Reply
Thread Tools Display Modes
#1
Old 05-27-2011, 01:01 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: 50N West Georgia Strait
Posts: 8,596
Canuck Supreme Court/Do not fondle your sleeping wife's boobs

If she can't actively consent to any specific sexual activity because she's not conscious, then you have committed sexual assault.
Apparently this guy choked his SO into unconciousness, which was okay, but then he inserted a dildo up her relaxed ass without permission.

Two months later she cries rape for the dildo.



What ever happened to "The government has no business in the bedrooms of the nation." ?

This is the most retarded Supreme Court decision ever handed down.

As far as I'm concerned, if a person in an ongoing sexual relationship, particularly marriage finds they have been violated sexually, they can deal with the problem within their relationship and terminate if neccessary. I'd make an exception for physical harm and/or previously specified taboos.

But the idea that a spouse must keep his hands off the other spouse while he/she is asleep unless he/she trusts the other enough not to go to the authorities is just too much to ignore for me.
#2
Old 05-27-2011, 01:03 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: Sturgeon Bay, WI USA
Posts: 19,903
If you fondle someone's sleeping boobs and she doesn't wake up, you're not doing it right.
#3
Old 05-27-2011, 01:06 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Los 'Kamala'ngeles
Posts: 6,377
If someone fondles themself while asleep, have they committed self-rape?
#4
Old 05-27-2011, 01:17 PM
Guest
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Dayton, OH
Posts: 1,794
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman View Post
As far as I'm concerned, if a person in an ongoing sexual relationship, particularly marriage finds they have been violated sexually, they can deal with the problem within their relationship and terminate if neccessary. I'd make an exception for physical harm and/or previously specified taboos.
I'm having trouble getting a handle on the sort of behavior your rules would prohibit. What is a "previously specified taboo"? Would rape-as-commonly-understood qualify, so long as care were taken not to effect physical damage? Would inserting a dildo into the ass of one's unconscious wife not be taboo, or at the very least a violation of societal norms?

Quote:
But the idea that a spouse must keep his hands off the other spouse while he/she is asleep unless he/she trusts the other enough not to go to the authorities is just too much to ignore for me.
But we're not talking about cuddling or even groping, here, we're talking about anal penetration. If you don't believe that your spouse would refrain from accusations of rape due to unconscious anal penetration, then I suggest you probably shouldn't do that (and I don't feel I'm being terribly unreasonable here) -- why is that "too much to ignore"?

Last edited by Paranoid Randroid; 05-27-2011 at 01:18 PM.
#5
Old 05-27-2011, 01:19 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 56,011
At first glance, this sound likes one of those textbook don't-talk-to-the-cops situations.


Detective: Your wife says two months you choked her unconscious and put a dildo in her anus. Is that correct?

WHAT DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE SAID: I'm not answering any questions until I talk to my lawyer.

WHAT DEFENDANT PROBABLY SAID: Yeah. So?
#6
Old 05-27-2011, 01:34 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2010
Posts: 304
wait, wait, wait...TWO MONTHS later? how the hell is she going to prove that unless he used a dildo the diameter of a 1 liter soda bottle?
#7
Old 05-27-2011, 01:38 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers View Post
WHAT DEFENDANT SHOULD HAVE SAID: I'm not answering any questions until I talk to my lawyer.

WHAT DEFENDANT PROBABLY SAID: Yeah. So?
Reminds me of this: That is not what R. Kelly does!
#8
Old 05-27-2011, 01:43 PM
Charter Member
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: ♂ San Jose, CA
Posts: 10,235
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I think there's a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife's breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass.
#9
Old 05-27-2011, 01:47 PM
Guest
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Brooklyn
Posts: 23,421
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe View Post
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I think there's a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife's breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass.
No, the gap is only two feet and around the corner.
#10
Old 05-27-2011, 01:58 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 14,548
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe View Post
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I think there's a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife's breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass.
Well, the guy was an ass. So I can't dredge up to much sympathy for him. What is concerning is the fact that this decision opens up the gate for any vindictive bitch that wants to cry rape on her SO because she having relationship issues.
#11
Old 05-27-2011, 02:00 PM
Head Cheese
Charter Member
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: El Cerrito, CA
Posts: 3,834
What if you shake her hand while she's asleep?
__________________
'Tis a pity that I have no gravy to put upon Uncle Hymie.
#12
Old 05-27-2011, 02:00 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Lost Jerusalem
Posts: 4,167
Am I the only one who lacked sufficient reading comprehension for the article? The way I read it, the Canadian court restored a man's conviction of sexual assault since the woman was unconscious and couldn't give consent.

Then feminist groups were decrying the decision, saying that if someone give consent once, that's pretty much de facto consent forever. But that's completely the opposite of what was stated earlier in the article.

What am I missing?
#13
Old 05-27-2011, 02:01 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: East TN Mtns USA,NA,Sol3
Posts: 4,101
Yes, I agree that this has 'unintended consequences' written all over it.
#14
Old 05-27-2011, 02:02 PM
BANNED
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: England, Britain, UK
Posts: 18,480
Quote:
Originally Posted by Giraffe View Post
Maybe I'm just old fashioned, but I think there's a pretty big gap between touching your sleeping wife's breasts and shoving a dildo up her ass.
I'm inclined to agree. Nevertheless, unconsented boob-groping is still sexual assault, or so the duty sergeant assured me during the interview.
#15
Old 05-27-2011, 02:02 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,791
Sounds like it couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The OP's linked article
Among J.A.’s 23 previous criminal convictions are three for domestic violence – including twice against his current partner. In one of these assaults, he kicked in her door, attempted to hit her with a wine bottle and called her a “whore, bitch, skank.”
But there is also this:

Quote:
“Her evidence that she consented to it – or was okay with it – when she regained consciousness has no bearing,” Ontario Court Judge Dianne Nicholas concluded. “There is no implied consent to sexual activity. It is a criminal activity to engage in sexual activity with a person who is unconscious.”
Which seems to suggest that either she didn't "cry rape," or attempted to rescind her cry, to no avail. It isn't completely clear from the article whether she sought out police to tell them about it--- is it possible they were talking to her about something unrelated, asked if the guy had ever put his hands on her, and she replied "well, couple of weeks ago he choked me unconscious and shoved a dildo up my ass, but that was no big deal..." ?
#16
Old 05-27-2011, 02:31 PM
The Zeroeth Mod
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 11,064
Having read most of the actual opinion, it sounds like they had a domestic dispute where the guy threatened to try to take full legal custody of her child, and because that pissed her off, she complained to the police about the assault. They both sound like winners to me.

What's frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy's arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she's asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court admits that this is true while making the ruling. I'm...flabbergasted.

Last edited by Asimovian; 05-27-2011 at 02:32 PM.
#17
Old 05-27-2011, 02:52 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Lovely Montclair, NJ
Posts: 12,417
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimovian View Post
What's frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy's arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she's asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court admits that this is true while making the ruling. I'm...flabbergasted.
It also seems to say that even if she gave consent prior to going asleep, it's still sexual assault.

Quote:
The definition of consent “requires the complainant to provide actual active consent throughout every phase of the sexual activity. It is not possible for an unconscious person to satisfy this requirement, even if she expresses her consent in advance,” Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin wrote for the majority.
Thankfully, I live in the USA, where it's still ok to wake up your wife by grabbing her ass, without worrying about anything but getting slapped.
#18
Old 05-27-2011, 03:01 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Near Philadelphia
Posts: 6,485
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimovian View Post
What's frightening is that the court specifically addresses one of the convicted guy's arguments that if the court were to rule this way, it would basically mean that kissing your wife while she's asleep could be considered sexual assault if she complains about it. And the court admits that this is true while making the ruling. I'm...flabbergasted.
I think what the court did there was just to beg Parliament to deal with that possibility rather than leaving it to the courts to carve out a bunch of impossible-to-carve-out exception cases. It's a pretty impossible thing to ask the court to make sure that it rules in a way that will categorically rule out something extremely mild like an unwanted kiss, especially when the case at bar is one that apparently involved binding the unconscious woman's hands before penetrating her anus and one that involves a recanted accusation by the alleged victim. I can't say I blame the court for not wanting to reinterpret the entirety of the criminal code just to make a ruling that couldn't hypothetically lead to a bad result elsewhere if every person involved was kind of wildly unreasonable about it. I think the court acknowledges a bit of an overbreadth problem, but it wants a legislative solution to it.

I'm not sure "Don't touch your wife's boobs while she's asleep" is quite what the court said, in any event. When someone is actually prosecuted for something remotely similar to that, that's when I'll start to be worried about it. And I continue to be mildly entertained by how paranoid a lot of the male members of this board seem to be about this stuff -- "opens up the gate for any vindictive bitch that wants to cry rape on her SO because she having relationship issues," really? False accusations of any crime are always possible; I doubt all those women who are out to get you were waiting for favorable jurisprudence before they perjured themselves in the hopes of bringing you low, first of all, and second of all, this doesn't open the door to any false claims of rape anyway. All you can really take from this ruling is that, if you're in Canada, you probably shouldn't tie up anybody's hands and insert a dildo into his/her anus after you've choked him/her unconscious. And really, if that news comes as a big blow to your lifestyle...

Last edited by Jimmy Chitwood; 05-27-2011 at 03:04 PM.
#19
Old 05-27-2011, 03:02 PM
Guest
Join Date: Feb 2003
Posts: 992
Wait, Wait, Wait... The guy Choked her into UNCONSCIOUSNESS and that is somehow OK?...
#20
Old 05-27-2011, 03:03 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
The actual judgement.

The bit about the dangers of kissing your sleeping wife (or hell sleeping child or sibling and parent) are on para 58.


I do think Justice has been served in this case. I do not think that the principal created is a sound one.
#21
Old 05-27-2011, 03:04 PM
The Zeroeth Mod
Moderator
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Maryland
Posts: 11,064
Quote:
Originally Posted by furlibusea View Post
Wait, Wait, Wait... The guy Choked her into UNCONSCIOUSNESS and that is somehow OK?...
She consented to that.
#22
Old 05-27-2011, 03:05 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by furlibusea View Post
Wait, Wait, Wait... The guy Choked her into UNCONSCIOUSNESS and that is somehow OK?...
At para 5 of the SCC Judgement

Quote:
She testified that she consented to J.A. choking her, and understood that she might lose consciousness. She stated that she and J.A. had experimented with erotic asphyxiation, and that she had lost consciousness before.
#23
Old 05-27-2011, 03:07 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by Agent Foxtrot View Post
Am I the only one who lacked sufficient reading comprehension for the article? The way I read it, the Canadian court restored a man's conviction of sexual assault since the woman was unconscious and couldn't give consent.

Then feminist groups were decrying the decision, saying that if someone give consent once, that's pretty much de facto consent forever. But that's completely the opposite of what was stated earlier in the article.

What am I missing?
The Feminists were decrying the Intermediate Appellate Court ruling.
#24
Old 05-27-2011, 03:11 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: True Blue Virginia
Posts: 7,622
This is the result of rape laws being based on requiring the victim to presume absence of consent, rather than acquiring affirmative consent. If (as is the case in most other crimes where consent is at issue) there was an affirmative consent standard, it would be possible to write into such laws the idea that in an ongoing relationship, consent was a continuing thing that could, of course, be actively withdrawn. Giving one's wife or husband a kiss while they were asleep would not then be considered to be assault.

However, that isn't the legal situation we are in, and it is one which many people have fought strongly against. If we are to continue in a situation where (a) we presume that marital rape is to be criminalized (and it took us hundreds of years to get to the point that it is) and (b) the present situation of requiring a active display of non-consent is required, then we are going to have cases like this.

Now, in an affirmative consent world, we would ask the question of whether the wife consented to being choked unconscious in the understanding she would be sodomized with a dildo while unconscious. To cry foul when someone gets convicted for that, and at the same time expect the unconscious woman to express non-consent for said sodomy strikes me as a little misguided.
#25
Old 05-27-2011, 03:14 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: True Blue Virginia
Posts: 7,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Asimovian View Post
She consented to that.
I don't know Canadian law, but I know in some (many, most?) US jurisdictions you cannot consent to that. I think you should be able to, but it certainly doesn't imply consent to the anal penetration after. And even if there was prior consent to the anal penetration, that consent has no real legal standing, because for consent to be valid, it has to be revokable. Once unconscious, it clearly isn't revocable.
#26
Old 05-27-2011, 03:35 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by villa View Post
I don't know Canadian law, but I know in some (many, most?) US jurisdictions you cannot consent to that. I think you should be able to, but it certainly doesn't imply consent to the anal penetration after. And even if there was prior consent to the anal penetration, that consent has no real legal standing, because for consent to be valid, it has to be revokable. Once unconscious, it clearly isn't revocable.
No comment on Canadian law, but at Common Law there are certain things you cannot consent to; really horrific torture for instance; See R v Brown and Laskey v United Kingdom (ECtHR).

I don't think this would come under that heading.
#27
Old 05-27-2011, 03:36 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The Middle of Puget Sound
Posts: 21,046
Quote:
Originally Posted by villa View Post
Now, in an affirmative consent world, we would ask the question of whether the wife consented to being choked unconscious in the understanding she would be sodomized with a dildo while unconscious. To cry foul when someone gets convicted for that, and at the same time expect the unconscious woman to express non-consent for said sodomy strikes me as a little misguided.
I'm just going to stand in awe of this paragraph. I don't have any comment on it other than: that's a paragraph right there, that is.
#28
Old 05-27-2011, 03:41 PM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
Quote:
Originally Posted by villa View Post
This is the result of rape laws being based on requiring the victim to presume absence of consent, rather than acquiring affirmative consent. If (as is the case in most other crimes where consent is at issue) there was an affirmative consent standard, it would be possible to write into such laws the idea that in an ongoing relationship, consent was a continuing thing that could, of course, be actively withdrawn. Giving one's wife or husband a kiss while they were asleep would not then be considered to be assault.

However, that isn't the legal situation we are in, and it is one which many people have fought strongly against. If we are to continue in a situation where (a) we presume that marital rape is to be criminalized (and it took us hundreds of years to get to the point that it is) and (b) the present situation of requiring a active display of non-consent is required, then we are going to have cases like this.

Now, in an affirmative consent world, we would ask the question of whether the wife consented to being choked unconscious in the understanding she would be sodomized with a dildo while unconscious. To cry foul when someone gets convicted for that, and at the same time expect the unconscious woman to express non-consent for said sodomy strikes me as a little misguided.
The problem is with Marital Rape and the current laws on consent. I am not advocating a return to marriage being a defense to rape or creating something akin to a doctrine of implied consent, but an acknowledgment that during the subsistence of a marriage or long term partnership, there are many circumstances where a partner or indeed any reasonable person in his/her position would believe that consent is given and that this is not the case in other relationships/interactions.
#29
Old 05-27-2011, 04:00 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: True Blue Virginia
Posts: 7,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by AK84 View Post
The problem is with Marital Rape and the current laws on consent. I am not advocating a return to marriage being a defense to rape or creating something akin to a doctrine of implied consent, but an acknowledgment that during the subsistence of a marriage or long term partnership, there are many circumstances where a partner or indeed any reasonable person in his/her position would believe that consent is given and that this is not the case in other relationships/interactions.
I can agree to that - but if we want to stay with expression of non-consent then we get this problem. I don't see an issue with implied consent within longstanding relationships when the legal standard is affirmative consent.
#30
Old 05-27-2011, 04:02 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Milky Way Galaxy
Posts: 35,123
Maybe tomorrow morning, just to celebrate being American, I will wake up the old ball-and-chain by slipping a dildo up her bum - just because I can.

Or maybe not.

Regards,
Shodan
#31
Old 05-27-2011, 04:07 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: True Blue Virginia
Posts: 7,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemur866 View Post
I'm just going to stand in awe of this paragraph. I don't have any comment on it other than: that's a paragraph right there, that is.
I am also available for weddings and bar mitzvahs. At very reasonable rates.
#32
Old 05-27-2011, 04:11 PM
Charter Member
Join Date: Mar 2002
Posts: 18,791
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
Maybe tomorrow morning, just to celebrate being American, I will wake up the old ball-and-chain by slipping a dildo up her bum - just because I can.

Or maybe not.
Joke's on you when you find one already there.
#33
Old 05-27-2011, 04:19 PM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Troynovant
Posts: 7,895
Jesus fucking Christ, both my first wife and I would be serving time now if this dumb ruling was enforced. I'd sometimes wake up in the night to find my nearest and dearest straddling me and guiding me home, so to speak. I'd return the favor some nights. We both found something intensely erotic about a sleeper being gradually aroused in their sleep. Legally, were we both guilty of rape in those moments before the sleeper awoke? Maybe so, but the judges can kiss my hairy ass if they think it's any of their damn business. As competent adults it was for my wife and I to decide if and when we'd been raped, not some damn lawyer.
#34
Old 05-27-2011, 04:20 PM
Guest
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 56,011
As an incidental note, if being rendered unconscious and then anally penetrated is illegal, that pretty much bans most rectal surgeries.
#35
Old 05-27-2011, 04:25 PM
Guest
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,692
I think she just should have waited and did the same thing to him. There. Problem solved.

She obviously wasn't too worked up over when it happened, hence the 2 month delay.

She should have been thinking to herself "I'll show you a dildo surprise fucker", and bought an even larger one for him. And left it in, so he could wake up with it in.

And then leave, cause he's an abusive shit anyway, but what an awesome way to leave.
#36
Old 05-27-2011, 04:26 PM
Member
Join Date: May 2000
Location: True Blue Virginia
Posts: 7,622
Quote:
Originally Posted by aldiboronti View Post
As competent adults it was for my wife and I to decide if and when we'd been raped, not some damn lawyer.
Well that's the thing - the wife in this situation did decide if and when she'd been raped, not some damn lawyer.
#37
Old 05-27-2011, 07:19 PM
Uzi Uzi is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryan Ekers View Post
As an incidental note, if being rendered unconscious and then anally penetrated is illegal, that pretty much bans most rectal surgeries.
Interesting point. What is the difference between the verbal consent the wife gave and the written consent you give a doctor? Or is it that the doctor isn't doing it for fun?
#38
Old 05-27-2011, 07:47 PM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jimmy Chitwood View Post

All you can really take from this ruling is that, if you're in Canada, you probably shouldn't tie up anybody's hands and insert a dildo into his/her anus after you've choked him/her unconscious. And really, if that news comes as a big blow to your lifestyle...

Tomorrow, my (imaginary) girlfriend wakes me up with a blowjob. I accuse her of sexual assault.

Using the ratio decidendi of the court, what legal defense means does she have?
#39
Old 05-27-2011, 07:50 PM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
I gotta member, sodomize THEN choke!.
#40
Old 05-28-2011, 06:10 AM
Guest
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 14,012
The Court has attempted to (very properly) distinguish between law and evidence. In other words that you say that a single sexual touch is capable of in law being illegal, whether it actually was as a matter of evidence (in other words did the receiving party consent?)

That could have been tolerable, what makes the Courts decision dangerous is the opinion that consent can never be given by a sleeping person; even if consent was given before falling asleep since it can never be withdrawn. It just makes it impossible.
#41
Old 05-28-2011, 06:41 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 6,440
Seems like a self-evidently reasonable ruling. As far as the precedent this sets? Sheesh. My advice? If you have the type of relationship where your wife would run to the police if you woke her by grabbing her ass, don't wake her by grabbing her ass.

Seriously, in 99.9999% of relationships, are there really such blurry boundaries and shaky relationships? Are there really married posters in this thread who worry that this now gives the old ball and chain just the ammunition she needs? Well, if so, my advice again: leave her alone when she's unconscious. I know that' a horrible burden, but try to be a brave little soldier.
#42
Old 05-28-2011, 06:45 AM
Guest
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 10,325
I think he took the wrong approach to defense.

"Well your honor you see, After she passed out I panicked and tried to get her to wake up, So I went through the standard medical procedures. A tap on the shoulder, a slap on the cheek, a cup of cold water, a dildo up the ass."
#43
Old 05-28-2011, 07:12 AM
Uzi Uzi is offline
Charter Member
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Hong Kong
Posts: 4,860
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stratocaster View Post
Seriously, in 99.9999% of relationships, are there really such blurry boundaries and shaky relationships? Are there really married posters in this thread who worry that this now gives the old ball and chain just the ammunition she needs? Well, if so, my advice again: leave her alone when she's unconscious. I know that' a horrible burden, but try to be a brave little soldier.
If I'm not mistaken, it doesn't matter what you and your wife think or agree to, it is sexual assault. Even if you both agree to the action, all it would take is one of you making a joking comment, "I wake my husband up to a blowjob", in the presence of the wrong person and the offending party is dealing with the police.
#44
Old 05-28-2011, 07:32 AM
BANNED
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 399
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Flying Dutchman
Apparently this guy choked his SO into unconciousness, which was okay, but then he inserted a dildo up her relaxed ass without permission.
Does anyone else recognise the somewhat clinical, and needlessly descriptive use of the word "relaxed" in that sentence as something of a red flag? You're really not quite right in the head, are you Dutchman?

Last edited by Cort; 05-28-2011 at 07:35 AM.
#45
Old 05-28-2011, 09:30 AM
Charter Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Queens
Posts: 12,079
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uzi View Post
If I'm not mistaken, it doesn't matter what you and your wife think or agree to, it is sexual assault. Even if you both agree to the action, all it would take is one of you making a joking comment, "I wake my husband up to a blowjob", in the presence of the wrong person and the offending party is dealing with the police.
Your mistaken (unless Canadian law is radically different). If the husband doesn't file a complaint and agree to testify, there is no case. It doesn't matter if you tell the DA himself. I'm fairly certain even an insane DA can't put him on the stand as a plaintiff against his will.
#46
Old 05-28-2011, 09:47 AM
Guest
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 5,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Odds View Post
Your mistaken (unless Canadian law is radically different). If the husband doesn't file a complaint and agree to testify, there is no case. It doesn't matter if you tell the DA himself. I'm fairly certain even an insane DA can't put him on the stand as a plaintiff against his will.
Perhaps I've misunderstood, but I thought that in the case cited by the OP in the first post, the woman had withdrawn her complaint.

