VA - Freshman daughter, mom 'good time drop off' outrages VA university

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Let me say this. Drunks are temporarily insane due to the gross amount of drinking. So if 2 drunks stumble across a path or oath together that leads to a disaster; Would clearly be hard to see who was truly and premeditatedly at fault.

When people are drinking without being purposely drugged on the side; They still consent to things that they will regret in the morning.

But if both parties were on the same level. Then it's impossible without proof to justify who actually didn't consent.

So who do you sue? To tell you the truth; without proof. No one. Because both parties were too drunk to remember anything while in a temporary insane mindset.

Now let's say 2 drunks in 2 different cars both caused an accident that killed a sober person in a 3rd vehicle.

Well guess what. Both drunks that drove separate vehicles would be charged with the same crime regardless of the facts unless video proved which drunk one was originally at fault.

So just because the drunk girl recants while the drunk guy doesn't remember. Shouldn't state that the drunk girl should be 100% believable when everything took place while both parties were feeling each other but becoming incoherent at the same time.

Jmo.

In cases like this. More proof should be needed. Or any drunk party can wake up the next morning and recant anything. Whether male or female. Jmo.

Considering the 7% conviction rate for reported rapes, do you believe women are being believed and taken at their word too frequently? Do you think the standard of proof is too low when 93% of rapists go free?
 
I'm not sure if I should start a new thread or not but this seems to fit in pretty well with what we had been debating here. There is more at the link...

The highest criminal court in the state of Oklahoma has ruled that oral sex cannot be classified as rape if an individual is drunk anThe Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said in a unanimous decision that 'forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation.'

<snip>

The Oklahoma Court of Criminal Appeals said in a unanimous decision that 'forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation.'

Tulsa County district attorney Benjamin Fu said he was 'gobsmacked' by the decision according to Oklahoma Watch.

'The plain meaning of forcible oral sodomy, of using force, includes taking advantage of a victim who was too intoxicated to consent,' said Fu.

He later added; 'All this does is add to the fire. Their biggest fear is that people they tell the story to won&#8217;t understand or will judge them for their behavior. If they had that concern, the Court of Criminal Appeals affirmed that, 5-0.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...6-filed-charges-against-alleged-attacker.html
 
Wait I'm misunderstanding. Are they saying that if a man inserts his penis into a passed-out person's mouth, that's not rape? What is it then? Certainly not legal... Certainly I'm not understanding... Please help
 
Wait I'm misunderstanding. Are they saying that if a man inserts his penis into a passed-out person's mouth, that's not rape? What is it then? Certainly not legal... Certainly I'm not understanding... Please help

I seemed to have messed up my quote. That's surely why you aren't comprehending this ruling. Let me try that first sentence again...

The highest criminal court in the state of Oklahoma has ruled that oral sex cannot be classified as rape if an individual is drunk and unconscious.

There it is...right there...it seems as we have been on the incorrect side of this argument all along (sarcasm, in case that wasn't clear either).

Holy :censored:!! I am gobsmacked. While I'm sure OK is a fine state, I certainly am steering clear of it. People usually use a 10-foot pole; I'm going to make mine a 1,000-mile one, thank you very much. And, in case anyone was wondering, my daughter is not allowed to go to college there.
 
Holy mother of Hannah that is just wrong.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
185
Guests online
4,957
Total visitors
5,142

Forum statistics

Threads
602,842
Messages
18,147,554
Members
231,549
Latest member
lilb
Back
Top