Rape Logic

[meus-ovatio.livejournal.com]

"Mr. Anderson, you allege that on the night of 14 December 2010, the defendant robbed you on the corner of 24th St. and Broadway Ave. Am I correct in this?"

"Yes. He robbed me. Took my wallet."

"He took your wallet, Mr. Anderson? You mean, surely, that he tore your pants off and physically removed your wallet with his own hands?"

"Well no, it wasn't quite like that..."

"Well what was it like, Mr. Anderson?"

"He told me to give him his wallet and threatened me."

"And did you hand over your wallet, Mr. Anderson?"

"Well... well yes I did."

"So you willingly removed your own wallet and transferred possession of said wallet to the defendant?"

"No, he robbed me! He said he had a gun!"

"Did he, Mr. Anderson? Did he really say that?"

"Yes!"

"My client denies any such thing. What do you have to say?"

"He said he had a gun, and to give him his wallet."

"And did the defendant touch or harm you in any way?"

"Well... no... nothing happened like that... I was afraid!"

"Did you tell him that?"

"What? No! What kind of question is that?"

"So here we are left to believe only your word, Mr. Anderson? Your word that you freely handed over your wallet to the defendant, with no signs of violence, no evidence of any untoward actions, and yet you insist on wasting our time with this?"

"I was robbed!"

"That is precisely the issue under question, Mr. Anderson. Simply repeating yourself doesn't help. Mr. Anderson... were you drinking on the night of 14 December 2010?"

"Well yes... I was coming home from a pub I was at with my friends."

"Really, Mr. Anderson. How much did you drink?"

"Well I don't know really... a few beers, a couple shots... there was a birthday..."

"Ah, so it would be safe to say that you were suffering from, let us say, impaired faculties?"

"I know what happened to me!"

"Do you, Mr. Anderson? I can have an expert testify before the court that even moderate alcohol consumption greatly affects memory."

"This is insane!"

"No, Mr. Anderson, this is Conservative Court."

Comments

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

Your idiosyncratic definition of force is not shared by lawmakers, considering that theft by fraud and violent robbery are treated under different sections of the penal code, thereby making rape by deception non-forcible rape according to legal usage. This is done for good reason: crime by trickery specifically exists to circumvent the need to use violence. They are separate because one does not actually involve force/violence.

[badlydrawnjeff.livejournal.com]

I don't see how it's idiosyncratic, but okay.

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

Trickery as a form of force is quite idiosyncratic.

[usekh.livejournal.com]

Because almost no-one else including the legal system agrees with your definition?