so she obviously deserved it...

Originally Posted by keithd

and then there's the angle of crying rape when in fact she was too pished to realise she consented....

but thats getting way off the initial subject....

Surely you aren't capable of consenting if you are v drunk.

Out of interest who foots the bill for this 'compensation'?

Is it me and thee or is it the defendant?

Oh and how is money going to compensate for being raped? As society won’t let us chop his willy off, surely the dude being convicted, serving time* and then being put on the register so he is tracked in the future is the justice (that the law will allow)? Why does the victim need money?

Further to this, is this not opening the flood gates for people making falsified claims just to get a payoff? Thus potentially reducing the likelihood of ‘real’ cases being taken ‘seriously’ and potentially seeing innocent/entrapped dudes in jail?

*where he will no doubt become someones b1tch and get 'violated' in the showers himself – now that IS justice

Originally Posted by sarah

Surely you aren't capable of consenting if you are v drunk.

Certainly from a legal perspective and my POV, but some people are of the attitude that if you don't (or can't) explicitly say 'no' then you are up for it. How many people formally ask for an explicit 'yes' when having sex in general (be it with a stranger or a regular partner)?

[the_lone_wolf]

Originally Posted by Ceri JC

How many people formally ask for an explicit 'yes' when having sex in general (be it with a stranger or a regular partner)?

i've discovered by the time we've found two notaries and got to the contract signing she's kind of lost interest

I'm amazed so many of you can have such simplistic views. The big question is whether you can believe her evidence if she doesn't remember the situation. Alcohol can turn people in to such different creatures from their normal selves, and without a full recollection of events how could you possibly send a man to prison for rape. Based on hindsight?! Get a grip.

No girl deserves to be raped equally as much as no man deserves to be prosecuted for a life-ruining crime on a girls whim.

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

i've discovered by the time we've found two notaries and got to the contract signing she's kind of lost interest

This is why the legal expectation for a formal 'yes' seems a bit askew. If no one does it normally and this is turned a blind eye to the rest of the time, it seems a bit odd to retroactively expect it of someone once they're accused of rape. Of course, the argument that if you can't say 'no' you're game is unfair too: what about people in comas?

[SoulKiss]

Originally Posted by the_lone_wolf

i've discovered by the time we've found two notaries and got to the contract signing she's kind of lost interest

Or to sum it up in song.....

Originally Posted by Meatloaf, Where the Rubber Meets the Road

Ya say "girl, you're a beauty", but I'm no beast
I got a little contract right here
See, you can slam on the brakes, anytime you got the stick
Even if we're in 4th gear
Cop in the front seat, lawyer in the back seat
Gettin' it on videotape
Got a shrink in the bed, lord, sittin' on the headboard
Swearin' that we both got raped

[Biker Biggles]

Good points about the difference between the crime itself which is (hopefully)dealt with by the courts,and compensation for the victim from the criminal injuries compensation agency.I heard an interview on Radio 4 this morning where a woman(not sure if she was a politician or from the CICA)was asked what the difference was between a rape victim(drunk) and a victim of a mugging(also drunk)vis a vis compensation.Todays story clearly says that rape victims are to get full compensation,but then why not drunk mugging victims?Of course there was no logical answer to this question.To me it shows the kind of hypocrisy that we are so familiar with in our society today.If you are one kind of victim you are entitled to full payment,but if you are another kind,its partly your fault.

Originally Posted by gettin2dizzy

I'm amazed so many of you can have such simplistic views. The big question is whether you can believe her evidence if she doesn't remember the situation. Alcohol can turn people in to such different creatures from their normal selves, and without a full recollection of events how could you possibly send a man to prison for rape. Based on hindsight?! Get a grip.

No girl deserves to be raped equally as much as no man deserves to be prosecuted for a life-ruining crime on a girls whim.

You are completely right.

The following is completely true, not a wind up and no, I'd rather not go into the gory details, particularly on a public forum. I've twice had girls "take avantage" of me whilst I was properly drunk, not technically 'rape', but you could certainly call it sexual assault and in the latter case, if the mechanics of male/female genitalia were reversed I'm quite sure she'd of taken it that far. The way I recall it, I in no way led them on and told them to stop, before resorting to force to shove them away, at which point they got the picture. In both instances I was only just able to talk and in one, I was lying on the floor barely concious, so there's no way I'd trust my recollection of it to the degree needed to take any action. In the former, where I didn't know the girl concerned, I'd of really struggled to identify her at an ID parade. Of course, being a man, I was able to laugh them off as "silly drunken slappers" and didn't feel 'violated' as such, although it was certainly a very unpleasent experience at the time. Would either of incident happened if I'd been sober? No chance.

Originally Posted by Biker Biggles

Good points about the difference between the crime itself which is (hopefully)dealt with by the courts,and compensation for the victim from the criminal injuries compensation agency.I heard an interview on Radio 4 this morning where a woman(not sure if she was a politician or from the CICA)was asked what the difference was between a rape victim(drunk) and a victim of a mugging(also drunk)vis a vis compensation.Todays story clearly says that rape victims are to get full compensation,but then why not drunk mugging victims?Of course there was no logical answer to this question.To me it shows the kind of hypocrisy that we are so familiar with in our society today.If you are one kind of victim you are entitled to full payment,but if you are another kind,its partly your fault.

Very interesting, I wasn't aware of this discrepancy. To look at it another way, lets say at the end of the tax year we have £100,000 left in our compensation pot and 2 outstanding cases. Both rapes, in one the victim was by her own admission absolutely hammered and was seen willingly going off with the perpetrator minutes before the attack. In the other, a woman was walking home from work down a lane and grabbed by a guy who threated her with a knife and then raped her. How would you split the money? 50:50 doesn't seem very just to me...