Guilty of rape by deception

[Snorrius]

Good way to start a serious relationship, meet in a bar and have sex in a nearby building.

Probably she was magically charmed.

Hence, rape by magic.

 

[Truronian]

Ridiculous. Can it be appealed?

 

[El_Machinae]

Hi everyone!

This is not ridiculous, or, not as ridiculous as you'd think. In most of the countries that have decent sexual assault laws, misrepresenting yourself can be considered sexual assault if the victim complains.

Sex requires consent. It really does. I know that you guys know about "make sure she says yes", because it's gotta be decently advertised. And the law is not kidding when it says that sex requires consent. Consent implies fair knowledge of what's going on.

The girl thought she was sleeping with a Jew. She'd consented to sleep with a Jew. She'd not consented to sleeping with a non-Jew. Ergo, a non-Jew violated her consent.

Now, this case seems to be outrageous, but it is built upon principles that the sexual-assault-community recognises quite easily. This is the same law that prevents people from refusing to pay a hooker after services. This is the same law that prevents people from waiting until a girl is too drunk to know better. This is the same law the prevents people from lying about whether they're infertile.

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

 

[TopDog]

At a stretch at best, if the intention to create relations was dependant upon him being jewish then there definitely was 'deception.'

I've never heard of rape by deception though.

 

[Silurian]

Planning to appeal

This could happen to anyone who picks someone up in a bar in Israel.

He said he was single and looking for a long term relationship - unfortunately lots of people say that.

They will have to build a lot of jails in Israel.

 

[Frank Drebin]

well, there definitely was deception.

it's just that it wasnt rape.

EL_Machinae, you dont need a vague law like this to protect prostitutes from not being paid. just make freaking not paying prostitutes for their work illegal.
a woman who got so drunk she decided to have sex with someone she wouldnt normally have had sex with was getting too drunk, not being raped.
and why lying about being infertile should be illegal i can not comprehend.

now, what kind of deception to make someone consent to sex should be considered rape?

i can not think of a single one, maybe you can help me?

 

[Grisu]

Makes a mockery of actual rape victims.

This, very much this

Sex requires consent. It really does. I know that you guys know about "make sure she says yes", because it's gotta be decently advertised. And the law is not kidding when it says that sex requires consent. Consent implies fair knowledge of what's going on.

The problem is there's no even remotely fair way this law is being implemented. One can always claim one didn't know about one certain facet about the other and wouldn't have slept with him/her if one had known that. What if he thought he was sleeping with a blonde when in reality she had dyed her hair? And even if it could be enacted in a fair way, dubbing it 'rape' is just silly. As Mise said, it makes a mockery of everybody who's ever been a victim of a real rape.

The hooker comparison doesn't work either because there, not paying is just breaking a contract, and thus worthy of a fine. No need going down the rape avenue.

 

[Snorrius]

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

Next time some girl will jail a guy because she thought he earns more $$$ than he actually does.

Violation of consent, my chess. Another legalistic Anglo-Saxon rap devoid of common sense.

 

[Ziggy Stardust]

Hi everyone!

This is not ridiculous, or, not as ridiculous as you'd think. In most of the countries that have decent sexual assault laws, misrepresenting yourself can be considered sexual assault if the victim complains.

Sex requires consent. It really does. I know that you guys know about "make sure she says yes", because it's gotta be decently advertised. And the law is not kidding when it says that sex requires consent. Consent implies fair knowledge of what's going on.

The girl thought she was sleeping with a Jew. She'd consented to sleep with a Jew. She'd not consented to sleeping with a non-Jew. Ergo, a non-Jew violated her consent.

Now, this case seems to be outrageous, but it is built upon principles that the sexual-assault-community recognises quite easily. This is the same law that prevents people from refusing to pay a hooker after services. This is the same law that prevents people from waiting until a girl is too drunk to know better. This is the same law the prevents people from lying about whether they're infertile.

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

One thing

Does this include: "Do you really love me?", "Of course I do ". 18 months! A part of the ridiculousness is the charge of 18 months here.

btw: Kudos for introducing the much needed discussion!

 

[TopDog]

i can not think of a single one, maybe you can help me?

