[papertyger]

The law regarding consent is clear. If she’s passed out, she doesn’t have the ability to consent by law.

Thus far, I have seen no evidence she was uniformly comatose throughout the ordeal, nor that her prior behavior had any bearing on what transpired.

As she claims to have no memory of her involvement, or lack thereof, there seems to me to be no positive evidence to support a charge of rape due to the spotty and inferential nature of the evidence that does exist.

I do not condone destroying the lives of somewhat advantaged teenagers to satisfy the altruist mob with less than comprehensive evidence.

[Darren McCarty]

She doesn't even have to be passed out. "Substantially impaired" is the Ohio standard.

[butterdezillion]

Spotty and inferential? As I understand it, the boys admit they did it, admit that she was out of it, but said they didn’t think they did anything wrong because they didn’t have to force her to do anything. Am I mistaken on that?