Ched Evans situation

[Loz]

legalbeagle Wrote:

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

> I don't think a person would get far reporting a rape on the basis they were tipsy. But "drunk" is

> a very difficult area.

Which is why your first post was hyperbole worthy of one of the more barkingly mad Guardian opinion writers, but your second post showed that the law in this area is fiendishly grey. 'Too drunk to consent' not anywhere near the same as 'drunk'.

Unless you wish to brand 99% of sexually active adults in this country (including, in all likelihood, yourself) a sexual offender.

[LadyDeliah]

Here is some bedtime reading on what constitutes consent when drunk:

http://www.trinitinture.com/documents/wallerstein.pdf

[LadyDeliah]

If a woman is shit faced and a guy takes advantage to empty his nuts, he's a rapist.

There are lots of them around.

[legalbeagle]

Which brings me back to my original point. "She's a bit pissed but seems up for it" is an attitude that APPEARS to be common place, and that might, genuinely, benefit from some education.

[LadyDeliah]

Any hats fitting here?

[Loz]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> Any hats fitting here?

Not here. You?

[LadyDeliah]

Not yet.

But I have briefly woken up when I was comatose at a friend's party with a dickhead I wouldn't have even spat on, on top of me when I was about 22.

[Loz]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> Here is some bedtime reading on what constitutes

> consent when drunk:

>

> http://www.trinitinture.com/documents/wallerstein.pdf

I like reading legal stuff more than most people, but that is probably more than even I can take. Even the final summary was hard work.

[Loz]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> Not yet.

>

> But I have briefly woken up when I was comatose at

> a friend's party with a dickhead I wouldn't have

> even spat on, on top of me when I was about 22.

I did once (a long time ago) have a girlfriend tell me the following morning we had sex the previous (very drunken) evening. I had absolutely no memory of it.

[LadyDeliah]

It's funny that taking someone's property without consent is seen as automatically bad and the perps should rightly be punished, but taking someone's body for sex without consent is a grey area.

If she's not an actively willing participant, wtf are you going there for anyway?

And being drunk is no defence. If you rob a petrol station, tanked up on booze, you won't be let off just because you were drunk.

[reggie]

(devilish laugh ensues)

[Loz]

It's funny that taking someone's property without consent is seen as automatically bad and the perps should rightly be punished, but taking someone's body for sex without consent is a grey area.

If she's not an actively willing participant, wtf are you going there for anyway?

I don't believe anyone has argued otherwise. Are you setting up some sort of strawman here?

[LadyDeliah]

Myself mainly (This was in response to Loz asking who I was talking to).

It just pisses me off. I grew up in the late 70's/80's in Birkenhead. The neanderthal's I had to deal with make Evans look like a gentleman.

I hate that attitudes about this kind of shit have moved so little since those days.

And your comment doesn't even come close, nice try though.

[LadyDeliah]

Incase you want to know why your comment doesn't come close, you were in a relationship, you both got drunk and had sex. I doubt the next day you thought, 'The bitch, how could she take advantage of me like that ...'

[legalbeagle]

It's an interesting one, LD isn't it? Can you imagine saying:

Well, you were a bit pissed so it's no surprise he punched you and took your wallet; or

Well, they did have slack stock control so it's no surprise you stole a few bits from work.....

But we hear, quite frequently, "Well he/she was drunk and went back to their room. What did they THINK was going to happen?"

The fact that a victim's actions might either make a crime easier to commit, or attract a criminal in no way makes the crime less awful or the criminal less culpable. Nor does it mean that the victim is to blame.

I think sexual offences are one of the few areas of crime where we still do often (not always) find victim-blaming going on to some extent.

[LadyDeliah]

Totally agree LB, and I'm now going to get drunk (not shit-faced of course) and go shag someone a couple of decades younger than me, consensual all round.

[Robert Poste's Child]

Let's face it, if we educate everyone to understand that someone who's drunk cannot give consent to sex, that's the end of this country as very few English people would manage to get a relationship off the ground sober.

[legalbeagle]

You don't have to be sober......just able to agree.......

