Apparently, Rape is not Rape

[Saint Jade IV]

http://www.news.com.au/couriermail/story/0,23739,25823169-952,00.html

A judge refused to impose a jail sentence on a man who pled guilty to rape after continuing to perform a sex act AFTER the victim passed out. Apparently, it's unfair to mark him as a rapist.

I'm sorry, but if someone is PASSED OUT, how do you continue and not be a rapist?

While I am unsure of the appropriate sentence, I do think, if you KNOWINGLY continue to have sex with someone after they have passed out, then that makes you a rapist. Of course, she consented to an initial sex act before passing out, but we have no way of knowing what further sex acts were performed, or how far the victim was prepared to go. Because she didn't get the opportunity to consent to continuation or further sex acts.

[Secruss]

: /

[Dinaverg]

...that's a little weird. Let's pretend he was just that good.

[Gaia Tree]

Gross.

[Secruss]

...that's a little weird. Let's pretend he was just that good.

Wait...

[Anti-Social Darwinism]

If she passed out, she was no longer in a position (no pun intended) to give consent, informed or otherwise.

It was ruled, several years ago, that if a woman withdrew consent in the middle of the act (as in "stop, you're hurting me"), then it became rape. I would think that passing out in the middle of the act would be tantamount to withdrawing consent.

The judge is an asshole.

[Saint Clair Island]

Poor call on the judge's part.

Mind you, that's the kind of thing you should expect when you live in an uncivilized place like Australia. First banning alcohol, then this. <.<

[Greed and Death]

His mistake seems to be admitting he knew she was passed out.

[NERVUN]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

[United Dependencies]

looks like we could use a lawyer.

[Dinaverg]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

so, wait, did she wake up again? I'm not familiar with how alcohol works precisely, how much does she actually remember?

[NERVUN]

If she passed out, she was no longer in a position (no pun intended) to give consent, informed or otherwise.

It was ruled, several years ago, that if a woman withdrew consent in the middle of the act (as in "stop, you're hurting me"), then it became rape. I would think that passing out in the middle of the act would be tantamount to withdrawing consent.

The judge is an asshole.

I dunno though, what was her position (no pun intended either) AFTER she woke up?

[SaintB]

Ick duh... uhmm...

Makes you wonder about the Judge's past.

[Greed and Death]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

so, wait, did she wake up again? I'm not familiar with how alcohol works precisely, how much does she actually remember?

My guess is if something is inserted in you while your unconscious your going to have an idea in the morning.

[Poliwanacraca]

If she passed out, she was no longer in a position (no pun intended) to give consent, informed or otherwise.

It was ruled, several years ago, that if a woman withdrew consent in the middle of the act (as in "stop, you're hurting me"), then it became rape. I would think that passing out in the middle of the act would be tantamount to withdrawing consent.

The judge is an asshole.

I dunno though, what was her position (no pun intended either) AFTER she woke up?

Given that the guy was charged with rape, it seems rather strongly implied that she reported him to the cops for raping her.

Further, unless they had a very specific conversation about how it was okay for him to fuck her after she passed out, I'm not seeing how what she was willing to do while awake has any bearing on what she was willing to have done to her unconscious body.

[The Rich Port]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

[Saint Jade IV]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

She consented to sex while she was conscious. Once she became unconscious, there is no way to know what he did, or how much more she would have consented to. Whether she agreed in the beginning or would have agreed is irrelevant as we will never know what she may or may not have agreed to because she was not in a position to consent.

[Greed and Death]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

Some women act like they are dead during sex.

[Galloism]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

Some women act like they are dead during sex.

You're doing it wrong.

[NERVUN]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

so, wait, did she wake up again? I'm not familiar with how alcohol works precisely, how much does she actually remember?

Damned if I know, said article is very vauge, that's why I can say I can see where the judge might a. have a point where we have concent prior to passing out (And indeed sex starting to be performed) and then waking up and being ok with it, but due to consent laws as written it is rape or b. the woman gave concent to inital sexual contact, but then passed out and was NOT ok with what happened, at which case it was rape and the judge is an idiot.

Sadly, there is not enough information about what the woman thinks to make a good judgement.

[Anti-Social Darwinism]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

Some women act like they are dead during sex.

Probably because the way some men go about it, they want to get it over with as quickly as possible.

[Greed and Death]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

Some women act like they are dead during sex.

Probably because the way some men go about it, they want to get it over with as quickly as possible.

Or raised in a strict Asian culture where they are not supposed to enjoy sex.

[Saint Clair Island]

How stupid can you be to not know when a woman's passed out? What a frackin' idiot...

Some women act like they are dead during sex.

You're doing it wrong.

Or they are.

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

so, wait, did she wake up again? I'm not familiar with how alcohol works precisely, how much does she actually remember?

Damned if I know, said article is very vauge, that's why I can say I can see where the judge might a. have a point where we have concent prior to passing out (And indeed sex starting to be performed) and then waking up and being ok with it, but due to consent laws as written it is rape or b. the woman gave concent to inital sexual contact, but then passed out and was NOT ok with what happened, at which case it was rape and the judge is an idiot.

Sadly, there is not enough information about what the woman thinks to make a good judgement.

I dunno -- can you consent to a sex act after it's been performed? If not, he still should have gotten jail time, either way.

[Neo Art]

Actually, I can see where the judge was going with this. The woman greed to sex before passing out, and the article does not make it clear whether she though she was raped after passing out (It sounds like she made the complaint and then withdrew it), so it's rather hard to say it was rape or not.

She consented to sex while she was conscious. Once she became unconscious, there is no way to know what he did, or how much more she would have consented to. Whether she agreed in the beginning or would have agreed is irrelevant as we will never know what she may or may not have agreed to because she was not in a position to consent.

You're right, of course, that we can't particularly know IF she would have still consented which...well, that's part of the problem isn't it? In criminal law, ambiguity goes in favor of the defendant.

[NERVUN]

If she passed out, she was no longer in a position (no pun intended) to give consent, informed or otherwise.

It was ruled, several years ago, that if a woman withdrew consent in the middle of the act (as in "stop, you're hurting me"), then it became rape. I would think that passing out in the middle of the act would be tantamount to withdrawing consent.

The judge is an asshole.

I dunno though, what was her position (no pun intended either) AFTER she woke up?

Given that the guy was charged with rape, it seems rather strongly implied that she reported him to the cops for raping her.

Not nessicarily. I don't know the laws of Oz though. However, there is that line about how the victim has withdrawn the complaint.

Further, unless they had a very specific conversation about how it was okay for him to fuck her after she passed out, I'm not seeing how what she was willing to do while awake has any bearing on what she was willing to have done to her unconscious body.

Again, the point that I am trying to make is that IF concent was given before hand, and IF the woman was ok with the sex afterwards (As in approved of it), THEN it is hard to claim it is actual rape. In other words, if for example I tell you that it's ok for you to come to my house and get a book you want and if you do so while I'm not at home and decide to take another book as well, I wouldn't call it theft if after the fact you told me and I said, "Oh, yeah, that was ok". It wouldn't be a bright thing to do on your part and very rude, but if I agreed after the fact, but hardly illegal.

If I wasn't ok with you taking the other book, it WOULD be theft. So, again, if after she woke up and was NOT ok with what had happened, then yes, it was indeed rape.

My problem is that the article is lacking what her stated position is on the matter.