Rape And The issue of Consent. The Pundits Miss The Point.

Pabilito

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
5,666


AyaanMyHero

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
920
You’re effectively saying that the accused should prove themselves innocent…you're a lowlife.
I am not saying that..the headline says that..I am just wondering if that is a misrepresentation of the Icelandic law...since I cannot believe it could be so. The other article I posted is better but it is still a bit perplexing.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,952
Would it work here? New law in Iceland means rape accused must prove they had explicit consent

Shift the burden of proof of consent to the accused. And it seems from the comments, a lot of people cannot see any problem with this. Has the journal misinterpreted what Iceland has done here ?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
There doesnt seem to be any comments on that page at the time of me checking it just now.

Well I'm not sure Iceland presumes guilt. But they have expanded the definition of rape to a point I can forsee the possibility of an unfair trial by this provision "It is also considered rape and shall result in the same punishment as specified in the first paragraph of this Article to employ false pretences..".

"False pretences"? That could be anything. It could be any kind of idle boast designed to impress a prospective sexual partner. Someone could boast at being good in bed - and if the other person thinks they are useless in bed they could say "Your honour they were no good in bed so under the law that means its rape". Or a man could pretend to be wealthy (it is well known that women are more drawn to a wealthy man than the other way around) and then after sex she finds out he lied about his financial state, and under the Icelandic law, this could be judged a "false pretence" and therefore rape. I find that ridiculous.

I think a "false pretences" provision in Irish law would risk an unfair trial also - and might not be constitutional when you remember the ruling some years ago on "honest mistake".
 

Who is John Galt?

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 15, 2010
Messages
6,195
There doesnt seem to be any comments on that page at the time of me checking it just now.

Well I'm not sure Iceland presumes guilt. But they have expanded the definition of rape to a point I can forsee the possibility of an unfair trial by this provision "It is also considered rape and shall result in the same punishment as specified in the first paragraph of this Article to employ false pretences..".

"False pretences"? That could be anything. It could be any kind of idle boast designed to impress a prospective sexual partner. Someone could boast at being good in bed - and if the other person thinks they are useless in bed they could say "Your honour they were no good in bed so under the law that means its rape". Or a man could pretend to be wealthy (it is well known that women are more drawn to a wealthy man than the other way around) and then after sex she finds out he lied about his financial state, and under the Icelandic law, this could be judged a "false pretence" and therefore rape. I find that ridiculous.

I think a "false pretences" provision in Irish law would risk an unfair trial also - and might not be constitutional when you remember the ruling some years ago on "honest mistake".
No more claiming that you're a brain surgeon or a helicopter pilot then?
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,952
I mean. The Icelandic model would make the fictional Emmerdale character Rodney a rapist because in the recent episode, he wrongly claims to his girlfriend that he used to be part of a rock band. Under Icelandic law that would be "false pretences" and therefore on its own constitute "rape" if willing sex resulted from it. :roll:
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
86,865
I mean. The Icelandic model would make the fictional Emmerdale character Rodney a rapist because in the recent episode, he wrongly claims to his girlfriend that he used to be part of a rock band. Under Icelandic law that would be "false pretences" and therefore on its own constitute "rape" if willing sex resulted from it. :roll:
I mean, you could just try not lying to women in order to sleep with them...
 

Quebecoise

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 21, 2011
Messages
361
Women must realise that if they put themselves in a position where they are alone with a man then the circumstances may be such that it becomes impossible to prove lack of consent in a sexual encounter. Harsh but true.
I suppose that does put a lot of power in the man's hands.
 

firefly123

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
28,335
That was some encounter.


[video=youtube;aMcjxSThD54]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aMcjxSThD54[/video]
What a fantastic half hour. Fascinating to listen to and to observe. He calmly ripped apart every single argument made by the interviewer.

Thanks for that.
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,952
I mean, you could just try not lying to women in order to sleep with them...
I personally am into men not women. But I am showing some solidarity here because nearly always, the people accused of this sort of thing - often on flimsy grounds (as lack of convictions show) - are straight men. Also I strongly believe that the Common Law principle of the presumption of innocence is under concerted attack.
 

Iarmuid

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 12, 2010
Messages
1,655
I personally am into men not women. But I am showing some solidarity here because nearly always, the people accused of this sort of thing - often on flimsy grounds (as lack of convictions show) - are straight men.
Like, that one need not condone lying while at the same time disagreeing with criminalizing lying in a courting / relationship context; that it might be problematic to say the least, is a nuanced idea. /sarc

The PC brigade have definitely gone full retard.
 

talkingshop

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
26,677
The Jackson Law of Hospitality (Draft Resolution).

