• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Does Prior Consent Indicate Future Consent

calamity

calamity

Privileged
Supporting Member
DP Veteran
Monthly Donator
Joined
Feb 12, 2013
Messages
160,900
Reaction score
57,844
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Centrist
IMO, this happens a lot. Woman indicates she is interested in having sex, tells her friends, tells you , tells the world that she is ready to **** you. Then, something goes terribly wrong. You somehow pissed her off, and she changes her mind, leaving the more civilized among us sitting alone at the end of the evening, wondering where we went wrong.

There are some, however, who will not agree that sitting alone, licking one's wounds at the end of the evening, is the only option here. They may even say that once she agreed to sex, there is no backing out. It's a firm commitment, like a contract. So, instead of sitting home alone all disappointed, they may argue that you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not.


Think I am joking? Uh, no. That seems to be the exact reason why this clown is getting a new trial.

Sam Ukwuachu has sexual assault conviction overturned by Texas appeals court
 
calamity said:
IMO, this happens a lot. Woman indicates she is interested in having sex, tells her friends, tells you , tells the world that she is ready to **** you. Then, something goes terribly wrong. You somehow pissed her off, and she changes her mind, leaving the more civilized among us sitting alone at the end of the evening, wondering where we went wrong.

There are some, however, who will not agree that sitting alone, licking one's wounds at the end of the evening, is the only option here. They may even say that once she agreed to sex, there is no backing out. It's a firm commitment, like a contract. So, instead of sitting home alone all disappointed, they may argue that you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not.


Think I am joking? Uh, no. That seems to be the exact reason why this clown is getting a new trial.

Sam Ukwuachu has sexual assault conviction overturned by Texas appeals court
Click to expand...

Interesting spin. In reality, "The text messages in question started when the victim was letting her friend know that she and Ukwuachu were not coming to a Homecoming party and continued during the time the victim was in Ukwuachu's apartment," the ruling said. "There was a short break in the messages during the time that the victim stated that the offense occurred and resumed almost immediately thereafter, resulting in the message that the State introduced during the victim's testimony, where she texted her friend that Ukwuachu had 'basically raped [her].'

"We find that the text messages were part of an ongoing conversation and that after the State sought to introduce one of the messages, the Rule of Optional Completeness allowed Ukwuachu to inquire into any other part of the same subject, which are the messages in question. The trial court's determination that Rule 107 did not apply was an abuse of discretion and therefore, erroneous." Appeals court overturns Sam Ukwuachu's conviction on sexual assault charges
In other words, the court did not rule that "you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not" but that by only allowing some text messages and not others, based on their content, that the defense was hurt.
 
calamity said:
IMO, this happens a lot. Woman indicates she is interested in having sex, tells her friends, tells you , tells the world that she is ready to **** you. Then, something goes terribly wrong. You somehow pissed her off, and she changes her mind, leaving the more civilized among us sitting alone at the end of the evening, wondering where we went wrong.

There are some, however, who will not agree that sitting alone, licking one's wounds at the end of the evening, is the only option here. They may even say that once she agreed to sex, there is no backing out. It's a firm commitment, like a contract. So, instead of sitting home alone all disappointed, they may argue that you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not.


Think I am joking? Uh, no. That seems to be the exact reason why this clown is getting a new trial.

Sam Ukwuachu has sexual assault conviction overturned by Texas appeals court
Click to expand...

any kinda provacitive behavior is forbidden in the bible
 
pinqy said:
Interesting spin. In reality, "The text messages in question started when the victim was letting her friend know that she and Ukwuachu were not coming to a Homecoming party and continued during the time the victim was in Ukwuachu's apartment," the ruling said. "There was a short break in the messages during the time that the victim stated that the offense occurred and resumed almost immediately thereafter, resulting in the message that the State introduced during the victim's testimony, where she texted her friend that Ukwuachu had 'basically raped [her].'

"We find that the text messages were part of an ongoing conversation and that after the State sought to introduce one of the messages, the Rule of Optional Completeness allowed Ukwuachu to inquire into any other part of the same subject, which are the messages in question. The trial court's determination that Rule 107 did not apply was an abuse of discretion and therefore, erroneous." Appeals court overturns Sam Ukwuachu's conviction on sexual assault charges
In other words, the court did not rule that "you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not" but that by only allowing some text messages and not others, based on their content, that the defense was hurt.
Click to expand...

I know that...I'm just expanding on the issue. Can a woman change her mind at anytime? Does a man have to comply?
 
calamity said:
IMO, this happens a lot. Woman indicates she is interested in having sex, tells her friends, tells you , tells the world that she is ready to **** you. Then, something goes terribly wrong. You somehow pissed her off, and she changes her mind, leaving the more civilized among us sitting alone at the end of the evening, wondering where we went wrong.

There are some, however, who will not agree that sitting alone, licking one's wounds at the end of the evening, is the only option here. They may even say that once she agreed to sex, there is no backing out. It's a firm commitment, like a contract. So, instead of sitting home alone all disappointed, they may argue that you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not.


