Accused rapist Ched Evans to be released from prison

[DotCommunist]

The pissing in drawers,wardrobes and on the floor thing is quite common and is more to do with sleepwalking rather than blacking out.

and its usually the correct destination for the toilet in your own house, walking from your own bed. falls down when it aint your house or your bed

add up how many units of alcohol she's consumed and detract them from her apparent behaviour

you KNOW when someones far gone, poper far gone. Not 'how many pints' or whatever, unit stuff is basic guidelines varies from build to tolerance levels etc. But totally slurred little recognition of where you are et, nodding off? thats gone. thats when mates guide other mates to the sofa for a sleep

 

[bimble]

you KNOW when someones far gone, proper far gone. Not 'how many pints' or whatever, unit stuff is basic guidelines varies from build to tolerance levels etc. But totally slurred little recognition of where you are et, nodding off? thats gone. thats when mates guide other mates to the sofa for a sleep

yes, i know. I'm sodding off out of this thread with my stuff anyway. Mostly because I don't know the circumstances of the case and my concerns are all about where things aren't as clear cut as in the scenario you & others describe (where one person is obviously totally out of it, in which case yes, there is no confusion, of course you can't have consensual sex with semi-conscious half asleep people).

 

[BigTom]

So even if a woman says yes, enthusiastically, even if she lets say puts prince on the hifi and does a strip tease on the coffee table etc, its the man's job to second guess whether or not she's in a position to be taken at her word, to add up how many units of alcohol she's consumed and detract them from her apparent behaviour etc.
*gets coat*

Yes. It is up to you to make a judgement as to whether or not someone is too drunk or not to sleep with. In my case she put her hand down my trousers and tried to kiss me, she was too drunk to be able to know where my face was really and I'd brought her home from a nightclub because she was collapsed, being sick, unable to walk unaided or speak coherently and would not have been able to get home herself. When someone is too far gone, like DC says, you know it, but they can still make a move, sort of. I reckon if someone can do a striptease on a table, then they are probably not too fucked to know what they are doing, I dunno though having not been in that situation.

Are you saying that it's not possible for someone to make a judgement call as to whether someone is too fucked to know what they are doing? Or are you suggesting that it doesn't matter if you think that, if they make a move then go for it, no matter how fucked they are?

 

[J Ed]

He's a rapey piece of shit. I don't care what technicality or stupid gap in our law he is going to exploit he will always be a rapist as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think that there are many cases where you can say that subsequent behaviour after an alleged crime is strong evidence of the crime being committed in the first place but this is surely one of those. In theory I suppose a non-rapist could well employ private investigators and misogynist internet activists to harass an alleged victim but in reality it isn't likely, is it?

 

[LeslieB]

You struggle with the difference between 'drunk' and 'so drunk she pissed herself'?

Fucksake.

Where do you draw the line, though?

I would certainly be extremely cautious about having sex with someone that drunk whom I didn't have reasonable cause to believe was wanting to have sex with me

So would I. Indeed I've only ever had sex as part of a long term relationship. Don't get me wrong, I think Ched's behaviour is disgusting. But I'm not convinced it is rape.

If I was to go out tonight and get ultra pissed, and then rape some woman, the fact that I was drunk wouldn't be significant mitigation- and rightly so. Shouldn't the same apply to consent?

 

[toggle]

Where do you draw the line, though?




So would I. Indeed I've only ever had sex as part of a long term relationship. Don't get me wrong, I think Ched's behaviour is disgusting. But I'm not convinced it is rape.

If I was to go out tonight and get ultra pissed, and then rape some woman, the fact that I was drunk wouldn't be significant mitigation- and rightly so. Shouldn't the same apply to consent?

can you work out the difference between getting drunk and doing something and getting drunk and having something done to you?

 

[bimble]

can you work out the difference between getting drunk and doing something and getting drunk and having something done to you?

Wow. That's where we end up with this, isn't it though: men do sex and women have sex done to them.

 

[BigTom]

Wow. That's where we end up with this, isn't it though: men do sex and women have sex done to them.

That's not what toggle said at all.

 

[cyril_smear]

I suppose it depends on what the new evidence is as to whether i accept it fully exonerates Evans or not.

You dont really have a choice. The court of public opinion can piss and moan all day but its the courts of justice that matter.

I dont know what happened that night, only a certain amount of people do. If hes found not guilty i hope he gets adequate recompense for what will be nearly five years of lost earnings; the same as any other person should.

 

[toggle]

Wow. That's where we end up with this, isn't it though: men do sex and women have sex done to them.

i didn't mention the gender of the victims.

 

[bluescreen]

And you know what? It really isn't so relevant what happens afterwards. Yeah, defence lawyers make a big deal of it but in real life people do strange things after they've been raped, including excusing the behaviour because they don't want to present as a victim.

 

[toggle]

And you know what? It really isn't so relevant what happens afterwards. Yeah, defence lawyers make a big deal of it but in real life people do strange things after they've been raped, including excusing the behaviour because they don't want to present as a victim.

it shouldn't be. but it is.

defence lawyers use this stuff because it works. because people want to continue to beleive it. because it's easier to believe that women lie than accepting that rape isn't a crime done by nasty looking men in dark alleys.

