Police Officer who "made a bad decision" cleared of on duty rape

[Annamarine]

Yes, rape. Refer to my consent video posted on the first page.

Except again when was the last time you ever heard of a girl being charged with rape like this. Name once, it does happen and more than most SJW care to admit .. most have the opinion that guys CAN NOT be raped.

[Raelbo]

We're going straight by the facts here:
1. He is a cheater.
2. He even cheated his work and the taxpayer by sleeping around on the job.

Yes. Moral assessments can be made to determine whether someone would be the type to have committed a certain crime or not when it's a case of he said/she said.

1 & 2 are not sufficient to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Circumstantial evidence can be used to prove a crime beyond reasonable doubt, but only if there is enough of it to paint a good enough picture. In other words, if there was a bunch of other circumstantial evidence that suggested he was being dishonest, or had a history of taking advantage of drunk women, then maybe you can start looking a guilty verdict.

[Trollhammer]

The majority used to own slaves in the US. Your point?

95% of Southerners did not own slaves. 1.4 percent of white Americans owned black slaves when slavery was at it's peak.

[grexly75]

Juries are a flawed concept since they're so easily emotionally manipulated.

So do you have a much better idea that is fair? Or do you prefer a kangaroo court system, where it has already been decided that the defendant is guilty even if they are not..

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court

[Deleted]

In that case rape isn't a crime anymore, because it's a lot of the time a case of he said/she said.

Sure, if you have no evidence whatsoever then it shouldn't really count as a crime should it? If i just accuse a random colleague that she raped me her skipping work because she was lazy doesn't mean the rape happens. This is already an issue with the current way things are where just because of allegations your life can get ruined, no need to push that further so that you can be found guilty because of unrelated things.

[dextersmith]

Law enforcers need to be held to higher standards and be dealt harsher punishments. They betray their office and everyone else when they commit crimes.

[grexly75]

They can, but someone who's been in court for years is less prone to it than someone who has all his juridical knowledge from tv shows. The jury system is flawed.

Why not have a kangaroo court system then there is no need for all that pesky laws and lawyers and juries to get in the way.. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kangaroo_court

[Nitro Fun]

So do you have a much better idea that is fair?

Yes, let educated experts handle it instead of people who have no education in the law.

[Aeula]

Law enforcers need to be held to higher standards and be dealt harsher punishments. They betray their office and everyone else when they commit crimes.

No crime was committed. There's no evidence of it. He failed his duty as a law enforcement officer when he had sex on duty, but that's not a crime, he'll just get fired.

[Deleted]

Law enforcers need to be held to higher standards and be dealt harsher punishments. They betray their office and everyone else when they commit crimes.

He didn't commit a crime.

[AcidicSyn]

Not everyone considers having consensual sex with other adults as "cheating".

Fair enough- replace "cheating" with "committed adultery" then? Or does that work differently in Canada? (Genuinely curious)

[Raelbo]

He picked her up outside of a bar

That is not part of the information we have been given in the OP (which is the information I am going on).

and drove her home while she was lost and blackout drunk.

Is there anything that can prove beyond reasonable doubt that he knew, or should have known, that she was blackout drunk?

The rape apologists are really stretching on this one.

LOL. Normally I am the one being accused of being an SJW because I am normally arguing against the rape apologists and MRA crowd. As I have already said in my preface to what you quoted, I do support the notion that knowingly taking advantage of an intoxicated person is rape, so maybe read the context next time instead of just cherry picking.

Sorry to be so blunt about it, but what makes rape rape is not how the victim feels about it the next day. It's a wilful act by the perpetrator to have sex with someone whose consent is in doubt.

[dextersmith]

No crime was committed. There's no evidence of it. He failed his duty as a law enforcement officer when he had sex on duty, but that's not a crime, he'll just get fired.

He didn't commit a crime.

She was too drunk to give consent. It was rape. They need body cams. Bold text is misconduct and is betraying people he should be protecting.

[Raelbo]

There used to be a time when certain public service jobs were kept to higher standards.

And as a result he deserves to lose his job and to given some sort of "dishonourable discharge". It doesn't mean he should be found guilty of a crime.

- - - Updated - - -

She was too drunk to give consent. It was rape.

Only if he was aware of her condition.

They need body cams.

I can agree with this. It would certainly provide some circumstantial evidence in support of/contradicting his story that he didn't know she was intoxicated.

Bold text is misconduct and is betraying people he should be protecting.

It is misconduct towards his job.

I disagree with the "betrayal" part though. Are you trying to say that cops should not be allowed to have sex? Remember, his guilt is contingent on his being derelict in his duty to ascertain consent. If he genuinely didn't realise she was drunk (which is very different from had one or two drinks) then it is quite understandable that he believed her consent was real and valid.

[Trollhammer]

She was too drunk to give consent. It was rape. They need body cams. Bold text is misconduct and is betraying people he should be protecting.

Officer claims she made sexual advances and was consensual. Being drunk does not obsolve one of responsibility.

[StayTuned]

She was too drunk to give consent. It was rape. They need body cams. Bold text is misconduct and is betraying people he should be protecting.

She says

I say she wasn't drunk at all.

How do we know who's right? Oh yea, we cannot.

[Aeula]

She was too drunk to give consent. It was rape. They need body cams. Bold text is misconduct and is betraying people he should be protecting.

There's no proof she was too drunk to give consent.

[ipaq]

Oh look, another 'he said, she said' story. How interesting...

A Jury of peers acquitted the guy, that should be the end of it. He fucked up by having extra-marital sex (while on duty!), but that shouldn't come into the equation during a rape trial.

Kids, they just do not get it:

1. Policeman;

2. In function, during his shift;

3. Married;

4. Drunk young & attractive woman;

5. She may, or may not, have made sexual advance;

6. She may, or may not, agreed to a sexual relation;

7. No well define set of law and this situation has to end up under the "rape" umbrella;


What a decent human being should do in this situation:

. Reject the advance and get out of the situation.


But I'm sure you're the type of asshole that would have sex with her, that's why you're so triggered by that post.

[Raelbo]

She says

I say she wasn't drunk at all.

How do we know who's right? Oh yea, we cannot.

Actually we can. Because she can provide evidence to support her assertion (eg drinks receipts, witness accounts from the establishment where she drank the alcohol). That being said, her simply being drunk is not sufficient to prove rape. He would have to be aware of her status.

Fact is that drunk people can act fairly coherently at times and fake being sober, at least enough to fool a person who doesn't know them well. The job of the prosecution would have been to build a case proving that it would be very unlikely for the cop to have not figured out she was drunk.

[ipaq]

Guess its mans place to decide whether the poor woman was to drunk or not.. poor feeble creature needs to have a man decide whats good for her at that moment.

A real man do, and knows how to spell men.

He do not decide for her, but for himself. You have to live with abusing a person in distress or intoxication. Unless you're a psychopath, it matters.