I do the same in the evenings, your post came across as funny, given the most recents posts, I ‘assumed’ u were throwing in a jesting remark
What are you even talking about? 80% strike rate? Again, it is a FACT that the percentage of rapes that happen, not reported, but that HAPPEN, that end in a conviction is less than 1%. What part are you confused about? I’m not talking about convictions of rapes that end up in court… do you realise that? If 8% on average of rapes get reported… and 7% OF the 8% that get reported end up in a sentence for a rapist… what result do you get? For the number of incidents… I don’t know why you can’t understand that or where you’re pulling 80% of rapes end in conviction or what you’re disputing? The statistics are wrong?
If 100 rapes happen… 8 get reported… then (7%) .56 of those end up with a sentence for the rapist.
The real problem is, what is the definition of rape.
2 Likes
True. I just think it’s ludicrous to suggest that if you report rape, you’re likely to get a conviction.
Bizarre.
And yes, the definition of rape is hard to pinpoint, everyone seems to take a different view.
Mine would be that you should ensure the other person is enjoying it… I.e. look for signs of pleasure… after all, isn’t that the main aim of sex, reproduction aside? Not just “do” sex to someone… all parties should be willing and partaking in it.
Jesus calm down. You will have an aneurysm if you keep carrying on like that. Read the comment of yours i quoted in my last reply to you. Thats what started this back and forth. You’re plucking figures out of thin air now. You cant go moving the goalposts to suit your argument. Its a FACT that someone cant be convicted of a crime thats not reported. Anyway you are blinded from reason so carry on regardless.
Ah but we have all had interludes we didn’t exactly enjoy. I wouldn’t use that as an argument
Apparently it’s a game of power and control:rofl:
Yes, but not reported doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. And people don’t report as going to court is difficult, and evidence in rape cases is, difficult to accumulate. Even with internal injuries, one party can argue it was consensual rough sex.
And they most often take place behind closed doors and are likely to be committed by someone the victim knows, meaning the victim will be in their presence willingly.
Then the court process… lengthy and the line of invasive questioning, along with the burden to prove guilt… often as traumatising than the rape itself.
True, true. I guess then lack of consent being established is the only way to really define it.
Exactly. So, the law says consent can’t be given if one is intoxicated. the law doesn’t discriminate against gender. Could either the girl or the lads consent? Remember, they are arguing that she instigated it. Legally, they could cry rape, except she did first
The nuns at my school said sex was a beautiful thing between two people, they didn’t go much further but they did mention that getting a third person involved took it to another level.
Does it say that? I believe it’s the “capacity” to give consent I.e. a severely intoxicated person cannot give consent.
Same way as if you asked a lad with a few drinks on him for a lend of twenty quid… and grand he gives it to you. Then the same lad later is falling all over the shop hammered, and you hold up his wallet and tell him you’re taking twenty quid and he can’t respond clearly. He’s not saying no, but his severe intoxication would suggest he doesn’t have the “capacity” to say yes.
I think everyone involved in this scenario had the capacity to say yes/no. Is that wrong to still borrow the 20 quid, knowing he’s not saying no but he can’t agree as he is unaware due to his levels of intoxication.
They can’t cry rape, as rape is defined in the UK as penetration of the mouth, anus or vagina with a penis. Sure, they could have reported sexual assault if they believed she sexually assaulted them but they didn’t. They can take up that legal argument should they choose.
Yep, but how to prove who caused the penetration to happen. Could be the woman or the man
A man cannot legally cry rape against a woman in the UK. A woman cannot “rape” a man as by the legal definition, the rapist has to have a penis. If a woman forces herself on a man, then it can be reported and charged as a serious sexual assault, but not rape, legally.
Ah right, so PJ can say she sexually assaulted him and he responded.
Yes, he could have initially if he wanted to bring that to the cops I guess. He clearly couldn’t now, given his testimony says he was a very willing party.
What a gentleman
Yes, he took one for the team…
I’m not arguing against you.
1 Like
I know yeah I was just being sarcy