[News] Patrick Kane being investigated for rape. UPD: DA announces no charges

[zamler]

Originally Posted by flameswin

In all seriousness a girl has every freaking right to change her mind at any point in the evening. The fact that a girl goes to a hotel room with a guy doesn't equal consent, that's ridiculous.

What does equal consent anyway? And don't you mean either sex has a right to change their mind at any point?

[GreenLantern2814]

Originally Posted by zamler

What does equal consent anyway? And don't you mean either sex has a right to change their mind at any point?

Jesus ####ing Christ, dude.

[dino7c]

Originally Posted by the2bears

I would say he's a fairly minor celebrity now, more of a curiosity piece. Just my opinion, but Hangover Part 2 isn't much of a resume builder.

Mike Tyson is more well known than any hockey player ever...then, now, doesn't matter the guy is known worldwide

You could go many places where nobody knows who the hell Sidney Crosby is but everyone has heard of Mike Tyson

[schteve_d]

Originally Posted by zamler

What does equal consent anyway?

Have you ever been with a women or is your experience in such things coming mostly from odd porn?

[thefoss1957]

Originally Posted by RougeUnderoos

I'm sure you aren't saying it's okay to force people to have sex with you because they in your hotel room after dark, but it's coming across that way.

Maybe you mean she went to his room to have sex with him, and lied afterwards about having been assaulted?

As your comments read right now, you seem to be saying that she went to his hotel room and Tyson was then allowed to have sex with her whether she wanted it or not because 'what else did she expect to happen?'.

I am NOT a lawyer...however, there seem to be circumstances where consent is IMPLIED...this would be one of them, a girl who voluntarily accompanies a guy to a hotel room, at a time when for the vast majority of people would be asleep...

The truth is, in this circumstance, impossible to tell, verbal consent may or may not have been given, and if one party has "buyer's remorse" and withdraws consent, it is difficult to say that WHEN that consent was withdrawn. Legally, it comes down to one party's word against another, whether this withdrawal was clear at the time, or if it was withdrawn after intercourse was in progress, or even completed. Reading accounts of Tyson's trial, it seemed to boil down to his word/her word...

Unfair as it may be to a potential "victim", I don't feel that this disputation should be sufficient evidence to convict. And unless there was, say, vaginal bruising (which occurs normally with intercourse) that would indicate forcible entry, as opposed to consensual entry (the bruising patterns, apparently, are different), a verbal account, alone, should NOT be sufficient evidence for conviction.

Of course, I don't have these details of either Tyson or Kane's case...

[jayswin]

Originally Posted by zamler

What does equal consent anyway? And don't you mean either sex has a right to change their mind at any point?

Consent is when the girl taps her hand against her left hip and goes "cluck cluck cluck, the batter is stepping up to the plate", and then turns her head to the right. I thought everyone knew that.

And yes, either sex has the right to change their mind at any point.

Haha, "what equals consent, anyways?".

[N-E-B]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

I am NOT a lawyer...however, there seem to be circumstances where consent is IMPLIED...this would be one of them, a girl who voluntarily accompanies a guy to a hotel room, at a time when for the vast majority of people would be asleep...

The truth is, in this circumstance, impossible to tell, verbal consent may or may not have been given, and if one party has "buyer's remorse" and withdraws consent, it is difficult to say that WHEN that consent was withdrawn. Legally, it comes down to one party's word against another, whether this withdrawal was clear at the time, or if it was withdrawn after intercourse was in progress, or even completed. Reading accounts of Tyson's trial, it seemed to boil down to his word/her word...

Unfair as it may be to a potential "victim", I don't feel that this disputation should be sufficient evidence to convict. And unless there was, say, vaginal bruising (which occurs normally with intercourse) that would indicate forcible entry, as opposed to consensual entry (the bruising patterns, apparently, are different), a verbal account, alone, should NOT be sufficient evidence for conviction.

Of course, I don't have these details of either Tyson or Kane's case...

I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as implied consent for sex. Implied consent would be consenting to physical contact in sports by voluntarily playing contact sports (or something like that).

[zamler]

Originally Posted by GreenLantern2814

Jesus ####ing Christ, dude.

Snarky post aside, do you realize that consent has become a very complex issue?

[thefoss1957]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as implied consent for sex. Implied consent would be consenting to physical contact in sports by voluntarily playing contact sports (or something like that).

N-E-B...would you invite a person of the opposite sex to your hotel room, late at night (or early in the morning), if you DIDN'T plan to have sex? And IF a person did invite YOU so, what would be your expectations of their intent?

[CliffFletcher]

Originally Posted by N-E-B

I'm not a lawyer either, but I'm pretty sure there's no such thing as implied consent for sex.

Of course there is. Do you think every time consensual sex happens in the world one of the parties says "should we have sex now?", and the other replies "yes."

[V]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

N-E-B...would you invite a person of the opposite sex to your hotel room, late at night (or early in the morning), if you DIDN'T plan to have sex? And IF a person did invite YOU so, what would be your expectations of their intent?

I'm not going to wade through this disaster of a thread, but please tell me someone's linked the video of Dennis talking about women sleeping with him on a boat because of the implication.

[RougeUnderoos]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

I am NOT a lawyer...

You don't have to be a lawyer to figure out if someone wants to have sex with you while it's happening, about to happen, or if you simply want it to happen.

It's not complicated.

[thefoss1957]

Rouge...as I am pushing 60, consent for me is begging the old lady, and having her sigh: "all right"

It's impossible to read the mood of peri-menopausal females

[Street Pharmacist]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

N-E-B...would you invite a person of the opposite sex to your hotel room, late at night (or early in the morning), if you DIDN'T plan to have sex? And IF a person did invite YOU so, what would be your expectations of their intent?

Video Games! Magic the Gathering! Hop Scotch!

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by ricardodw

Yet more value added comments.

So, I politely responded to a point I disagreed with. On a message board. What exactly did you come here for?

[the2bears]

Originally Posted by dino7c

Mike Tyson is more well known than any hockey player ever...then, now, doesn't matter the guy is known worldwide

You could go many places where nobody knows who the hell Sidney Crosby is but everyone has heard of Mike Tyson

I agree. And if we're talking about being well known then yes, Tyson is still quite a celebrity. In the original context, Tyson's conviction was brought up as something that did not affect him. So while he may still be really well known, he's not likely to be doing to many appearances or endorsements.

[bax]

Originally Posted by thefoss1957

N-E-B...would you invite a person of the opposite sex to your hotel room, late at night (or early in the morning), if you DIDN'T plan to have sex? And IF a person did invite YOU so, what would be your expectations of their intent?

This is pretty vague man. A person could be so wasted that they don't know what they are doing, they could be under the impression that the hotel is an after party, they could be expecting others to be there, they could just need a place to crash.

There are lots of plausible explanations and just because you are present during the situation does not mean that you are consenting.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Location based consent, what a time we live in.

[Mike F]

Originally Posted by zamler

What does equal consent anyway?

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt and assume this was a legitimate question, because it actually is a good one.

For the answer under Canadian law, read at least the summary of R. v. Ewanchuk

[GoJetsGo]