You'd have to be pretty fucking dimwitted to be fucked by a woman with a strap-on and not notice it.
Even dumber immediately fucking someone u've never seen before.
What if it was actual Lebron? You'd be looking at 3 homicides.
You'd have to be pretty fucking dimwitted to be fucked by a woman with a strap-on and not notice it.
Even dumber immediately fucking someone u've never seen before.
What if it was actual Lebron? You'd be looking at 3 homicides.
Well this is just bizarre...
meeting a man from the internet and they insist you wear a blindfold at all times...yeah nothing bad is going to happen there.....During the retrial the victim, who gave evidence behind a curtain, told the court she was persuaded by the defendant to wear a blindfold at all times when they met.
Somehow the defense that it was simple ERP and they were both gay is MUCH more reasonable than to believe she had sex 3 times with a stranger without seeing him at all. Door to bed blindfolded?
Only a great fool would vote for a lunatic. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the candidate on the Right.
But they must have known I was not a great fool, and would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the corrupt candidate on the Left.
Only a great fool would vote for a lunatic. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the candidate on the Right.
But they must have known I was not a great fool, and would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the corrupt candidate on the Left.
Calling it "rape by deception" is a stretch. So if a guy tells a girl he's rich and she sleeps with him and turns out he's actually broke, that's "rape"? Sorry, that's fucking retarded. There has to be a degree of personal responsibility. Also, "rape" literally means "without consent". If you give consent, even under a false premise, you still gave consent, thus it's not rape. If a false premise that would otherwise prevent someone from sleeping with you changes the encounter to "rape", then that's really going to change the rape statistics. I would agree in this case that's some degree of sexual assault, but it's not rape.
Only a great fool would vote for a lunatic. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the candidate on the Right.
But they must have known I was not a great fool, and would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the corrupt candidate on the Left.
What about if a guy goes into a women's bed and pretends to be her boyfriend. Similar features, similar voice, but it is dark so she can't see him. Only later does the women realize it was not her boyfriend. Was this rape? I mean, she did consent.
In some jurisdictions this is rape, in others it is not. In the jurisdiction from the OP, it is rape.
Only a great fool would vote for a lunatic. I am not a great fool, so I can clearly not choose the candidate on the Right.
But they must have known I was not a great fool, and would have counted on it, so I can clearly not choose the corrupt candidate on the Left.
I find it hard to believe someone is this stupid; the defense seems far more plausible."During the retrial the victim, who gave evidence behind a curtain, told the court she was persuaded by the defendant to wear a blindfold at all times when they met."
Last edited by Video Games; 2017-07-20 at 07:14 PM.
She didn't consent to have sex with that woman, she consented to have sex with a man. The man she consented to have sex with did not exist. Therefore the man she consented to have sex with was, categorically, not the woman she was having sex with. This was rape, clean and simple. Everyone arguing she consented has not taken the 2 seconds necessary to think this through.
Rape refers specifically to a lack of consent. Consent under false premise is not the same thing as lack of consent. Otherwise, guys who tell girls they love them to get a piece are "raping" them. The negative implications of the term itself then becomes non-existent because a word only carries the value of its weakest connotation and lying about something to get some isn't that big a deal. Most people have done it.
There's a huge difference between actual rape and false-premise consent. Unless you're referring to pretending to being a guy vs a guy pretending they love a girl, in which case, yes, a slight difference, but nonetheless an equally valid comparison. You can't exactly make a list of "acceptable" false premise situations, especially when you completely discount personal responsibility. For sure, this was a case of sexual assault based on a false premise. But her agreeing to wear a blindfold inherently places part of the blame on her. She has a responsibility to make sure the person she's having sex with is, in fact, the person she thinks she's having sex with. So either all case of false-premise consent are "rape" or none of them are.
Six years for something like this?