Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Dejarma

Accused of rape= what does that mean exactly?

61 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Dejarma

Example 1: a man meets a woman at a nightclub...

The drinks are flowing, they get on great & end up having sex...

The woman (the next day) thinks: 'oh dam what have I done' realizing in the heat of the moment she had sex with this man. 

Feels disgusted with herself & decides to claim rape= that's why she had sex because it was rape=  a subconscious way of justifying it? Was she forced? Well there's the problem= who knows? The man is put in front of a jury...

Example 2: a man hides behind a wall, jumps out on a poor unfortunate woman/ punches her in the face & has sex with her= the man is eventually court & put in front of a jury...

Technically these 2 scenarios are both classed as rape! Is it right because the man at the nightclub will have <<acused of rape>> on his record?

There's an obvious difference here but why are they both classed as RAPE???== again: 'what does that mean, exactly'?

Edited by Dejarma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
MWoo7

Sometimes, deep in the woods right on the trail at times bodies might be found, and some say must have been a reason, meaning obviously that being(PC <SNIP!> correct) / person was no angel.

Does it quack like a duck ? Does it walk like a duck ? Does it act like a duck? Well, more than likely a full fledged <SNIP!!!!> ah worldly <SNIP!!!!> hmmm person.

No reply necessary,. well rather-- I can't see any text anyway, I just thought to quickly just tossed in a thought.  Laterzzzzzzzzzzzz

-


Clarity, I was hinting that the young lady might have been a total  < SNIP > !!!!

Edited by MWoo7
Needed one more ! for emphasis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, MWoo7 said:

Sometimes, deep in the woods right on the trail at times bodies might be found, and some say must have been a reason, meaning obviously that being(PC <SNIP!> correct) / person was not angel. 

sorry you've lost me

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PeacemongerWarlord

Keep it in your pants???

It's not that hard, I do it all the time.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, PeacemongerWarlord said:

Keep it in your pants???

It's not that hard, I do it all the time.

sorry you've lost me= what is your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PeacemongerWarlord
1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

sorry you've lost me= what is your point?

My point is people shouldn't be having random sex with people they met at a bar.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
Just now, PeacemongerWarlord said:

My point is people shouldn't be having random sex with people they met at a bar.

why not?

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
PeacemongerWarlord
1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

why not?

Uhhh....Seriously? Never mind dude. Bang away!

  • Haha 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Aaron2016

Always let the woman make the first sexual move.  Ask her "are you sure you want to do this?"  If she confirms (in a coherent responsible voice) then it is consensual.  If she later claims that it was not consensual then a lie detector might prove your innocence and her guilt.  Otherwise its her word against yours.  Although a selfie photo taken just after the act might prove she was happy with the transaction.  Hard to believe someone was raped if they are seen smiling in a photo with the accused just moments after the act.

 

Edited by Aaron2016
  • Like 3
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
11 minutes ago, MWoo7 said:

Sometimes, deep in the woods right on the trail at times bodies might be found, and some say must have been a reason, meaning obviously that being(PC <SNIP!> correct) / person was no angel.

Does it quack like a duck ? Does it walk like a duck ? Does it act like a duck? Well, more than likely a full fledged <SNIP!!!!> ah worldly <SNIP!!!!> hmmm person.

No reply necessary,. well rather-- I can't see any text anyway, I just thought to quickly just tossed in a thought.  Laterzzzzzzzzzzzz

I've no idea what you're talking about= if I've missed something obvious then I apologize ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
8 minutes ago, Aaron2016 said:

Always let the woman make the first sexual move.  Ask her "are you sure you want to do this?"  If she confirms (in a coherent responsible voice) then it is consensual.  If she later claims that it was not consensual then a lie detector might prove your innocence and her guilt.  Otherwise its her word against yours.  Although a selfie photo taken just after the act might prove she was happy with the transaction.  Hard to believe someone was raped if they are seen smiling in a photo with the accused just moments after the act.

 

yeah, i see your logic, but my logic would be that the woman would say she was forced to smile= it wouldn't work imo in a court of law

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Arbenol
1 hour ago, Dejarma said:

Example 1: a man meets a woman at a nightclub...

The drinks are flowing, they get on great & end up having sex...

The woman (the next day) thinks: 'oh dam what have I done' realizing in the heat of the moment she had sex with this man. 

Feels disgusted with herself & decides to claim rape= that's why she had sex because it was rape=  a subconscious way of justifying it? Was she forced? Well there's the problem= who knows? The man is put in front of a jury...

Example 2: a man hides behind a wall, jumps out on a poor unfortunate woman/ punches her in the face & has sex with her= the man is eventually court & put in front of a jury...

Technically these 2 scenarios are both classed as rape! Is it right because the man at the nightclub will have <<acused of rape>> on his record?

There's an obvious difference here but why are they both classed as RAPE???== again: 'what does that mean, exactly'?

I don't think both scenarios can be classed as rape. The second one, certainly. But the first one is clearly consensual, except in that scenario the woman decides to lie after the event.

Your first example is a complete nightmare for all involved. I've sat on a jury trying a man for a sexual offence. There was no physical evidence and no third party witness testimony. All we had to go on was - Her: "He did it". Him: "No, I didn't".

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
18 minutes ago, Arbenol said:

I don't think both scenarios can be classed as rape. The second one, certainly. But the first one is clearly consensual, except in that scenario the woman decides to lie after the event.

Your first example is a complete nightmare for all involved. I've sat on a jury trying a man for a sexual offence. There was no physical evidence and no third party witness testimony. All we had to go on was - Her: "He did it". Him: "No, I didn't".