Lying about HIV/AIDS?

To be fair, I think that may be unlawful by its own merit.

But the problem here, I think, isn't with the law. It's a good law to prevent people from being manipulated against and provide some protection. The only thing is, 'deception' has a wide range of meanings. As is the case with most laws there are unintended consequences.

 

[nonconformist]

Hi everyone!

This is not ridiculous, or, not as ridiculous as you'd think. In most of the countries that have decent sexual assault laws, misrepresenting yourself can be considered sexual assault if the victim complains.

Sex requires consent. It really does. I know that you guys know about "make sure she says yes", because it's gotta be decently advertised. And the law is not kidding when it says that sex requires consent. Consent implies fair knowledge of what's going on.

The girl thought she was sleeping with a Jew. She'd consented to sleep with a Jew. She'd not consented to sleeping with a non-Jew. Ergo, a non-Jew violated her consent.

Now, this case seems to be outrageous, but it is built upon principles that the sexual-assault-community recognises quite easily. This is the same law that prevents people from refusing to pay a hooker after services. This is the same law that prevents people from waiting until a girl is too drunk to know better. This is the same law the prevents people from lying about whether they're infertile.

Sex requires consent. It's true. It's really true. You might as well understand, and even accept, such an idea.

Correct, but that stipulation does not really cover such provisions as this. It's more aimed at more deceptive and underhanded tactics, not ******** racism.
It's aimed more at people who, for example, pretend to be gynaecologists to molest women etc.


I remember in the UK, a guy was charged with it, as he crept into a married woman's room when the husband was away while sshe was sleeping and the lights were out, climbed into bed, and she proceeded to have sex with him thinking it was her husband, and he was charged with it.

 

[Grisu]

Lying about HIV/AIDS?

I think that would be something like aggravated assault (up to manslaughter if/when the victim dies of it)

 

[Frank Drebin]

Lying about HIV/AIDS?

To be fair, I think that may be unlawful by its own merit.

yer, that's already causing grievous bodily harm.

 

[ParadigmShifter]

And reckless endangerment.

 

[Bugfatty300]

Where is the woman's responsibility? She is a victim? Jesus [darn] Christ ol' lordy mercy. No one forced her to have sex with a complete stranger. No one is forcing her to be a skank ho bag. And I don't think it's even religiously motivated. Just extreme courts trying to enforce the progressive theory it is the state's job to protect the sex poodles and shield them from the risks and consequences of being sex poodles. One of the risks of being a sex poodle is that you might go home and bang someone who you wouldn't have banged if you knew their dirty little secret. Of course the state must act!

The woman initially accused Mr Kashur under oath of a brutal rape against her consent, a charge that carries a heavy jail sentence. But when Mr Kashur's lawyer mounted his own investigation and disproved her claims, the Jerusalem District Court agreed to a plea bargain.

What kind of [idiot] lawyer proves your innocence, proves the accuser is [of questionable repute] and still ends up taking a plea bargain?

How about a NOT [DARN] GUILTY plea?

 

[ParadigmShifter]

Language Timothy!

But good point.

EDIT: Nice edit

 

[TopDog]

Where is the woman's responsibility? She is a victim? Jesus F-ing Crist ol' lordy mercy. No one forced her to have sex with a complete stranger. No one is forcing her to be a skank ho bag.

The way this is viewed is that the woman's responsibility 'ends' when she asks whether or not he's jewish. If he had said no then she may not have had sex with him. The distinction between whether she would have had sex with him if he wasn't jewish is the issue. If not, then it seems she was deceived, the sex was against her will and therefore rape.

 

[Silurian]

From Haaretz

According to Kashur, he was exiting a grocery store in downtown Jerusalem around midday when a woman in her late 20s began to talk to him. "I would say she set upon me. She was interested in my motorcycle and so we talked. I didn't pretend. I said my name is Dudu because that's how everybody knows me. My wife even calls me that."

I have not found anywhere that says he said he was Jewish just that he uses a Jewish name.

 

[useless]

This smell's strongly like racism.

 

[Grisu]

Btw, does this make any adulterer/ess automatically a rapist too, since his/her partner would not sleep with him if she knew the truth?