Posted on 03/05/2021 1:31:50 PM PST by Stravinsky
An excellent point, yes it does. Often. And you just illustrated the confusion that the author is laboring under, or wants you to labor under.
1. If you commit fraud and by doing so you harm someone, or steal their funds, you may go to jail. That's a criminal matter.
2. In addition, a contract is made in two parts: offer and acceptance, and if the acceptance (consent) is obtained by fraud it is ineffective and therefor the contract is null and void. That's a civil matter.
But note that the lack of effective consent in 2. does not in and of itself create a crime, it merely undoes the contract. If there wasn't some other element of a crime, the mere lack of effective consent would not get you sent to jail for the rest of your life.
It's easy for non-lawyers to get these confused, but it's completely inexcusable for a law professor. Either this professor does not understand the basic structure of American law (ie civil vs. criminal) or she wants to induce that confusion to strengthen her point.
He said it was very traumatic when he finally found out! So re-telling the story must have brought that all back.
Ellen needs friends like mine. They need a name, age or workplace and not only I would have known he was married, but probably the last women he did this with, tax history, parking ticket history and what ever else they could dig up.
I don’t question methods, I just get recommendations from people I trust that keep me from these types of situations.
Women tell far more lies in a relationship, I don’t think they want this legal standard set.
According to femi-nazis… Having second thoughts the next day means she was RAPED the previous night.
How many beers would it take to hit that?
“But I know what I am and I’m glad I’m a man
And so is Lola”
People are still trying to figure out the meaning of the above.
She knows the man is not married to her.
The same principle is timeless and independent of geography. He shouldn’t be able to lament that it was long ago or far away. It is also irrelevant if it was so much better then than it is today.
Well said.
“What if the man was 24 and the woman/girl told him he was 16? Then she continued to lie to him to get him to fly in to NYC twice a month for weekend hookups?”
Yes.
This writer’s argument would hold that statutory rape would not apply if the minor party told the adult he/she was 18 or more.
I doubt this writer would take that position.
Not rape rape (thanks Whoopie!) but she’s allowed to boil his pet rabbit.
Next, we can decide how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
All of timeshare is based on this premise.
No, he just “identifies” as a single male.
“add this hook...Ellen has HIV and doesn’t tell Frank...”
Or Ellen tells Frank he looks like he’s been working out.
Or Ellen tells Frank she is going to divorce her husband.
Or Ellen tells Frank it doesn’t matter to her whether he drives a Mercedes or a Yugo.
.....
As hell
It’s a fine line between, “Don’t, Stop” and “don’t stop.”
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.