Lying = Rape?

Printable View

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

07-23-2010, 03:36 PM
Aimless

If you have sex with a very drunk girl, can it be construed as rape after the fact because she is assumed to have been unable to consent? If you have sex with a girl thinking she's over the age of consent (because she said so, even though she isn't :o) then can it be construed as rape because she is by definition unable to consent?

I'm pretty sure there have been cases where men have been convicted of rape for having sex with drunk girls, as well as men being convicted of statutory rape for having sex with girls under the age of consent without knowing it. If their consent at the time of sex wasn't viewed as valid, then can someone argue that consent based on a lie--about religious affiliation and about intentions--was not valid?
07-23-2010, 03:39 PM
littlelolligagged

Someone who is incapacitated is unable to consent, the same as someone who is underage.

There is a huge difference between that and "oh, the random stranger I boffed isn't actually a Jew."
07-23-2010, 03:45 PM
Hazir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aimless

If you have sex with a very drunk girl, can it be construed as rape after the fact because she is assumed to have been unable to consent? If you have sex with a girl thinking she's over the age of consent (because she said so, even though she isn't :o) then can it be construed as rape because she is by definition unable to consent?

I'm pretty sure there have been cases where men have been convicted of rape for having sex with drunk girls, as well as men being convicted of statutory rape for having sex with girls under the age of consent without knowing it. If their consent at the time of sex wasn't viewed as valid, then can someone argue that consent based on a lie--about religious affiliation and about intentions--was not valid?

Well, by posting this you show that you actually are following the absolutist nonsense this judge tries to pass for justice. What's the German proverb again ? "Jeder konsequenz leitet zur Hölle" ? If that ever was appropriate it is here. This guy's crime was not being honest, if he hadn't been caught out there would be no discernable damage this woman suffered. None whatsoever.
07-23-2010, 03:52 PM
Aimless

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hazir

Well, by posting this you show that you actually are following the absolutist nonsense this judge tries to pass for justice. What's the German proverb again ? "Jeder konsequenz leitet zur Hölle" ? If that ever was appropriate it is here.

Please don't ascribe beliefs to me that I do not hold :noob: I am merely wondering if the sentence is defensible in any way. So far I have found Nessie's point about the state sanctioning racism to be the most convincing reason for rejecting this ruling, although I'm not sure how convincing it would be in a state that really does sanction racism. But then again I can't say for sure that Israel really does sanction racism.
07-23-2010, 04:05 PM
Hazir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aimless

Please don't ascribe beliefs to me that I do not hold :noob: I am merely wondering if the sentence is defensible in any way. So far I have found Nessie's point about the state sanctioning racism to be the most convincing reason for rejecting this ruling, although I'm not sure how convincing it would be in a state that really does sanction racism. But then again I can't say for sure that Israel really does sanction racism.

The racist angle is the lesser problem here. What if he had lied about his marital status? The problem lies in a judge making an irrelevant fact the reason for condemning him to time in prison. It puts the standards for inter-human relations so high that relations actually have to be deemed impossible.
07-23-2010, 04:55 PM
LittleFuzzy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aimless

If this had been about a con-man who lied about his identity and his intentions to con a girl of $1000, then he would be punished in some way, right? Or?

Yes, in that case there is a direct harm inflicted, which society thinks the government should try to stop or punish. It is debatable whether there is harm in what happened to that woman, and I think most of us do not think the government should step in and try to regulate pick-up lines.
07-23-2010, 05:05 PM
LittleFuzzy

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nessus

I'm not convinced it's sensible to call that rape, either, unless the man in question extorted sex from the women as an authority figure.

I agree. I can see how one might consider it a form of criminal fraud, if it were at all practical to use verbal contracts but rape?

Ok, here's an even better example, one involving actual physical harm. You sleep with someone who does not disclose they are HIV+, and you get infected. Very real damage has been done to you, you definitely have recourse to civil action, and depending on what your laws are, you might be able to get something like criminal assault. But you can't cry rape. You consented. Being of sound mind, you consented. There was no force involved, no coercion. And that's what rape is about.
07-24-2010, 06:47 AM
Being

What part of plea bargain don't you people understand?
07-25-2010, 03:51 PM
Hazir

He appealed, so that doesn't really sound as if he's accepting of the verdict.
07-25-2010, 07:11 PM
earthJoker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Being

What part of plea bargain don't you people understand?

I don't know the Israeli system, but usually in a criminal case the judge has to a plea bargain.
07-25-2010, 09:04 PM
Being

Quote:

Originally Posted by earthJoker

I don't know the Israeli system, but usually in a criminal case the judge has to a plea bargain.

And the judge sentenced him for what he pled guilty to. Him not taking into account what the maximum sentence could be does not, IMO, constitute grounds for appeal.
07-25-2010, 10:42 PM
Hazir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Being

And the judge sentenced him for what he pled guilty to. Him not taking into account what the maximum sentence could be does not, IMO, constitute grounds for appeal.

I would be more hesitant to make such sweeping statements about a legal system that is neither Code Napoleon nor Common Law but a mix of the two with some Judaic highlights thrown in.
07-26-2010, 05:27 AM
Being

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hazir

I would be more hesitant to make such sweeping statements about a legal system that is neither Code Napoleon nor Common Law but a mix of the two with some Judaic highlights thrown in.

My opinion rarely matches up with existing legal systems. Is there any value added to linking up?
07-26-2010, 06:33 AM
earthJoker

Quote:

Originally Posted by Being

And the judge sentenced him for what he pled guilty to.

That doesn't matter, a pleadge alone can never be enough for a sentence, the needs to be evidence. A judge for excample should never sentence somone wo is pleading something he has not done.

Quote:

Him not taking into account what the maximum sentence could be does not, IMO, constitute grounds for appeal.

Acutally, at least in my country, most appeals are about the length/ammount of the sentence and not to change the actual verdict.

And I have to agree with Hazir, we speak about a system that is neither common nor civil, so I assume that neither of us can judge about the legal implication here. But we still can discuss about the outcome for society.
07-26-2010, 08:09 PM
Hazir

Quote:

Originally Posted by Being

My opinion rarely matches up with existing legal systems. Is there any value added to linking up?

If you are talking about the implications of a type of action in a legal system then it sure matters. And it seems pretty clear to me that we are talking about an actual legal system rather than about loose legal concepts.

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page