While some may argue that the laws punishing men who have been accused of sexual assault on college campuses these days are unfair — as the accusation is often enough to expel a student — it is hard to find logic in this week’s ruling of the Oklahoma court of appeals. The court ruled that while some forms of sex with an unconscious individual are considered rape, oral sex is not.
In Oklahoma, it is illegal to have sex with an unconscious woman. It is illegal to force a woman to perform oral sex. But the Oklahoma appeals court found that under current state law, it is not illegal to force an unconscious woman to perform oral sex.
Tulsa County assistant district attorney Benjamin Fu called the ruling “insane,” “dangerous” and “offensive,” Oklahoma Watch reported.
Fu disagreed with the court’s interpretation of the law, while other legal experts said the decision just proves that the state’s sexual assault laws desperately need to be updated.
The case involved two high school students in Tusla. Reportedly, a 17-year-old male forced himself upon a 16-year-old female who had passed out after drinking too much. The Tusla County assistant D.A. says that the ruling is a dangerous precedent.
Oklahoma’s rape statute makes it illegal to have vaginal or anal intercourse with someone who is too drunk to give consent, but the law against forcible oral sodomy does not include a similar provision.
Fu told The Guardian that he was “completely gobsmacked” by the ruling.
“It creates a huge loophole for sexual abuse that makes no sense. The plain meaning of forcible oral sodomy, of using force, includes taking advantage of a victim who was too intoxicated to consent,” Fu said. “I don’t believe that anybody, until that day, believed that the state of the law was that this kind of conduct was ambiguous, much less legal. And I don’t think the law was a loophole until the court decided it was.”
Whether or not you agree with the extreme measures being employed on college campuses to stop sexual assaults, it is hard to imagine supporting the idea that it is ever okay to perform any kind of sexual act on someone who is unconscious or incapacitated.
Source: National Post
I am so sick of assholes turning an article like this, into something political, with the asinine comment, “liberals are stupid”! No, you are stupid!
Like going fishing, If you are casting out live Bait, then you are likely to have a fish put your stuff in his mouth.. The game warden would call that fishing in court.
True story.
Well that’s what goes along with drinking at most college parties and I don’t believe its rape
Its rape if the person at a party isn’t drinking along with the crowd and they wait for the girl to get plastered then you can say its rape.
But a bunch of college girls been trying to claim they were raped when they were at a party just to get free money they know what they’re doing even when they’re drunk
If they don’t know what the hell they’re doing why do they keep putting that bottle to they’re lips while drunk already
Then when they’ve had enough on their own they’ll stumble with you to the floor to lay down and spread their loose legs wanting fucked
I’ve drank with college girls before and they’ve grabbed my dick and I’m not crying rape on them who grabbed on me I didn’t f**k her neither
I agree with what the courts said.
I really think it would much more effective to stop rapes if victim’s intoxication or loss of consciousness was deemed ‘consent’. The larger problem is women so grossly negligent as to constitute them complicit. If I walk onto a highway in camoflage, put on a blindfold, and expect traffic to go around me, which is what the law calls for, it won’t always work. Any sane female knows to avoid rooms full a drunken men in their 20s. The chances of emerging without having been raped, given consent was not granted, is so close to zero, those who fall prey are Darwin Award candidates!