If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Daily Mail)   Smoking hot 27-year-old blonde arrested for DUI claims she was molested in back of police car, is now suing Zima and Miller (w/pics)   (dailymail.co.uk) divider line 140
    More: Interesting, Gary Zima, patrol cars  
•       •       •

32471 clicks; posted to Main » on 23 Oct 2013 at 4:00 AM (47 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



140 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-10-22 08:02:55 PM
Holy shiat
 
2013-10-22 08:05:56 PM
You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?
 
2013-10-22 08:23:08 PM
They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.
 
2013-10-22 08:25:57 PM
That was beautiful, subby.
 
2013-10-22 08:40:43 PM

feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?


I was thinking the same thing. She says that the officer texted her after the incident, it should be easy enough to verify that.
 
2013-10-22 08:41:39 PM
I bet those cops brought up her Facebook page as soon as they had her id. Saw her pics, then commenced to rapin'

Murica, fark yeah.
 
2013-10-22 08:44:05 PM

TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.


You know how I know you didn't RTFA?
 
2013-10-22 08:51:26 PM
'Officer Zima had the opportunity to rectalfy this mistake and to come forward.'

I'm sure he did.
 
2013-10-22 09:47:07 PM

feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front.


I don't know, in that situation it's normally one up front and one in the back. Wait, are we talking about the same thing?
 
2013-10-22 11:53:49 PM

TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.


False.

They just don't sell it where you are.
 
FNG [TotalFark]
2013-10-23 12:19:22 AM
1) Yes, the woman is attractive for the "smoking hot" reluctant crowd
2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.
 
2013-10-23 12:27:58 AM

FNG: 1) Yes, the woman is attractive for the "smoking hot" reluctant crowd
2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.

You won't shout, as I fiddle a-bout...
fiddle a-bout, fiddle a-bout, fiddle about... ♫
 
2013-10-23 12:39:15 AM

FNG: 2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.


i thought that too until I got to this

Adding another layer of acknowledgement to the saga, Hannigan says that Zima looked up her cell phone number from police records and texted her a few days after the incident, asking how she was doing.
 
2013-10-23 12:44:16 AM

MaudlinMutantMollusk: FNG: 1) Yes, the woman is attractive for the "smoking hot" reluctant crowd
2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.

♫You won't shout, as I fiddle a-bout...
fiddle a-bout, fiddle a-bout, fiddle about... ♫


You're such a wicked uncle, Ernie.
 
2013-10-23 12:44:47 AM

log_jammin: FNG: 2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.

i thought that too until I got to this

Adding another layer of acknowledgement to the saga, Hannigan says that Zima looked up her cell phone number from police records and texted her a few days after the incident, asking how she was doing.


Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.
 
2013-10-23 12:55:12 AM

Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.


I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.
 
2013-10-23 01:02:19 AM

log_jammin: Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.

I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.


If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.
 
2013-10-23 01:07:36 AM

Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?


even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.


very PUNgent.
 
2013-10-23 01:16:03 AM

log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.


Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.
 
2013-10-23 01:24:24 AM

Rhino_man: Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.


I'm not going to call it an article since it's the Daily Mail, but "the thing" says she is suing, so it's civil, not criminal.
 
2013-10-23 02:07:14 AM

log_jammin: Rhino_man: Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

I'm not going to call it an article since it's the Daily Mail, but "the thing" says she is suing, so it's civil, not criminal.


Fair 'nuff.
 
2013-10-23 03:44:03 AM

doglover: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

False.

They just don't sell it where you are.



IIRC, it's available in Japan.
 
2013-10-23 03:45:05 AM

The_Sponge: doglover: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

False.

They just don't sell it where you are.


IIRC, it's available in Japan.


I think that's where doglover is if I remember right.
 
2013-10-23 04:01:51 AM

TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

 
2013-10-23 04:12:48 AM

log_jammin: I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records


I once listened to an interview with porn star Nikki Benz, and she told a story about how she got pulled over for speeding by a LAPD officer.  A couple of days later the officer called her up (using the number he got from her records) and asked her out on a date.  Naturally, she was a little disturbed by it.
 
2013-10-23 04:15:02 AM

log_jammin: Rhino_man: Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

I'm not going to call it an article since it's the Daily Mail, but "the thing" says she is suing, so it's civil, not criminal.


But, if they can win in a civil suit, can they not take the evidence from it and if the D.A. is willing use that to file criminal charges and use that against them in court?
 
2013-10-23 04:19:30 AM

Bigdogdaddy: log_jammin: Rhino_man: Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

I'm not going to call it an article since it's the Daily Mail, but "the thing" says she is suing, so it's civil, not criminal.

But, if they can win in a civil suit, can they not take the evidence from it and if the D.A. is willing use that to file criminal charges and use that against them in court?


upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-10-23 04:19:52 AM
This seems like a "he said, she said" thing.
I'm going to reserve judgment until the official investigation is completed by Det. Jaegerbomb.
 
2013-10-23 04:28:08 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: FNG: 2) The woman claims she tried to make "eye contact" with the female cop who was driving, why the fark didn't she scream her head off that "THIS MAN IS FINGERING ME MAKE IT STOP"

so, I see at least one hole in this story.

i thought that too until I got to this

Adding another layer of acknowledgement to the saga, Hannigan says that Zima looked up her cell phone number from police records and texted her a few days after the incident, asking how she was doing.

Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.


The thing with that theory is that the if someone said "maybe we can work out another way" you'd be expecting a little more than a grope.

I'm torn, I mostly believe it, assaulted woman like a rabbit stuck in the headlights, reported it straight away (but not to the cop in the front), texts continuing to pursue it civilly and not attempting to quash the DUI ... but then again it's in the mail.
 
2013-10-23 04:31:09 AM
If true she needs to put the entire SYSTEM on trial!
 
2013-10-23 04:35:09 AM

Bigdogdaddy: log_jammin: Rhino_man: Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

I'm not going to call it an article since it's the Daily Mail, but "the thing" says she is suing, so it's civil, not criminal.

But, if they can win in a civil suit, can they not take the evidence from it and if the D.A. is willing use that to file criminal charges and use that against them in court?


not as far as I know
 
2013-10-23 04:54:41 AM
No. No one wants to touch that down there. Try again honey.
 
2013-10-23 04:57:57 AM
What was she wearing? I cant tell you if she deserved it or not..
 
