New Rape Laws

Tefal has stated this in other threads and I tend to agree:

Tefal said:
no your wrong its not the woman is the victim unless consent is given the woman is the victim EVEN IF consent is given.

an intoxicated woman cannot legally consent.

but an intoxicated man legally must get consent and then determine if that consent is acceptable or if it is not and if he decides it is acceptable but the next day the woman decides to change her mind after the fact then he is still guilty as he did not have consent.
Click to expand...

http://forums.overclockers.co.uk/showpost.php?p=27074027&postcount=113

So a man can be held liable for their drunken actions (getting consent and thinking its "viable" due to drunkenness of both parties) but a woman cannot in these cases? :confused:
 
Last edited:
anything I don't mind said:
I willbe carrying one night stand t&c from now on. Specifying consent as well as clause for maternity fraud. Just whip it out, please sign here and here.
Click to expand...

What about the issue of them saying they were forced to sign under duress? I don't think that this plan is quite as ironclad as it needs to be...

Hyburnate said:
Yeah until that contracts voided because they were intoxicated.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure about English law but in Scottish law if you want to void a contract through intoxication it's a pretty high bar - you've got to be monumentally drunk and repudiate the contract about as soon as you regain your senses.

From reading the press release it seems they're going to be asking how the defendant knew the consent was valid and freely given - provided in the circumstances it would be reasonable to assume that there was valid consent then it shouldn't be an issue. I'm almost certain it isn't a perfect solution but given we're dealing with people I don't expect a perfect solution to exist and it is hopefully a step forward, it doesn't appear to change the presumptions or the case law - it's more of a reminder to check during any investigation and/or trial.
 
Boy goes out to bar, boy meets girl, boy and girl go home for some "fun", before anything happens boy pulls out smart phone from pocket and points at the girl, boy turns on recording video "please say your name to the camera and that you are consenting to have "fun", girl gets freaked out and leaves.

/the end

Slight variation, girl enjoys the thought of the recording video and does the above, everything gets recorded and boy posts it on internet...

/the end
 
Cosimo said:
"For what you are about to receive, sign here....."

Maybe Durex will have it as a disclaimer on their products.
Click to expand...

I can just imagine the "family planning" section in supermarkets now:

Condoms, Lube, **** rings, sex contracts.

Surely this in a way trivialises "real" rape (as opposed to the example above where a girl decides after the fact that she made a mistake)? Also, as a poster above mentioned, where both the man and woman are intoxicated, and therefore both were in no position to consent, I'm sure they will both be sentenced equally... right? (of course not :rolleyes:).
 
We are going to end up with a generation of men who are afraid to even approach a woman let alone ask her back for some "Fun".

Stupid!
 
I wonder if a NDA would suffice for a contract :D.

I'm all for rapists getting bent over by the law but the direction it's going worries me.

If I took a girl home and she changed her mind after the fact it doesn't matter that I'm innocent my name is freely available it would destroy my business regardless of guilt. As proved in previous cases even if the guy is proved innocent the female who made a false claim is still protected by anonymity.

Novel way to destroy a competitor though.
 
Well I certainly hope that the punishment for false claims of rape are stepped up in accordance.

How long before everyone is using a consensual sex app....probably integrated with facebook, so everybody can see who is and isn't a rapist!
 
You know that's not a bad idea for an app lol.

A facebook status posted via app "I [female name] consent to have sex with [male name]" then on the opposing account swap the name fields.

I wonder how long before that gets taken off the store though.

"Consext" winner! I'll make it now.
 
Nitefly said:
Sounds like guidance consolidation of existing case law to me! All this is doing is re-emphasising consideration of the witness statement of the defendant, which is going to be under scrutiny anyway. It's really not a big thing, not half as much as some of you are making out ^ :p

If a girl is wrecked that senseless, I'm not really sure how you could poke her and maintain a clean conscious anyway!
Click to expand...

Indeed. The Telegraph despises women almost as much as the Daily Mail so I understand the have an agenda to adhere to but it's a little saddening to see how quick so many here are to jump on the 'feminazi's ruined surprise sex for men!!1!' bandwagon. I wonder how many of you actually read the press release from the CPS.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom