Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wonder how many people commenting on the law in this case have actually read the law of either sexual offences or evidence.


I was going to get into the whys and wherefores of consent, but I suspect it will just wind me up, particularly when so many inferences are being made just in the context of this thread. I will leave you with the only point that Ian left out from "The Secret Barrister"'s blog post:



10. What does this whole affair say about our society?

Christ knows. Nothing good.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> Drunken consent is still consent

>


Not my definition of Drunk (we don't mean tipsy here - we mean unconscious or out on their feet)

- mind you who would want to do anything to someone in the state of my definition of drunk unless

they're completely weird (deeply unattractive state to be in).

The law doesn't define drunk - it defines consent:


"a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice."


So drunken consent is consent unless it removes capacity. However, if a person is unconscious then it is assumed both that they did not consent and that the suspect did not reasonably believe that they consented.

DaveR Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The law doesn't define drunk - it defines

> consent:

>

> "a person consents if he agrees by choice, and has

> the freedom and capacity to make that choice."

>

> So drunken consent is consent unless it removes

> capacity. However, if a person is unconscious

> then it is assumed both that they did not consent

> and that the suspect did not reasonably believe

> that they consented.


There comes a time if you drink enough (15 pints maybe)

where you can't make a reasoned decision, been there

and been attacked in that state - and you've lost the

reasoning to get yourself out of it. Alcohol is a

terrible drug.


By the way - when this happened I've never seen the Police

so angry when I said my memory (which was there on morphine)

had gone - so you've decided to let these people get away with it

- I just said yes and so should that girl to be honest).

Otta Wrote:

------------------------------------------

> Erm, except the case wasn't written about the

> case.



Semantics - but having read your OP on this thread you might want to read the case itself. It's definitely interesting and the core details of the case are a better insight than anv second hand opinion I'd have thought.

JohnL Wrote:

----------------------------

> let off - I just said yes and so should that girl to be

> honest).


Not really - it was important that it was tested and evidenced that she wasn't raped - so they weren't let off with anything


What was perhaps wrong here is that there seemed to be an assumption by police that because she was too drunk to remember that it was therefore rape.

This was tested and found not to be the case which is also important.

And because she said she couldn't remember she then obviously couldn't then give evidence about something she couldn't remember, hence other testimonies were necessary to be taken into consideration about other times when she had drunken sex in an attempt to evidence whether the conduct claimed by the defendants was consistent.

Huggers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> She'd fallen over in the takeaway. left her

> handbag there. That is pretty drunk. The room was

> dark. She may not even have known a second man was

> having sex with her. Maybe that was part of their

> 'joke'in 'bagging a drunk one'.



But he can't have known about what happened in the take away.


Don't want to sound like I'm defending the sleaze bag, just find the whole thing grim yet interesting.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Otta Wrote:

> ------------------------------------------

> > Erm, except the case wasn't written about the

> > case.

>

>

> Semantics - but having read your OP on this thread

> you might want to read the case itself. It's

> definitely interesting and the core details of the

> case are a better insight than anv second hand

> opinion I'd have thought.




Agreed. But the case wasn't available to read when I posted the OP.

And I think that's the trouble - media jump to conclusions too early. As did the football clubs etc.

I do find it surprising that his fiancee has stood by him though - as although he's not a rapist, he is a low moral case who treated a woman like a notch on a bedpost and no doubt took advantage of her in a situation that was just a bucket list option for him and his mate. All pretty disturbing.

Mick Mac Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I do find it surprising that his fiancee has stood

> by him though



I suppose she had to weigh it up.



On the one hand - her betrothed in a Travelodge taking it it turns with his mate to have a go on someone who was so drunk she can?t even remember the encounter.


On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.



It seems she has decided that everyone deserves a second chance. It's a real victory for womankind.

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Mick Mac Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > I do find it surprising that his fiancee has

> stood

> > by him though

>

>

> I suppose she had to weigh it up.

>

>

> On the one hand - her betrothed in a Travelodge

> taking it it turns with his mate to have a go on

> someone who was so drunk she can?t even remember

> the encounter.

>

> On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her

> unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.

>

>

> It seems she has decided that everyone deserves a

> second chance. It's a real victory for womankind.


HRC stuck by Bill - vile.....

*Bob* Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> On the other hand - his ?20,000/week wage and her

> unlikelihood of bagging an alternative.


He's earning a tenth of that now. Not sure if a big club will touch him again, and he probably only has 6-8 years left of his career. So it must be love - or stupidity.

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> He's earning a tenth of that now. Not sure if a

> big club will touch him again, and he probably

> only has 6-8 years left of his career. So it must

> be love - or stupidity.


I'm sure the football industry will be prepared to forgive and forget now all that nasty trial business is out of the way. Especially if there's a good deal to be had.

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The media seem to have made up their mind (as do

> most on here) about the facts regardless of the

> judge's verdict.


The fact is, it's not rape. To say anything else is now potentially slander or something of that sort....

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • The current wave of xenophobia is due to powerful/influential people stirring up hatred.  It;'s what happened in the past, think 1930s Germany.  It seems to be even easier now as so many get their information from social media, whether it is right or wrong.  The media seeking so called balance will bring some nutter on, they don't then bring a nutter on to counteract that. They now seem to turn to Reform at the first opportunity. So your life is 'shite', let;s blame someone else.  Whilst sounding a bit like a Tory, taking some ownership/personal responsibility would be a start.  There are some situations where that may be more challenging, in deindustrialised 'left behind' wasteland we can't all get on our bikes and find work.  But I loathe how it is now popular to blame those of us from relatively modest backgrounds, like me, who did see education and knowledge as a way to self improve. Now we are seen by some as smug liberals......  
    • Kwik Fit buggered up an A/C leak diagnosis for me (saying there wasn't one, when there was) and sold a regas. The vehicle had to be taken to an A/C specialist for condensor replacement and a further regas. Not impressed.
    • Yes, these are all good points. I agree with you, that division has led us down dangerous paths in the past. And I deplore any kind of racism (as I think you probably know).  But I feel that a lot of the current wave of xenophobia we're witnessing is actually more about a general malaise and discontent. I know non-white people around here who are surprisingly vocal about immigrants - legal or otherwise. I think this feeling transcends skin colour for a lot of people and isn't as simple as, say, the Jew hatred of the 1930s or the Irish and Black racism that we saw laterally. I think people feel ignored and looked down upon.  What you don't realise, Sephiroth, is that I actually agree with a lot of what you're saying. I just think that looking down on people because of their voting history and opinions is self-defeating. And that's where Labour's getting it wrong and Reform is reaping the rewards.   
    • @Sephiroth you made some interesting points on the economy, on the Lammy thread. Thought it worth broadening the discussion. Reeves (irrespective of her financial competence) clearly was too downbeat on things when Labour came into power. But could there have been more honesty on the liklihood of taxes going up (which they have done, and will do in any case due to the freezing of personal allowances).  It may have been a silly commitment not to do this, but were you damned if you do and damned if you don't?
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...