• 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!

Was A Crime Committed Here??

VanceMack said:
Way back in 85 when I was stationed at Nellis AFB, we had a young airman in tears sobbing to the 1st Sergeant...he had been dating a girl for about a year til they decided to get married. There had been some above the belt hanky panky and the girl had given several blow jobs, but allowed no reciprocal below the belt contact til after marriage. On the wedding night the new bride controlled the sex...lights out...she was shy dont you know. On like the third night of their honeymoon the airman made contact with something that wasnt supposed to be there while they were having intercourse. He turned on the lights to find that his beautiful new bride was in fact a man. Shocked...horrified...he asked what to do. The 1st Sgt told him right away...get the marriage annulled and stay away from the guy because if you see him you might snap and kill him. The airmans response...deeper sobs. But I LOVE her......

Dood was pretty ****ed up for a long time after that.

Yeah...its a criminal act. Its more than just the physical contact.
Click to expand...

That is ****ing mental.
 
Mach said:
I can understand charges for posing as someone else, but there has to be some personal responsibility, I mean, no voice, no visual, but has sex... that's willful risk taking IMO. In general, people lead each other on in relationships, especially internet, all the time...that's not a crime in itself.

I don't quite get what her friend did it for either, the thrill? To blackmail her? Embarrass her? Such a long con for a thrill? Wow.

I wonder if that's a U.S. law thing too. Can't be consensual if the other person hides their identity... seems so crazy to think it's not incumbent on the other party to do normal, customary verification with eyes/ears. Personal responsibility should be the first line of defense in these things, IMO. She had every opportunity to refuse or verify, she forfeited those IMO.

Maybe your second post describes it best. Assuming she crafted that identify and hid it from the partner...the partner only consented with the "fake identity", not the actual girl...

So bizarre.
Click to expand...
The perpetrator's defense was that the victim always knew and she was never blindfolded during the sex. Apparently she came across as being unbelievable and a bit of a con artists. Her work history probably didnt help her on that front.

Im not sure what the payoff for the perpetrator was. Maybe just the thrill of giving her partner an orgasm and sexual pleasure.
 
Dragonfly said:
Other than stupidity....

Woman who wore fake penis, tricked blindfolded friend into having sex with her sentenced | Fox News

[/FONT][/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR]





So a woman is stupid enough to agree to wear a blindfold every single time she meets this girl, and even agrees to sex with a blindfold....

The level of oddness here is astounding.

I'm having trouble understanding a crime of sexual assault. It was consensual sex. Blindfolded, but consensual. Idiotic, but consensual.

Other than gross-stupidity, was a crime committed here? Deserving of 6+ years in prison?
Click to expand...

False advertising is the only thing I see.

;)
 
VanceMack said:
Way back in 85 when I was stationed at Nellis AFB, we had a young airman in tears sobbing to the 1st Sergeant...he had been dating a girl for about a year til they decided to get married. There had been some above the belt hanky panky and the girl had given several blow jobs, but allowed no reciprocal below the belt contact til after marriage. On the wedding night the new bride controlled the sex...lights out...she was shy dont you know. On like the third night of their honeymoon the airman made contact with something that wasnt supposed to be there while they were having intercourse. He turned on the lights to find that his beautiful new bride was in fact a man. Shocked...horrified...he asked what to do. The 1st Sgt told him right away...get the marriage annulled and stay away from the guy because if you see him you might snap and kill him. The airmans response...deeper sobs. But I LOVE her......

Dood was pretty ****ed up for a long time after that.

Yeah...its a criminal act. Its more than just the physical contact.
Click to expand...

Oh, the stories that come from Subic Bay along those lines.
 
VanceMack said:
Saying it was consensual and therefore not criminal....would it have been criminal if the woman had blindfolded her and then had a male friend come in and commit the sexual act? I mean...even though it was someone else committing the act it would still be consensual...right?

This is no different.
Click to expand...

yes - it's different.

She had sex with the person she agreed to have sex with.
She consented to penetration with the person who penetrated her.

She met this person on more than one occasion and was ALWAYS blindfolded.
So basically she consented to the entire anonymity of the situation.

At worst, the sentence should be community service spent in a woman's clinic for sexual assault.
The "victim" should also be sentenced to some time with a psychiatrist.
 
Dragonfly said:
yes - it's different.

She had sex with the person she agreed to have sex with.
She consented to penetration with the person who penetrated her.

She met this person on more than one occasion and was ALWAYS blindfolded.
So basically she consented to the entire anonymity of the situation.

