If you have been paying attention to the news stories out of college campuses over the last decade or so, then you’ve heard a lot of talk of sexual assaults on college campuses, and the movement to try and stop future assaults from happening. The government has tried pushing harsher legislation to combat rape on college campuses — but many young men are being convicted in the court of public opinion instead of a court of law.
The legislation has resulted in many male students being expelled from universities just for being accused of sexual assault. There have been a number of cases where the male student was found to be completely innocent, but the damage was already done. These students were expelled from their current universities — and many are unable to enroll anywhere else because of the stigma attached to them.
With all of the harsh penalties surrounding sexual crimes these days, it was quite a shock this week when the Oklahoma appeals court said that it is not illegal for a man to perform certain sex acts on a woman who isn’t even conscious. To read about this perplexing decision out of the Sooner State, continue reading on the next page:
That’s probably not going to be much of a$#%&!@* huh?
No way not in USA
Morons
Omg let’s hope his daughter, grand daughter, or wife never have to experience this so called “non rape”.
Liberal propegana..right up there with “she asked for it” and “No means Yes”
Can NOT believe this!!!!
Some of our judges have lost their minds or they are unfit to be a judge in any case
Let the judge try it
From Oklahoma Watch:
“In an interview with police, the defendant said the victim engaged in consensual oral sex with him and it was her idea. The girl told officers she could not remember anything after being at the park.
Prosecutors initially charged the boy with first-degree rape and forcible oral$#%&!@* but because there was no evidence showing he had raped the girl, that charge was dismissed.
Later, Tulsa County District Court Judge Patrick Pickerill dismissed the forcible oral$#%&!@*charge, stating unconsciousness and intoxication are not present in the law’s definition of the crime.”
Wtf