• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Oklahoma court rules it's legal to "forcibly sodomize" someone if they're unconscious

Status
Not open for further replies.

Jackpot

Banned
The logic being if they're unconscious then no force could have been needed to rape them. It's like the most literal interpretation of what constitutes forcible sodomy. Rape case dismissed as a result.

http://www.theguardian.com/society/2016/apr/27/oral-sex-rape-ruling-tulsa-oklahoma-alcohol-consent

Oklahoma court: oral sex is not rape if victim is unconscious from drinking

The ruling sparked outrage among critics who argue the judicial system engaged in victim-blaming and upholding outdated notions about rape and sexual assault

An Oklahoma court has stunned local prosecutors with a declaration that state law doesn’t criminalize oral sex with a victim who is completely unconscious.

The ruling, a unanimous decision by the state’s criminal appeals court, is sparking outrage among critics who say the judicial system was engaged in victim-blaming and buying outdated notions about rape.

But legal experts and victims’ advocates said they viewed the ruling as a sign of something larger: the troubling gaps that still exist between the nation’s patchwork of laws and evolving ideas about rape and consent.

The case involved allegations that a 17-year-old boy assaulted a girl, 16, after volunteering to give her a ride home. The two had been drinking in a Tulsa park with a group of friends when it became clear that the girl was badly intoxicated. Witnesses recalled that she had to be carried into the defendant’s car. Another boy, who briefly rode in the car, recalled her coming in and out of consciousness.

Tests would later confirm that the young man’s DNA was found on the back of her leg and around her mouth. The boy claimed to investigators that the girl had consented to performing oral sex. The girl said she didn’t have any memories after leaving the park. Tulsa County prosecutors charged the young man with forcible oral sodomy.

But the trial judge dismissed the case. And the appeals court ruling, on 24 March, affirmed that prosecutors could not apply the law to a victim who was incapacitated by alcohol.

“Forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation,” the decision read. Its reasoning, the court said, was that the statute listed several circumstances that constitute force, and yet was silent on incapacitation due to the victim drinking alcohol. “We will not, in order to justify prosecution of a person for an offense, enlarge a statute beyond the fair meaning of its language.”

Benjamin Fu, the Tulsa County district attorney leading the case, said the ruling had him “completely gobsmacked”.

“The plain meaning of forcible oral sodomy, of using force, includes taking advantage of a victim who was too intoxicated to consent,” Fu said. “I don’t believe that anybody, until that day, believed that the state of the law was that this kind of conduct was ambiguous, much less legal. And I don’t think the law was a loophole until the court decided it was.” To focus on why the victim was unable to consent, he continued, puts the victim at fault.
 

jaekeem

Member
WTF

but on a positive note, this will force a national reaction that lead to harsher and more defined standards in Oklahoma laws, hopefully
 

Rhaknar

The Steam equivalent of the drunk friend who keeps offering to pay your tab all night.
Is this a Onion article? How is this even possible?
 
The problem appears to be a poorly written law that doesn't appropriately criminalize the behavior in the case. Sounds like the legislature needs to get its butt in gear.
 

BriGuy

Member
They should be forced to rename the state "Jokelahoma" and replace their flag with a pair of balls draped over a unconscious person's face. Let everyone know what they're getting into beforehand.
 
This state is a cesspit.

Benjamin Fu, the Tulsa County district attorney leading the case, said the ruling had him “completely gobsmacked”.

“The plain meaning of forcible oral sodomy, of using force, includes taking advantage of a victim who was too intoxicated to consent,” Fu said. “I don’t believe that anybody, until that day, believed that the state of the law was that this kind of conduct was ambiguous, much less legal. And I don’t think the law was a loophole until the court decided it was.” To focus on why the victim was unable to consent, he continued, puts the victim at fault.

Yeah, it's such a "are you for real right now" ruling. You know the fucker that dismissed this is one of those "boys just being boys" spouting pieces of trash.
 
You know, my old Islamic teachers that taught me to read the Quran always said stuff like how Americans lived a life in Sin, that their beliefs and rules are impure.

I always just shrugged him off. But AMERICA, COME THE FUCK ON!
 

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
“Forcible sodomy cannot occur where a victim is so intoxicated as to be completely unconscious at the time of the sexual act of oral copulation,” the decision read. Its reasoning, the court said, was that the statute listed several circumstances that constitute force, and yet was silent on incapacitation due to the victim drinking alcohol. “We will not, in order to justify prosecution of a person for an offense, enlarge a statute beyond the fair meaning of its language.”
So it's a free-for-all to commit forcible sodomy in ways not explicitly described in this legislation?

Good job, assholes.
 

ffdgh

Member
...Wat
 

Alienous

Member
Just to show how fucked up this is I've probably read the title 6 times glancing at the off-topic and I couldn't read it as anything other than 'Oklahoma court rules it's illegal to "forcibly sodomize" someone if they're unconscious' until I entered the thread and saw people talking about how fucked up this was.
 

Aureon

Please do not let me serve on a jury. I am actually a crazy person.
I hope the judge that made this idiotic sentence gets thrown out after appeal.

Because this shit is getting appealed, right?
 

MIMIC

Banned
Seems like a case of it being an old ass statute, since most modern statutes have removed the "force" requirement.
 

zerosum

Member
For ten minutes I've stared at this screen and the only words or thoughts that I can process to describe this, is that I have no words or thoughts that I can process to describe this.

Absolutely zero fucking logic being displayed here.
 

Chariot

Member
Greatest Nation on Earth, eh. Get your shit together. Throw these idiots from their thrones and put your smart people on them.
 
What about murdering someone while they were asleep. It's not like they can tell me they don't want to be murdered when they are sleeping.
 

turtle553

Member
As horrible as it sounds, it seems like the judges are enforcing the law as written and not necessarily by the law's intent.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom