| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
 Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:46 am Post subject: Democrat War on Women Continues to Continue |
 |
|
Rapist gets off Scot-free due to Democrat-dominated California's antediluvian rape laws and misogynistic Democrat appeals court justices. California's bronze-age rape laws only protect married women from sex by subterfuge (i.e. impersonation). However, prosecution may retry the case, charging the perp with Assange-style sleep-fucking.
| Quote: | | A California appeals court overturned the rape conviction of a man accused of pretending to be a woman's boyfriend when he snuck into her bedroom and had sex with her, concluding that the law doesn't protect unmarried women in such cases. |
| Quote: | "We reluctantly hold that a person who accomplishes sexual intercourse by impersonating someone other than a married victim's spouse is not guilty of the crime of rape of an unconscious person," Willhite wrote.
Julio Morales was accused of raping an 18-year-old woman in February 2009, after the woman, Morales, and her boyfriend attended a party together where they were drinking. After coming home together Morales allegedly snuck into the woman's room while she was sleeping and had sex with her.
It was not until a beam of light from a window illuminated his face, that the woman realized she was not having sex with her boyfriend, but with Morales, according to prosecutors.
He was sentenced to three years in a state prison.
The three justices found that prosecutors advanced two theories at the time of trial. One was the impersonator theory, which the appeals court threw out. But prosecutors also suggested Morales raped a sleeping woman. When the case is retried, prosecutors will have to rely only on that theory, the court found.
The panel implied that their hands were tied given the law and implored California lawmakers to "correct the incongruity that exists when a man may commit rape … when impersonating a husband, but not when impersonating a boyfriend." |
http://abcnews.go.com/US/calif-court-finds-single-woman-protected-rape-law/story?id=18132972
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
pjp
Administrator
Joined: 16 Apr 2002
Posts: 16029
Location: Colorado
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:27 am Post subject: Re: Democrat War on Women Continues to Continue |
|
|
| Quote: | | "We reluctantly hold that a person who accomplishes sexual intercourse by impersonating someone other than a married victim's spouse is not guilty of the crime of rape of an unconscious person," Willhite wrote. |
Kind of reminds you of the dark ages when husbands couldn't be convicted of raping their wives. I guess that's the difference between private & public property. I thought laws existed wrt deception. Seems like that would be applicable.
_________________
lolgov. 'cause where we're going, you don't have civil liberties.
In Loving Memory
1787 - 2008 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 10:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Marriage is a weird thing where you live. My then girlfriend now wife were surprised to find out that you don't recognize common-law for either immigration or tax purposes.
But again, is this really a democrat issue? but yeah, that is a gross ruling. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
big dave
n00b
Joined: 03 Jul 2009
Posts: 0
Location: land of first world problems
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| the judges cannot hold otherwise... the law is very clear cut. they can only interpret what is written. if they did otherwise, that's by definition, an activist judge. if you want someone to blame, go after the nutty legislators. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| big dave wrote: | | the judges cannot hold otherwise... the law is very clear cut. they can only interpret what is written. if they did otherwise, that's by definition, an activist judge. if you want someone to blame, go after the nutty legislators. |
agreed. Though judges have gone against precedent. But clearly the problem is the law. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, laws in the most "progressive", Democrat-run state in the Nation, as interpreted by Democrat judges elected by Democrats. Clearly, the problem is the continuing Democrat War on Womens.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
juniper
l33t
Joined: 22 Oct 2004
Posts: 756
Location: EU
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 2:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BoneKracker wrote: | | Yeah, laws in the most "progressive", Democrat-run state in the Nation, as interpreted by Democrat judges elected by Democrats. Clearly, the problem is the continuing Democrat War on Womens. |
wasn't the governator republican?
why so much hate? This seems to not be a partisan issue, so why make it one.
spread love, not hate. eat some vegetables. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
BoneKracker
Veteran
Joined: 14 Mar 2006
Posts: 1488
Location: U.S.A.
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 15, 2013 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| juniper wrote: | | BoneKracker wrote: | | Yeah, laws in the most "progressive", Democrat-run state in the Nation, as interpreted by Democrat judges elected by Democrats. Clearly, the problem is the continuing Democrat War on Womens. |
wasn't the governator republican?
why so much hate? This seems to not be a partisan issue, so why make it one.
spread love, not hate. eat some vegetables. |
Governors don't make laws or run courts. Ask the rape victims "why so much hate". Democrats are the ones who made it a partisan issue, with their bullshit "Republican War on Women", all the while ignoring that about 85% of rapes in the U.S. are committed by Democrats (as was this particular rape). You'd think they feel some sense of responsibility to do something about it as opposed to letting the rapists off without punishment.
_________________
Oldthinkers unbellyfeel INGSOC.
-- Headline of a document on Winston Smith's terminal in his cubicle at the Ministry of Truth, seen briefly in the background in one scene of the movie rendition of Nineteen Eighty-Four. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Off the Wall
