[Born in a Rage]

She wrote that the girl never clearly said stop, instead saying "I should be going now" and "I need to go home."

What a stupid statement. I suppose he wouldn't have understood "Get away from me, you jerk" either.

[ontos-on]

The justice understands what happens during sexual congress. It is not a debating society or a telegraph station receiving dispassioned messages. The justice understands that language requires context to be taken into account in order to grasp what's going on .

[Walkingfeather]

Careful Here Janice is a great conservative judge. I know how could she be on the California Supreme court? Take my word for it, You WILL here here name coming up in VERY IMPORTANT CONFIRMATION HEARINGS.... I know you didn't know so it is just a heads up for everyone here at FR.

[Dan Day]

"She wrote that the girl never clearly said stop, instead saying "I should be going now" and "I need to go home.""

What a stupid statement. I suppose he wouldn't have understood "Get away from me, you jerk" either.

He probably *would* have understood that one because that (very different) announcement would have actually been a clearer statement of her alleged meaning.

However, after getting the woman's clear consent to sex (and after having engaged in it a while with her voluntary assistance), he probably took her actual statements of "I should be going now" and "I need to go home" in exactly the way *I* would take it (and I'm no young pup): As meaning, "we need to hurry up and finish, I'm short on time".

In no *way* would I interpret either "I should be going now" or "I need to go home" as meaning "stop this very instant" or "you're raping me, you asshole".

However, *EVEN SO* -- despite her poor communication skills -- the boy apparently got the message after a bit (probably by her attitude if not her words) and then stopped. (From the article: "The boy testified that the sex was consensual and that he stopped when the girl demanded.") It is not disputed that he *did* stop. The only dispute (more like "confusion") appears to be over the point where the girl actually did "demand" that it stop (as opposed to making unclear statements about needing to go home soon).

As another poster pointed out, since the sex up to that point was consensual, it's incumbent upon the girl to *clearly* indicate when/if she has definitely changed her mind. Guys aren't mind-readers, no matter how often women might wish them to be (said the long-married man).

[lavaroise]

I have had many women (more than 2) tell me to stop when they enjoyed it and they specificaly were telling me to continue while they would say stop - it fitted their arousals, go figure. So in the eyes of the California court I am the rapist while I was the one being raped in fact... well, sort of.. LOL...

Autonomy is something the government is against and the government will seek to divide families and lovers at every turn, giving the option to the female party to complain if she is not satisfied one way or the other.