At worst, the sentence should be community service spent in a woman's clinic for sexual assault.
The "victim" should also be sentenced to some time with a psychiatrist.
Click to expand...
No...she didnt. She agreed to have sex with a man she knew as 'Kye'. She had no knowledge 'Kye' didnt exist.
 
Fledermaus said:
Oh, the stories that come from Subic Bay along those lines.
Click to expand...
And Zaragosa Spain. The older folk used to tell the younger folk "Do a package check before you even think about letting her kiss you"
 
If the court says it was a crime, then it was a crime. But the concept of consent has become so muddled in recent years that this may very well be a travesty of justice. Apparently a good deal of the evidence (not available to us) came down to he said/she said, as it often does in rape cases, or in this case she said/she said. The trier of fact has to make a judgment call in these cases. The sentence seems out of proportion to the actual deception, if there was indeed deception. I mean, the difference between a prosthetic phallus and an organic phallus does not equate with six years of incarceration. :)
 
VanceMack said:
No...she didnt. She agreed to have sex with a man she knew as 'Kye'. She had no knowledge 'Kye' didnt exist.
Click to expand...

So if a guy lies about his name to a girl, then has consensual sex with her, did he sexually assault her based on his lie about his name?


To me this is along the lines of a guy who frequents "glory holes" for pleasure.
One day he finds out the person on the other side of the wall is a male, so he claims he's been assaulted.
 
Dragonfly said:
So if a guy lies about his name to a girl, then has consensual sex with her, did he sexually assault her based on his lie about his name?


To me this is along the lines of a guy who frequents "glory holes" for pleasure.
One day he finds out the person on the other side of the wall is a male, so he claims he's been assaulted.
Click to expand...
This isnt a lie about a name. Its not a lie about income levels. It is a literal lie about who and what they are.

I find some of the responses rather cavalier...especially coming from people that would call Trump a sexual predator for stating "And when you’re a star, they let you do it. You can do anything. Grab ’em by the *****. You can do anything."
 
VanceMack said:
It is a literal lie about who and what they are.
Click to expand...

Correct.

However, does that justify 6.5 years in jail for sexual assault?

Especially considering the "victim's" actions throughout the entire process?
 
Dragonfly said:
So if a guy lies about his name to a girl, then has consensual sex with her, did he sexually assault her based on his lie about his name?


To me this is along the lines of a guy who frequents "glory holes" for pleasure.
One day he finds out the person on the other side of the wall is a male, so he claims he's been assaulted.
Click to expand...

This essentially the exact same situation as when a transgendered man/woman deceive a male partner. The only difference is this girl isn't trans. The punishment though is a bit harsh, more than a bit harsh to be honest. This is more of a compensate the victim case than remove perpetrator off the street thing. I do believe the victim is culpable in this case as well, for not doing a minimum of due diligence.
 
Dragonfly said:
Correct.

However, does that justify 6.5 years in jail for sexual assault?

Especially considering the "victim's" actions throughout the entire process?
Click to expand...
In a word..yes. She intentionally committed an act of sexual assault. If everything is as reported, she didnt just lie about her bank account, she lied about her very identity and executed that lie with both bondage and a prosthetic.

I'd like to know more about the victim. Id like to know more about her capability and capacity. But the example I used is no different than what actually happened. She represented herself as person B, but had sex with her as person A pretending to be person B. Now..if there is any evidence that the victim was in the loop...I'd completely see this differently. But from an advocates perspective I have to believe the victim.
 
PirateMk1 said:
This essentially the exact same situation as when a transgendered man/woman deceive a male partner. The only difference is this girl isn't trans. The punishment though is a bit harsh, more than a bit harsh to be honest. This is more of a compensate the victim case than remove perpetrator off the street thing. I do believe the victim is culpable in this case as well, for not doing a minimum of due diligence.
Click to expand...
The perpetrator spent 12 years creating his persona and used it to exploit others. She also did similar things at work. Not sure how this is considered a 'harsh' sentence. Is the victim any less a victim just because a woman did it?

The crying game thing has had some pretty severe results.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/...of-transgender-woman-in-philippines.html?_r=0
 
Dragonfly said:
yes - it's different.
She had sex with the person she agreed to have sex with.
She consented to penetration with the person who penetrated her.
Click to expand...
But the false identify resulted in her agreeing to have sex basically with the false identity, some guy. Not her friend, a girl.
She did not consent to have sex with a girl/friend, the false identify removed that option from her.

There are consequences to deceiving people into doing something they would not normally do.
If this was just some one night thing, and the girl had no history of this, and just did it because she was in love...I doubt it would have been this way, but apparently she's doing more than that.

It is strange though, I mean, at what point did it cross the line from consent to assault...was it because she was a girl and not a guy, or a friend and not a stranger?

When someone picks someone up at a bar, and the person lies about being a movie executive...and they have sex...is that non-consensual too?
 
VanceMack said:
The perpetrator spent 12 years creating his persona and used it to exploit others. She also did similar things at work. Not sure how this is considered a 'harsh' sentence. Is the victim any less a victim just because a woman did it?

The crying game thing has had some pretty severe results.
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/02/...of-transgender-woman-in-philippines.html?_r=0
Click to expand...

The victim is not lessor or greater, but she is culpable as well. Let me be even more blunt. Sex is as intimate an act as one can get. If the woman was with a man before she would know the difference one and a dildo. I am not buying she didn't know. Maybe not at first, I might buy that. But not after multiple times. I was generous in comparing the situation to being fooled by a transgendered person. I would be more sympathetic to that victim, simply because the knowledge would be more difficult to ascertain. Strap on dildo?? Really?? She didn't know? After multiple times?? I aint buying it.

I do think the punishment as meted is harsh and more to the point, pointless. The victim should be compensated. Jail for the perpetrator is poor compensation. It is was me I would want to be compensated. Money might not make me happy but it would sure make me feel better.
 
PirateMk1 said:
The victim is not lessor or greater, but she is culpable as well. Let me be even more blunt. Sex is as intimate an act as one can get. If the woman was with a man before she would know the difference one and a dildo. I am not buying she didn't know. Maybe not at first, I might buy that. But not after multiple times. I was generous in comparing the situation to being fooled by a transgendered person. I would be more sympathetic to that victim, simply because the knowledge would be more difficult to ascertain. Strap on dildo?? Really?? She didn't know? After multiple times?? I aint buying it.

I do think the punishment as meted is harsh and more to the point, pointless. The victim should be compensated. Jail for the perpetrator is poor compensation. It is was me I would want to be compensated. Money might not make me happy but it would sure make me feel better.
Click to expand...
Thats why I said I would like to know more about the victim. Someone with diminished mental capacity or extreme naivete would be very easily exploited. Again...as an advocate...I always believe the victim. But I'd like to know more.

Ive seen people that are in their early 30s that didnt know what the word 'masturbate' actually involved. If it was her fist experience...how would she know the difference?
 
VanceMack said:
Saying it was consensual and therefore not criminal....would it have been criminal if the woman had blindfolded her and then had a male friend come in and commit the sexual act? I mean...even though it was someone else committing the act it would still be consensual...right?

This is no different.
Click to expand...
Let's turn this around a bit. The person in question was male the whole time, but when it came to sex, he, unknowingly to the "victim", used a strap on instead of his own penis. Is this stilll assault? Where does the deception line get drawn from simply being wrong to being outright criminal.
 
VanceMack said:
Thats why I said I would like to know more about the victim. Someone with diminished mental capacity or extreme naivete would be very easily exploited. Again...as an advocate...I always believe the victim. But I'd like to know more.

Ive seen people that are in their early 30s that didnt know what the word 'masturbate' actually involved. If it was her fist experience...how would she know the difference?
Click to expand...

Well I am not an advocate, so my sympathy is quite minimal for the victim.

People in their thirties that didn't know masturbating is? Its an almost instinctual process. I think you were getting bull****ted.
 
maquiscat said:
Let's turn this around a bit. The person in question was male the whole time, but when it came to sex, he, unknowingly to the "victim", used a strap on instead of his own penis. Is this stilll assault? Where does the deception line get drawn from simply being wrong to being outright criminal.
Click to expand...
I think it begins and ends with a woman creating a male persona, living that lie virtually and online for 12 years, using that male persona to develop a relationship with a woman, and then having sex with her.

To the point...why didnt the woman develop a relationship with her as a woman and have sex with her as a woman? Why did she commit the fraudulent act in order to engage in the sexual assault? The answer is because the victim would not have had any interest in her romantically as a woman.
 
PirateMk1 said:
Well I am not an advocate, so my sympathy is quite minimal for the victim.

People in their thirties that didn't know masturbating is? Its an almost instinctual process. I think you were getting bull****ted.
Click to expand...
I assure you I am not. "The 40 year old virgin" is not just a movie plot.
 
VanceMack said:
I assure you I am not. "The 40 year old virgin" is not just a movie plot.
Click to expand...

Am I to assume they were mentally competent? Presuming such competence then those you talked to were the very rare exception with what would have to be some very extenuating circumstance. I don't believe there are a statistically significant number of mentally competent people who don't know what masturbation is.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom