Woman Rapes Man. Not Charged with Rape

[*PhilHos*]

(06-27-2018, 03:55 PM)fredtoast Wrote: If he was afraid of the machete then he would not have tried to push her off of him after he ejaculated to end the sex.  He can't claim he was only afraid until he came.

She was sitting on the bed with her back to the wall when he took multiple photos.  Again this indicates he was not afraid.

He also texted his sister while he was in the room with the "rapist".

This girl is not innocent, but it does not sound like a strong case for rape charges.

I get that. But, here's the thing: if she's guilty of unlawful restraint (one of the things she was charged with), wouldn't that go towards him being raped? 

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2018, 12:43 PM)PhilHos Wrote: How often is that actually brought up in rape cases?

It was brought up so often that there were specific laws passed to keep it out of trials.

My favorite "war story" when I talk to other lawyers involves these laws.  I had a case where my client was charged with "aggravated rape" because they claimed there was bodily injury.  The injury was an abrasion on the labia.  This is not the type of injury that the law was written to cover.  It was supposed to be for cases where a woman was beaten during the rape.  What had happened was a teenage girl had had consensual sex with her boyfriend and was so afraid she might be pregnant that she charged an immigrant laborer with rape.  She was supposed to be just relaxing at home, but she was wearing a thong.  Thongs are not really comfortable for women so they usually just wear them when they want to make their ass look better or when they want to look sexy.  Under the law in Tennessee I usually could not have introduce the fact that she was wearing a thong, but because the state had made the abrasion on the labia an element of the crime I argued that the abrasion was just a "thong scrub".  I just made up that term but when the states medical expert was testifying I crossed examined her about the possibility of a "thong scrub" and kept repeating the term like it was a well known thing. It was great that their doctor was a woman because when I kept asking her about the effects of wearing a thong she said "I don't know because I would never wear a thong."

That was not the only evidence that helped me win that case, but I feel like it really helped.

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2018, 04:01 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I get that. But, here's the thing: if she's guilty of unlawful restraint (one of the things she was charged with), wouldn't that go towards him being raped? 

Yes.

I am not saying this case is a slam dunk either way.  I am just saying there is more to this than just "Women never get charged with rape."

He claimed that they got into a big argument after the sex.  Again it is hard to claim that he was afraid if he started arguing with her.  If he was too afraid to disagree with having sex then he would have been too afraid to disagree with her about anything else and start an argument.

The biggest fact against him is that he admits he tried to resist and stop the sex after he ejaculated.  If he was too afraid to resist before he came he would not have resisted after he came.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-27-2018, 04:10 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It was brought up so often that there were specific laws passed to keep it out of trials.

No, I get that. I should've clarified. I meant, how often is it brought up NOWadays?
I get that it used to be brought up a lot and I agree that it's a particularly egregious strategy to use, but how often is it brought up in court nowadays?

[*PhilHos*]

(06-27-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.

That's what I thought. Thanks.

(06-27-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: I am not saying this case is a slam dunk either way.  I am just saying there is more to this than just "Women never get charged with rape."

I'm not saying it's a slam dunk either way nor am I implying that women never get charged with rape. But, I do find it interesting that it wasn't even a charge in this case. I mean, think if it were the other way around. Do you honestly think the guy wouldn't have been charged with rape even if the evidence was kind of lacking like it is here?

(06-27-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: He claimed that they got into a big argument after the sex.  Again it is hard to claim that he was afraid if he started arguing with her.  If he was too afraid to disagree with having sex then he would have been too afraid to disagree with her about anything else and start an argument.

The biggest fact against him is that he admits he tried to resist and stop the sex after he ejaculated.  If he was too afraid to resist before he came he would not have resisted after he came.

I just want the truth to come out and justice to be served. If she DID rape him, then she should be processed to the full extent of the law. If she did NOT rape him, then she should only face justice for the crimes (if any) she committed.

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2018, 04:59 PM)PhilHos Wrote: No, I get that. I should've clarified. I meant, how often is it brought up NOWadays?
I get that it used to be brought up a lot and I agree that it's a particularly egregious strategy to use, but how often is it brought up in court nowadays?

It never comes up here in Tennessee because there is a specific law against that type of evidence coming into a trial.

I am pretty sure most other states have similar laws.

[fredtoast]

(06-27-2018, 05:03 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I just want the truth to come out and justice to be served.

This is the problem with rape charges.  Both parties can agree on what happened (they had sex while she was holding a machete), but it is sometimes very compliocated to determine lack of consent.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-27-2018, 05:12 PM)fredtoast Wrote: It never comes up here in Tennessee because there is a specific law against that type of evidence coming into a trial.

I am pretty sure most other states have similar laws.

Good.

(06-27-2018, 05:18 PM)fredtoast Wrote: This is the problem with rape charges.  Both parties can agree on what happened (they had sex while she was holding a machete), but it is sometimes very compliocated to determine lack of consent.

True.

[Millhouse]

(06-27-2018, 05:03 PM)PhilHos Wrote: I just want the truth to come out and justice to be served. If she DID rape him, then she should be processed to the full extent of the law. If she did NOT rape him, then she should only face justice for the crimes (if any) she committed.

I was looking this story up and read a couple of other things about it.

