Neu Mitanni wrote:Dyakovo wrote:
Wrong. She consented to sex with "Dudu" a jewish businessman, not Sabbar Kashu an arab. Therefore the "consent" she gave was not informed consent, thus not legally consent, thus it was rape.
What he said.
As has been pointed out repeatedly: fraud vitiates consent. Deniers, repeat that statement until you reach enlightenment.
I think there's something more going on in this discussion than just the legal definition of rape, though. Had the rapist been, say, a Hindu rather than an Arab, I doubt there would be nearly as many apologists and amateur criminal defense attorneys sounding off.
This can't be right... You agreed with me... One of us is going to have to change our position or risk starting the apocalypse.
*nods*