Court Case: woman tricked into sex with a woman pretending to be a man

Sorry, didn't read whole thread. But it's probably - as I think - demolishing brains of most of us, what.... judge announcing verdict has got in his head. 8 years, lol, it's like prosecuting me for fresh air theft. Can't believe that happens in civilised country. Sorry, mr (mistress ?) judge.
 
tom_e said:
Where do you draw the line? A guy flashing some fake bling and talking the talk like he's minted and the next big thing when in reality he hasn't got a pot to pee in?
Click to expand...

Put it this way, if a girl only was attracted to rich people and a guy flashed fake bling to get to her pants, when otherwise she would be put off, then i would describe that as an immoral betrayal for the sake of sex.

The line is drawn where the choice for attraction pivots. If what attracts her is money and he knows it and so lies, then it is wrong. If a requirement for attraction is being biologically female, then pretending otherwise is wrong.

The 'if they dont find out then its okay' argument shouldn't really come into play here.

I don't think this crime deserves jail time but it certainly should be discouraged some how.

cheesyboy said:
If I tell a girl I'm an airline pilot with a suitably dreamy masculine name (you pick), is it rape if we bone on that basis? What if really I'm a government appointed Badger culler, and she's a rampant vegan?
Click to expand...

Well if your relationship with her hinges on those lies, then it is wrong. If she is incredibly disgusted by your real line of work, do you not think she is undeserving of the emotional distress if she found out?

Personal preferences should be respected, whether you think they would find out or not.
 
Last edited:
tom_e said:
Where do you draw the line? A guy flashing some fake bling and talking the talk like he's minted and the next big thing when in reality he hasn't got a pot to pee in?
Click to expand...

cheesyboy said:
If I tell a girl I'm an airline pilot with a suitably dreamy masculine name (you pick), is it rape if we bone on that basis? What if really I'm a government appointed Badger culler, and she's a rampant vegan?
Click to expand...

very unlikely in any of those cases - the criteria is 'very narrow'

this is apparently the leading case - pretending to be a 'punter' then not paying didn't count as 'rape' either:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R_v_Linekar

we already know from the case in the OP however that pretending to be a different sex does count

AFAIK lying to get someone to sleep with you often won't count but pretending to be someone else (like a dark room pretending to be the person's boyfriend/girlfriend or pretending to be of a different sex) will sometimes
 
Last edited:
I think what these examples and cases all highlight is why it's probably best you actually get to know someone before you bump uglies.
 
dowie said:
never thought you'd be a rape apologist

say a girl starts dating a guy who has an identical twin she doesn't know about, he doesn't actually care much about her so let's his twin go round and have a go one night pretending to be him... rape by deception

in the case of a tranny you're not pretending to be a specific person but are pretending to be a person you're not in order to have sex with someone who wouldn't ordinarily consent. It isn't too uncommon and trans people do sometimes catch a beating if they try something like that (though more likely pre OP types - which is especially silly of them)
Click to expand...

I think you need to learn the definition of rape before you go around accusing people of apologising for it.

If any one here has slept with more than say, 30 women, lol if you asked every single one "were you born female?".

If a trans person says "I was born a woman" and sleeps with you, and after goes "haha surprise I was actually born a man", its still not rape, you have been lied to yes, and you may feel horrible about that, but its not rape.

If you aren't asking, and they don't say either way before hand, you had sex with someone you were attracted to, your identification as a heterosexual is not in danger.

My guessing here though is that a lot of the chaps who are so petrified of accidentally sleeping with a trans person, don't sleep with nearly enough women to ever be in danger of being "tricked".
 
cheesyboy said:
Just to throw it out there, what about infertile women (or men)? Do they have a duty to declare? Before or after you first do the sex with them?
Click to expand...

Well you'd hope people would be grown up enough to talk about it after a few dates if you think things are going somewhere. Much like me and my fiancee and her not wanting kids.
 
Delvis said:
Well you'd hope people would be grown up enough to talk about it after a few dates if you think things are going somewhere. Much like me and my fiancee and her not wanting kids.
Click to expand...

I've had sex with a lot of women, I have had that conversation with 2 of them, both long term partners. What the posters in here are saying is that that conversation must happen before sex is even considered otherwise its rape because you might have different opinions.

I am guessing you can tell how successful with women they are.
 
I would say if specifically was specifically asked and lied about it, that's something I would frown upon and I'd be rightfully peed off about it, but that's the same with anything else. If I ask a girl at the pub if she's single, she responds yes and then I find out after she's married, I'd be annoyed but I wouldn't go as far as calling the police and withdrawing consent after the deed.
 
hurfdurf said:
I think you need to learn the definition of rape before you go around accusing people of apologising for it.
Click to expand...

you're posting in a thread where someone pretending to be of a different sex was found guilty

If any one here has slept with more than say, 30 women, lol if you asked every single one "were you born female?".
Click to expand...

I doubt the woman in the case in this thread ever actually posed the question 'are you a man?'. The rapist was a trans person pretending to be a man and as you can see they were found guilty. Likewise in a dark room someone sleeping with another person pretending to be their partner isn't likely to be asked 'are you my partner'. That doesn't stop the deception/rape from occurring - you're being a rape apologist by trying that angle.

If a trans person says "I was born a woman" and sleeps with you, and after goes "haha surprise I was actually born a man", its still not rape, you have been lied to yes, and you may feel horrible about that, but its not rape.
Click to expand...

do you think that if she'd got a fake penis added through surgery instead of wearing a strap on then that somehow fundamentally changes the principle here?

overall perhaps you need to learn the definition of rape (which includes rape by deception) as you are ironically, in this instance, a rape apologist! :p
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
you're posting in a thread where someone pretending to be of a different sex literally was judged to have committed rape



I doubt the woman in the case in this thread ever actually posed the question 'are you a man?'. The rapist was a trans person pretending to be a man and as you can see they were found guilty. Likewise in a dark room someone sleeping with another person pretending to be their partner isn't likely to be asked 'are you my partner'. That doesn't stop the deception/rape from occurring - you're being a rape apologist by trying that angle.



do you think that if she'd got a fake penis added through surgery instead of wearing a strap on then that somehow fundamentally changes the principle here?

overall perhaps you need to learn the definition of rape (which includes rape by deception) as you are ironically, in this instance, a rape apologist! :p
Click to expand...

I can see your confusion here. Look at the post I originally addressed instead of wading into a conversation and tying it to the OP, your either being disingenuous or you haven't read the thread, its 11 pages long.

You are confusing someone lying about who they are having sex with, vs someone having sex with someone and not knowing something about them.

If I have sex with Bob, and Bob later tells me he used to be named Sarah before his operation, that's not rape, I wanted to have sex with Bob, so I had sex with Bob.

If I said ok to sex with Bob, and James had sex with me whilst I thought he was Bob, I had not consented to sex with James, and that is rape.

I am sorry you don't understand that. Try and read up on some basic definitions of rape.
 
Last edited:
hurfdurf said:
My guessing here though is that a lot of the chaps who are so petrified of accidentally sleeping with a trans person, don't sleep with nearly enough women to ever be in danger of being "tricked".
Click to expand...

It is not about possibly harming ones view on their own sexuality, that is ridiculous, as that is a personal preference. It is about being lied to on purpose to fulfil someone elses selfish wants.

If a scam is so good that the victims have no chance of finding out, does it make it a scam?

Of course it still does.

You may think it does not matter but that is because you honestly wouldnt care. The fact that some people do care means that both parties should be honest to each-other and selfishly withholding something which could mean so much to the other person, is abhorrent.

I agree it is not rape but it is still underhanded and wrong. I believe the person in OP should not face any prison time but should be punished some how, unfortunately there is little that will make the victim feel better or be fitting as a 'punishment'

Maybe because she hid her identity to trick someone into having sex and entering a relationship, her deeds and identity should be made public to make people aware what sort of person she is? Obviously cant do that because of what nutcases are out there but seems more fitting than a fine or a prison sentence and is really no different from being put on a sex offender register.
 
Last edited:
hurfdurf said:
I can see your confusion here. Look at the post I originally addressed instead of wading into a conversation and tying it to the OP, your either being disingenuous or you haven't read the thread, its 11 pages long.

You are confusing someone lying about who they are having sex with, vs someone having sex with someone and not knowing something about them.

If I have sex with Bob, and Bob later tells me he used to be named Sarah before his operation, that's not rape, I wanted to have sex with Bob, so I had sex with Bob.

If I said ok to sex with Bob, and James had sex with me whilst I thought he was Bob, I had not consented to sex with James, and that is rape.

I am sorry you don't understand that. Try and read up on some basic definitions of rape.
Click to expand...

I'm not confused by that at all, it is another example of rape by deception. You seem to have been confused by me adding another example of rape by deception and you're also ignoring again the fact that in the case in the OP the accused was found guilty!

in both the case of pretending to be someone else such as a partner known to the victim and pretending to be be of another sex the deception can be serious enough for prosecution

you can try to deny it all you like but you're literally posting in a thread with an example of a person being found guilty for this
 
Last edited:
dowie said:
I'm not confused by that at all, it is another example of rape by deception. You seem to have been confused by me adding another example of rape by deception and you're also ignoring again the fact that in the case in the OP the accused was found guilty!

in both the case of pretending to be someone else such as a partner known to the victim and pretending to be be of another gender the deception can be serious enough for prosecution

you can try to deny it all you like but you're literally posting in a thread with an example of a person being found guilty for this
Click to expand...
We're surely arguing on the moral side of things, rather than the legal (though she's not been found guilty anyway, since the conviction has been quashed).
 
hurfdurf said:
Try and read up on some basic definitions of rape.
Click to expand...

I'd suggest you do that... I've stated the term a few times: rape by deception:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception

In November 2015, British Judge Roger Dutton sentenced a 25-year-old woman, Gayle Newland, to eight years in prison for pretending to be a man as a means having sex with an unnamed woman of the same age. Newland has made her female victim believe that she was a man by means of deception and used the deception in order to have sex with her on more than 10 occasions. Newland's victim was shocked to discover that her "boyfriend" was in reality a female, and testified in Chester Crown Court to a jury that she would have preferred to have been raped by a man.
Click to expand...
 
cheesyboy said:
We're surely arguing on the moral side of things, rather than the legal (though she's not been found guilty anyway, since the conviction has been quashed).
Click to expand...

Ah I was replying to the chain of posts hurf durf was referring to(ironically something he accused me of not doing), didn't go back far enough to see that it had been quashed. However it doesn't seem to have been quashed on a point of law - so the act itself would still be illegal.
 
It's all about consent, person A has a preference for person Z but not for persons X P or A (just vague examples, none stands for any sexuality/gender/sex/anything else).

Just because person P appears to be person Z does not give person P implied permission to sleep with person A because person A only has preference for person Z.
 
This is one of the weirdest stories I've ever heard of.

How the hell did she get 8 years! The other womens stupidity plays a huge part here.
 
It deserved some kind of scrutiny, there is a chance of one off deception, even a small series of deceptions but the one portrayed either suggested the victim was utterly stupid or the perpetrator incredibly clever.

I surmise the original sentence passed was somewhat longer taking into account the scale of deception and premeditation that the accused had used in the commission of the original crimes she was found guilty of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom