Esternial wrote:Depends on how you define mentally disabled, but frankly the fact that these victims are impacted to such a degree does give us reason to presume any consequences associated with being a former sex slave do apply here, until any definite conclusions can be made.
For any further legal actions, further proof would be needed but the facts outlined in my source do offer additional credence to her inability to consent without that proof being necessary. The weight of those facts in respect to this case will of course be determined by this proof, once acquired.
For debating purposes, in this preliminary phase, it's entirely logical to assume she couldn't consent.
In this context the standard of mental disability would be that she didn't understand what she was doing was sexual.
She couldn't consent because she was 15. It's not at all logical to assume that she couldn't consent based on her past experiences, there is nothing to inform the jump from "this could happen" to "this has happened."