Skip to comments.
Great Britain: Be sure of women's consent or face rape trial, men told
The Telegraph (U.K.) ^
| March 8, 2006
| Joshua Rozenberg
Posted on 03/08/2006 10:43:37 AM PST by Stoat
Be sure of women's consent or face rape trial, men told
By Joshua Rozenberg, Legal Editor (Filed: 08/03/2006) Young men risk being charged with rape unless they are sure they have the consent of their sexual partners, the Government will tell them in an advertising campaign to be launched next week.
The campaign comes amid concern at low conviction rates for rape cases in England and Wales. There were 11,766 allegations of rape made in 2002 but just 655 convictions, according to Home Office figures. In 258 of these cases the rapist pleaded guilty and the remainder were convicted after a trial. A Home Office spokesman said: "We are launching an awareness campaign on March 14 to help tackle rape by educating young men about the need to gain consent before having sex." Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, a person consents to sex if he or she "agrees by choice, and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice". The campaign will begin with two radio advertisements, followed on March 20 with magazine advertisements and posters in men's lavatories in urban pubs and clubs, the spokesman added. Meanwhile, one of the Government's law officers revealed that the Home Office is also considering a change in the rape laws to require juries to decide whether a woman who had consumed alcohol was too drunk to give her consent. Mike O'Brien, the Solicitor General, in an interview for BBC Radio 4's File On Four, said that redrafting the law would stop cases being thrown out by judges and increase the number of convictions. He said: "It may be that the legislation needs some clarification, because these sorts of mistakes shouldn't be being made.'' A spokesman explained later that the Government would be launching a consultation exercise in the next few weeks. It would consider whether "capacity" in the 2003 Act needs further definition. The Act affects the burden of proof but it does not seem to require the defendant to prove that his partner gave her consent. |
|
|
|
TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; United Kingdom
KEYWORDS: britain; crime; england; greatbritain; hussies; men; rape; sex; uk; unitedkingdom; women
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
To: Stoat
Valid questions, to which I have no reasonable answers. I still can't figure out why the Brits insist on driving on the wrong side of the road. Really complicates things when doing the whisky trail up in Scotland.
To: Stoat
Before engaging in sexual relations a young man should get her written, notarized consent, together with a blood test to prove that she was not too drunk to consent.
And then: Let the good times roll!
To: Philistone
That is a HUGE pain. I was with this girl this one time, right? Things start getting pretty hot and heavy, and she's like "No..." and I'm like "Whoa! Disengage!" And she's like "what the hell are you doing?" and I'm like "you said 'no,' so I'm stopping." and she's like "oh, come on. I didn't
mean it."
wtf?
23
posted on
03/08/2006 11:43:41 AM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: stubernx98
That'll last about a week before some woman claims duress. You'll have to get the form notarized after that.
24
posted on
03/08/2006 11:45:04 AM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Fido969
If a sufficiently hawt woman jumps on top of a guy, she can pretty much always be assured of consent. Unless he's gay or has a girlfriend or something. Then he might not want to go through with it.
25
posted on
03/08/2006 11:46:31 AM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Mogengator
I'm guessing sales of camcorders are about to go through the roof in the UK. I mean, since documentary proof of consent may be required. As a result, expect a huge wave of British "ex-girlfriend videos" to appear on the internet...
To: Gordongekko909
You ain't the first and you won't be the last to have that happen to.
To: Mogengator
Yeah! Are there any female types out there that can explain this? Why must they confuse guys in this manner? Simplicity is good!
28
posted on
03/08/2006 12:04:32 PM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Gordongekko909
Are there any female types out there that can explain this? Why must they confuse guys in this manner? Male stoat here, but isn't it part of the definition of 'female' to "engage in activities and statements that intentionally confuse men"?
<<<<putting on flameproof suit and running as fast as I can :-)
29
posted on
03/08/2006 12:09:56 PM PST
by
Stoat
(Rice / Coulter 2008: Smart Ladies for a Strong America)
To: Gordongekko909
Yup. Then there's the ones who decide the next morning that they probably SHOULDN'T have done it.
And there's a VERY fine line between "Probably shouldn't have done it" and "Didn't REALLY want to do it."
30
posted on
03/08/2006 12:10:56 PM PST
by
Philistone
(Turning lead into gold...)
To: Philistone
Actually, I'm talking about the ones who say "no" when they actually do mean "yes" and get all weirded out when the guy disengages after she says "no." What the hell is the deal with that?
31
posted on
03/08/2006 12:15:16 PM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Gordongekko909
Dunno. Not being a female and all.
I would imagine for some that saying "yes" would imply that they are sluts, while saying "no" (all the time wanting it of course) would make it more like acquiescence than desire (which they don't want to admit they have).
My arm-chair psychologist view.
32
posted on
03/08/2006 12:19:23 PM PST
by
Philistone
(Turning lead into gold...)
To: Philistone
That's insane! If they say "no," then they get none. And presumably, they wanted some.
33
posted on
03/08/2006 12:20:27 PM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Stoat
Do I have to undo the handcuffs long enough for her to sign?
To: Gordongekko909
I'm not going to invite a flame war here by agreeing with you (publicly).
Even if I do!
35
posted on
03/08/2006 12:24:09 PM PST
by
Philistone
(Turning lead into gold...)
To: Mogengator; sit-rep
together with a blood test to prove that she was not too drunk to consent. That's what the breathalyzer is for. "Just blow here."
To: Larry Lucido
*sigh* Another breathalyzer?
37
posted on
03/08/2006 12:30:55 PM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Gordongekko909
To: Larry Lucido
I was wondering if anyone would get that joke...
39
posted on
03/08/2006 12:38:32 PM PST
by
Gordongekko909
(I know. Let's cut his WHOLE BODY off.)
To: Stoat
How sad for the once mighty UK
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson