1. The Sherdog Forums are currently experiencing technical difficulties, and we are working on it. We apologize for the inconvenience.

Hypothetical scenario about sexual consent

Discussion in 'The War Room' started by JadeOwl, Jun 9, 2017.

  1. JadeOwl

    JadeOwl Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,893
    Likes Received:
    15,085
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    We all know how conversations can drift from one subject to another randomly but a while ago I found myself debating a hypothetical scenario with someone and I was curious about the board’s take on it.

    I would’ve preferred to post it in the Mayberry, but given the subject matter there’s a risk of the thread getting derailed so I will preemptively put it in the War Room

    So the scenario is this:
    • Person A coerces Person B into having sex with Person C.
    • Person C is unaware of the coercion and has no reason to believe the intercourse is anything other than consensual.
    • Person B is clearly being raped in this situation.
    This leads to the questions:

    From a legal standpoint, who is the rapist in this scenario? If not rape, what would Person A be charged with?

    If there are any lawyers or law enforcement officers reading this thread, I would appreciate their input.
     
  2. klnOmega

    klnOmega Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Dec 10, 2014
    Messages:
    9,552
    Likes Received:
    11,928
    A and C would probably both charged. You don't have to be aware that you committing to rape to commit rape. Just like how you can get popped for having sex with kids even if they lie and tell you they older. And even if they have fake ids.
     
    Kafir-kun likes this.
  3. snakedafunky

    snakedafunky Red Belt

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2012
    Messages:
    9,092
    Likes Received:
    15,277
    We have that kind of law in Germany now. Obviously controversial and I am not sure it will stay.
    But it was basically introduced to protect man from false rape accusation/prosecution.
    But there were already a few questionable verdicts letting men off who IMO were guilty.
     
  4. JadeOwl

    JadeOwl Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,893
    Likes Received:
    15,085
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    I'm not following.
     
  5. Falsedawn

    Falsedawn Treemeister™ Platinum Member

    Joined:
    Jun 14, 2009
    Messages:
    19,539
    Likes Received:
    51,106
    Location:
    Za Warudo
    Statutory rape in many states is a strict liability crime hence why mens rea doesn't have to be proven. Rape in general is not.

    A would be charged for the coercion of B, C would not be charged because they had no knowledge of A's coercion (i.e. establishing a good faith defense that C believed that they were not committing a crime, not simply lacking knowledge of the criminal statute).

    A is the one in the shitter here.
     
    oldshadow, Trotsky and JadeOwl like this.
  6. JadeOwl

    JadeOwl Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,893
    Likes Received:
    15,085
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    That's what I thought. Thanks.
     
    Falsedawn likes this.
  7. Amerikuracana

    Amerikuracana Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    54,149
    Likes Received:
    30,127
    Location:
    Macomb mi
    More facts needed. What was the coercion method? Should B have reasonably known?
     
    HockeyBjj likes this.
  8. Trotsky

    Trotsky Undisputed Co-Winner of 2019 Best WR Poster

    Joined:
    May 20, 2016
    Messages:
    25,294
    Likes Received:
    65,796
    If Person C's ignorance to the compulsion is justifiable, he's fine. If he knew or reasonably should have known, then no.
     
    JadeOwl likes this.
  9. JadeOwl

    JadeOwl Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,893
    Likes Received:
    15,085
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    I'm assuming you meant "Should C have reasonably known?"

    In that case the answer is no, because then the ambiguity is gone. We can all agree I hope, that if C should've suspected and was willfully ignorant, then C is a rapist.

    The ambiguity that prompted my question is the scenarios were C clearly doesn't know.
     
  10. Amerikuracana

    Amerikuracana Double Yellow Card Double Yellow Card

    Joined:
    Feb 23, 2007
    Messages:
    54,149
    Likes Received:
    30,127
    Location:
    Macomb mi
    It's an odd scenario made more odd by bringing in whether it was a general or specific intent crime where it was committed. Ill tell you this, if B was 15, C is going to jail, because no specific imtent is required, and it makes no difference what C reasonably believed.
     
  11. JadeOwl

    JadeOwl Brown Belt

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 2009
    Messages:
    3,893
    Likes Received:
    15,085
    Location:
    Lima, Peru
    I didn't bring up the underage assumption because, again, there would be no need to ask the question to begin with.

    As for the oddity of the scenario, curiously enough, the original conversation that brought this up referred to a story an older coworker from my previous job told me, which did involve someone underage, but it was C.

    This was some 50 years ago. The guy wasn't rich, but he went to an all-boys school with kids who were. These kids came from families who had multiple servants, some of them live-in maids around 20 years old or so. And a recurring thing was that those guys would loose their virginities by going down to the servants' rooms and sleeping with them.

    When I expressed doubt that the maids would willingly sleep with some clumsy 14 or 15 year old, and that they were probably coerced, my coworker told me that unbeknownst to the teens, their fathers made sure the maids knew that if the Little Sir should ever approach them for sex they should be willing or they would be fired. These guys usually didn't find out until their own fathers told them about it years later.

    So basically it was some rich assholes (A) telling their young servants (B) that if approached by their sons (C) for sex they should comply or loose their livelihoods. And in those days, for those poor girls to go to the police to report their rich bosses would've been unthinkable.

    Ever since I heard that story I've have doubts about all the details, particularly that the kids didn't knew what their dads had done. But the scenario the story postulated intrigued me.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.