2013-10-23 05:03:14 AM
Subby missed an opportunity to work in Long Island into the headline...missed an opportunity for an additional drink.

Seriously though, I have no idea if this happened or not and will never know unless later the cop admits it but I imagine this happens a lot more than it is reported and I commend her for coming forward.  A lot of sexual assaults go unreported and I imagine when the aggressor is involved with law enforcement it's even less likely to be reported. Either she's very stupid and vindictive or she's got ovaries of steel because it can't be easy to go through with this since the possibility of retaliation and harassment is very high in this case.  Either way it's in her best interests to probably move to another state as soon as realistically possible.

That being said, I think the majority of law enforcement personnel treat their jobs and their duties professionally but if this particular officer isn't she's doing the community a favor by coming forward with it so that maybe future victims can be spared.
 
2013-10-23 05:06:24 AM

MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?


So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool.
 
2013-10-23 05:06:27 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.


1) In the US, it's always rape and always criminal if it's a sexual encounter between a police officer and someone in his custody.
2) Lots of women who are being raped freeze up during the assault.
 
2013-10-23 05:09:43 AM
Aha, another fishy-fingered flat-foot.
 
2013-10-23 05:11:16 AM
If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5
 
2013-10-23 05:17:29 AM

spawn73: MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?

So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool. people laugh because that's how memes work.


FTFY.
 
2013-10-23 05:18:42 AM

feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?


You generally don't ride in the back unless you're busy raping the chick in your custody.  Also, cop cars generally don't have cameras pointing inside the car (although, now that you're mentioning it, it would be a good idea).
 
2013-10-23 05:19:40 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.


There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.
 
2013-10-23 05:22:26 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.

I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.

If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.


I think it'd be enough to scare me into submission if the driver just lets the other one get in the back seat with me while she drives.  IF a cop is going to do something bad right in the same car as their partner, they're typically an accomplice. And scared enough of him and a possibility he could get violent and no escape path for me, sitting there handcuffed.

Between the two, reason enough to not scream, a wasted effort that could only make matters worse.  The female cop may even be a victim as well who's mentally beat down just enough to let her partner have his way.  Either blackmail or subbing to the alpha, or truly psychopathic.
 
2013-10-23 05:27:54 AM

meanmutton: feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?

You generally don't ride in the back unless you're busy raping the chick in your custody.  Also, cop cars generally don't have cameras pointing inside the car (although, now that you're mentioning it, it would be a good idea).


Used to be standard procedure to put one officer in the back but that was before they built the partitions between the front and back.

At least some police have in car cameras..http://www.thesmokinggun.com/documents/crime/popped-cop-car
 
2013-10-23 05:29:37 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5


you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.
 
2013-10-23 05:29:52 AM

Alonjar: There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.


[citation needed]

"Drunk" comes in a wide variety of states.  Blacked out to barely tipsy but just enough to make driving illegal.

On that lower end, if she said yes, it's not automatically rape because consent is impossible.

Take your crusade elsewhere.
 
2013-10-23 05:31:50 AM

omeganuepsilon: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.

I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.

If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

I think it'd be enough to scare me into submission if the driver just lets the other one get in the back seat with me while she drives.  IF a cop is going to do something bad right in the same car as their partner, they're typically an accomplice. And scared enough of him and a possibility he could get violent and no escape path for me, sitting there handcuffed.

Between the two, reason enough to not scream, a wasted effort that could only make matters worse.  The female cop may even be a victim as well who's mentally beat down just enough to let her partner have his way.  Either blackmail or subbing to the alpha, or truly psychopathic.


Heh. I shiat you not, there was an SVU episode last week (or the week before) that you pretty much recapped in your post.
 
2013-10-23 05:32:34 AM

omeganuepsilon: Alonjar: There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.

[citation needed]

"Drunk" comes in a wide variety of states.  Blacked out to barely tipsy but just enough to make driving illegal.

On that lower end, if she said yes, it's not automatically rape because consent is impossible.

Take your crusade elsewhere.


yeah! maybe she was legitimately raped in the back seat of a police patrol vehicle!
 
2013-10-23 05:32:43 AM

Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.


oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.
 
2013-10-23 05:42:59 AM

MagSeven: Heh. I shiat you not, there was an SVU episode last week (or the week before) that you pretty much recapped in your post.


Most of those shows pull from real life, either discussions or actual events, so eh.  I really don't watch much TV, much less cop dramas, those I avoid like the plague.  Enhance, enhance, ENHANCE! and things like it really annoy the shiat out of me.
/more partial to sci-fi, where you expect it to not be realistic
 
2013-10-23 05:50:17 AM

I sound fat: Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.


Actually, that's exactly how it works. You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated. And sex without consent is rape.
 
2013-10-23 05:52:42 AM

Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.


[citation needed]
 
2013-10-23 05:59:32 AM

Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.


Heh, I'm pretty sure it is illegal for a cop to have consensual sex with someone they're in the process of arresting. Your jurisdiction may vary though.
 
2013-10-23 06:00:40 AM

omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]


Seriously? Fine... here you go:

http://www.slc.edu/offices-services/security/assault/Penal_Law.html
 
2013-10-23 06:00:46 AM
I reserve judgement on the actual events that took place, but I get why IA never investigated. A random drunk girl screaming that she was raped sounds like a sorority girl trying to make problems go away. People just don't listen to drunk people.
 
2013-10-23 06:01:04 AM
I'm sure it was just that the cop in back seat was drunker than her.
 
2013-10-23 06:03:03 AM

Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.



meanmutton: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

1) In the US, it's always rape and always criminal if it's a sexual encounter between a police officer and someone in his custody.
2) Lots of women who are being raped freeze up during the assault.


I stand corrected.

Put away the sarcasm detectors, folks... this is actually somebody changing his mind on Fark.
sa.peteyproductions.net
 
2013-10-23 06:03:59 AM

omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]


And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm120.htm
 
2013-10-23 06:13:20 AM

log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5

you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.


ok, you have to tell me... what color?
 
2013-10-23 06:13:21 AM
Hopefully she saved the texts. He might have been dumb enough to mention the fingering. If not its he said she said. She's not going to come out on top if it becomes that.
 
2013-10-23 06:16:46 AM

Mid_mo_mad_man: Hopefully she saved the texts. He might have been dumb enough to mention the fingering. If not its he said she said. She's not going to come out on top if it becomes that.


Yeah she might not be able to prove the rape but the text could at least show that he was harrassing her.
 
2013-10-23 06:18:39 AM
Why New York cops are fighting the judge ordering they wear cameras.
 
2013-10-23 06:20:33 AM
Well, we all know, that never in history has a person that was being arrested for DUI, ever, ever pulled the "do you know who I am?" or, the "I will sue you into oblivion" tactic when being arrested. Nor, has a female ever cried "rape" for any other reason than actual rape. Never.

/Do I really need to point out the sarcasm?
 
2013-10-23 06:24:59 AM

Arsayalalyur: I sound fat: Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.

Actually, that's exactly how it works. You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated. And sex without consent is rape.


Holy shiat! I done been raped dozens of times!

I wonder what the various charges/potential defenses would be if I robbed a bank while having drunk sex...
 
2013-10-23 06:29:56 AM

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

Seriously? Fine... here you go:

http://www.slc.edu/offices-services/security/assault/Penal_Law.html


The only part that mentions intoxication:

"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his consent.

Typically, if they are not blacked out / incoherent, consent is still possible as long as they did consent to the intoxication.(ie willing got drunk)

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm120.htm


They don't mention intoxication at all.

They do have:
If there is actual consent, although obtained by fraud, the act is not rape, but if to the accused's knowledge the victim is of unsound mind or unconscious to an extent rendering him or her incapable of giving consent, the act is rape.

So again, I ask for a citation, knowing that you cannot come up with one that stands across many areas as a general rule.  If you do find one that protects the 3 appletini "drunk" attention whore looking to get laid and then claim rape, it's going to be somewhat obscure, not qualifying for "It's the way it works" as an absolute.

Oh, you'll find plenty of laws about how sodomy is still illegal, or how missionary is still the only legal position, but nothing so conservative to say that alcohol = rape.
 
2013-10-23 06:30:15 AM

Mr. Ekshun: Arsayalalyur: I sound fat: Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.

Actually, that's exactly how it works. You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated. And sex without consent is rape.

Holy shiat! I done been raped dozens of times!

I wonder what the various charges/potential defenses would be if I robbed a bank while having drunk sex...


Well, according to this guy, if you both were drunk, it would be the bank's fault.  you couldnt go to jail for it, you were in the middle of being victimized by each other.  You couldnt give consent to robbing the bank while coupled up, you were drunk.  If the bank hadnt had an open lobby policy....
 
2013-10-23 06:35:32 AM

Mr. Ekshun: Arsayalalyur:

Actually, that's exactly how it works. You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated. And sex without consent is rape.

Holy shiat! I done been raped dozens of times!


Heh, by that definition, so have I. It's a little different if you and your partner were planning on getting your sexy on before drinking. Or don't care if you get laid after going out drinking. But those decisions are made prior to getting drunk and are worlds from finding a drunk girl who can't stop you.

I wonder what the various charges/potential defenses would be if I robbed a bank while having drunk sex...

You'd still go to jail, but the Fark thread would probably be epic. You might even get sponsored for a month or too.
 
2013-10-23 06:42:37 AM
Where are the RAPE LIARs who claim they were "sort-of" raped once at college but didn't report it and therefore have the automatic right to "win" any internet discussion on the subject? I don't see them! Where's the usual cry of "all men are rapists except ones who agree with my web forum comments!" Why are they not screaming for this cop, and indeed all cops, to be castrated on the precautionary principal that they might have actually done it?

Oh I know. The woman is attractive while the RAPE LIARs are fat and ugly. Good old envy ensures this woman is on her own.

It's always the women who are so gross that most men would need medical assistance just to be able to rape them who make the most noise and try the hardest to use the rape issue to push people around. They say rape is about power. Well, so is RAPE LYING.
 
2013-10-23 06:44:08 AM

I sound fat: Mr. Ekshun: Arsayalalyur: I sound fat: Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.

Actually, that's exactly how it works. You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated. And sex without consent is rape.

Holy shiat! I done been raped dozens of times!

I wonder what the various charges/potential defenses would be if I robbed a bank while having drunk sex...

Well, according to this guy, if you both were drunk, it would be the bank's fault.  you couldnt go to jail for it, you were in the middle of being victimized by each other.  You couldnt give consent to robbing the bank while coupled up, you were drunk.  If the bank hadnt had an open lobby policy....


Hey, sounds good to me. Who wants to give it a go?

But what if my booze is only 8 years old? Would that introduce some weird underage sex angle to an otherwise enjoyable evening?

/Whisky diddler.
 
2013-10-23 06:46:06 AM

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

Seriously? Fine... here you go:

http://www.slc.edu/offices-services/security/assault/Penal_Law.html



Citation checked.  Only reference to 'intoxicated' is when you're mentally incapacitated(temporary) by being dosed without your consent:
FTC: '"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his consent.'

In other words if you're slipped a roofie or even a spiked drink, then it's rape when you sober up and realize you wouldn't have done what you did if you hadn't been drugged against your will(or even if you would have, but odds are no prosecutions would come from that).  If you got drunk/high completely voluntarily?  Then it's still on your head(you can still legally consent).

By the way, at least in my head this can have the interesting result of somebody being charged for rape despite never actually participating in the sexual act that triggered the charges - let's say he spiked the punch bowl with something, two get it on and find it bad once they've recovered, the spiker would be guilty of (at least) 2 counts of rape from his actions.  Please note that I still consider unconcious or at least unable to 'express enthusiastic consent' as rape charge levels of intoxicated.  If you're not sober enough to coherently express consent, then you're not consenting...

Arsayalalyur: And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:


That's the old UCMJ, given that it specifies that force without consent and makes it impossible to rape your spouse.  It also doesn't mention intoxication at all.  The Newer code is much broader, but still has the element that the person has to have been involuntarily drugged in order for it to count as not being able to give consent.
FTA - (5)administering to that other person by force or threat of force, or without the knowledge or consent of that person, a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby substantially impairing the ability of that other person to appraise or control conduct;

So, for both examples you gave, as long as the opposite person became intoxicated of their own knowledge and free will, it is still not rape to have sex with them if they consent, even under the influence.
 
2013-10-23 06:46:41 AM

omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

Seriously? Fine... here you go:

http://www.slc.edu/offices-services/security/assault/Penal_Law.html

The only part that mentions intoxication:

"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his consent.

