of 'no', he is inside of her. She withdrew consent and a millisecond later, you haven't left.

How long do you think it takes to stop and/or pull out?

Geez, I would have thought at least you were on my side, Imran.

[Velociryx]

Che,

The answer to your "how long do you think it would take" question is:

TIME!!!

It takes time, which is why that amount of time needs to be codified if this is to be made law.

Instantly doesn't work, for the reasons already stated (cos in that case, the man's already guilty)

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

(and yes, IF you codify that amount of time, I'll try to come up with scenarios that render whatever timeframe you select invalid)

-=Vel=-

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Sorry Velo, but you're wrong. The issue is not whether the cessation is instantaneous, but whether a mens rea to commit the act of rape is formed.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Except for the part about saying she was kidding, thus negating the withdrawl of consent. So, following the letter of the law, if she tried to have him thrown in prison, she would go to jail for a false claim of rape.

that'd be cool. rape cases could be like double edged sword. no matter how it turns out! someone is going to jail!

ahhhhhh that'd make good tv.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Che and I decide to go out for burgers. He asks me to drive and I do (I consent).

En route, I decide that this whole thing is NOT something I want to do. It's...oppressive....a form of slavery...I am being FORCED to drive this stinking car, and....I don't want to.

Fearing greatly this oppressive goat sitting next to me, I say no....but, he complains that we're almost to the burger joint....it's not much farther.

The law doesn't say you can't try and talk the person into continuing to have sex. If you decided to pull over and I wouldn't let you, then clearly I would be breaknig the law.

So....fearing for my rights as a free human being, I slow down and jump out of the vehicle, regaining my freedom.

If I had threatened actual violence against you, would this be wrong?

Let's turn this around, however. In your case, it would be as if she was on bottom, the guy no top, and he decided he didn't want to have sex anymore.

Rather look at it this way. I drop by with my car and ask if you want to grab a burder. As soon as we pull away, you remember you have someplace to be, and ask me to pull over because you don't want to go get a burder anymore. I say, "We're almost there" and don't stop and keep driving. I've just committed kidnapping and unlawful imprisonment.

But beware, now no one will ever give anyone else a ride because of the danger of false claims of kidnapping. Oh sure, they consented at first, but after the ride they decided they really didn't want to go, and woe, now people will go to jail for taking people places they really did want to go.

[Velociryx]

Laz, sure it matters. She withdrew consent. At that point, it's NON-CONSENSUAL sex, isn't it?

-=Vel=-

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

No it isn't. It's not a strict liability offence.

Mens rea must exist simultaneously with actus reus, or there is no crime.

[Velociryx]

Exactly my point....let's not put people in jail for taking them places they want to go, and let's not be hasty and put a poorly worded law in effect that opens the door for abuse.

-=Vel=-

[Velociryx]

Laz, so if she says no, then it's....still consensual sex, or just not a crime?

-=Vel=-

[yavoon]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Velociryx
Che and I decide to go out for burgers. He asks me to drive and I do (I consent).

En route, I decide that this whole thing is NOT something I want to do. It's...oppressive....a form of slavery...I am being FORCED to drive this stinking car, and....I don't want to.

Fearing greatly this oppressive goat sitting next to me, I say no....but, he complains that we're almost to the burger joint....it's not much farther.

The law doesn't say you can't try and talk the person into continuing to have sex. If you decided to pull over and I wouldn't let you, then clearly I would be breaknig the law.

So....fearing for my rights as a free human being, I slow down and jump out of the vehicle, regaining my freedom.

If I had threatened actual violence against you, would this be wrong?

Let's turn this around, however. In your case, it would be as if she was on bottom, the guy no top, and he decided he didn't want to have sex anymore.

Rather look at it this way. I drop by with my car and ask if you want to grab a burder. As soon as we pull away, you remember you have someplace to be, and ask me to pull over because you don't want to go get a burder anymore. I say, "We're almost there" and don't stop and keep driving. I've just committed kidnapping and unlawful imprisonment.

But beware, now no one will ever give anyone else a ride because of the danger of false claims of kidnapping. Oh sure, they consented at first, but after the ride they decided they really didn't want to go, and woe, now people will go to jail for taking people places they really did want to go.

yah I guess u'd have to drop them off by the side of the road and go get a burder by urself. but if u ask any guy he'll tell u that burders are better w/ a friend.

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Velociryx
Laz, so if she says no, then it's....still consensual sex, or just not a crime?

-=Vel=-

It's not consensual sex, but it's not a crime either.

If you don't hear her say "no", there's no mens rea. No crime.

If she changes her mind after the act, there's no mens rea. No crime.

[Ned]

When Che says he stopped immediately, I find this hard to believe. Most guys will protest, will literally "beg" to go on. At some point in this negotiation, it will be clear to the man that he has to stop or else he is proceeding only by force. At this point, the rape occurs.

Che is again being too "radical" if he suggests that the man must stop immediately, without protest - or else.

[Ramo]

Frankly, I'm amazed that the law wasn't like this before. The idea that a woman can't change her mind about having sex is insane. 'Course I'd be much more comfortable with "immediately" better defined.