Rape laws will kiss common sense goodbye
Stephen Morgan
Rape laws will kiss common
sense goodbye
by mick hume
It is now apparently government policy to see more men
convicted of rape on less evidence. That is a brutal
violation of the principles of criminal justice.
In the wake of the furore over Ulrika Jonsson’s alleged
date rape, the Home Office is to announce long-awaited
rape law reforms in next month’s Queen’s Speech. It is
reported that the new law will severely restrict a man’s
ability to claim that he “honestly believed” the woman
consented to sex, unless he can satisfy the court that he
made efforts to ensure that her agreement was
“genuine and voluntary”. One report says that women
who are under the influence of drink or drugs will
“automatically be regarded as unable to give consent to
sex”.
The Home Secretary, David Blunkett, has made it clear
that the current rate of convictions for rape is
“unacceptable”, and the explicit aim of these reforms is
to find more men guilty. Justice in rape cases is thus to
be made subject to external, political measurements.
As if the Government’s obsession with setting targets
has not done enough damage to the health and
education systems, it is now to be forced upon sexual
offences law.
These reforms will shift the burden of proof on to the
defendant, undermining the presumption of innocence.
It will be possible to convict a man of “accidentally”
raping somebody who he genuinely believed consented
to sex. That is as absurd as it is unjust. Yet it will be
widely accepted because sexual offences are such an
emotive issue, and none of us wants to be seen as
championing some kind of “rights for rapists”.
But we should be more, not less, wary of the extension
of legal power when it encroaches on sexual relations
between partners and acquaintances (now blamed for
most rapes). These proposed reforms raise
authoritarian notions of policing relationships, in the
user-friendly language of feminism. They risk taking sex
further down the road from a private to a public affair,
which has to be negotiated under the voyeuristic eye of
the courts.
Despite the ostensible aim of protecting women it will,
as usual, be the authorities who are “empowered”.
Prosecutors and judges will be left to redefine what it
means for individuals to give consent — ticking boxes to
decide whether the man was sufficiently diligent in
obtaining “voluntary and genuine agreement”, or
whether the woman said “no” loudly enough.
Presumably the courts will have to define exactly what it
means for a woman to be “drunk”. Bring on the bedside
Breathalyser tests. Indeed these proposals will mean
no woman who has had a drink can ever be considered
truly capable of giving consent. Are lawmakers so
unworldly that they cannot tell the difference between a
woman who is drugged and raped, and one who has a
few drinks and ends up in a bed she regrets the
morning after? New Labour is in danger of making
enthusiastic seduction a crime.
The Home Office has dismissed as “complete
nonsense” any notion of people having to sign a
contract before getting into bed. Yet such is the logic of
these reforms that we might find lawyers with an eye for
a shapely fee offering to draw one up anyway. There is
already a campaign, fronted by the Ealing vicarage rape
victim Jill Seward, to include consent forms in packets
of condoms. One entrepreneur claims to have invented
the “consent condom”, printed with the statement “Yes, I
agree to have sex with you”, complete with a space for a
woman’s thumb print. He admits that they might prove a
passion killer.
Of course the messy business of sexual affairs is not
really susceptible to strict codes and legal surveillance.
Yet these reforms will demean both sexes in the eyes of
the law. Rape law increasingly treats women like the
child victims of abuse, considered incapable of giving
consent and in need of special protective measures.
For their part, men are now to be treated more like
unconscious animals, who can be punished even
though they were unaware that they were doing anything
wrong.
Whatever happened to the idea of consenting adults?
--
...many blacks wonder whether black civil rights and abortion fit so
neatly together. Black pregnancies have historically been the target
of social engineers such as Margaret Sanger, founder of Planned
Parenthood. Sanger was convinced that blacks, Jews, Eastern
Europeans, and other non-Aryan groups were detracting from the
creative intellect and social potential of America, and she wanted
those groups' numbers reduced...
-- Greg Keath, in the "Wall Street Journal", 27/9/89
Sky King
rpa...@attbi.com.remove says...
>
> http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3284-462181,00.html
>
>
> Rape laws will kiss common sense goodbye
> by mick hume
>
>
> It is now apparently government policy to see more men
> convicted of rape on less evidence. That is a brutal
> violation of the principles of criminal justice.
>
> In the wake of the furore over Ulrika Jonsson’s alleged
> date rape, the Home Office is to announce long-awaited
> rape law reforms in next month’s Queen’s Speech. It is
> reported that the new law will severely restrict a man’s
> ability to claim that he “honestly believed” the woman
> consented to sex, unless he can satisfy the court that he
> made efforts to ensure that her agreement was
> “genuine and voluntary”. One report says that women
> who are under the influence of drink or drugs will
> “automatically be regarded as unable to give consent to
> sex”.
Oh yes protect the little ladies. Feminist now has society treating
women like little kids..unable to consent to anything. sky
Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they
could not file false rape complaints. sky
>
> Of course the messy business of sexual affairs is not
> really susceptible to strict codes and legal surveillance.
> Yet these reforms will demean both sexes in the eyes of
> the law. Rape law increasingly treats women like the
> child victims of abuse, considered incapable of giving
> consent and in need of special protective measures.
> For their part, men are now to be treated more like
> unconscious animals, who can be punished even
> though they were unaware that they were doing anything
> wrong.
>
> Whatever happened to the idea of consenting adults?
Well feminist killed that. I guess we have to treat women like little
babies from now on. sky
>
Mr. F. Le Mur
->> “genuine and voluntary”. One report says that women
->> who are under the influence of drink or drugs will
->> “automatically be regarded as unable to give consent to
->> sex”.
->
->Oh yes protect the little ladies. Feminist now has society treating
->women like little kids..unable to consent to anything. sky
Feminists are puritans at heart.
Bob
>> means for individuals to give consent -- ticking boxes to
Over on some of those S&M groups you can find "slave" contract
forms for women to sign prior to any sex. Under current laws its
not otherwise safe for men to get within 50 feet of one.
Bob
Parg2000
Subject: Re: Rape laws will kiss common sense goodbye
From: Sky King m...@home.net
Date: 10/29/02 6:30 AM Pacific Standard Time
Message-id:
<cut>
>
>Well feminist killed that. I guess we have to treat women like little
>babies from now on. sky
{Parg) Since women (even feminists) have equal rights by law, it doesn't much
matter how bitter boys like you attempt to "treat" them. If you're so very
concerned about rape issues why not support the idea of contractual rights
concerning consent?
>>
>
>
>
>
>
>
wd
"Bob" <bobx...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:3DBEA7E2...@hotmail.com...
There was something else in history that is similar to what
current rape laws are becomming today.
But i cannot remember what it is.
If it becomes too easy for a man to be accused of and sentenced for rape,
then it would be possible for us to see in the future where women are
murdered
after sex because of fear of wrongfull inprisonment. The mere and slightest
misunderstanding between the man and women could spur this action.
How many people are murdered during a robbery only because of the desire to
leave no wittnesses?
Our legislators really should think before they cave in to every special
intrest groups
law wish-list.
~wd
>
>
>
>
>
deadbeatdad
wd
"deadbeatdad" <johnme...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:qlvtru825pfpmhmd0...@4ax.com...
You must be brain dead.
~wd
Neil
news:urtva8k...@corp.supernews.com:
> There was something else in history that is similar to what
> current rape laws are becomming today.
> But i cannot remember what it is.
Thanks for that.
> If it becomes too easy for a man to be accused of and sentenced for
> rape, then it would be possible for us to see in the future where
> women are murdered
> after sex because of fear of wrongfull inprisonment. The mere and
> slightest misunderstanding between the man and women could spur this
> action.
>
> How many people are murdered during a robbery only because of the
> desire to leave no wittnesses?
Approximately? None.
--
Neil
"Verily when good is hungry it seeks food even in dark caves, and when
it thirsts it drinks even of dead waters." - "The Prophet", Kahlil Gibran
Blair Zajac
<neil....@ntlARSEworld.com> wrote:
> So anyway, wd [serve...@hotmail.com] wrote in message:
> news:urtva8k...@corp.supernews.com:
>
>
> > There was something else in history that is similar to what
> > current rape laws are becomming today.
> > But i cannot remember what it is.
>
> Thanks for that.
>
> > If it becomes too easy for a man to be accused of and sentenced for
> > rape, then it would be possible for us to see in the future where
> > women are murdered
> > after sex because of fear of wrongfull inprisonment. The mere and
> > slightest misunderstanding between the man and women could spur this
> > action.