DAs can put whoever they want on the stand as a witness as long as it's relevant and barring some exceptions (E.g.: you likely can't force the Prime Minister to testify).

Also, it would post an evidentiary problem, not a problem in law. To take my example again, let's say my girlfriend wakes me up with a blowjob. I can accuse her of sexual assault and she can be convicted. That is the implication I see in the court's reasoning. Do you see something in that situation which would prevent criminal liabilty from being triggered?
#47
Old 05-28-2011, 10:34 AM
Guest
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Right here in River City.
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelEmouse View Post
To take my example again, let's say my girlfriend wakes me up with a blowjob. I can accuse her of sexual assault and she can be convicted. That is the implication I see in the court's reasoning. Do you see something in that situation which would prevent criminal liabilty from being triggered?
Dinner and a movie the night before?


#48
Old 05-28-2011, 10:54 AM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by D_Odds View Post
Your mistaken (unless Canadian law is radically different). If the husband doesn't file a complaint and agree to testify, there is no case. It doesn't matter if you tell the DA himself. I'm fairly certain even an insane DA can't put him on the stand as a plaintiff against his will.
What country do you live in? A crime is a crime no matter what a third party says, even a spouse. There are tons of cases of assault that have been pressed against wife batterers even when the wife refuses to cooperate.

The odds of getting a conviction may go way down, but there is certainly a crime and a case should a prosecutor decide to pursue it.
#49
Old 05-28-2011, 10:58 AM
Creature of the Night
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: Fort Worth, Texas
Posts: 20,803
This whole issue reminds me of the nutjobs who are trying to rebrand rape as "surprise sex". If you don't KNOW that your partner is OK with having a particular sex act performed on him/her, then ASK. It's not that hard. "Honey, do you mind if I shove this dildo up your ass while you're passed out?" Now, if someone is awakened by NSFW 8 legs of love,
SPOILER:
http://oglaf.com/8legs/
, the fact that the loving arachnid usually paralyzes poor Ivan should be a hint that Ivan might not consent. On the other hand, Ivan might be so desperate for any sort of sex that he'd be OK with being fellated, as long as he's blindfolded.

Seriously, if the relationship is such that one partner does stuff to another partner and the active partner is not 100% sure that the other partner is OK with what s/he's doing, that relationship is in big trouble.

I'd have to say that having to TELL someone "It's not OK for you to sodomize me when I'm passed out" is probably not a good sign.
#50
Old 05-28-2011, 11:01 AM
Member
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 36,997
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lynn Bodoni View Post
This whole issue reminds me of the nutjobs who are trying to rebrand rape as "surprise sex". ...
Do they have a website? I gotta see this!
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:00 PM.

Copyright © 2017
Best Topics: sweat fever out jake brakes rhe baseball 203 phone number microsheer condoms galaxy rise what's a scrotum is rollerblading hard 1000 mg guaifenesin bronze cutlery rejected by eharmony antifungal toenail polish wax wood staffs height reduction surgery dreams of music garrote for sale bundling board vhs porn bob vaughn zodiac battlefield promotions no dentures rebecca romney nude coyote etymology meryl streep porn alprazolam drug test unstable spoilers shower head fun confirmed kill definition hypoglycemia sweating flat picking mythbusters ideas how to find out if someone has been admitted to hospital advice from a singer sewing machine manual 1949 if you don't eat yer meat you can't have any pudding helicopter hovering over my house elizabeth i tomb opened 6 packs a day what is an unattended death why is it hard to balance with eyes closed does fedex deliver to door cow joke one liners do people cough in their sleep how long to fry frozen french fries last episode of quantum leap explained primary doctor visit cost post office tracking says delivered but never received lupe fiasco modest mouse what is the head of a hospital called how are you answer funny does olive oil taste like olives elton john coming out when are computer parts cheapest ebay ship to canada hard to read license plate dog penis size by breed is pepperoni made out of pork age of consent in nevada paul harvey radio broadcast archives 18 to enter 21 to drink season of the witch lyrics meaning well done vs normal bake dr adrian rogers quote 1931 can you eat too many clementines sims 3 fallout world