Yeah a nightmare!! I'm 60 years old & have never been in this situation & neither do I know of any man that has, personally...

It's rare- & the reason it's rare is because THE VAST MAJORITY OF MEN on this planet are as caring/ empathetic/ understanding etc etc as any woman!

By saying this it seems like I might be suggesting there's a difference= well of course technically there is-- but WE ARE ALL HUMANS of which just want to (I hate using this phrase, but it fits):

 at the end of the day= everyone just wants to live in peace...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
1 hour ago, Dejarma said:

Example 1: a man meets a woman at a nightclub...

The drinks are flowing, they get on great & end up having sex...

The woman (the next day) thinks: 'oh dam what have I done' realizing in the heat of the moment she had sex with this man. 

Feels disgusted with herself & decides to claim rape= that's why she had sex because it was rape=  a subconscious way of justifying it? Was she forced? Well there's the problem= who knows? The man is put in front of a jury...

Example 2: a man hides behind a wall, jumps out on a poor unfortunate woman/ punches her in the face & has sex with her= the man is eventually court & put in front of a jury...

Technically these 2 scenarios are both classed as rape! Is it right because the man at the nightclub will have <<acused of rape>> on his record?

There's an obvious difference here but why are they both classed as RAPE???== again: 'what does that mean, exactly'?

The first example needs many more questions before you get an answer.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
1 hour ago, Aaron2016 said:

Always let the woman make the first sexual move.  Ask her "are you sure you want to do this?"  If she confirms (in a coherent responsible voice) then it is consensual.  If she later claims that it was not consensual then a lie detector might prove your innocence and her guilt.  Otherwise its her word against yours.  Although a selfie photo taken just after the act might prove she was happy with the transaction.  Hard to believe someone was raped if they are seen smiling in a photo with the accused just moments after the act.

2

Missionary work has a long history of causing trouble.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
2 minutes ago, Golden Duck said:

The first example needs many more questions before you get an answer.

what questions would they be then?

 

Edited by Dejarma

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck

That alcohol has complicated the situation. Lawyers will be looking and what may, or may not, constutitute reasonable consent.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, Golden Duck said:

That alcohol has complicated the situation. Lawyers will be looking and what may, or may not, constutitute reasonable consent.

yeah what does that mean?

the man in scenario 2 was also drunk- now what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
2 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

yeah what does that mean?

the man in scenario 2 was also drunk- now what?

In EG1 they will look at how affected she was by alcohol. Was she in a condition to give consent?  Basically, the situation is complicated by alcohol. Lawyers will be earning their money in that case.

In the OP you didn't state the man was drunk in scenario 2.  However, if he was, alcohol cannot be used as a defence. There is a good precedent for this. Rugby League footballer, Noah Nadruku, was acquitted of assault - in Canberra, ACT, Australia - by claiming he was too affected by alcohol to know what he was doing.  The legislation was subsequently changed to outlaw the Nadruku Defence.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, Golden Duck said:

In EG1 they will look at how affected she was by alcohol. Was she in a condition to give consent?  Basically, the situation is complicated by alcohol. Lawyers will be earning their money in that case.

In the OP you didn't state the man was drunk in scenario 2.  However, if he was, alcohol cannot be used as a defence. There is a good precedent for this. Rugby League footballer, Noah Nadruku, was acquitted of assault - in Canberra, ACT, Australia - by claiming he was too affected by alcohol to know what he was doing.  The legislation was subsequently changed to outlaw the Nadruku Defence.

1

alcohol is not an added complication= alcohol will be the reason why situation 1 happened in the first place <more than likely> ... 

what difference does it make if the man was drunk in scenario 2 ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

alcohol is not an added complication= alcohol will be the reason why situation 1 happened in the first place <more than likely> ... 

 

I don't agree that alcohol doesn't complicate things. However, if you're certain sex wouldn't have without alcohol - you've answered you're own question - and eg1 is very likely rape.

1 minute ago, Dejarma said:

what difference does it make if the man was drunk in scenario 2 ? 

1

None.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
1 minute ago, Golden Duck said:

I don't agree that alcohol doesn't complicate things. However, if you're certain sex wouldn't have without alcohol - you've answered you're own question - and eg1 is very likely rape.

complicate what?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dejarma
7 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

However, if you're certain sex wouldn't have without alcohol - you've answered you're own question - and eg1 is very likely rape.

very likely what? eg1=who raped who?? maybe due to alcohol the woman actually raped the man?? is this possible? yeah of course it is! or do you not agree?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
12 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

complicate what?

Alcohol complicates scenario 1 and any subsequent determination of rape

Quote

Who decides how drunk is too drunk to consent?

The law does not explicitly state how sober a person needs to be in order to make an informed decision. It is up to a judge to decide if a complainant was too drunk to consent. A person could be intoxicated but yet a judge could determine that he or she still had the capacity to consent.

Sexual assault cases are very complicated, especially in cases where the accused may not have realized how intoxicated their partner was or if he or she truly believed the other party gave consent.

Our legal system works on the presumption of innocence. Are we willing to lower our standard of proof?

In Australia, situations in which a person can and cannot give consent differ depending on the State and Territory you are. If you are involved in a sexual assault case involving consent one of our criminal lawyers can help.

 

https://lylawyers.com.au/sexual-assault-can-give-consent-drunk-high/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Golden Duck
5 minutes ago, Dejarma said:

very likely what? eg1=who raped who?? maybe due to alcohol the woman actually raped the man?? is this possible? yeah of course it is! or do you not agree?

You keep moving the goal posts.

In your EG1 you clearly state it is the female 'claiming rape'; and, the male is on trial.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.