You're more concerned about legal precision than I am. And about finding a precise rule. I said at the top of this discussion that the sisterhood should discourage women from charging rape in dubious cases. I also think that you don't convict if there's a reasonable doubt. I don't see anything contradictory in that. Grey doesn't get jail time but that doesn't mean a rape didn't occur.
[If you want to get into another of those arguments about whether a crime has technically been committed and whether the rapist is innocent or not guilty, I'm not willing to go there with you ever again. I am saying "no." <g>]
If she did not clearly consent and he pressed her to the point of force, he raped her. If there's no evidence that she was forced, such as bodily injuries or him shooting his mouth off to his buddies, unless the guy makes a horrible impression on the jury, I don't see how you can convict. I wouldn't even indict. But that doesn't mean she wasn't raped and that he isn't a rapist.
"As a result, the woman has no cause to press rape charges...
Perhaps your confusion results from my choice of words. I recognize belatedly that "cause" is a legal term. I wasn't using it that way. I meant that she "shouldn't" press the matter. She should recognize that the situation is grey and that she contributed to the problem. A hopefully learn from her mistake. She should feel free to shun him as a rapist, though, because that's what he is. If you're going to cry rape, you have to resist at least to the point of some bruising or be prepared for the likelihood that he'll get away with it. At least from a criminal perspective. That doesn't bother me.
Once again, they're both stupid. I do not feel particularly sorry for either of them. And I won't get exercised however the matter is resolved or not resolved. If she ends up spending years with a shrink, so be it. If he does time, so be it. They both should have been more careful. |
