Unbelievable

[Rex Mundi]

Iwannastayanonymous, your story is shocking, but it also has me concerned. You both got drunk and started consensual sex and then you decided to stop, and tried to get him off you? Are you honestly saying that that is rape or anything like the terrible case this thread is about? Your friend did not force himself upon you, you were a willing participant. You say you "blocked" it out - are you sure it's not actually that you've since convinced yourself you were raped? Now IF he continued after you protested for a long time; and his drunkardness could not explain his taking time before stopping then you may have a point.

However if thats not the case, it worries me very much that a case like that can be defined as rape. You were both drunk and had already started having consensual sex before deciding to stop. He should have stopped straigth away but you said yourself you were both drunk. Now I'm not in anyway trying to justify what your friend did. However I think it's a unfair to equate someone who, crucially, thought they were engaged in a consensual act and was drunk, with a rapist. As upsetting as it was for you, he was not violating you or forcing himself upon you.

I also find it suprising that you've gone round telling people it was rape. I think you have a responsibility to either go to the police if you honestly feel it was rape and sort it officially or keep silent. Why? Because it seems you may have to accept that there is some responsibility on your part in that event. You both got drunk, you both apparently decided to have sex. You are not a blameless victim from the way you told that story. So unless you know for a fact it was a rape, then I think you should stop telling people about it. Those sorts of accusations are extremely damaging, and while there are two sides to every story, invariable in accusations of rape people will tend to believe the alleged victims version.

Before the flaming begins; I'd like to make clear I'm in no way condoning rape or suggesting something stupid like "some women ask for it". All I am saying is that the story told by Iwannastayanonymous may be stretching the definitions of what rape is. I think you have to think very carefully about whether that is a rape, and whether one person is solely responsible and to blame for it. The truth may be in the detail, which only Iwannastayanonymous knows. Obviously I'm not asking you to share it with us, but I do ask you thinkvery very carefully and consider the possibility it was not rape.

[Neferet]

She said it was "practically" rape not that it was rape or that she told people it was, and was using her experience to say that she knows it can be scary telling people about it.

The way I read it the story was more about her trust being abused than anything else.

There is never an excuse for not stopping when someone says no, no matter how consensual it started out. The law is very very clear about that. Whether drink or drugs are involved willingly or otherwise, no means no.

If someone can't stop themselves then it is very clear what they have the potential of doing, and if you were genuinely scared out of your wits by a man in a sexual way as I imagine this girl was then most people would of course warn mutual friends if they could stomach the inevitable backlash.

[David Bean]

I agree with Rex Mundi. The issue of consent in law is a thorny one at best, and when it comes to consent for sex being granted and then withdrawn again, how is the law - or even one's partner - to deal with that?

If a lady and a gentleman are consorting, consent is either given or implied (and this isn't a weakness to the argument since the last time I checked we weren't required to draw up a legal contract formally granting consent; I think consent's one of those things where you know it when you see it) and withdrawn by one party but the other merely continues (let's say the man for the sake of logistics), does that make him a rapist? I don't think so. Does it even make him a particularly bad person? Well, copntroversial as it might sound, no, I don't think it does that, either. It makes him a fool, certainly, someone who's made a mistake, done something he shouldn't have and ought to do everything he can to make amends, but human passions aren't so clinical as to be able to be turned on and off like a light-switch.

At the same time, arguably it is equally incumbent upon the lady not to give consent if she has even the slightest feeling that she might be in a position to have to withdraw it later on. I think the moral of the story is, know what you want before you start anything, and make sure that what you want is explicitly (or implicitly, in the case of more comfortable relationships) clear. Alternatively, of course, there's always the option of just not sleeping with anyone you're not already in a loving relationship with (controversial again...)

[hr]"And all the people rejoiced, and said: 'God save the King! Long live the King! ...May the King live forever!'" - Handel, 'Zadok the Priest'

[for goodness sake]

Stop means stop. To suggest that a woman cannot change her mind is idiotic and grossly insensitive. Or that should she change her mind the term rape cannot be used...it flies against the face of all rape laws and it's frankly unbelieveable anyone could really believe that.