> >
> > How many people are murdered during a robbery only because of the
> > desire to leave no wittnesses?
>
> Approximately? None.
Wonder where Neil lives, let alone whether he ever reads the newspapers
and/or watches TV news.
Sky King
gary o brien
because as with pre-nups, women will try to evade their
responsibilities, and get the courts to overide them
rogue
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
Dr. Flonkenstein
in an ultimate attempt to be funny
and witty at once, that summum of the evolution
So you are saying: "If you rape a woman, make sure to kill her afterwards".
>
>Our legislators really should think before they cave in to every special
>intrest groups
>law wish-list.
>
>~wd
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
--
Dr Flonkenstein
Alcatroll Labs Inc. Flame, troll and
antispaem bots
development.
mhm 27x12 MEOW MEOW ARMY
ICQ 146303664
http://www.geocities.com/alc4troll
Highpriest of the
Romath Religion
Professor Kookology at
BUNGMUNCH Univ.
Flonk leader #19
Wereldsman's hate lits #7
Political Compass :Economic Left/Right: -3.25,
Authoritarian/Libertarian: -3.13
================================================================
Max Ernst (1972) The Four Shoes :
http://www.si.umich.edu/Art_History/UMMA/1983/1983_2.240.jpg
================================================================
"I'll give up Usenet Performance Art...
when they pry the keyboard from my cold, dead fingers."
The 2-Belo: EMPEROR OF MEOW news:alt.fan.karl-malden.nose
================================================================
ti...@canada.com (Teem) loves to PKB in
Message-ID: <a33db645.0208...@posting.google.com>:
"Idiot! If you were interested in a.b.c. you would have lurked long
enough to realize that your unthinking juvenile hostility is the only
unwelcome thing around here."
================================================================
"Jerry Howe" <jho...@bellsouth.net> after having made
the cohabitants of the trailerpark clean up the place,
now tries the same on usenet, Message-ID: <a56kh3$51tv6$1...@ID-41291.news.dfncis.de>
"You ought to trim your sig file....
that's a common complaint here"
Neil
news:291020022314190998%bza...@tcsn.net:
> In article <Xns92B739EBE69E2s...@194.168.222.8>, Neil
> <neil....@ntlARSEworld.com> wrote:
>
>> So anyway, wd [serve...@hotmail.com] wrote in message:
>> news:urtva8k...@corp.supernews.com:
>> > How many people are murdered during a robbery only because of the
>> > desire to leave no wittnesses?
>>
>> Approximately? None.
>
> Wonder where Neil lives,
In dear old Albion.
> let alone whether he ever reads the newspapers
> and/or watches TV news.
Rarely. The radio news is far better, and there's always the internet and
teletext which fit nicely with an erratic schedule. i know enough of
what's going on in my own country.
i can't think of a single case that's happened here that fits the
criterion.
Of course, where you live it may happen all the time, in which case i'm
sure you can provide lots of cites. Remember, what we're looking for is
robbers who murder *only* because of the desire to leave no witnesses.
i know that the "Three strike rule" in the US is likely to encourage
violent criminals to think fuck it, it doesn't matter. We don't have that
here. i'd be interested to know if it's contributed to any cases on the
above subject which you'd care to mention.
--
Neil
"There is a special hell for people who bring babies on airplanes"
- Steve Albini
Daran
propounded on this day, Tue, 29 Oct 2002 14:30:02 GMT, in a missive entitled
<MPG.18286579b...@news2.news.adelphia.net> the following words of
wisdom...
> In article <3DBE8AB6...@attbi.com.remove>, rpa...@attbi.com.remove
> says...
> Oh yes protect the little ladies. Feminist now has society treating women
> like little kids..unable to consent to anything. sky
Society has always treated women like little kids - for example, 'women and
children first'. Angilion has made the point that the effect of feminism
has been to grant them the privileges of adulthood without the corresponding
responsibilities.
[...]
>> ...There is already a campaign, fronted by the Ealing
>> vicarage rape victim Jill Seward, to include consent forms in
>> packets of condoms. One entrepreneur claims to have invented
>> the 'consent condom', printed with the statement 'Yes, I
>> agree to have sex with you', complete with a space for a
>> woman's thumb print. He admits that they might prove a
>> passion killer.
>
> Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they could
> not file false rape complaints. sky
Why on earth would she front a campaign to included consent forms if she
didn't want consenting women to sign them?
I think you're lying again.
--
Daran
"i wonder if you and i will ever have a normal, meaningful exchange, but if
the only way it'll happen is for me to kiss your arse, we'll be waiting a
long time." - Neil
Sky King
Alan Mackenzie
> [...]
Urm, perhaps her object is to increase the conviction rate in rape cases.
Perhaps she is cynically aware that but the veriest few women are going
to "sign" these things, and even fewer of their passionate lovers are
going to expect it. Such a used condom (yuck!) without such a thumbprint
could thus spuriously serve as evidence of lack of consent.
> --
> Daran
> "i wonder if you and i will ever have a normal, meaningful exchange, but if
> the only way it'll happen is for me to kiss your arse, we'll be waiting a
> long time." - Neil
--
Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
Email: aa...@muuc.dee; to decode, wherever there is a repeated letter
(like "aa"), remove half of them (leaving, say, "a").
Laurie S.
I would think that unless the condom was used almost exclusively, the
thumbprint would be more of a safety measure for men than its absence
would be a benefit to increasing the conviction rate.
The one concern I'd have with it, though, is that someone could easily
just press someone's thumb onto the space for the print. (I wondered,
too, wouldn't the print tend to get smudged if the woman touched the
man's penis after the condom was on?)
Laurie
--
You've not been paying attention. I've done pompous that'd make that post go
meek at the knees. -- John James (JJ) in talk.rape
Sky King
ro...@jerseymail.co.uk says...
Very true. It seems that the little ladies can't consent to anything.
sky
Parg2000
>Message-id: <MPG.182c62f35...@news2.news.adelphia.net>
{Parg} If the contract is drafted with her having her own representation and
you having yours and if it provides clear and
specific language as to what would be provided, I think that might work. Of
course, right now, as the law stands, contracts for sex are illegal.
>>
>> rogue
>
>
>Very true. It seems that the little ladies can't consent to anything.
{Parg} Women contract every day and those contracts are enforceable.
>sky
>
>
>
>
>
>
Baba Yaga
[Daran]
>>>> ...There is already a campaign, fronted by the Ealing
>>>> vicarage rape victim Jill Seward, to include consent forms in
>>>> packets of condoms. One entrepreneur claims to have invented
>>>> the 'consent condom', printed with the statement 'Yes, I
>>>> agree to have sex with you', complete with a space for a
>>>> woman's thumb print. He admits that they might prove a
>>>> passion killer.
[Sky]
>>> Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they could
>>> not file false rape complaints. sky
[Daran]
>> Why on earth would she front a campaign to included consent forms if she
>> didn't want consenting women to sign them?
>
>Urm, perhaps her object is to increase the conviction rate in rape cases.
>Perhaps she is cynically aware that but the veriest few women are going
>to "sign" these things, and even fewer of their passionate lovers are
>going to expect it.
Possibility, 'though I remember seeing a long interview with J.S. some
years ago. She seemed notably uncynical & pretty sensible, 'though
I'm not sure the idea of consent forms quite fits the description
"sensible".
Half the population don't seem to remember the things anyway, never
mind signing consent forms. (1 form for a whole packet? Or 1 form for
each time they have sex? Does that mean - oh, gawd, doesn't bear
thinking on.)
& shouldn't there be a consent form for both parties?
>Such a used condom (yuck!) without such a thumbprint
>could thus spuriously serve as evidence of lack of consent.
Is it daft of me also to think that a thumbprint could arrive on a
condom during a struggle (or during sex play) as well as by intent, or
that a sufficiently calculating rapist could force or intimidate his
victim into "signing"?
Baba Yaga
--
The people who explain things are the people who leave the deepest
footprints on the world.
- Tony Benn
Daran
propounded on this day, Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:00:34 GMT, in a missive entitled
<MPG.182b1aae6...@news2.news.adelphia.net> the following words of
wisdom...
>> > Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they could
>> > not file false rape complaints. sky
>>
>> Why on earth would she front a campaign to included consent forms if she
>> didn't want consenting women to sign them?
Care to answer the question?
>> I think you're lying again.
>>
>>
> I never lie pal. sky
That's another lie. You're not my pal.
Daran
<no...@example.invalid> propounded on this day, Thu, 31 Oct 2002 17:30:28
+0000, in a missive entitled <kbprpa...@acm.acm> the following words of
wisdom...
> Daran <daran...@lineone.net> wrote on Wed, 30 Oct 2002 19:27:37 +0000:
>> Inebriated by the exuberance of his own verbosity, Sky King <m...@home.net>
>> propounded on this day, Tue, 29 Oct 2002 14:30:02 GMT, in a missive entitled
>> <MPG.18286579b...@news2.news.adelphia.net> the following words of
>> wisdom...
>
>>> In article <3DBE8AB6...@attbi.com.remove>, rpa...@attbi.com.remove
>>> says...
[Quoting someone else. I can't be bothered to trace the attribution]
>>>> ...There is already a campaign, fronted by the Ealing
>>>> vicarage rape victim Jill Seward, to include consent forms in
>>>> packets of condoms. One entrepreneur claims to have invented
>>>> the 'consent condom', printed with the statement 'Yes, I
>>>> agree to have sex with you', complete with a space for a
>>>> woman's thumb print. He admits that they might prove a
>>>> passion killer.
>
>>> Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they could
>>> not file false rape complaints. sky
>
>> Why on earth would she front a campaign to included consent forms if she
>> didn't want consenting women to sign them?
>
> Urm, perhaps her object is to increase the conviction rate in rape cases.
> Perhaps she is cynically aware that but the veriest few women are going
> to "sign" these things, and even fewer of their passionate lovers are
> going to expect it. Such a used condom (yuck!) without such a thumbprint
> could thus spuriously serve as evidence of lack of consent.
If that's his theory, then he should post some evidence for it.
> --
> Alan Mackenzie (Munich, Germany)
--
Daran
"In the United States, the majority undertakes to supply a multitude of
ready-made opinions for the use of individuals, who are thus relieved from
the necessity of forming opinions of their own." -- Alexis de Tocqueville
Daran
<baba...@elephantschild.demon.co.uk> propounded on this day, Sat, 02 Nov
2002 11:15:01 +0000, in a missive entitled
<asc7suodf3l9ts1l2...@4ax.com> the following words of
wisdom...
> Alan Mackenzie<no...@example.invalid> wrote, in talk.rape:
>
> [Daran]
Not me.
[...]
> Possibility, 'though I remember seeing a long interview with J.S. some
> years ago. She seemed notably uncynical & pretty sensible, 'though
> I'm not sure the idea of consent forms quite fits the description
> "sensible".
Perhaps we saw the same interview. Was it on BBC News 24? That interview
in particular lead me away from the 'total destruction' model of the effect
of rape, since she was so manifestly undestroyed and unbitter.
> Half the population don't seem to remember the things anyway, never
> mind signing consent forms. (1 form for a whole packet? Or 1 form for
> each time they have sex? Does that mean - oh, gawd, doesn't bear
> thinking on.)
>
> & shouldn't there be a consent form for both parties?
Yep.
>>Such a used condom (yuck!) without such a thumbprint
>>could thus spuriously serve as evidence of lack of consent.
>
> Is it daft of me also to think that a thumbprint could arrive on a
> condom during a struggle (or during sex play) as well as by intent, or
> that a sufficiently calculating rapist could force or intimidate his
> victim into "signing"?
It's a consent form they'd be signing, not the condom itself! Can you
really imagine people keeping signed used condoms in the box along with the
receipts?!?
> Baba Yaga
Sky King
daran...@lineone.net says...
> Inebriated by the exuberance of their own verbosity, Sky King <m...@home.net>
> propounded on this day, Thu, 31 Oct 2002 16:00:34 GMT, in a missive entitled
> <MPG.182b1aae6...@news2.news.adelphia.net> the following words of
> wisdom...
>
> >> > Yeah the Jill bitch doesn't want the women to sign because then they could
> >> > not file false rape complaints. sky
> >>
> >> Why on earth would she front a campaign to included consent forms if she
> >> didn't want consenting women to sign them?
>
> Care to answer the question?
>
> >> I think you're lying again.
> >>
> >>
> > I never lie pal. sky
>
> That's another lie. You're not my pal.
>
>
Baba Yaga
>Inebriated by the exuberance of their own verbosity, Baba Yaga
><baba...@elephantschild.demon.co.uk> propounded on this day, Sat, 02 Nov
>2002 11:15:01 +0000, in a missive entitled
><asc7suodf3l9ts1l2...@4ax.com> the following words of
>wisdom...
