When prosecuting someone for rape, does it matter whether it was "stranger rape" or "acquaintance rape", and if so what are the differences when you come to prosecute?
Cheers.
I was wondering about this too in a different manner.
What is rape? As a definition? Or is there a "forceful hugging"?
hmm google says:
"Under the new legislation rape is classified as penetration by the penis of somebody's vagina, anus or mouth, without their consent. It can be committed against men or women but since it involves penile penetration it can only be committed by men. The Act also provides for the first time a clear definition of consent. "A person consents if s/he agrees by choice and has the freedom and capacity to make that choice." SOA, section 74. The new legislation also covers sexual assaults against adults, children, trafficking and abuse of adults with major learning and other disabilities."
So I guess the only differences in prosecuting the two "types" of rape is that one is obviously going to get a big emotional response, i.e stranger rape, as that is seen as "true" rape. So I imagine the prosecuting party will try and play this angle to the Jury, and on the defense side they will try and play the "acquiantance rape" card.
The definition has a strange point. Could a girl rape a guy? What happens if you somehow get tied down by a woman and she starts playing with you to get Mr Bahumat excited? She could then have sex with you.
The law states "penetration by the penis of somebody's vagina, anus or mouth, without their consent." This still occurs, but it's roll reversed. She is forcing the penetration so to speak?
You've said it all really, although curiously only men can rape!
If a woman ties me down and has her way without my consent thats only serious sexual assault!
I honestly dont think it would make a difference, your counsel (barrister) would just try and portray it in the best/worst way he could.
If a friend it would be "abuse of trust, raped by someone she trusted" if a stranger it would be "violently raped by a man she'd never met, making it even more scary"
Either way its not a good thing
Aoami, you're correct, but the same definition above applies, penetration by penis without consent - even if a 15 yo girl says "I consent" legally she can't consent as shes under age.
The definition has a strange point. Could a girl rape a guy? What happens if you somehow get tied down by a woman and she starts playing with you to get Mr Bahumat excited? She could then have sex with you.
The law states "penetration by the penis of somebody's vagina, anus or mouth, without their consent." This still occurs, but it's roll reversed. She is forcing the penetration so to speak?
The definition has a strange point. Could a girl rape a guy? What happens if you somehow get tied down by a woman and she starts playing with you to get Mr Bahumat excited? She could then have sex with you.
The law states "penetration by the penis of somebody's vagina, anus or mouth, without their consent." This still occurs, but it's roll reversed. She is forcing the penetration so to speak?
Nope. The "their" I've bolded above refers to the person being penetrated. So the person being penetrated by a penis has to not consent.
So no, a woman legally cant rape a man.
Tilda riddle me this then;
Well what i posted before about "forceful hug" thing
Is it assault or...?
i'm pretty positive its not just being penetrated by a penis, its anything really..
When i was in year 13 2 years ago, the law was changed and had a police officer come in to tell us this lol, that even shoving a pencil up someone is rape
I'm pretty sure that's sexual assault rather than rape.
I just stuck my penis in an orange....
i just stuck my penis in your mother. Your point is?
I think you will find she is running Cockblock V3.2 created by none other than our sex pest CorNutZ
Good thing im running Anti cockblock v4.0
..it was still in beta phase, now u got a virus..
hmm.. herpez?