Stop means stop, it's the golden rule and if you break it then you are either guilty of sexual assault or rape.

There have been cases where women have found out that their husbands have engaged in intercourse with them while the woman lay soundly asleep. No consent was given it was rape. A woman always has the right to change her mind as does a man, for it is not always women who are raped of course.

I cannot believe that anyone could be of the opinion that a woman can't change her mind, say no after saying yes, or is responsible for a predatory man's behaviour. No normal person would ever continue if a woman said no halfway through, they'd know even before it was said due to the body language.

Rapists are beasts and women ALWAYS have the right to put a stop to what is happening to their body.

[Guest]

[s]Unregisted User Name withheld wrote on 23:55, 20th May 2004:[i]
I would wake up crying and in the end I obviously had to explain the reason why (that and the fact that I was very into sex for obvious reasons!)

Just curious...why would you be into it? I know this experience has different effects on different people, but I was scared as hell after it happened. Only recently (i.e 2 or 3 months ago) have I been able to do THAT again and kinda enjoy it. What made you want to do it?

[iwannastayanonymous]

Yes, i was just trying to get across how hard it is to talk about these things from my own (very mild in comparison) experience and i was just conveying my admiration of those people who have gone through so much worse and dealt with it with such strength.

I'm in no way comparing myself to the girl in the article nor even to the other people who've posted their stories on the sinner - i only got a glimpse of what it might be like for someone to be totally powerless like that, in those few minutes when i tried to get him to stop, and it was rather scary to say the least.
I was just trying to explain how i empathised with them.

[Cain]

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/04/43/43news-moxley2.php

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/04/43/news-moxley.php

It's been a while since i've been so angry i want to burst.

[hr]
I will diminish, and go into fourth year, and remain Cain

[Cain]

[s]dunqn wrote on 20:19, 6th Jul 2004:
Oh my god. you have to be joking. Words can't describe how much of an outrage that actually is. Justice is truly dead.


i really wish that that was a joke, and that the judge would call a meeting tomorrow and say "Seriously folks - get your heads screwed on straight"

i'm not going to go on, because i think i expressed myself when this topic came up, but to sum up my feelings - This is a vilent and intrusive state endorsed assault far worse than the original crime.

[hr]
I will diminish, and go into fourth year, and remain Cain

[Saki]

Just unbelievable. The prosecution must have been the worst lawyers in history though. They ought to have known what sort of stuff the defence was going to come out with and been ready for it with arguments - it sounds to me as though they thought the tape would be enough and with a millionaire assistant sheriff's son as one of the defendants it wasn't ever going to be. Are they appealing? The articles don't make it clear either way.

Impressed with the one juror who wouldn't agree, though, it's tough to be the only one standing in the way of a unanimous verdict.

[Angry beyond belief]

[s]David Bean wrote on 15:39, 23rd May 2004:
I think consent's one of those things where you know it when you see it) and withdrawn by one party but the other merely continues (let's say the man for the sake of logistics), does that make him a rapist? I don't think so. Does it even make him a particularly bad person? Well, copntroversial as it might sound, no, I don't think it does that, either. It makes him a fool, certainly, someone who's made a mistake, done something he shouldn't have and ought to do everything he can to make amends, but human passions aren't so clinical as to be able to be turned on and off like a light-switch.

At the same time, arguably it is equally incumbent upon the lady not to give consent if she has even the slightest feeling that she might be in a position to have to withdraw it later on. I think the moral of the story is, know what you want before you start anything, and make sure that what you want is explicitly (or implicitly, in the case of more comfortable relationships) clear. Alternatively, of course, there's always the option of just not sleeping with anyone you're not already in a loving relationship with (controversial again...)


Excuse me but what planet are you on?! As soon as a woman says no then that means stop. For example if two people in a loving relationship are having sex and the woman cries for him to stop would he continue? Of course not. He would stop dead in fear and worry that something was wrong or that he had accidently hurt her.

Take away the situation of it being a loving relationship, the people don't know each other well and it is more likely for the woman to be accidently hurt. Even more so now the man should stop dead as soon as the woman cries out for him to stop.