>
>> Alan Mackenzie<no...@example.invalid> wrote, in talk.rape:
>>
>> [Daran]
>
>Not me.
Sorry.
>[...]
>
>> Possibility, 'though I remember seeing a long interview with J.S. some
>> years ago. She seemed notably uncynical & pretty sensible, 'though
>> I'm not sure the idea of consent forms quite fits the description
>> "sensible".
>
>Perhaps we saw the same interview. Was it on BBC News 24?
It didn't exist then. I haven't watched television in something like
10 years.
>That interview
>in particular lead me away from the 'total destruction' model of the effect
>of rape, since she was so manifestly undestroyed and unbitter.
Admirably so, even quite soon after the event.
[...]
>> Is it daft of me also to think that a thumbprint could arrive on a
>> condom during a struggle (or during sex play) as well as by intent, or
>> that a sufficiently calculating rapist could force or intimidate his
>> victim into "signing"?
>
>It's a consent form they'd be signing, not the condom itself! Can you
>really imagine people keeping signed used condoms in the box along with the
>receipts?!?
Not readily. Hmmmm.... Leetle *packets
# printed with the statement "Yes, I
# agree to have sex with you", complete with a space for a
# woman's thumb print.
That does make much more sense. But still - pretty easy to get a
thumb-print in the right space, consent or not. The did-didn't-did so
would go from, "the unspeakable bastard forced me to have sex", to
"the unspeakable bastard forced me to put my thumbprint on this 'ere
condom packet." !
Baba Yaga
--
He was a most exemplary man; fuller of virtuous precept than a copy
book. Some people likened him to a direction-post, which is always
telling the way to a place, and never goes there; but these were
his enemies, the shadows cast by his brightness; that was all.
Charles Dickens
Laurie S.
wrote:
*********************
There is already a campaign, fronted by the Ealing vicarage rape
victim Jill Seward, to include consent forms in packets
of condoms. One entrepreneur claims to have invented
the “consent condom”, printed with the statement “Yes, I
agree to have sex with you”, complete with a space for a
woman’s thumb print. He admits that they might prove a
passion killer.
***********************
I understand the consent forms in the first example, but in the second
example, doesn't the "consent condom" appear to be a condom?
Angilion
[..]
I'm just passing through but I thought I'd reply to this.
> I would think that unless the condom was used almost exclusively, the
> thumbprint would be more of a safety measure for men than its absence
> would be a benefit to increasing the conviction rate.
It's useless in such a context because it does not prove that
consent was maintained. Even if it was somehow necessary that such a
condom was used for all heterosex, it would still be useless.
> The one concern I'd have with it, though, is that someone could easily
> just press someone's thumb onto the space for the print.
That is another good reason why it would be useless as proof
of consent - it doesn't even prove consent ever existed.
> (I wondered,
> too, wouldn't the print tend to get smudged if the woman touched the
> man's penis after the condom was on?)
It must be on a separate tag, or else it would get smeared into
uselessness by the sex itself.
Rich
Angilion wrote:
>
> lauri...@hotmail.com (Laurie S.) wrote in message news:<3dc244c9....@news2.sympatico.ca>...
>
> [..]
>
> I'm just passing through but I thought I'd reply to this.
>
> > I would think that unless the condom was used almost exclusively, the
> > thumbprint would be more of a safety measure for men than its absence
> > would be a benefit to increasing the conviction rate.
>
> It's useless in such a context because it does not prove that
> consent was maintained.
I thought the burden of proof was the other way round?
Rich
Angilion
> Angilion wrote:
> >
> > lauri...@hotmail.com (Laurie S.) wrote in message news:<3dc244c9....@news2.sympatico.ca>...
> >
> > [..]
> >
> > I'm just passing through but I thought I'd reply to this.
> >
> > > I would think that unless the condom was used almost exclusively, the
> > > thumbprint would be more of a safety measure for men than its absence
> > > would be a benefit to increasing the conviction rate.
> >
> > It's useless in such a context because it does not prove that
> > consent was maintained.
>
> I thought the burden of proof was the other way round?
For the moment, though only really in court.
There are moves afoot to change even that. There is a consistent
push to get more men convicted of rape and little or nothing is
said about whether they need to be guilty or not - it's just assumed
that they must be.