Doesnt this ultimatley mean that any aggrieved wife/ partner with kids could have their significant other charged with sexual assault if they got pissed off enough?

I mean, he has no way of knowing she would get pregnant, there is still an element of chance.

Shes got options to protect herself that she didnt take up and we all know condoms are not 100% effective

The "assault" itself was presumably mutally consensual....

What would she have done if it had just been an accidental pregnancy?

I find this a bit odd, although clearly hes a scumbag for doing it, so Ill get over it. She may be no better though in pressing charges... Thanks god they dont have kids eh...

Kiwilass did say "witty remarks".

That's as good as it gets

We know....

Isn't this similar to the reason Julian Assange was extradited to Sweden to face a rape charge? As I understand things he had consensual sex with a woman. The woman syas she thought/was told that he was wearing a condom, but he wasn't. She says that if she had known he was not wearing a condom she would not have consented. Therefore it was rape.

Surely that opens up a huge can of worms. I'm curious if the same would happen the other way around where a woman confirmed, via a lie, that she was on the pill when she was not.

Whatever happened to personal responsibility these days. I understand a woman confirming she's on the pill is more difficult to prove in the same way as a condom with holes in it, during the heat of the moment. But to not know somebody is wearing a condom, especially if it's a huge deal to you? Wow!!!

If you're not in a commited relationship, and/or do not want to have a pregnancy, make every effort to protect yourself by being as certain as you can be, don't do it, or take a leaf out of the "how to" book of Canadian school kids and do it up the bum.

When was he extradited, I thought his lawyers are still trying to fight the ruling? Oh....there is more to the Assange case than just this, think of the actual leaks pertaining to the Americans

I don't think a sexual assault has been committed. Don't know how sexual assault is actually defined in law, but I can't see (from a layman's point of view) how this can be classed as one. Cutting the end off a condom can't, per se, be an assault. Once he'd put the cut condom on, presumably consensual sex took place, so no assault there. If he hadn't cut the end off but she'd got pregnant because the condom broke or had a manufacturing flaw, that wouldn't be an assault, so why does the deliberate "sabotage" change that? Perhaps that's where the dilemma lies - it was a deliberate act that resulted in an increased chance of impregnating his partner, so does that constitute an assault?

He lied to her, sure; he may have broken other laws relating to trust and deception, sure; but I don't think he should be convicted of sexual assault.

The least he or she can do in such instance if they choose not to be with the person, is paying alimony and everything needed by the kids till their 18yrs old or whatever the provincial rule is on when someone can be officially called an adult by signing official docs

Adoption is also another avenue, millions of people out there looking to have kids of their own but can't for one reason or another

To me it also trivialises other more obvious forms of non-consensual sexual assault too.

I can see how it could be seen as assault as he set out to "harm" her. Thats more clear cut with Aids or an STD, but Im not sure there is much legal basis to see a natural function like pregnancy as harmful.

What if her condition was such that giving birth again would be harmful/potentially fatal to her ?

But trying to force parenthood on a person who has been very clear about the fact they don't want it is a form of harm, surely?

That goes for reluctant mums or dads.

In that case her taking steps to protect herself would make sense to me.


Like I said, my OH would probably consider another pregnancy like #2 an assault anyway, regardless of additional complications.

Bottom line, he was reckless, but it takes 2 to have a child and either party can stop it happening. I can see how you can make a case that its assault as he could reasonably be expected to know that she would consider his actions as likely to cause her harm, but really this is domestic bickering and probably should never have gone to trial unless there was more to it than meets the eye.

But she did take steps, she relied on condoms. They were sabotaged deliberately.

So what about my comment about retroactively bringing action against a partner you now harbour a grudge against?


I clearly remember her saying something like "YOU DID THIS TO ME" in the delivery room...