"It could all have happened consensually and I don't remember it."

[Hibbyradge]

Parallels? :dunno:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-31446717

[Future17]

Parallels? :dunno:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-lincolnshire-31446717

It's a headline grabbing admission in that context, but I think the CofA placed a lot of stock in the video which they felt the victim was not capable of giving consent.

[Hibbyradge]

It's a headline grabbing admission in that context, but I think the CofA placed a lot of stock in the video which they felt the victim was not capable of giving consent.

I agree.

It's a very strange turn of events. How did it even get to court? If the victim wasn't sure if she'd consented or not, I doubt she'd make a complaint to the police.

[Future17]

I agree.

It's a very strange turn of events. How did it even get to court? If the victim wasn't sure if she'd consented or not, I doubt she'd make a complaint to the police.

Without wanting to presume, or to put words in her mouth, I would imagine the quoted line came out under questioning by one of the defence team. If she doesn't remember anything about what happened and was asked something like, "Is it possible that the sex happened consensually and you don't remember it?", her answer would simply be the most honest one.

However, I suppose this case again raises the issue of what actually constitutes consent and when it can and cannot be given. I would imagine that the case would only have proceeded on the basis that the victim did make an accusation of rape and felt that, even if she cannot remember what happened (or, arguably, because she can't remember what happened) she wasn't able to provide consent. The prosecuting authorities obviously agreed and to the extent that the CPS appealed the trial judge's initial ruling to the CofA.

I think if a video exists which shows a man having sex with a woman who is "inert and unresponsive" in a context similar to this incident (i.e. where the man is aware of the amount of alcohol consumed by the woman) then it would compelling evidence that she is not in a fit state to give consent.

I know this has been dealt with before on the Ched Evans thread and, to an extent, isn't relevant to this case, but the situation that troubles me is what happens when both the man and the woman are drunk to a level where the law would consider them unable to give consent, but the sex happens anyway. Who gets the blame there?

[snooky]

Without wanting to presume, or to put words in her mouth, I would imagine the quoted line came out under questioning by one of the defence team. If she doesn't remember anything about what happened and was asked something like, "Is it possible that the sex happened consensually and you don't remember it?", her answer would simply be the most honest one.

However, I suppose this case again raises the issue of what actually constitutes consent and when it can and cannot be given. I would imagine that the case would only have proceeded on the basis that the victim did make an accusation of rape and felt that, even if she cannot remember what happened (or, arguably, because she can't remember what happened) she wasn't able to provide consent. The prosecuting authorities obviously agreed and to the extent that the CPS appealed the trial judge's initial ruling to the CofA.

I think if a video exists which shows a man having sex with a woman who is "inert and unresponsive" in a context similar to this incident (i.e. where the man is aware of the amount of alcohol consumed by the woman) then it would compelling evidence that she is not in a fit state to give consent.

I know this has been dealt with before on the Ched Evans thread and, to an extent, isn't relevant to this case, but the situation that troubles me is what happens when both the man and the woman are drunk to a level where the law would consider them unable to give consent, but the sex happens anyway. Who gets the blame there?

In this 'inert' woman's case, I think it's fair to say she apparently did not appear to be in a state to give bona fide consent. However, there is a fine line that the law shouldn't cross.
What if a couple have a consensual consummate encounter and they fall out? One of them could claim that they were not in a fit state to give consent and charge the other with rape (or worse, resort to blackmail).
Each case should be judged independently on its own merits (or demerits). IMO, it's not practical to have a 'one size fits all' type of law.

[lord bunberry]

If we can all be honest for a second, how many guys(or girls) have woken up in the morning with a girl that they've no memory of bringing home.
its happened to me on a few occasions, I dread to think of the potential consequences in today's no win no fee culture

[Hibbyradge]

If we can all be honest for a second, how many guys(or girls) have woken up in the morning with a girl that they've no memory of bringing home.
its happened to me on a few occasions, I dread to think of the potential consequences in today's no win no fee culture

Are you suggesting you were raped?

[lord bunberry]

Are you suggesting you were raped?
No I'm suggesting that someone could've accused me of it.

[Hibbyradge]

No I'm suggesting that someone could've accused me of it.

I know. Twas merely a poorly timed attempt at a jolly jape.

[lord bunberry]

I know. Twas merely a poorly timed attempt at a jolly jape.
I thought it might be:greengrin