 

[Athos]

There's two things I said that could be the test



and



Could you elaborate please - the first is shaky I'm sure but I thought I had the law right in terms of the second bit so would appreciate being corrected

It's not my place to correct you, especially since, essentially, you're on the right side of this debate. But - bearing in mind I'm a dozen pints down such that I reserve my right to amend - basically, the test is: a) did she consent: and, b) if not, did he have a reasonable belief that she did. That second limb had two parts: first, did he (subjectively) hold that belief, and, secondly, was it (objectively) reasonable in all the circumstances. Which is slightly (but importantly) different from how you expressed it.

 

[Athos]

Any man who claims there is a fine line between a woman who is drunk and a woman who is so drunk as to be incapable of consenting to sex is a fucking cunt. We've all had sex with drunk women (usually when drunk ourselves), but, come on, for fuck's sake - if there's a sliver of doubt, don't go there. The law, as it stands, offers more than enough leeway. Which is what annoys me about people bending over backwards to excuse these scumbags.

 

[emanymton]

Any man who claims there is a fine line between a woman who is drunk and a woman who is so drunk as to be incapable of consenting to sex is a fucking cunt. We've all had sex with drunk women (usually when drunk ourselves), but, come on, for fuck's sake - if there's a sliver of doubt, don't go there. The law, as it stands, offers more than enough leeway. Which is what annoys me about people bending over backwards to excuse these scumbags.

It's like quibbling over exactly what point someone one is 'legal' or not.

Eta I meant in terms of age. God I need to get to bed.

 

[Athos]

It's like quibbling over exactly what point someone one is 'legal' or not.

Eta I meant in terms of age. God I need to get to bed.

Innit? We all know that girls (and I use that word deliberately, instead of women) can look older than they are, so, if you want to sleep with someone who looks like they're sixteen, you better fucking check. There's a lot to be said for strict liability.

 

[Grandma Death]

Don't get me wrong, I think Ched's behaviour is disgusting. But I'm not convinced it is rape.

If he didnt get clear consent its rape. And even if consent was given prior to the act of penetration a victim doesnt waiver her right to change their mind-and this is true up to and including the point of penetration

 

[Kesher]

Any man who claims there is a fine line between a woman who is drunk and a woman who is so drunk as to be incapable of consenting to sex is a fucking cunt. We've all had sex with drunk women (usually when drunk ourselves), but, come on, for fuck's sake - if there's a sliver of doubt, don't go there. The law, as it stands, offers more than enough leeway. Which is what annoys me about people bending over backwards to excuse these scumbags.

How does a drunk who is about to have sex with another drunk discern a sliver of doubt?

 

[existentialist]

How does a drunk who is about to have sex with a drunken woman discern a sliver of doubt?

The same way he decides not to grab his car keys and drive home.

 

[Kesher]

The same way he decides not to grab his car keys and drive home.

Not the same

 

[toggle]

Not the same

if someone isn't capable of working it out, then they shouldn't be having sex

 

[cyril_smear]

The thread title is still wrong. He was a convicted rapist when he was let out of prison.

 

[Kesher]

if someone isn't capable of working it out, then they shouldn't be having sex

But we are talking about a "sliver of doubt"

 

[existentialist]

Not the same

It should be.

 

[existentialist]

But we are talking about a "sliver of doubt"

Nobody died from not having sex. If there's a sliver of doubt, then it's time to make with the responsible and hope she'll respect you enough in the morning to still fancy you sober.

 

[Athos]

But we are talking about a "sliver of doubt"

Yes, morally, he shouldn't do it if he has a sliver of doubt. But, legally, he's given much, much more leeway; the jury can only find him guilty if they're sure beyond reasonable doubt that he did not reasonably believe she'd consented - effectively, if they're sure he knew the woman he was having sex with hadn't agreed to have sex with him.

 

[trashpony]

But we are talking about a "sliver of doubt"

If you have a sliver of doubt, then stop.

Honestly this stuff isn't that fucking hard.

And bimble, by your reckoning it's my fault that I've been raped twice. I don't think it is. I think it's the fault of the men who raped me. To believe otherwise is to perpetuate rape myths. Incidentally, I'm 51.

 

[Kesher]

Nobody died from not having sex. If there's a sliver of doubt, then it's time to make with the responsible and hope she'll respect you enough in the morning to still fancy you sober.

So someone who is heavily under the influence of a powerful psychoactive drug like alcohol is meant to be aware of such a finely tuned element of judgement?

 

[existentialist]

So someone who is heavily under the influence of a powerful psychoactive drug like alcohol is meant to be aware of such a finely tuned element of judgement?

What's the alternative? Absolve them of all responsibility for act committed under the influence? Doesn't work for drunk driving, does it? So what's different about sex?

 

[bimble]

If you have a sliver of doubt, then stop.

Honestly this stuff isn't that fucking hard.

And bimble, by your reckoning it's my fault that I've been raped twice. I don't think it is. I think it's the fault of the men who raped me. To believe otherwise is to perpetuate rape myths. Incidentally, I'm 51.

Of course it's not your fault trashpony. What you've written shows how fucked up my reckoning is when you take it to its logical conclusion.