Think I am joking? Uh, no. That seems to be the exact reason why this clown is getting a new trial.

Sam Ukwuachu has sexual assault conviction overturned by Texas appeals court
Click to expand...

He's not getting a conviction overturned or drawing a pass on an alleged sexual assault decision. He's getting a new trial. Generally that means the judge was uncomfortable with the procedure, not the verdict.
 
calamity said:
I know that...I'm just expanding on the issue. Can a woman change her mind at anytime? Does a man have to comply?
Click to expand...
Yes and yes

It should be that simple

Even during sex, if she says or he says stop, then it needs to stop (given a reasonable time for it to stop (30 seconds or so).
 
Based on the article the appeal has nothing to do with consent but with evidence that was excluded from the trial. Different animals altogether.

As far as consent goes I think once given it's valid until withdrawn. Which means if she says stop or no or does anything non verbally that indicates she want you to back - you back off.
 
calamity said:
I know that...I'm just expanding on the issue. Can a woman change her mind at anytime? Does a man have to comply?
Click to expand...

Can a man change his mind at anytime? Does a woman or other man have to comply?
 
11Bravo said:
any kinda provacitive behavior is forbidden in the bible
Click to expand...

Fortunately, the United States of America is a republic, not a theocracy.

You have the right to prohibit your idea of provocative on church grounds, not elsewhere.
 
jimbo said:
Fortunately, the United States of America is a republic, not a theocracy.

You have the right to prohibit your idea of provocative on church grounds, not elsewhere.
Click to expand...

imo that will change. we r a christian country
 
11Bravo said:
nothin excuses rape
Click to expand...

Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.
 
Prior consent justifies "making a move" without further consent but that consent can most definitely be withdrawn. What do I mean? If I walk up to a woman with whom I have no intimate relationship and grab her ass I am commiting assault. If I walk to a woman with whom I recently had consensual sex and grab her ass I have not commited assault. That woman might then say, "Hey! Don't do that again" and I would be obligated not to do it again.
 
pinqy said:
Can a man change his mind at anytime? Does a woman or other man have to comply?
Click to expand...

I would say a man changing his mind at any time would not be challenged with physical violence in a heterosexual encounter. If it was, it would be just as criminal, IMO, as if a female is assaulted.

In a homosexual encounter, I would say that both parties have equal right to change their mind at any time without being forced to perform. If forced, it would be assault.
 
pinqy said:
Deuteronomy 22:28-29 "28 If a man find a damsel that is a virgin, which is not betrothed, and lay hold on her, and lie with her, and they be found;

29 Then the man that lay with her shall give unto the damsel's father fifty shekels of silver, and she shall be his wife; because he hath humbled her, he may not put her away all his days.
Click to expand...

Times, they do change.
 
Gaius46 said:
Based on the article the appeal has nothing to do with consent but with evidence that was excluded from the trial. Different animals altogether.
Click to expand...
Yes, but it is pretty obvious why the defense wants those tests included.

As far as consent goes I think once given it's valid until withdrawn. Which means if she says stop or no or does anything non verbally that indicates she want you to back - you back off.
Click to expand...
I would agree. Stop means stop, regardless where you are in the process.
 
calamity said:
IMO, this happens a lot. Woman indicates she is interested in having sex, tells her friends, tells you , tells the world that she is ready to **** you. Then, something goes terribly wrong. You somehow pissed her off, and she changes her mind, leaving the more civilized among us sitting alone at the end of the evening, wondering where we went wrong.

There are some, however, who will not agree that sitting alone, licking one's wounds at the end of the evening, is the only option here. They may even say that once she agreed to sex, there is no backing out. It's a firm commitment, like a contract. So, instead of sitting home alone all disappointed, they may argue that you can just take that sex you were promised, whether she agrees or not.


Think I am joking? Uh, no. That seems to be the exact reason why this clown is getting a new trial.

Sam Ukwuachu has sexual assault conviction overturned by Texas appeals court
Click to expand...

No, prior consent does not indicate future consent. You could have had sex with someone 999 times and if the person says "no" on the 1,000, even after they had previously said "yes, then it's rape.
 
Fishking said:
No, prior consent does not indicate future consent. You could have had sex with someone 999 times and if the person says "no" on the 1,000, even after they had previously said "yes, then it's rape.
Click to expand...

I agree. That's why I always find it odd that defense attorneys often try using a rape victim's prior sexual conduct as a strategy for assuaging guilt.
 
calamity said:
I agree. That's why I always find it odd that defense attorneys often try using a rape victim's prior sexual conduct as a strategy for assuaging guilt.
Click to expand...

That's their job. Defense attorneys are supposed to use every trick in their book to defend the person, even if they think they are guilty. That's the balance of our judicial system that's supposed to err on the side of caution of the accused.
 
Yes, anyone can change their mind at any point. Past a certain point, it is rather rude, though, and likely to engender lasting animosity.


But if you spent Friday and Saturday texting your GFs that you were going to spend the night at Bonzo's apt and screw his brains out, lots of luck proving rape if you changed your mind during late foreplay or something. Not saying that's what happened, speaking generally.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom