is it rape or not...

Raggamuffin wrote:So this guy tried to kiss someone and they said no. If that was a criminal offence, there would be a lot of people in prison now. How ridiculous.

BigAndy9 wrote:The title should be "is it sexual assault or not?" God.

And well, legally, if he tried to kiss somebody then it's a yes (once proven).

From a legal perspective, I do hate these cases -  my common sense tells me that no man should be found guilty if the only evidence is one persons word against the accused.

BigAndy9 wrote:The title should be "is it sexual assault or not?" God.

And well, legally, if he tried to kiss somebody then it's a yes (once proven).

From a legal perspective, I do hate these cases -  my common sense tells me that no man should be found guilty if the only evidence is one persons word against the accused.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:So this guy tried to kiss someone and they said no. If that was a criminal offence, there would be a lot of people in prison now. How ridiculous.

Depends where (location, lol).

If they were in work, he should be dragged in by bosses and given a formal warning.

If they were in a pub on a night out, then a "piss off" from the complainant would do.

For instances of this, wouldn't a "no" be enough?  We're all adults for gods sake and if somebody wants to try it on, they can, and the person on the receiving end is quite able to say no.

Why are people using the courts so much these days?

Raggamuffin wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:


Depends where (location, lol).

If they were in work, he should be dragged in by bosses and given a formal warning.

If they were in a pub on a night out, then a "piss off" from the complainant would do.

For instances of this, wouldn't a "no" be enough?  We're all adults for gods sake and if somebody wants to try it on, they can, and the person on the receiving end is quite able to say no.

Why are people using the courts so much these days?

Exactly, and even if it was in work, just a quick word would be enough. It wouldn't be the first time someone fancied another person at work.   

Joy Division wrote:He still should have asked first,rather than just 'chance it'...

If a man had lifts up a woman's skirt without permission,that would also be not on...and a possible court appearance for the offending person, most likely some kind of sexual charge or other.



On a lighter note though...Andy, had that been a Labour MP, you would be screaming about it and demand he is prosecuted ...RW whore  ::troll::

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

Joy Division wrote:He still should have asked first,rather than just 'chance it'...

If a man had lifts up a woman's skirt without permission,that would also be not on...and a possible court appearance for the offending person, most likely some kind of sexual charge or other.



On a lighter note though...Andy, had that been a Labour MP, you would be screaming about it and demand he is prosecuted ...RW whore  ::troll::

I don't care on what party they represent everyone should be responsible for their actions xx

Joy Division wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

I don't care on what party they represent everyone should be responsible for their actions

Absolutely Favva...and that means don't touch if not asked to xx:)

Nems wrote:The victim was 22 at best he is a dirty old man.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Nems wrote:The victim was 22 at best he is a dirty old man.

That article says he was 27.

Nems wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

That article says he was 27.

Odd, this one says 22 or is there more than one victim?
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/03/25/mp-nigel-evans-sex-22-year-old-man-consensual/

Raggamuffin wrote:

Nems wrote:

Odd, this one says 22 or is there more than one victim?
http://www.pinknews.co.uk/2014/03/25/mp-nigel-evans-sex-22-year-old-man-consensual/

I think that must be a different bloke, but he's not necessarily a victim.

Joy Division wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think that must be a different bloke, but he's not necessarily a victim.

...so if a man gropes a female without permission and these advances are not wanted. Wouldn't that make the female a victim?

Since when is it acceptable to force one's self upon another?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


...so if a man gropes a female without permission and these advances are not wanted. Wouldn't that make the female a victim?

Since when is it acceptable to force one's self upon another?

The point is that Nigel Evans said the sex was consensual - ie, there was no victim.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Joy Division wrote:


...so if a man gropes a female without permission and these advances are not wanted. Wouldn't that make the female a victim?

Since when is it acceptable to force one's self upon another?

The point is that Nigel Evans said the sex was consensual - ie, there was no victim.

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

The point is that Nigel Evans said the sex was consensual - ie, there was no victim.

but was it consensual or did they feel pressured as they may lose their job ..

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

The point is that Nigel Evans said the sex was consensual - ie, there was no victim.

but was it consensual or did they feel pressured as they may lose their job ..

Joy Division wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

but was it consensual or did they feel pressured as they may lose their job ..

...well we wasn't there Favva, so I guess it's hard to say for sure in this case, but in general , nobody should have to accept being groped or attempted kneckies  or anything,

Joy Division wrote:

Godisgoodallthetime wrote:

I don't care on what party they represent everyone should be responsible for their actions xx

Absolutely Favva...and that means don't touch if not asked to xx:)