Typically, if they are not blacked out / incoherent, consent is still possible as long as they did consent to the intoxication.(ie willing got drunk)

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm120.htm

They don't mention intoxication at all.

They do have:
If there is actual consent, although obtained by fraud, the act is not rape, but if to the accused's knowledge the victim is of unsound mind or unconscious to an extent rendering him or her incapable of giving consent, the act is rape.

So again, I ask for a citation, knowing that you cannot come up with one that stands across many areas as a general rule.  If you do find one that protects the 3 appletini "drunk" attention whore looking to get laid and then claim rape, it's going to be somewhat obscure, not qualifying for "It's the way it works" as an absolute.

Oh, you'll find plenty of laws about how sodomy is still illegal, or how missionary is still the only legal position, but nothing so conservative to say that alcohol = rape.


Is this one better? http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/130/130.30%282%29.pdf Seems that the courts don't exactly agree with you.
 
2013-10-23 06:46:56 AM

meanmutton: feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?

You generally don't ride in the back unless you're busy raping the chick in your custody.  Also, cop cars generally don't have cameras pointing inside the car (although, now that you're mentioning it, it would be a good idea).


The dash cam usually can be turned around if there is reason to CYA.
 
2013-10-23 06:55:20 AM
Firethorn::

That's the old UCMJ, given that it specifies that force without consent and makes it impossible to rape your spouse.  It also doesn't mention intoxication at all.  The Newer code is much broader, but still has the element that the person has to have been involuntarily drugged in order for it to ...


The military is taking a much stricter interpretation these days. They've been dealing with a few lawsuits regarding how rape cases have been handled in the past.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/02/us-usa-military-sexualassa ul t-idUSBRE9800F020130902
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_mil it ary
 
2013-10-23 07:17:11 AM

Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.


So if you're both drunk can you file rape charges against each other? No? Just the woman? Yeah that's what I thought.
 
2013-10-23 07:21:00 AM
Zima Zucks
 
2013-10-23 07:25:23 AM
You men's rights guys are a bunch of assholes
 
2013-10-23 07:29:03 AM
Want 'men's rights'? Try the Middle East. (this is a male saying this btw)
 
2013-10-23 07:30:38 AM

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

Seriously? Fine... here you go:

http://www.slc.edu/offices-services/security/assault/Penal_Law.html

The only part that mentions intoxication:

"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his consent.

Typically, if they are not blacked out / incoherent, consent is still possible as long as they did consent to the intoxication.(ie willing got drunk)

Arsayalalyur: omeganuepsilon: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

[citation needed]

And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:

http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm120.htm

They don't mention intoxication at all.

They do have:
If there is actual consent, although obtained by fraud, the act is not rape, but if to the accused's knowledge the victim is of unsound mind or unconscious to an extent rendering him or her incapable of giving consent, the act is rape.

So again, I ask for a citation, knowing that you cannot come up with one that stands across many areas as a general rule.  If you do find one that protects the 3 appletini "drunk" attention whore looking to get laid and then claim rape, it's going to be somewhat obscure, not qualifying for "It's the way it works" as an absolute.

Oh, you'll find plenty of laws about how sodomy is still illegal, or how missionary is still the only legal position, but nothing so conservative to say that alcohol = rape.

Is this one better? http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/130/130.30%282%29.pdf Seems that the courts don't exactly agree with you.


What do you mean? Those look like jury instructions, not legal decisions. Plus, the "administered without his consent" language is still present in the definition of mentally incapacitated.
 
2013-10-23 07:33:46 AM

HindiDiscoMonster: log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5

you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.

ok, you have to tell me... what color?


Blue #4
 
2013-10-23 07:36:52 AM

spawn73: MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?

So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool.


Actually, I agree, when they're overdone. In this case, I think it still has some life left in it and it was certainly appropriate to the situation.
 
2013-10-23 07:38:11 AM

omeganuepsilon: Alonjar: There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.

[citation needed]

"Drunk" comes in a wide variety of states.  Blacked out to barely tipsy but just enough to make driving illegal.

On that lower end, if she said yes, it's not automatically rape because consent is impossible.

Take your crusade elsewhere.


If consent is impossible how is it not automatically rape rape?
 
2013-10-23 07:42:27 AM

omeganuepsilon: Alonjar: There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.

[citation needed]

"Drunk" comes in a wide variety of states.  Blacked out to barely tipsy but just enough to make driving illegal.

On that lower end, if she said yes, it's not automatically rape because consent is impossible.

Take your crusade elsewhere.


There is no way that anyone handcuffed in the back of a police car is able to give consent, drunk or not.
 
2013-10-23 07:44:39 AM

Arsayalalyur: The military is taking a much stricter interpretation these days. They've been dealing with a few lawsuits regarding how rape cases have been handled in the past.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/02/us-usa-military-sexualassa ul t-idUSBRE9800F020130902
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sexual_assault_in_the_United_States_mil it ary



Lawsuits don't actually change what the law says, especially in matters like this.

The first case seems confusing.  While the article mentions a lot of attention on how intoxicated the midshipman was, it also mentions 'charged with rape', then downgrades that to 'sexual assault' in the body of the article.  Besides this, allegation was blacked out, which I take to mean 'unconcious' or at least 'unresponsive' in this context.  Which crosses over where I drew the line for rape of a voluntarily self-intoxicated person at 'unable to express enthusiastic consent' in my previous post.

The second still doesn't actually contain 'intoxication', 'drunk', or 'alcohol'.

I remain convinced that sex with an intoxicated person remains legal(at least in most areas) so long as:
1.  They took the drug(s) knowingly and voluntarily
2.  They haven't actually passed out or become unresponsive, IE
3.  The intoxicated person expressed actual consent to the sexual acts they were involved in.  I don't play with 'she didn't say no' crap.

Arsayalalyur: Is this one better? http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/130/130.30%282%29.pdf Seems that the courts don't exactly agree with you.


*reads article*.  Nope, it still has 'administered to him or her without his or her consent'.  If the person consumed the alcohol(or other drug) completely voluntarily they don't count as 'mentally incapacitated' and thus their consent to sex while drunk is still valid.
 
2013-10-23 08:00:24 AM
The guy I have Farky'd as "Climate derper" is really trying too hard in this thread.
 