Chapter 6 of the Swedish Penal Code

Section 1

A person who by assault or other violence or by threat of a criminal act forces
another person to have sexual intercourse or to undertake or endure another sexual
act that, in view of the seriousness of the violation, is comparable to sexual
intercourse, shall be sentenced for rape to imprisonment for at least two and at
most six years.

This also applies if a person engages with another person in sexual intercourse or in
a sexual act which under the first paragraph is comparable to sexual intercourse by
improperly exploiting that the person, due to unconsciousness, sleep, serious fear,
intoxication or other drug influence, illness, physical injury or mental disturbance,
or otherwise in view of the circumstances, is in a particularly vulnerable situation.
If, in view of the circumstances associated with the crime, a crime provided for in
the first or second paragraph is considered less aggravated, a sentence to
imprisonment for at most four years shall be imposed for rape.

If a crime referred to in the first or second paragraph is considered gross, a
sentence to imprisonment for at least four and at most ten years shall be imposed
for gross rape. In assessing whether the crime is gross, special consideration shall
be given to whether the violence or threat was of a particularly serious nature or
whether more than one person assaulted the victim or in any other way took part in
the assault or whether the perpetrator, in view of the method used or otherwise,
exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality.

Section 2

A person who, otherwise than as provided in Section 1 first paragraph, induces
another person by unlawful coercion to undertake or endure a sexual act, shall be
sentenced for sexual coercion to imprisonment for at most two years.
This shall also apply to a person who carries out a sexual act other than provided
for in Section 1 second paragraph with a person, under the conditions otherwise
specified in that paragraph.

If a crime provided for in the first or second paragraph is considered gross, a
sentence to imprisonment for at least six months and at most six years shall be
imposed for gross sexual coercion. In assessing whether the crime is gross, special
consideration shall be given to whether more than one person assaulted the victim
or in any other way took part in the assault or whether the perpetrator otherwise
exhibited particular ruthlessness or brutality.

Section 3

A person who induces another person to undertake or endure a sexual act by
serious abuse of that person’s position of dependency on the perpetrator shall be
sentenced for sexual exploitation of a person in a position of dependency to
imprisonment for at most two years.

If the offence is gross, a sentence to imprisonment for at least six months and at
most four years shall be imposed for gross sexual exploitation of a person in a
position of dependency. In assessing whether the crime is gross, special consideration
shall be given to whether more than one person assaulted the victim or in any
other way took part in the assault or whether the perpetrator otherwise exhibited
particular ruthlessness. -http://www.government.se/contentassets/602a1b5a8d65426496402d99e19325d5/chapter-6-of-the-swedish-penal-code_unoffical-translation_20140922.pdf

What we need to prevent more of the same is a new Law, weighted in favor of a guest in someones home, which places the responsibility on the homeowner to ensure that guests are in a position to consent, similar if not identical to Sections 1,2 and 3 of Chapter 6 of the Swedish Penal Code, and it should be called The Jackson Law of Hospitality.
Yeah, all a long-winded way of saying what we have already in our law. :roll:
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,952
Like, that one need not condone lying while at the same time disagreeing with criminalizing lying in a courting / relationship context; that it might be problematic to say the least, is a nuanced idea. /sarc

The PC brigade have definitely gone full retard.
Its sortof like Henry VIII claiming not to have consented to marrying Catherine of Aragon because she couldnt give him a son.
 

Mercurial

Moderator
Joined
Jun 4, 2009
Messages
86,865
I personally am into men not women. But I am showing some solidarity here because nearly always, the people accused of this sort of thing - often on flimsy grounds (as lack of convictions show) - are straight men. Also I strongly believe that the Common Law principle of the presumption of innocence is under concerted attack.
You don't need to show solidarity with men who need to lie to women in order to sleep with them.
 

firefly123

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2009
Messages
28,335
You don't need to show solidarity with men who need to lie to women in order to sleep with them.
We have all lied a little to get the leg over Merc.

Some might argue that make up and push up bras are lies.

Spanks are downright untruthful!
 

Dame_Enda

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 14, 2011
Messages
53,952
You don't need to show solidarity with men who need to lie to women in order to sleep with them.
We shouldnt criminalise lying that isnt defamatory or threatening to someone's health.
 

Antóin Mac Comháin

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 18, 2017
Messages
3,700
Yeah, all a long-winded way of saying what we have already in our law. :roll:
We clearly don't, and I think that We the Citizens,the people of this island, should have the right to vote for such a Law, via a Referendum, and that the IRFU should be advocating for such, if they are in any way serious about preventing more of the same shenanigans from their employees.
 


New Threads

Popular Threads

Most Replies

Top