Lying = Rape?

[Hazir]

It was a precedent because two years ago a judge ruled that misrepresenting parts of your identity when seducing someone constituted rape. That precedent itself is pretty extraordinary, so it's no surprise that it applied to this situation and could apply to so many others.

And that stood? That's pretty unpretty to say the least. Makes me seriously doubt the quality of Israeli justice.

[Hazir]

I have been having a hard time with this discussion... intuitively the sentence strikes me as ridiculous, but I'm having a hard time justifying that viewpoint. Exactly why is this a ridiculous or indefensible sentence??

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?

The point is that by a ruling like this you can only interact with people on the basis of full disclosure.

To make this into something closer to yourself; IIRC you recently met somebody who you really really like. Now let's say that every time you were not 100% (not 99,99% but the full 100%) honest to that person could land you in jail. Would you really still be a free man?

I for my part would certainly not want to be held responsable for the times I bitched to my friends about Ronald without telling him I had done that. Under the idea of justice of this judge I'd be fried for every now and then thinking that I might be better off without him.

[Aimless]

But I'm not sure how I see that being the inevitable conclusion. The bit that confuses me is that I thought similar cases involving money could result in punishment, and this is just a case of replacing money with some bizarre form of virtue. Now money you can pay back, but how do you return someone to the purity of not having had sex with a dirty Arab with evil intentions?

What I'm trying to sort out in my own head is that if you defraud someone of a large sum of money, it's not very different from having stolen it, and in some situations that can lead to eg. a prison sentence. Why is it so very different if you "defraud" someone of their "virtue"?

EDIT: Okay, so basically if I am not 100% honest I might end up being charged with--and convicted for--rape? Yes, I can see how that would be a problem, even if you require her to prove her aversion towards Arabs

[Aimless]

A guy on another forum painted it as "predatory deception":

But I'm still in favor of at least the concept of someone having to pay a penalty if they secure sexual favors or other nontangibles using predatory deception, and it can be proven with concrete evidence.

If a guy goes around with a bogus story and gets a bunch of little old ladies to give him $1000 each, if the cops catch up to him he's forced to repay them and probably spends some time in jail. But if a guy goes around with a bogus story and steals the innocence and faith in the goodness of mankind from a bunch of naïve young ladies, everyone says, "Hey, that's YOUR fault, girls." That REALLY doesn't sit well with me. Either way they're being a predator. Either way they're taking something precious. Except in the latter case it's both precious and irreplacable.

And I'm not talking about garden variety, a guy hides his flaws during the initial startup of the dating phase. I'm talking about behavior that reasonable person would classify as clear and flagrant deceit. And I could agree that there has to be evidence so that the nature of the lies can be evaluated... emails, texts, eyewitness accounts, etc. But if that's there, I think there should be some sort of recourse for the victim.

What do you guys think?

[Nessus]

But I'm not sure how I see that being the inevitable conclusion. The bit that confuses me is that I thought similar cases involving money could result in punishment, and this is just a case of replacing money with some bizarre form of virtue. Now money you can pay back, but how do you return someone to the purity of not having had sex with a dirty Arab with evil intentions?

What I'm trying to sort out in my own head is that if you defraud someone of a large sum of money, it's not very different from having stolen it, and in some situations that can lead to eg. a prison sentence. Why is it so very different if you "defraud" someone of their "virtue"?

EDIT: Okay, so basically if I am not 100% honest I might end up being charged with--and convicted for--rape? Yes, I can see how that would be a problem, even if you require her to prove her aversion towards Arabs

I think the hang-up comes from the implicit assumption that it is okay for a state to validate racism. The damage done here is, if I'm reading it right, solely because this woman is a racist bigot. Racist bigots can refrain from sleeping with the darkies if they so choose, but if they fail to spot the darkie, is it really the state's job to step in and partake in the bigotry?

[Loki]

A guy on another forum painted it as "predatory deception":

Lying is a crime only if it's used to obtain some service. Unless the women in question are prostitutes, having sex with a guy is not a service. Therefore, they can't complain if they did so under false pretenses.

[Aimless]

I think the hang-up comes from the implicit assumption that it is okay for a state to validate racism. The damage done here is, if I'm reading it right, solely because this woman is a racist bigot. Racist bigots can refrain from sleeping with the darkies if they so choose, but if they fail to spot the darkie, is it really the state's job to step in and partake in the bigotry?

This is the impression I would have gotten if it hadn't been for this:

A legal precedent in Israel classifying sex by deception as rape was set by the Supreme Court in a 2008 conviction of a man who posed as a government official and persuaded women to have sex with him by promising them state benefits.

[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. If I tell some chick my other car's a Porsche and would you like to spend a weekend at my Hampton house next month, now be a dear and suck me off, and she does this willingly in the hopes of getting to partake of my false high life style. How is that rape? Am I raped if some chick tells me she's 27, when in reality she's 34? I certainly wouldn't feel raped.

[Loki]

This is the impression I would have gotten if it hadn't been for this:

That person should have been arrested for pretending to be a state employee. To add to Nessus' point, rape occurs during sex, not after. If you weren't raped when you had sex, you certainly weren't afterward.

[littlelolligagged]

Yes, the whole thought of morning after regrets being called rape is disturbing.

[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 ) 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?

[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."

[Hazir]

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 ) 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.

[Aimless]

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 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.

[Hazir]

Please don't ascribe beliefs to me that I do not hold 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.

[LittleFuzzy]

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.

[LittleFuzzy]

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.

[Being]

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

[Hazir]

He appealed, so that doesn't really sound as if he's accepting of the verdict.

[earthJoker]

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.

[Being]

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.

[Hazir]

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.

[Being]

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?

[earthJoker]

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.

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.

[Hazir]

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.