Quizzes & Puzzles32 mins ago
"of Course It Wasn't Rape" . . . . .
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Canary42. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.//The woman civilian, in her 20s, was invited to the barracks in Shearwater after meeting a British sailor on the dating app Tinder …..She said she felt "threatened" and "scared" after finding a naked man in a room full of cheering hockey players…..Later that night, she woke up face down and naked in a sailor's bed to find at least three men performing sex acts on her,//
Why didn’t she leave when she felt ‘threatened and scared’. How come she ended up in bed and asleep?
Right ruling. Well done that judge.
Why didn’t she leave when she felt ‘threatened and scared’. How come she ended up in bed and asleep?
Right ruling. Well done that judge.
Curious that where our friends from the east are concerned, the news source for some ABers is more important than the crime. On the other hand, we have another case of alleged sexual assault but this time carried out by a Brit who has been cleared … but appears to remain under suspicion on AB.
https:/ /www.th eanswer bank.co .uk/New s/Quest ion1642 101.htm l
Funny old world.
https:/
Funny old world.
"Later that night, she woke up face down and naked in a sailor's bed to find at least three men performing sex acts on her, the court heard."
What sex acts? Intercourse?
I am sure that this sort of thing goes on in a sex charged environment more commonly than we realise.
It probably....probably was rape.....but the judge ruled correctly.
What sex acts? Intercourse?
I am sure that this sort of thing goes on in a sex charged environment more commonly than we realise.
It probably....probably was rape.....but the judge ruled correctly.
It can be hard enough to prove rape cases without requiring that the woman follow a specific course of action throughout in order to ensure any possible successful prosecution.
// Why didn’t she leave when she felt ‘threatened and scared’? //
Could have been scared in such a way that she was effectively rooted to the spot -- a sort of rabbit-in-headlights reaction. It's not exactly unheard of.
// Why didn’t she leave when she felt ‘threatened and scared’? //
Could have been scared in such a way that she was effectively rooted to the spot -- a sort of rabbit-in-headlights reaction. It's not exactly unheard of.
All I'm saying is that, firstly, you need to be in the situation yourself to determine exactly how you'd have responded, and secondly that there's no obligation for an alleged victim to act rationally in order for it to be a criminal offence.
Finally, it's worth noting that consent can carry on up to the moment that any participant withdraws it, so how things started doesn't have a bearing on whether a crime was committed. If you choose to have sex with one person, but then three others join in and you didn't want them to, then at that point it becomes rape.
Finally, it's worth noting that consent can carry on up to the moment that any participant withdraws it, so how things started doesn't have a bearing on whether a crime was committed. If you choose to have sex with one person, but then three others join in and you didn't want them to, then at that point it becomes rape.
Canary - Nowhere in th report has the judge stated, or implied, that rape did not take place.
As I am sure you know, for an offender to be convicted, the judge and / or jury must be satisfied 'beyond reasonable doubt' that the offence took place.
Clearly that is the case here - there was insufficient evidence to convict, so no conviction.
It matters not what you, or I, or the judge, or anyone else beleives, it comes down to what can be proved with evidence in court, and those three vital words - beyond reasonable doubt.
As I am sure you know, for an offender to be convicted, the judge and / or jury must be satisfied 'beyond reasonable doubt' that the offence took place.
Clearly that is the case here - there was insufficient evidence to convict, so no conviction.
It matters not what you, or I, or the judge, or anyone else beleives, it comes down to what can be proved with evidence in court, and those three vital words - beyond reasonable doubt.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.