Now take away the situation of the woman being completely sober, substance free, etc. If at any time the woman says stop or no or whatever REGARDLESS of the situation then the man should stop.

Sex is an unbelievebly intimate thing to do between two consenting people at the best of times and it is ridiculously easy for the woman to be hurt if the man so desires. Men are more physically strong and intimidating especially when a woman is at her most vulnerable.

If a man continues against a woman's will, then he is a bad person, a terrible person. And in many cases it makes him a rapist if he does so with deliberate intent of continuing against the woman's will. If it is not deliberate then it still makes him a bad person for being such a pig as to continue for his own pleasure amidst his partner's discomfort and/or pain.


Opinions such as "oh if the man continues he is merely a fool" don't wash with me, and I dare say do not wash with most women and perhaps most men. Certainly with all of both sexes who have had this terrible crime inflicted upon them. And it is most certainly opinions like the one above that lead directly to the fact that many men still think they can get away with it, many women still think it is all their fault, and many men do still in fact get away with being rapist pigs.

[Al]

It seems that, rather than a verdict being reached, a mistrial was called. That would make it very likely that the prosecution will re-indict the defendants. They haven't got away with it yet.

[hr]Life is too important to be taken seriously.

[Saki]

On the consent issue, I have to say that I disagree with David that it isn't rape if consent was given and then withdrawn. I do think that it's sensible and good policy for women in general to take great care about putting themselves in vulnerable situations, but it's still rape if a woman changes her mind. I also tend to think that some rapes are worse than others and that in _most_ cases where consent was withdrawn, the woman is going to be far less upset and affected by it than a violent rape that was rape from beginning to end. There is a tendency to see all rape crimes as being the same and, while I think all rape is wrong, I also think that some rapes are worse than others. The one that this thread is concerned with is one of the very nastiest.

[penfold]

surley it depends upon at what point consent was withdrawn? i.e before or after entery has occured. If after then proving rape is almost impossible.

[Saki]

[s]penfold wrote on 00:19, 7th Jul 2004:
surley it depends upon at what point consent was withdrawn? i.e before or after entery has occured. If after then proving rape is almost impossible.


That's why I think it's a poor idea for women to put themselves in that sort of situation, but it's still technically rape even if it's unprovable. Rape is extremely difficult to prove at the best of times, but you can't make the definition of the word hinge on that.

[Guest]

In america, can the jury only return unanimous or 10-1 verticts, rather than, say, 6-5?

[Haunted]

I dont think this was quite the open-and-shut case everyone thinks it was. Having read the articles i can see some inconsistencies with the prosecution. Rather than point them out i'll just say that none of us was in that courtroom and none of us could honesty say how we would vote in that jury. Anyway they only got aquitted on 4 of the 24 charges, there almost certainly guilty of something but perhaps the more serious charges will fall through

[S.P.I.G]

Viva la revolution!!!

[Cain]

http://www.ocweekly.com/ink/04/46/columns-lowery.php

regardless of his guilt or otherwise in the Jane Doe trial, Gregory Haidl is a stupid boy.

[hr]
I will diminish, and go into fourth year, and remain Cain

[randypanthegoatboy]

YOU STOPPIDO IN MY HOOSE WAN NICHT FORTE BRAVO FORTE, RIDCULOOOS PEEEPLE MAKE MWA SICKO

[Guest]

It has been quite some time since I've posted about this topic, although I have been following this story rather closely for the past few months. As I posted earlier this year, (annonymously of course!) I was in somewhat of a similar position and felt great sympathy for Jane Doe. I believed that this would be an open & shut case with a guilty verdict, but I was wrong. Although one defendent is currently in jail, the other two are still free on bail. They are all awaiting the re-trial early next year.
What scares me the most is how this trial seems to have affected me. I think about it every so often, and frequently update myself on the proceedings. As I wrote months ago, this is so weird as I've heard many horror stories before on the news and such, but have never been so personally affected as I am now.
I truly wish I hadn't read Dunqn's post in May. As melodramatic as it may sound, part of me is scarred for life.