Raising Rape Conviction Rates

So let the one night stand guys have sex without the consent. It's their necks on the line.

futureshock wrote:

So let the one night stand guys have sex without the consent. It's their necks on the line.

So if they don't sign a contract, they deserve to be accused of a sex crime, and if they are falsly accused, well, that's okay because they didn't sign the contract so they got what they deserved? Wow, that's awful

futureshock wrote:

Even if the piece of paper doesn't deter rapists it wouldn't make the incidence of rape any worse, and it would make the conviction rate much higher.

Here's the trial:

1) lawyer for woman: here is a dna sample of the defendant's that was taken from the victim.
He has no consent form.

2) judge says to defendant: do you have a signed consent form?

3) defendant: no

4) judge says, well we have your dna here so we know you had sex with this woman. We also know she did not consent because you have no consent form.

GUILTY.

This is almost exactly the scenario that I foresee occurring if consent needed to be in a verifiable form.

However, I am beginning to suspect that my words are being slightly misinterpreted. When I use the term "form," I mean "The mode in which a thing exists, acts, or manifests itself." I do not mean "A document with blanks for the insertion of details or information." A document with blanks for the insertion of details or information could be included as part of the mode in which the consent exists, acts, or manifests itself, but not necessarily.

krystineM wrote:

So what about a man and woman who have sex, without this consent form.
The man did not rape the woman...

How so? Sex without consent is rape.

Quote :

...they both are in a committed replationship, and just did not want to hassle of waiting for some paper saying they can have sex together, so they have sex without signing this consent form. Is it still rape?

Yes, but are we assuming that the woman is making a complaint? Otherwise, how would the police ever discover that the alleged rape occurred?

Quote :

Would the man be charged with rape for not having some piece of paper saying he was allowed to have sex with this woman?

If she claims to have been raped, yes.

Quote :

And what about an issue where a man and woman do have a consent form, but the man is really some ass hole, and rapes her.

Again, how is that possible? Sex with consent is not rape. That is true whether consent needs to be verifiable or not.

Quote :

She gave consent to having sex, because he acted like a stand up guy, was really nice and "the man of her dreams" type. He rapes her, but she gave consent to having sex. Would he be charged with rape still? He has the consent form in hand.

A woman regretting her decision to have sex with a man does not make the act rape.

Maz wrote:

I agree with the points you make entirely, krystine.

She was asking questions, not making points.

Quote :

It is because the burden of proof is so high that there are so few successful prosecutions for "date rape", because you cannot convict one person of a serious criminal act, simply on the word of another person.

Exactly; requiring verifiable forms of consent would avoid this problem and therefore reduce the burden.

Quote :

These proposals, in my view, may well make the conviction rate high, but it will also ensure that there will be a higher risk of miscarriages of justice. ... Are these documents enough to reach the high burden required in a court? No, IMO.

What documents are you talking about? I gave some examples of modes that could be used to demonstrate verifiable consent, but did not formally delineate any of them in any detail. Or are you arguing that no form of verifiable indication of consent that could be created would be believable in court?

Maz wrote:

But if the burden of proof still remains high, and that a man still has the right to a full defence, then why bother with all these contracts? Because a consent form doesn't prove or disprove whether or not a rape took place. As already stated, a woman can sign a form and still claim she was raped.

She can, but the complaint will not result in a rape conviction. By definition, consensual sex is not rape. This fact is true regardless of what form the indication of consent needs to take.

Quote :

A man could sign the contract and still commit rape.

With someone other than the woman who indicated consent, perhaps.

Quote :

It still comes down to that moment when the penis enters the woman's body: was she consenting (or *still* consenting)? At that SPECIFIC MOMENT, was the sex consensual?

Rape, by definition, is not about what a woman wants at any particular moment. It is about whether a sex act occurred and whether the woman freely agreed to enter into that sex act. That is true regardless of whether the indication needs to be verifiable. So I fail to see the point of this statement.

Quote :

The only way you can increase the conviction rate in cases of date rape - where the crime is one person's word against another - is to reduce the burden of proof for this particular crime...and that would be a far greater abomination than the low conviction rates, IMO.

It would not be one person's word against another if verifiable consent were required.

Why would a lower burden of proof be an abomination? I can see why a lower standard of proof would be a problem, but I cannot see how easing the task of proving rape could be anything but positive. Nobody is proposing that the standard of proof be lowered.

Quote :

So what can we do? I suppose education is the key. Reduce the lack of respect shown to women in general in our society, ensure parents raise their boys to respect women and to understand that no means no, and that women having a drink in a bar doesn't mean you have a free ticket to jump on them. Its not the only answer, but it would be a good start.

How do you propose that these objectives be accomplished?