[Otta]

I am a bit troubled by this I have to say. Most student sex could be called rape by the sounds of it. Does it make any difference how much the male has had to drink?

[legalbeagle]

Otta - It's not that most student sex is rape. It's that there is a point of drunkenness, at which a person is no longer able to give consent, and that point will vary from person to person.

It's your obligation to have a reasonable belief that the person you are having sex with is consenting to it.

Where they are drunk, and there is no other information to go on - eg you know them well, they are your girlfriend, you've had sex before, they went on a date with you and came back to your room - then it is harder for you to establish a reasonable belief that they consented to sex when drunk.

I suspect this is why the man who had sex with Evans's victim first was not convicted - there was additional evidence as to her and his state of mind that lead the court to think she did consent. The fact that they went on a date, both drank lots voluntarily, she agreed to go back to his room, they went through the hotel public entrances etc. (I'm not saying that doing all of this with a person means they cannot rape you, just that it is evidence adduced in court to establish your state of mind and whether it was reasonable to think you had consented).

With Evans it was sneak in, shag, hide on the way out. That left him only with "I thought she agreed" and the court decided that there was not sufficient evidence of consent given her level of drunkenness.

Not all sex while drunk is rape. Not at all. But establishing someone's true intentions when they are drunk and you do not know them is not easy. I think that's the point.

[Help-Ma-Boab]

Thanks LB. A well written and easy to understand summary (for me anyway).

legalbeagle Wrote:

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

> Otta - It's not that most student sex is rape.

> It's that there is a point of drunkenness, at

> which a person is no longer able to give consent,

> and that point will vary from person to person.

>

> It's your obligation to have a reasonable belief

> that the person you are having sex with is

> consenting to it.

>

> Where they are drunk, and there is no other

> information to go on - eg you know them well, they

> are your girlfriend, you've had sex before, they

> went on a date with you and came back to your room

> - then it is harder for you to establish a

> reasonable belief that they consented to sex when

> drunk.

>

> I suspect this is why the man who had sex with

> Evans's victim first was not convicted - there was

> additional evidence as to her and his state of

> mind that lead the court to think she did consent.

> The fact that they went on a date, both drank lots

> voluntarily, she agreed to go back to his room,

> they went through the hotel public entrances etc.

> (I'm not saying that doing all of this with a

> person means they cannot rape you, just that it is

> evidence adduced in court to establish your state

> of mind and whether it was reasonable to think you

> had consented).

>

> With Evans it was sneak in, shag, hide on the way

> out. That left him only with "I thought she

> agreed" and the court decided that there was not

> sufficient evidence of consent given her level of

> drunkenness.

>

> Not all sex while drunk is rape. Not at all. But

> establishing someone's true intentions when they

> are drunk and you do not know them is not easy. I

> think that's the point.

[Robert Poste's Child]

Isn't this one of the reasons why so few rapes lead to a conviction still? It's not just one person's word against another: at the less violent end of the scale it can be a stand-off between their recollections of what happened when drunk, filtered through a subsequently sober brain and their non-drunk beliefs.

Men can be victims as well as perpetrators. Last time I saw stats, reported rapes in England and Wales, victims were something like 85k women and 12k men.

[legalbeagle]

Lots of reasons why rape convictions are so low Robert. And of course men can be victims too, no one would argue otherwise.

There's a really good article on it here: http://www.thebureauinvestigates.com/2014/02/28/revealed-why-the-police-are-failing-most-rape-victims/

[JohnL]

LadyDeliah Wrote:

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

> If a woman is shit faced and a guy takes advantage

> to empty his nuts, he's a rapist.

>

> There are lots of them around.

This is how I read the law and had some arguments with friends over it

Trying to get a girl drunk in hope she might is heading right there.

[JohnL]

Otta Wrote:

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

> I am a bit troubled by this I have to say. Most

> student sex could be called rape by the sounds of

> it. Does it make any difference how much the male

> has had to drink?

a lot of students in the 80s would have hit it yes - as they'd never met before they ended up drunk in a party/bed - of course somebody has to complain.