- They apparently had been dating or dated for 7 years. 7.
- She had assault charges against her during that time against him.
- Two days before this occurred, she reportedly tried to strangle him

My thoughts:

- Why did he date her for so long.
- He said she somehow broke into his place, but I never found out how.
- This story seems to revolve around two people who just 'ain't' right, especially the girl.

[SunsetBengal]

(06-27-2018, 04:11 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Yes.

I am not saying this case is a slam dunk either way.  I am just saying there is more to this than just "Women never get charged with rape."

He claimed that they got into a big argument after the sex.  Again it is hard to claim that he was afraid if he started arguing with her.  If he was too afraid to disagree with having sex then he would have been too afraid to disagree with her about anything else and start an argument.

The biggest fact against him is that he admits he tried to resist and stop the sex after he ejaculated.  If he was too afraid to resist before he came he would not have resisted after he came.

This is a rather unusual case.  I'm sure to most people the connotation of "rape" is the typical strange intruder using physical force to get someone to submit to their demands.  Seeing how this is a couple that had a very long relationship, that certainly muddies the waters.  Further complicating the matter is the female is the aggressor.

I agree with you, this is tough to call.  Rape cases among people in relationships or even marriages are not a new thing, but typically the male is the culprit.  

[GMDino]

So I'm still not sure why this was even a thread.

Are we just gonna be a police blotter now?

[*PhilHos*]

(06-27-2018, 09:57 PM)GMDino Wrote: So I'm still not sure why this was even a thread.

Are we just gonna be a police blotter now?

Oh I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were the only one allowed to make threads.

It's an interesting story that has an unusual gender dynamic that had the potential of leading the argument down a slope of men's rights/feminism/etc. So I felt it more prudent to post here than in Klotsch, lest it eventually be moved here anyway.

I'll be sure to run all future threads by you before posting them. 

[GMDino]

(06-28-2018, 03:24 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Oh I'm sorry. I didn't realize that you were the only one allowed to make threads.

It's an interesting story that has an unusual gender dynamic that had the potential of leading the argument down a slope of men's rights/feminism/etc. So I felt it more prudent to post here than in Klotsch, lest it eventually be moved here anyway.

I'll be sure to run all future threads by you before posting them. 

Not at all....and I didn't expect you to be so easily triggered.

She was arrested and charged with an array of charges....and maybe rape later.

Seems like the usual suspects just trying to complain that men don't get treated "fairly."

[*PhilHos*]

(06-28-2018, 03:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: Seems like the usual suspects just trying to complain that men don't get treated "fairly."

Who has complained that men don't get treated "fairly" (besides you)? Did you even READ this thread?

[GMDino]

(06-28-2018, 03:35 PM)PhilHos Wrote: Who has complained that men don't get treated "fairly" (besides you)? Did you even READ this thread?

Seems to be the only thing involved in the story is a woman didn't get charged with rape.  

[SunsetBengal]

(06-28-2018, 03:31 PM)GMDino Wrote: Not at all....and I didn't expect you to be so easily triggered.

She was arrested and charged with an array of charges....and maybe rape later.

Seems like the usual suspects just trying to complain that men don't get treated "fairly."

Are you trying to deny the fact that men are charged with sex crimes at a disproportionally higher rate than women?  

I find your lack of compassion for the victim in this case to be quite disturbing.    


No means no, no matter the gender of the aggressor.  

[*PhilHos*]

(06-28-2018, 03:42 PM)GMDino Wrote: Seems to be the only thing involved in the story is a woman didn't get charged with rape.  

And? Do you honestly think it's not possible for their to be singular injustices that don't necessarily equate to the larger group as a whole? In other words, can't this be a situation where a man didn't get treated the same as a woman would have but it doens't mean that ALL men get treated differently than ALL women?

[GMDino]

(06-28-2018, 03:45 PM)PhilHos Wrote: And? Do you honestly think it's not possible for their to be singular injustices that don't necessarily equate to the larger group as a whole? In other words, can't this be a situation where a man didn't get treated the same as a woman would have but it doens't mean that ALL men get treated differently than ALL women?

Then I'll repeat:  Does every singular injustice need discussed?

Was that really all it was, was one man not getting "justice"?

Seems odd to me given how this board is and those who usually complain about such things.

[Millhouse]

(06-28-2018, 03:45 PM)PhilHos Wrote: And? Do you honestly think it's not possible for their to be singular injustices that don't necessarily equate to the larger group as a whole? In other words, can't this be a situation where a man didn't get treated the same as a woman would have but it doens't mean that ALL men get treated differently than ALL women?

You should know that's not how it is supposed to work in P&R, as isolated incident threads like this should only pertain to minorities, women, and generally anyone to the left who might be the victim. Anyone else not in those categories should be taken to Reddit to be discussed.

[*PhilHos*]

(06-28-2018, 03:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: Then I'll repeat:  Does every singular injustice need discussed?

Why do you care? Are you the arbiter of what gets discussed? If not, then either comment on the topic or kindly STFU. The fact I have to explain this to someone I thought was an adult is somewhat surprising.

(06-28-2018, 03:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: Was that really all it was, was one man not getting "justice"?

Read the thread. Come to your own conclusion. That's how it usually works.

(06-28-2018, 03:48 PM)GMDino Wrote: Seems odd to me given how this board is and those who usually complain about such things.

The only one complaining is you. I don't give a damn about your thread on the ICE whistleblower, but do you see me complaining about it and wondering why its here? No.