Cornell Rape Case

[thetragichippy]

This is a very interesting case if you look at it objectively.  

Her own text days later claim she was not raped and there was nothing done illegal.

Now, it has became a political bomb, just like the ME-TOO movement, where men were shamed out of giving an opinion. 

If that was not enough, they appoint Letitia James who a couple days earlier post on Facebook:

"What this young woman has been forced to endure is horrific and unacceptable. I'm holding her in my heart and in my prayers. To her, ad to all survivors: You're not alone. We stand with you." 

That statement to me sounds like she's made up her mind..... How in the world could they let her on this case.

The last thing this brings up is drinking and consent. Luckily New York has a rule if you drink or do drugs voluntarily, you can't claim non-consent, or something like that.  However, some are arguing she could not give consent because she was intoxicated. If the guys were intoxicated as well, shouldn't the law be applied equally? 

 

This is the hidden content, please

• Sign In
• or
• Sign Up

[tvc184]

I wouldn’t want to be in their shoes.

Certainly no one wants such as accusation but it seems likely that the deck is going to be stacked against them. 

If they are guilty of the accusations then they need to be put under the jail with extreme prejudice  

Now we have the governor appointing the AG who seems not to be looking at the case to see what is true or can be proven but the decision is already made.

I think sexual assault kits should be performed up to 72 hours after the claimed assault but they may stretch the kits to maybe 7 days.

 If i read the article correctly, the kit was not performed for almost 3 weeks.

It seems like with the little that is known, there might definitely be some issues with reasonable doubt. It’s unfortunate because the complete truth might never come out. 

[thetragichippy]

13 hours ago, tvc184 said:

there might definitely be some issues with reasonable doubt.

I've read her own text, leaves reasonable doubt to me,

What is your thoughts about "consent" while intoxicated?

[tvc184]

16 hours ago, thetragichippy said:

I've read her own text, leaves reasonable doubt to me,

What is your thoughts about "consent" while intoxicated?

If the person is almost or is unconscious, that isn’t with consent. A person has to have the ability to say no.

In most or all states there are implied consent laws when driving. When you drive a vehicle in public, by law you have already consented to taking a breath test or having blood drawn. You can verbally withdraw that consent but that becomes another penalty. However….  the Supreme Court has ruled that implied consent laws mean that if you are unconscious due to intoxication (or injury) and is unable to consent, it doesn’t matter. State law says that be driving you have already consented to giving up your blood. That is to show that an unconscious person can consent while driving merely by driving and being unconscious doesn’t matter.

 Why bring that up? There is obviously no such thing as implied consent for sex. A guy can’t say (like the police can with an intoxicated driver), “oh well, she didn’t say no”.

But merely being intoxicated in my opinion should not matter. A girl could drink two beers while on a date and start feeling frisky and technically be intoxicated but fully aware of her situation.  That is not the same as a person who is unconscious or nearly so.

Also note that in this case it was brought up that they gave her ketamine. In Texas as an example, using a date rape drug like ketamine or rohypnol automatically kicks it to a First Degree Felony or equal to Murder with up to 99 years in prison. In such a case I don’t think probation is allowed.

So assuming this was in Texas and it could be proven that they gave her ketamine, consent doesn’t seem to be an element to the offense because the use of the drug removed any voluntary consent. That’s why there is a specific law on using drugs to render the (usually) female unable to say no. I don’t know the laws in that state but they are probably similar. If the prosecutor “can prove” any person had sex with her after she was given ketamine, they will likely be facing many years in prison and should be in my opinion.

Proving it after not having a sexual assault examination for three weeks and certainly no blood tests for drugs in that time frame, will make it difficult.