this post was submitted on 20 Feb 2024
351 points (88.4% liked)
Facepalm
2647 readers
529 users here now
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
It's heavily implied she consented while intoxicated, which is impossible according to the poster, and is therefore considered rape, even though both were under the influence
Legal consent in criminal law and legal consent for contracts are two different things. It's like you haven't even read § 1-201 of the UCC...geeez! (/s on that last part if it wasn't clear)
They both derive from the standard and have been interpreted differently given the different contexts and applications. For the purposes of this conversation about the poster, they're similar enough to make the point. I'm not bringing suit, I'm trying to explain why legal consent and intoxication bear on one another in a court.
And? If either one of them felt as though they were taken advantage of, they should report the rape, no?