|
Ditto.....
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:16
AM
Subject: RE: [Sndbox] Breaking...
But Jackie you have to have some sort of
standard to go by. I'm not advocating that it's ok for someone to drug a
gal and rape her, you know I'm not. But if there isn't some sort of
standard then rape will never be prosecutable. Either that or anyone can
get prosecuted for a serious crime because he makes a girl mad. That's
why the recent law passed in one state that says a woman can withdraw consent
even while the act is being committed and if he doesn't stop the thrust
*immediately* he's raped her is such a dangerous law.
There has to be some sort of
acknowledgement that the guy in question should at least have the right to
expect a clear no. In the case of drugging someone that's not consensual
in any manner. In this case both parties admit consent. She even
told the detective that he stopped when she made it clear.
Charles
Mims
In a message dated 10/16/2003 6:56:49 AM Eastern
Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
No, but it does have bearing on
whether he raped her or not. If she herself doesn't remember if she
was clear in saying no, then that matters don't you think? What if all
she said to him was "Maybe we shouldn't do this", is that clearly no?
its not a yes. how about a rape victim whos
been drugged or a rape victim whos drank too much or one whos mouth is covered
where they cant say no does that make it less of a rape because they
couldnt say no?
________________________________
Changes to your subscription
(unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
|
________________________________
Changes to your subscription (unsubs, nomail, digest) can be made by going to
http://sandboxmail.net/mailman/listinfo/sndbox_sandboxmail.net
