I am also surprised by the people itt who didn't know the law. I know plenty of people who are willing to hookup with drunk girls because they aren't opposed to it morally and they don't think there is any meaningful chance it could come back to haunt them, but they all know that it is technically illegal.

ive raped the same girl about 20 times this year good grief i'm a monster

yep im pretty shocked to find out that sex with gf after sharing a meal and a bottle of wine makes me a rapist. i'll turn myself in tomorow, scoundrels and predators such as myself do not deserve to live

I think this is where you're misinterpreting. I seriously doubt it's illegal to have sex while drunk, otherwise DA's would have their hands full. A girl actually has to claim she didn't want to have sex for it to be rape. If she admitted she wanted to have sex at the time, drunk or not, the case would be dismissed.

the laws vary by state and are not all clear and some that I found only make it illegal if the alcohol or drugs were not "administered to the victim with their own consent," but here is the link to the CT laws: http://www.cga.ct.gov/current/pub/ch...htm#sec_53a-70

in Part VI - Sex Offenses it says:

so basically the victim could not only be drunk on her own free will, but the person having sex with her can have no reason to even suspect that she was drunk and still be convicted of rape. technically, this isn't "rape," but many states don't use the word "rape" legally anymore and I believe CT is one of those states. also, notice that the language is not gender neutral.



I think the laws are absolutely awful and have vocalized this to the dismay of many friends who have accused me of "victim blaming," "enabling," and being a "rape apologist" as many itt have been accused of, but those are the laws in many/most of the US and by living here people agree to abide by them. With how serious a crime rape is and how long you can end up in jail it is pretty wise to know these laws.

Guess I'll stop suggesting wine bars as a first date location

Ha. It does say:

Which, if I'm reading it correctly, matches up with intuition, i.e. a person that is drunk—but not really, really, drunk—can still give consent. Then again, it's possible it clarifies elsewhere (but I'll never know as that page is super long, and formatted terribly).

mentally incapacitated just means under the influence of a substance or some form or coercion

almost all people agree that the laws are dumb and incriminate people who shouldn't be, but those who defend the laws do so either because they think the pros of incredibly strict laws outweigh the cons. Most of this is related to thinking that more loosely written laws would make it less likely that real victims come forward and real offenders get convicted.

uk law

BOOM - VERDICT: NOT RAPIST. GET IN

suck it you bunch of deviants (not that i'm forcing you to suck it)

Women missing out on a lot more rape accusation opportunities than I first suspected.

No one is going to call a guy who pops in and says, "Yo, bros, I took my wife out for our tenth anniversary. We had a nice dinner and split a bottle of wine. Afterwards, we went home and had sex. In the morning, she woke me up with a kiss and then made me breakfast. Am I a rapist?" a rapist. That, obviously, is a very different story from "I had sex with one of my best friend's sisters after a crazy night out drinking. We were both wasted and it just happened." Foldndark's attempts to equate his own telling of his own story with meeting a girl, having a couple drinks, going back to her place, bumping uglies, and then doing it all again next Friday is him just running interference for himself.

According to the page you linked:

"Under the influence of a substance" and "rendered temporarily incapable of appraising or controlling such person’s conduct [under the influence of a substance]" are very different.

This spring a good friend of mine got married in New Orleans. The wedding was on a Friday evening and the reception was open bar. Needless to say a large group took the after party to the French Quarter and yes the bride and groom arrived later in the night. We were all getting pretty sloppy drunk on Hand Grenades which are the most insanely strong drinks you'll ever try (if you've been to New Orleans you'll know what I mean).

I really hope my friend didn't rape his new wife that night, what a tragedy that would be.

Even accepting that as true, CalledDownLight seems to be suggesting that the above husband/wife case might indeed legally be considered rape (which is absurd).

I understand why they have laws against taking advantage of drunks. They want to avoid random guys plying random girls to pass out drunk and sexing them. It's difficult to write the law in such a way that makes common sense though.

Well this escalated quickly.

Warchant; I'm afraid that 'reputable source' seems way too much like an exact quote from that frathouse forum from earlier, only with all the "bitch" and "slut" references cut out. If there are so many photos of them together both before and after the allegation, why haven't we seen any?

FoldnDark; precisely how do you think the cop was able to ascertain her jealous crazy liar persona from the conversation ALONE WITH HER LAWYER?!?!?

Cotton Hill; don't go lumping "cops burried the case" in with "**** the media is peddling" here. I have no idea what happened between the two of them. I can clearly see what happened with investigating the case. It's not just the media saying this, the actual state attorney has stated the case was not handled properly.

BAIDS; Take a break, please. You've had a little too much to drink to consent to this conversation. Get some sleep. We can converse in the morning, when you're a little less annoying.

Foldndark, I havent read your most recent posts, but congrats on passing pvn for biggest ****ing ****** itt.

seems like Europe has actually had judges direct jurors to rule not guilty in a few cases where the accuser either gave consent and didn't remember it or gave consent and was too drunk to be in total control of their actions so laws definitely differ across the globe and are more relaxed in some US states than in others. I actually thought the stricter of the laws I have found tonight were in affect almost everywhere in the US, but it seems like some states are more lenient if the accuser willingly became intoxicated or incapacitated.

.

"I had sex with one of my best friend's sisters after a crazy night out drinking. We were both wasted and it just happened."

based on my research this would be ok in a lot of states (but not all) assuming she got drunk on her own free will. I didn't know that until tonight. The high school scare tactics worked on me. Still don't think "when in doubt just don't do it" is a bad rule of thumb for most people even if it would be legal.

I don't get it. Is that a brag? Seems like a brag.

Okay. Do you have a cite for the "but not all" part?

So, have you had sex with a girl you'd describe as "wasted?"

Well, that's not what I was doing but it does fit. She never intended to accuse me of rape and even told me so in subsequent conversations. We were wasted, but both knew what we were doing - no different than any husband and wife. We all actually made up a few weeks later, and the issue wasn't the false/inadvertent rape claim which everyone knew wasn't true because we were friends and we all knew I'd never force myself on her, it was that I crossed the line and had sex with my good friend's sister, which I regret. It's fools like you who are making this into something it never was.

And it's often similar fools who take incomplete information and start throwing rocks in cases like the OP. Of course, they slink back into the corners after proven wrong and the damage is done, having cast the scarlett R all willynilly. Perhaps the cops are complete aholes here, but they could be on the right side of this.