Stubby Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 [MOD]All right you lot, settle down.No more personal sniping.[/MOD]On topic, the offence committed in this case would arguably be an offence here too. Section 319(2)a) of the WA Criminal Code says:consent means a consent freely and voluntarily given and, without in any way affecting the meaning attributable to those words, a consent is not freely and voluntarily given if it is obtained by force, threat, intimidation, deceit, or any fraudulent means...(my emphasis)In Michael v The State of Western Australia, the court dealt with a police officer who extracted sex from two sex workers after telling them they were obliged to do so because he was a police officer. After a careful analysis of the legislative history, the Court said that the determination of the question of consent was for the jury to decide (at [79]):...the question whether or not consent has been obtained by any of the forbidden means is a factual question to be determined by the jury.Another important point noted by the Court was this comment offered by an academic during the lawmaking process:It is therefore submitted that section 319(2)(a) requires the courts to focus on the defendant's fraud rather than the victim's mistake. This ensures a clearer focus on the defendant's culpability and also accords with the policy behind modern sexual assault laws which ... should seek to protect victims from violence and various forms of exploitation and not from their own mistakes. (Michael, at [63])It would all depend on the nature of the deceit or fraud and would be dealt with on a case by case basis. It follows that it is not a racist law here and it may or may not be in Israel. If the victim was bigoted it might be argued that the fraud was as to race, but that would be on the victim's interpretation, not the law itself. If that were the issue here then the Jury would have to look at the reasonableness of that interpretation.I recommend reading the whole decision linked above as it provides a useful debate on the issues of consent generally, between paras [31] - [79]. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_BlauerDragon Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I think that this case is absolutely ludicrous, but I do have a question. If he told her that he was looking for a serious relationship and she immediately went with him to a near-by building to have consensual sex, wouldn't she be equally as guilty of deceiving him? I know nothing says "Serious Relationship" to me quite like ducking into a near by building for a quicky with someone that you just met. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumer Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 So is there any case law precedent in the Israeli legal system in which a Jewish male who made fraudulent claims about himself to obtain sexual favor from women were similarly punished?Because if there isn't, this would look like blatant institutional racism.I am no legal expert, but people I trust on Israeli forums who are say that there are a few precedents, one where a guy said he was some government official who could help the women and the other when the guy claimed he's a fighter-pilot (when in fact he was a mere clerk). The law may be flawed (I agree), but both the law and its implementation is not racist, just plain old f*-ed up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slim da reaper Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I get the 'deception' part and can even understand wanting to see someone punished for it, but the actual sex act itself was consensual. Separating the two out here would seem more sensible.The crime lies in the obtaining of the consent via deception, in the UK there is a law known as "Obtaining Goods or services by deception" and it is because it involves consent but consent obtained fraudulently but still obtained, however the act of obtaining consent by deception is where the crime lies. The consent gained cannot be used as a defence and infact it is the gaining of the consent via deception which makes it this particular offence.So you are correct it is deception and not rape, but the consent is fundamentally part of the deception. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I think the easiest thing to end this issue is to have all jewish women check and see if the men they are hooking up with are circumcised before intercourse. Problem solved. And if this shit floats over to the U.S.A i'm fucked. No more claiming to be a south african shark tamer or a c-15 pilot to win over the ladies Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I am no legal expert, but people I trust on Israeli forums who are say that there are a few precedents, one where a guy said he was some government official who could help the women and the other when the guy claimed he's a fighter-pilot (when in fact he was a mere clerk). The law may be flawed (I agree), but both the law and its implementation is not racist, just plain old f*-ed up.Again, hope this doesn't catch on in the U.S. for i have most assuredly used the fighter pilot line to hook up. More than once. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IheartTesla Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Circumcision is a part of Islam as well..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godlikebuthumble Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I joyfully recall my buddies' time in the German Air Force... since your service ID said "airman" (right word?, like gunner or marine?), girls in nearby bars and clubs tended to assume the guys were fighter pilots... so, long story short, would those guys be liable? Seriously?I also wonder if the girl in OP specifically told the guy she would not want to bang, I mean, "enter a serious relationship" with a Palestinian under any circumstances. Might be relevant, but what do I know.Also, if deceit in order to get laid is a crime, I see the cosmetics industry falling on hard times if word gets out... *duck* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Circumcision is a part of Islam as well..... Curses!! Foiled by silly religious ceremony again!! There goes that option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peterbound Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 I joyfully recall my buddies' time in the German Air Force... since your service ID said "airman" (right word?, like gunner or marine?), girls in nearby bars and clubs tended to assume the guys were fighter pilots... so, long story short, would those guys be liable? Seriously?I also wonder if the girl in OP specifically told the guy she would not want to bang, I mean, "enter a serious relationship" with a Palestinian under any circumstances. Might be relevant, but what do I know.Also, if deceit in order to get laid is a crime, I see the cosmetics industry falling on hard times if word gets out... *duck*Yep, my time in England was filled with stories of me flying sorties over enemy territory. The english girls ate that shit up. all joking aside though, there has to be more to this story than what we are getting. The sentence seems ridiculous to say the least, men have been lying to get into women's pants since the beginning of time, i don't see how this is any different. If i went to utah and told a girl i was mormon and returning from a mission to get laid would i be arrested? Either this is a sad statement about how Arabs are treated in Israel or as i stated above, we aren't getting the whole story. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eurytus Posted July 21, 2010 Author Share Posted July 21, 2010 I think that this case is absolutely ludicrous, but I do have a question. If he told her that he was looking for a serious relationship and she immediately went with him to a near-by building to have consensual sex, wouldn't she be equally as guilty of deceiving him? I know nothing says "Serious Relationship" to me quite like ducking into a near by building for a quicky with someone that you just met.Not just any building either. An office.And as the other story mentions, she tried to claim it was "brutal rape against consent", so it would appear that she is a liar in addition to being a fast mover. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godlikebuthumble Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 So, we stop calling each other racists, sexists and whatnot and wait for more info on this? ...But where's the fun in that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stego Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Religion fucks up everything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TrueMetis Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Religion fucks up everything.Most things, the rest of the time its great comedy. Unfortunately this is not one of those cases. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crazydog7 Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Religion fucks up everything.As always excellent point. The rule should be that if he's charming enough to fool you he's probably alright. So which is it? The nice Jewish girl didn't want to be infected by the dirty Arab? Its like the American South or South Africa in the age of apartheid in many respects. However a black man could never just tell a white woman he was sweet on that he was actually white. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 So if a guy tells a girl he's a rich, successful businessman with his own sports car and she's so impressed she sleeps with him, but it later turns out he works at McDonalds and lives in his parents' basement, she could have him charged with rape by deception?I don't have time to read the whole thread, but from a quick scan of the haaretz article (hebrew) - in Israeli precedent - yes. (case of a guy who pretended to be someone of importance at the ministry of the interior and promised dubious ministry-of-interior related favours and was charged with rape, another of someone who pretended to be a neurologist. (businessman schmisnessman. Doctors, beuracrats and jews is what works here, apparently.) lol, the public defence criticizes it with, amongs others "What if a man tells a woman he loves her and she sleeps with him? Can he then be charged with rape?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
zollo Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Amazing. Of all the things to get prosecuted for. Rob a store and you probably get away with less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Onion Knight Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 an Arab from East JerusalemCouldn't she tell by the accent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datepalm Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Hm. The person in charge of a sexual assault victims support center supports this. Putting the trees in front of the forest, to my mind. the Defences charge of 'paternalism' against the court sounds spot on to me. It will be interesting to see what the supreme court decides. (All these dodgy fuzzed concent/deception rulings seem to be coming out of Jerusalem in particular. Why am I not surprised?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lumer Posted July 21, 2010 Share Posted July 21, 2010 Well in essence, Barney Stinson in Israel would be in jail and the key thrown away to the sea. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.