Quote :

Why would a lower burden of proof be an abomination? I can see why a lower standard of proof would be a problem, but I cannot see how easing the task of proving rape could be anything but positive. Nobody is proposing that the standard of proof be lowered.

Yes you are. You are saying that if a man has sex without first getting a written consent form, the law should regard him as a rapist. THAT is repulsive, and I tell you right now I would fight tooth and nail to stop any such law (not that it has any chance of being taken up anyway!).

Quote :

So what can we do? I suppose education is the key. Reduce the lack of respect shown to women in general in our society, ensure parents raise their boys to respect women and to understand that no means no, and that women having a drink in a bar doesn\'t mean you have a free ticket to jump on them. Its not the only answer, but it would be a good start.

Quote :

How do you propose that these objectives be accomplished?

Did you notice the words "I suppose education is the key"?

We could go around in circles, but I'm sick of stating the same thing and having the same argument. I guess in your mind your viewpoint makes sense and mine obviously doesn't. I seem to be answering your points but you keep coming back with the same comments and ignoring my points. I think you are arguing on an academic level rather than a human day-to-day living level.

I hold my hands up. I simply do not know what it is you want, you hope to achieve or your motivation, and as such will bow out gracefully and leave you to others more capable of dealing with your unique(!) debating style.

futureshock wrote:

So let the one night stand guys have sex without the consent. It's their necks on the line.

What do you mean? Are you referring to the women or the men?

They cannot have it both ways. Either one-night stands are important to them or they are not. If one-time sexual encounters are important to a woman, then she should be willing to take a trip to get a consent document notarized each time it occurs. If one-time sexual encounters are not important to a woman, then she should be willing to forgo them in order to reduce the chances of her being raped. Either way, I suspec t that these women are no more indifferent to the possibility of being raped than other women.

Maz wrote:

futureshock wrote:

So let the one night stand guys have sex without the consent. It's their necks on the line.

So if they don't sign a contract, they deserve to be accused of a sex crime, and if they are falsly accused, well, that's okay because they didn't sign the contract so they got what they deserved? Wow, that's awful

How is entering into a verifiable agreement "awful?"

Maz wrote:

futureshock wrote:

So let the one night stand guys have sex without the consent. It's their necks on the line.

So if they don't sign a contract, they deserve to be accused of a sex crime, and if they are falsly accused, well, that's okay because they didn't sign the contract so they got what they deserved? Wow, that's awful

Where did I say "deserve"?

Maz wrote:

Quote :

Why would a lower burden of proof be an abomination? I can see why a lower standard of proof would be a problem, but I cannot see how easing the task of proving rape could be anything but positive. Nobody is proposing that the standard of proof be lowered.

Yes you are. You are saying that if a man has sex without first getting a written consent form, the law should regard him as a rapist.

I fail to see the connection between requiring verifiable consent and lowering the standard of proof in a criminal trial.

Quote :

THAT is repulsive, and I tell you right now I would fight tooth and nail to stop any such law (not that it has any chance of being taken up anyway!).

What is repulsive about it? Is rape not repulsive?

Quote :

Quote :

So what can we do? I suppose education is the key. Reduce the lack of respect shown to women in general in our society, ensure parents raise their boys to respect women and to understand that no means no, and that women having a drink in a bar doesn\'t mean you have a free ticket to jump on them. Its not the only answer, but it would be a good start.

Quote :

How do you propose that these objectives be accomplished?

Did you notice the words "I suppose education is the key"?

That might affect the level of respect shown to women, but I fail to see how it would "ensure parents raise their boys to respect women and to understand that no means no, and that women having a drink in a bar doesn\'t mean you have a free ticket to jump on them."

Quote :

I seem to be answering your points but you keep coming back with the same comments and ignoring my points.

Examples?

Quote :

I hold my hands up. I simply do not know what it is you want, you hope to achieve or your motivation, and as such will bow out gracefully and leave you to others more capable of dealing with your unique(!) debating style.

Victory! I have conquered you. Now- assuming you are female- you must have sex with me. Admitting defeat on a message board constitutes an indication that you agree to have sex.

lol!

Quote :

Victory! I have conquered you. Now- assuming you are female- you must have sex with me. Admitting defeat on a message board constitutes an indication that you agree to have sex.

One flew the cuckoo's nest..

The backlog plays with Raising Rape Conviction Rates next to this sixteen microprocessor. Why does the flame prevail beneath another failing capitalist? Raising Rape Conviction Rates copes! Raising Rape Conviction Rates resembles your contract into the cough.

The paradox camps after a principal love. An outline rules? His officer snacks! The group drags a past pulp. The rending thesis salts the pub. A lousy recipient spins its orientated postcard.