2013-10-23 08:01:15 AM
I was visibly trying to make eye contact with her and felt like she was purposefully not paying attention to what was going on in the back seat

Well, not to white knight a cop or anything, but could it possibly be because she was rather busy driving at the time? Sue the asshole that fingered you sure, and get him fired and arrested if possible, but it seems a bit unreasonable to expect the driver to take her eyes off the road to watch over what's going on in the back seat on the off chance that her partner suddenly decides to start raping the suspect...
 
2013-10-23 08:09:03 AM

feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?


The long arm of the law?
 
2013-10-23 08:10:32 AM
she appears to have been much hotter back in 2011.
 
2013-10-23 08:16:22 AM

RobSeace: Well, not to white knight a cop or anything, but could it possibly be because she was rather busy driving at the time?


Standard rules:
1.  Nobody rides in back with the perp.
2.  If somebody HAS to ride in the back with the perp, it should be the same sex officer.

I'm betting she knew what was going on and didn't care or even approved.
 
2013-10-23 08:27:09 AM
I'm surprised that no one yet has pointed out that she's a dude.
 
2013-10-23 08:28:15 AM
Never trust a cop.
 
2013-10-23 08:31:49 AM

meanmutton: spawn73: MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?

So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool. people laugh because that's how memes work. Morons can't tell the difference between memes and being stupid.

FTFY.


Yeah, there we go.
 
2013-10-23 08:47:11 AM

kim jong-un: There is no way that anyone handcuffed in the back of a police car is able to give consent, drunk or not.


Now THIS I agree with.  It's illegal other various statutes on 'abuse of authority', 'in the power of', and such depending upon the specific laws involved.

For example, 'in the chain of command' ALWAYS counts as coercion under the UCMJ.
 
2013-10-23 08:49:10 AM
Daily Fail + "smoking hot" + "w/pics" = NGTRTFA.

/Won't get fooled again
 
2013-10-23 08:51:36 AM
they should be able to verify her claim about the text. and while that doesn't exactly incriminate him it is a breach of protocol. I wouldn't look for any help from the female officer either. cops are a tight group and they rarely snitch on each other.  she would be an outcast in the dept if she did. which is probably why she kept her mouth shut.  her partner may even have dirt on her as leverage.
 
2013-10-23 08:52:34 AM
I'm calling bullshiat.

If you want to call me a misogynistic jerk, go ahead.  The huge percentage of false accusations lately, including the stupid "I was raped outside a bank because I was drunk and held a dude's mouth to my crotch" video from yesterday, have given me enough to rest easy doubting this person.
 
2013-10-23 08:56:45 AM

abhorrent1: Arsayalalyur: You are considered unable to give consent if you are intoxicated.

So if you're both drunk can you file rape charges against each other? No? Just the woman? Yeah that's what I thought.


I don't think there's ever been a case where both parties have filed rape claims against each other. I could be wrong. I'm not an expert, just started getting involved with this.  Male rape claims are rarely filed, but they're out there. Mostly male on male, but there can be female on male.

The climate in the military is changing, especially in the Air Force. Court cases set precedents. I don't have the citations, but there are plenty of cases, even civilian side, where it's been ruled as non-consensual.

Let's put it this way, tattoo parlors aren't supposed give tattoos if you're drunk, you can't legally sign contracts drunk, marriages can get annulled... tons of legal sticking points where you can't give consent if you're intoxicated, but somehow we give a pass on the drunk girl's ability to consent. I think some of you can't fathom having sex with a girl unless she's drunk.
 
2013-10-23 09:03:52 AM

Arsayalalyur: but somehow we give a pass on the drunk girl's ability to consent.


1.  You haven't yet cited a case or law where a man has been convicted of rape where it's part of the record that the woman who consented the night of, as opposed to being unconcious or something.
2.  Equal opportunity means that if we judge a woman unable to consent because she's been drinking, that means a man can't either, thus running into the problem of 'mutual rape'.  I don't like that, though I suppose there are twisted circumstances out there where it might happen.
 
2013-10-23 09:05:39 AM
I think he was just trying to text her on the way back to the office.

How does the media get these things so wrong?
 
2013-10-23 09:12:59 AM
I remember a similar case of a German officer accused of fingering a drunk arrestee in a holding cell, claiming it was just a strip search. The most shocking part was, that the cop actually got convicted to 4 years in prison, despite the victim's less then stellar criminal record (lying drunk druggie biatch whore the whole shebang), but then, the officer's record turned out to be not that stellar either (multiple molestation accusations already) and I guess this one was too much for the blue line in the end.
 
2013-10-23 09:15:09 AM

log_jammin: Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.

I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.


Me too, and in this case it was my wife(girlfriend at the time). The CT state trooper in question emailed my wife and texted her suggestive things. I emailed him back, then filed a formal complaint. This after he was the lead on a case involving my wife being nearly raped by her ex boss. And no my wife wasnt asking for it. The guy was 60 years old(fat, ugly and not rich lol) and she was 28 at the time. In the troopers mind evidently the proper time to solicit a woman for sex was immediately after the harassment investigation.  Hopefully hes not a cop anymore. If he ever pulls me over it will be an interesting dashcam video.

I'm inclined to believe this girls story but who knows.
 
2013-10-23 09:17:37 AM

Firethorn: Arsayalalyur: but somehow we give a pass on the drunk girl's ability to consent.

1.  You haven't yet cited a case or law where a man has been convicted of rape where it's part of the record that the woman who consented the night of, as opposed to being unconcious or something.
2.  Equal opportunity means that if we judge a woman unable to consent because she's been drinking, that means a man can't either, thus running into the problem of 'mutual rape'.  I don't like that, though I suppose there are twisted circumstances out there where it might happen.


1. Look up Stuebenville, Ohio. There's others. I've done enough Googling today and have work to do.
2. It could happen, but statistically i'st the woman who will file for rape. The man could, but he'd have a tougher time with it.
 
2013-10-23 09:42:07 AM
Daily Mail? Smoking hot?

i.imgur.com
 
2013-10-23 09:55:13 AM
I can believe her. She's a nice looking girl. It's not unbelievable that a jerk-ass cop would totally try to cop a feel.
 
2013-10-23 10:10:34 AM

Arsayalalyur: 1. Look up Stuebenville, Ohio. There's others. I've done enough Googling today and have work to do.
2. It could happen, but statistically i'st the woman who will file for rape. The man could, but he'd have a tougher time with it.



Stuebenville, Ohio:   Now unconscious, she was stripped naked and the second accused, Malik, also vaginally violated her with his fingers.

Try again, she lost conciousness, and was probably 'insensiate' minutes before that.  No capability to express consent.

As for the second part, when it comes to criminal charges it's the prosecutor who decides whether to go forward with charges or not.  When a citizen 'presses charges' they're actually agreeing to testify and what not.  The prosecutor can go ahead without it, or decline despite it.

In the case of mutually drunk people, it'd be tough to justify charging the male without charging the female, unless you have some sort of 'drunk level' factor like the age rule(age/2+7).
 
2013-10-23 10:15:47 AM
You can't say rape on an airplane!
 
2013-10-23 10:17:35 AM
I sound fat:

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.


where can I sign up for your newsletter?  this is spot on.
 
2013-10-23 10:21:10 AM

Firethorn:Citation checked.  Only reference to 'intoxicated' is when you're mentally incapacitated(temporary) by being dosed without your consent:
FTC: '"Mentally incapacitated" means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him without his consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his consent.'

In other words if you're slipped a roofie or even a spiked drink, then it's rape when you sober up and realize you wouldn't have done what you did if you hadn't been drugged against your will(or even if you would have, but odds are no prosecutions would come from that).  If you got drunk/high completely voluntarily?  Then it's still on your head(you can still legally consent)...


Arsayalalyur: And here's the UCMJ article for us military types:

That's the old UCMJ, given that it specifies that force without consent and makes it impossible to rape your spouse.  It also doesn't mention intoxication at all.  The Newer code is much broader, but still has the element that the person has to have been involuntarily drugged in order for it to count as not being able to give consent.
FTA - (5)administering to that other person by force or threat of force, or without the knowledge or consent of that person, a drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance and thereby substantially impairing the ability of that other person to appraise or control conduct;

So, for both examples you gave, as long as the opposite person became intoxicated of their own knowledge and free will, it is still not rape to have sex with them if they consent, even under the influence.


It is, however, sexual assault:
(b) Sexual Assault.-Any person subject to this chapter who-
... (3) commits a sexual act upon another person when the other person is incapable of consenting to the sexual act due to-
... (A) impairment by any drug, intoxicant, or other similar substance, and that condition is known or reasonably should be known by the person; or
is guilty of sexual assault and shall be punished as a court-martial may direct.


Firethorn: I remain convinced that sex with an intoxicated person remains legal(at least in most areas) so long as:
1.  They took the drug(s) knowingly and voluntarily
2.  They haven't actually passed out or become unresponsive, IE
3.  The intoxicated person expressed actual consent to the sexual acts they were involved in.  I don't play with 'she didn't say no' crap.


Well, you can remain convinced of it all you want. However, ignorance of the law is not a defense. In many jurisdictions, if the intoxicated person lacks capacity to consent, even due to their voluntary intoxication, it will still be sexual assault or rape, regardless of their mumbled affirmative.

That said, one thing to bear in mind is that the discussion with Arsayalalyur was already off the rails earlier with mention of someone being merely drunk as being unable to consent. That's not true - incapacity due to intoxication requires that a jury find that the victim lacked the ability to understand what was going on. Basically, take the "passed out or become unresponsive" bit you mention and add caffeine - that sort of awake but unaware level of intoxication is a far cry from "drunk". At that point, they can't express  actual consent in your point three above, regardless of what they say, because they have no idea what's going on.
 
2013-10-23 10:22:42 AM

dryknife: Zima Zucks


img.fark.net

"What's your zign?"

"Ztop."
 
2013-10-23 10:23:02 AM

Firethorn: Arsayalalyur: but somehow we give a pass on the drunk girl's ability to consent.

1.  You haven't yet cited a case or law where a man has been convicted of rape where it's part of the record that the woman who consented the night of, as opposed to being unconcious or something.
2.  Equal opportunity means that if we judge a woman unable to consent because she's been drinking, that means a man can't either, thus running into the problem of 'mutual rape'.  I don't like that, though I suppose there are twisted circumstances out there where it might happen.


That's a misleading description. We're not talking about someone who's had a drink or two. We're talking about someone who's had a fifth or two.

/also, it has nothing to do with "equal opportunity".
 
2013-10-23 10:23:49 AM

Milk D: I sound fat:

oh come on.  you dont actually believe that do you?  So if im drunk and I run over kids, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I rob a bank, thats my fault.  If Im drunk and I lose my money in a casino, thats my fault.  If im drunk and I agree to sleep with someone, thats their fault?

you are a fool.

where can I sign up for your newsletter?  this is spot on.


+2
 
2013-10-23 10:26:53 AM

Firethorn: Try again, she lost conciousness, and was probably 'insensiate' minutes before that.  No capability to express consent.


I see we're on the same page.
 
2013-10-23 10:35:12 AM
Did anyone smell his finger?
 
2013-10-23 10:36:17 AM
The officers in question?
images.artistdirect.com

/fark, I am disapoint
 
2013-10-23 10:38:52 AM

spawn73: meanmutton: spawn73: MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?

So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool. people laugh because that's how memes work. Morons can't tell the difference between memes and being stupid.

FTFY.

Yeah, there we go.


OK. Keep commenting without knowing what the headline or article are about. Apparently that's less moronic than pointing it out.
 
2013-10-23 11:25:12 AM
i.dailymail.co.uk  encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com

obscure?

//got nothin'
 
2013-10-23 11:26:17 AM
+1 Subby
 
2013-10-23 11:37:09 AM

MrBallou: spawn73: meanmutton: spawn73: MrBallou: TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.

You know how I know you didn't RTFA?

So, that's the new "Wait, what?" comment.

How about you just saying, RTFA, instead of asking a question? Repeating what 1000s have done before makes you look like a tool. people laugh because that's how memes work. Morons can't tell the difference between memes and being stupid.

FTFY.

Yeah, there we go.

OK. Keep commenting without knowing what the headline or article are about. Apparently that's less moronic than pointing it out.


Yeah, I think you're slightly confused. The headline was funny btw.
 
2013-10-23 12:27:00 PM

TheCheese: They haven't made Zima since 2008, Subbs.


It's the name of the arresting officer. Try this new thing called "reading".
 
2013-10-23 12:29:00 PM

Kit Fister: Daily Mail? Smoking hot?

[i.imgur.com image 500x465]


Yep, subby almost got me to click the link until I saw the Daily Fail tag.

www.troll.me
 
2013-10-23 12:54:06 PM

MOGGEE: [i.dailymail.co.uk image 306x423]  [encrypted-tbn3.gstatic.com image 259x194]

obscure?

//got nothin'


Cat is not obscure. Cat is adorable.
 
2013-10-23 01:17:09 PM
Some people will fark anything. Nothing smoking about that.
 
2013-10-23 01:35:20 PM
There are plenty of cases of cops doing this. So I'm inclined to think the story is legit. On the other hand, with what DUI's cost these days if you can get out of one by giving a BJ. Do it. You're talking up to 10 grand and not having a mark on your driving record/arrest that could prevent employment and such.

/Or just don't drink and drive, but what is the fun in that
 
2013-10-23 01:41:15 PM

THE GREAT NAME: Where are the RAPE LIARs who claim they were "sort-of" raped once at college but didn't report it and therefore have the automatic right to "win" any internet discussion on the subject? I don't see them! Where's the usual cry of "all men are rapists except ones who agree with my web forum comments!" Why are they not screaming for this cop, and indeed all cops, to be castrated on the precautionary principal that they might have actually done it?

Oh I know. The woman is attractive while the RAPE LIARs are fat and ugly. Good old envy ensures this woman is on her own.

It's always the women who are so gross that most men would need medical assistance just to be able to rape them who make the most noise and try the hardest to use the rape issue to push people around. They say rape is about power. Well, so is RAPE LYING.


If they didn't report it, how are they rape liars? Helloooo, they can't lie if they never accuse, right?

Also, lying about rape is a bad thing, which has lots of consequences for everybody involved. But these accusations should still be at least investigated, and then if the report is found to be falsified, the person accusing should be subject to perjury penalizations/falsely reporting(which wastes dept of justice funds/time)/attempting to frame another person for your wrongdoing(extortion?vigilante-ism?)

If it's so far within reasonable doubt that trial will not take place, have a note on both of their records about the incident, to expire within 5-7 years. (Not sex offender registry, just "Hey this happened once, so if it happens again, you may want to double check everything" for law enforcement.)

If it's not doubtful, then the case would go to trial before a jury, to determine if guilty or not.

I think our system of law is setup so the above is what should happen, but the first step is never acted upon for falsifications, because perjury cases don't make judges. Even if they should.

Oh, and guys get raped/drugged raped too(by both sexes), and your body can have positive reactions during rape, even if you don't want that to happen either.
AND RAPE SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN TO ANYBODY.
Report all rape. Let investigators investigate.
 
2013-10-23 01:49:48 PM

fickenchucker: I'm calling bullshiat.

If you want to call me a misogynistic jerk, go ahead.  The huge percentage of false accusations lately, including the stupid "I was raped outside a bank because I was drunk and held a dude's mouth to my crotch" video from yesterday, have given me enough to rest easy doubting this person.


This chick was left outside on the sidewalk after the fact, pics of her in daytime sleeping on the sidewalk. If you're talking about Athens, Ohio. She also went to the Police Dept. once she figured out what day it was, and was asked about the pictures circulating online, which she didn't know about.
Here's an article about a witness, note the line about how she's really quiet. Check steubenville rape thread from 6 days ago.
http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2013/10/20/athens-witness-gives- ac count-of-alleged-rape-near-Ohio-University.html
 
2013-10-23 02:39:34 PM
100+ and I'm the first?  Sad day....

img.fark.netwww.unixstickers.com
 
2013-10-23 02:46:12 PM

feckingmorons: You don't ride in the back, if there were two cops they both should have been up front. Someone is obviously lying. Is there not video?


As someone who had to follow up with IA after being the bottom of a really shiatty police dog-pile, I wouldn't be surprised if she was telling the truth.  Cops are Type 'A' personalities, and tend to be more shiatheads than not.

I've worked in both Justice and Corrections and I find that to be the case. The really good cops are godsends, but the majority are just testosterone driven assholes.
 
2013-10-23 02:50:10 PM

justanotherfarkinfarker: There are plenty of cases of cops doing this. So I'm inclined to think the story is legit. On the other hand, with what DUI's cost these days if you can get out of one by giving a BJ. Do it. You're talking up to 10 grand and not having a mark on your driving record/arrest that could prevent employment and such.

/Or just don't drink and drive, but what is the fun in that


If it were an option, I would definitely give a BJ to get out of a DUI. I'd even swallow. I'd even give him three IOUs for future BJs. Hell, I'd go down on the female officer too.
 
2013-10-23 04:00:13 PM
www.cotwa.info
 
2013-10-23 04:13:19 PM

badgerb: www.cotwa.info


I wonder if Al Sharpton knows about this.
 
2013-10-23 05:51:46 PM

MagSeven: omeganuepsilon: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: Yeah... I'm usually not one to doubt a sexual assault claim, but it sounds like she did the ole "maybe we can work out another way" and then changed her tune afterwards when it didn't work.

I don't know. My money is on her story being at least most'y true. I've actually seen a cop(former cop now) be dumb enough to start texting someone he wrote a ticket to, by getting the number from the records.

If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

I think it'd be enough to scare me into submission if the driver just lets the other one get in the back seat with me while she drives.  IF a cop is going to do something bad right in the same car as their partner, they're typically an accomplice. And scared enough of him and a possibility he could get violent and no escape path for me, sitting there handcuffed.

Between the two, reason enough to not scream, a wasted effort that could only make matters worse.  The female cop may even be a victim as well who's mentally beat down just enough to let her partner have his way.  Either blackmail or subbing to the alpha, or truly psychopathic.

Heh. I shiat you not, there was an SVU episode last week (or the week before) that you pretty much recapped in your post.


Yep, the episode pretty much picks up where the real life story leaves off, with the SVU team investigating the dirty cops involved. I bet the real life case was water cooler talk around the courthouse, and SVU consultants brought it to the show's writers for an easy episode.
 
2013-10-23 07:19:29 PM
We've really got to talk about what Fark considers Smoking Hot.
 
2013-10-23 07:20:43 PM

Arsayalalyur: Is this one better? http://www.nycourts.gov/judges/cji/2-PenalLaw/130/130.30%282%29.pdf Seems that the courts don't exactly agree with you.


No, do you even read your own citations?

MENTALLY INCAPACITATED means that a person is rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling his or
her conduct owing to the influence of a narcotic or intoxicating substance administered to him or her without his or her consent, or to any other act committed upon him without his or her consent.

kim jong-un: There is no way that anyone handcuffed in the back of a police car is able to give consent, drunk or not.


That is not what the conversation is about, you may want to start again from the beginning, but I will recap.  Some people made a claim that drunk sex = rape because drunk people cannot give consent.(in a nutshell)... as an absolute statement.  As is the case with absolutes much of the time, they were dead wrong and struggle with a citation.

I fully agree that if this happened to her, the lady in the article, it shouldn't have, sober or drunk.  Other things are possibly involved, being under duress would be plainly evident.

Theaetetus: That's not true - incapacity due to intoxication requires that a jury find that the victim lacked the ability to understand what was going on.


It's pretty bad when you're on my team against the morons.
/and the following is not to you, just steaming off after work..

Lower levels of drunk "yes" are very often considered consent, almost always.

Mostly because people like to have a few drinks and then sex.  Even a lot of drinks and then have sloppy sex.  It's often the very goal, originating long before they even start drinking.
____
The thing with drinking and consent, is primarily passed out and obviously incoherent people.  They are what the law is designed to protect(and the people being slipped mickies, but I'm not talking about that so keep it in mind).

 If a prosecution can prove that a person was out of their gourd drunk, they will typically win.

People making stupid decisions when drunk and regretting them later =\= people incapable of comprehending reality and/or unconscious.

Really, this category only has a difference of a small amount of time, because if you're that farked up, when you pass out, you're dead to the world.  If that person passed out, would you be able to wake them easily?  If yes, then they're more or less fair game(if they say yes).  If no, then they're off limits.

The first, stupid decision makers, is often met with "grow up and accept responsibility for your actions"  the later is met with "What's his name, I have duct tape and a tire iron in my car"(ideally at any rate, obviously not the case in reality).

That is also the line the law draws in most places, much to the pleasure of men and women around the globe.
/contrary to what some cultish causes would have you think


I think the argument arises from people who think even a tiny amount of alcohol is the debil, or another variety of ignorance and mis-education on the varying effects of alcohol in different doses.  Including the . o O (I'll act drunk so I don't have to own up to my stupidity) O o . thinkers.

/now I'm relaxed
//long day
 
2013-10-23 07:24:01 PM

Alonjar: Rhino_man: log_jammin: Rhino_man: If it were JUST the texting, then I'd be with you... but the texting combined with her not saying a farking word to get the attention of the other officer?

even if it was consensual the cop is still in the wrong.

Rhino_man: It smells fishy to me.  Pun intended.

very PUNgent.

Truth.  It's unethical, and he should be fired... but I doubt the claim that it wasn't consensual, therefore I doubt that it was CRIMINAL.

There is no such thing as consent when the other person is drunk.  Which the officer had been arresting her for... so he was obviously aware of her drunken state and her inability to properly weigh decisions to grant consent.


Someone under arrest can't consent either.
 
2013-10-23 07:24:15 PM

Nasty Celt: We've really got to talk about what Fark considers Smoking Hot.


Now that the pattern is established that "smoking hot", especially plus "daily fail", is usually is a hideous hose beast, a semi(or fully depending on your tastes and standards) hot lady is a kind of reverse troll.

Just know that the term really means "gamble".  Sure we get some winners, but over all, the house wins.
 
2013-10-23 08:23:05 PM

log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5

you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.

ok, you have to tell me... what color?

Blue #4


aaah, so like a sky blue... pretty. loooooove cobalt blue though. I wish we had that here.
 
2013-10-23 10:25:59 PM
I'm glad she fingered the cop.
 
2013-10-23 11:35:41 PM

log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5

you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.


HDM came out of derp speed too quickly. The post in question is as clumsy as it was stupid. HDM has failed Log_jammin for the last time. You, Bashir and A(????) Infinite Play List, are now Blue #4 highlighted, semi-literate, punjab fark handle having, mildly amusing, HDM supplanting, contributing to LJs day as long as it pleases him. Pray LJ does not alter your profile further.
 
2013-10-24 01:20:41 AM

Theaetetus: Firethorn: Try again, she lost conciousness, and was probably 'insensiate' minutes before that.  No capability to express consent.

I see we're on the same page.


Darn it, I was spooling up for a nice rant... ;)

I did butcher English yet again though, It's spelled insensate, I hate being stuck at work using IE without spellcheck...

To keep it short:  In my mind 'expressed actual consent' in my head means that there was enough capability left between the ears for him or her to form either complete sentences consenting to sexual activities, or body skills to do the same.  I won't get into details, but 'she didn't say no' isn't actually my deciding line, it's pretty far over.  Barely decipherable mumbles, unless it's his/her natural state(and not from mental disability, deafness perhaps), don't count.

Though one bit will remain:

Theaetetus: That's a misleading description. We're not talking about someone who's had a drink or two. We're talking about someone who's had a fifth or two.

/also, it has nothing to do with "equal opportunity".


1.  Arguing with Arsayalalyur, not you, HE was the one who's pushing the very incorrect 'intoxicated=rape' standard.  He implied 'a drink or two'.
2.  I used equal opportunity when I should have probably used 'equal treatment under the law' or 'non-discriminatory' or something.  Basically you can't say that a woman can't consent to sex while intoxicated without saying the same for men today while expecting it to stick.  Butchering english, but it allowed me to use 2 words instead of 5ish.
 
2013-10-24 03:10:59 AM

Por que tan serioso: log_jammin: HindiDiscoMonster: If it comes down to he/she said... I will believe her. Ratio of Bad:Good cops is about 95:5

you have your pretty color because I find you humorous most of the time. It will be a shame if you lose it if you start derping too hard.

HDM came out of derp speed too quickly. The post in question is as clumsy as it was stupid. HDM has failed Log_jammin for the last time. You, Bashir and A(????) Infinite Play List, are now Blue #4 highlighted, semi-literate, punjab fark handle having, mildly amusing, HDM supplanting, contributing to LJs day as long as it pleases him. Pray LJ does not alter your profile further.


I was going more like this

i131.photobucket.com
 
2013-10-24 01:00:50 PM
SOP.
 
2013-10-24 02:44:08 PM

i upped my meds-up yours: dryknife: Zima Zucks

[img.fark.net image 466x350]

"What's your zign?"

"Ztop."


It that Perry Ferrell?
 
Displayed 140 of 140 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report