Is this sexual assault?
Jun 6th 2012 | 6:38 am
#31
Moderαtor Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,771
From: Upstate South Carolina
Re: Is this sexual assault?
She shouldnt be relying on him if its that important to her anyway, especially as he seems to think having kids was worth doing this. You dont think the subject of kids came up in conversation between them at some point prior to the sabotage?
Marriage counselling, or just going their own separate ways would have been better that all this legal crap wouldnt it?
I suppose this is an open and shut case of "irreconcilable differences" now at least...
Last edited by iaink; Jun 6th 2012 at 6:46 am.
Jun 6th 2012 | 6:40 am
#32
Sawdust making harpy
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 11,291
From: Alberta
Re: Is this sexual assault?
oooh what a whole big can of worms.
As others have said I wouldn't say "assault" (although don't know all the legal definitions) but decption definitely.
If you are that adamant you don't want a child, just relying on condoms (which can and have failed) is probably a bad idea. Although it is at least an idea.
Implications for the charge / conviction and future are huge.
As others have said I wouldn't say "assault" (although don't know all the legal definitions) but decption definitely.
If you are that adamant you don't want a child, just relying on condoms (which can and have failed) is probably a bad idea. Although it is at least an idea.
Implications for the charge / conviction and future are huge.
Jun 6th 2012 | 6:48 am
#33
Lost in BE Cyberspace
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 7,866
From: Cochrane, Alberta
Re: Is this sexual assault?
For sexual assault, there surely needs to be an element of forcing someone into the act?
Canada's Criminal Code has no specific "rape" provision. Instead, it defines assault and provides for a specific punishment for "sexual assault". In defining "assault", the Code includes physical contact and threats. The provision reads:
265. (1) A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or
(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.
(2) This section applies to all forms of assault, including sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm and aggravated sexual assault.
Whether someone engaged in sex under false pretences (as opposed to threats), or being mislead, or tricked - that must come other some other legislation?
Even if you are in the middle of a sexual act, and one party says "stop" - anything after that point could be assault.
I'm not sure where you draw the line at "well, if I had know he was carrying sperm, HIV, whatever, I wouldn't have consented" ... it's difficult to unravel.
Is pregnancy or the possibility of pregnancy "causing bodily harm"? It must surely be judged on a case by case basis. If I got pregnant now, there might be harm to my husband!
The possibility of getting HIV is easier to define.
Canada's Criminal Code has no specific "rape" provision. Instead, it defines assault and provides for a specific punishment for "sexual assault". In defining "assault", the Code includes physical contact and threats. The provision reads:
265. (1) A person commits an assault when
(a) without the consent of another person, he applies force intentionally to that other person, directly or indirectly;
(b) he attempts or threatens, by an act or a gesture, to apply force to another person, if he has, or causes that other person to believe on reasonable grounds that he has, present ability to effect his purpose; or
(c) while openly wearing or carrying a weapon or an imitation thereof, he accosts or impedes another person or begs.
(2) This section applies to all forms of assault, including sexual assault, sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm and aggravated sexual assault.
Whether someone engaged in sex under false pretences (as opposed to threats), or being mislead, or tricked - that must come other some other legislation?
Even if you are in the middle of a sexual act, and one party says "stop" - anything after that point could be assault.
I'm not sure where you draw the line at "well, if I had know he was carrying sperm, HIV, whatever, I wouldn't have consented" ... it's difficult to unravel.
Is pregnancy or the possibility of pregnancy "causing bodily harm"? It must surely be judged on a case by case basis. If I got pregnant now, there might be harm to my husband!
The possibility of getting HIV is easier to define.
Jun 6th 2012 | 6:49 am
#34
Beep
Joined: Jan 2009
Posts: 8,311
From: Here
Re: Is this sexual assault?
If i, as a man, really didn't want to get anybody pregnant, i would always use a condom. I would imagine if i were a woman with the same mindset, i would always take personal precautions so as to not put my eggs (or seed) in one basket hoping for the best. In both cases, i'd not rely on the other person.
It still doesn't make what he did right, however.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:11 am
#35
Thread Starter
slanderer of the innocent
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC
Re: Is this sexual assault?
Yup I think that's an issue for sure. There would have to be some way of proving deliberately lying/sabotage.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:13 am
#36
Thread Starter
slanderer of the innocent
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC
Re: Is this sexual assault?
Noone should RELY solely on condoms, they are what, 98% effective under ideal conditions? more like 85% in the real world.
She shouldnt be relying on him if its that important to her anyway, especially as he seems to think having kids was worth doing this. You dont think the subject of kids came up in conversation between them at some point prior to the sabotage?
Marriage counselling, or just going their own separate ways would have been better that all this legal crap wouldnt it?
I suppose this is an open and shut case of "irreconcilable differences" now at least...
She shouldnt be relying on him if its that important to her anyway, especially as he seems to think having kids was worth doing this. You dont think the subject of kids came up in conversation between them at some point prior to the sabotage?
Marriage counselling, or just going their own separate ways would have been better that all this legal crap wouldnt it?
I suppose this is an open and shut case of "irreconcilable differences" now at least...
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:17 am
#37
Thread Starter
slanderer of the innocent
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC
Re: Is this sexual assault?
I agree to a point. Isn't it like not wanting to be hurt in a car crash so you choose to drive slowly instead of also using a seatbelt?
If i, as a man, really didn't want to get anybody pregnant, i would always use a condom. I would imagine if i were a woman with the same mindset, i would always take personal precautions so as to not put my eggs (or seed) in one basket hoping for the best. In both cases, i'd not rely on the other person.
It still doesn't make what he did right, however.
If i, as a man, really didn't want to get anybody pregnant, i would always use a condom. I would imagine if i were a woman with the same mindset, i would always take personal precautions so as to not put my eggs (or seed) in one basket hoping for the best. In both cases, i'd not rely on the other person.
It still doesn't make what he did right, however.
I'm going to guess most of us in long term relationships have, at some point, developed a level of trust where you don't have to be on guard all the time and assume the other person is out to get you - that's not realistic surely? Contraception in most situations is a mutual choice.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:18 am
#38
Moderαtor Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,771
From: Upstate South Carolina
Re: Is this sexual assault?
Vasectomy / tied tubes is... so is abstention if that floats your boat.
He was in the wrong to do what he did, but to class this alongside rape and other "real" sexual assaults just seems wrong, the courts really shouldnt be dealing with what is in effect a "marital" disagreement as a criminal case.
Last edited by iaink; Jun 6th 2012 at 7:22 am.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:22 am
#39
Just Joined
Joined: Jun 2012
Posts: 12
From: Lantz, Nova Scotia
Re: Is this sexual assault?
I would have to say it is. If it is deemed rape when a woman says no then deception should be considered the same.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:25 am
#40
Moderαtor Emeritus
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 30,771
From: Upstate South Carolina
Re: Is this sexual assault?
But if her consent was conditional on him using an intact condom, and he intentionally broke them, then there is a case to answer.
Were these two a couple, or was this just a one night stand? Im assuming there was a relationship, but maybe not...
Last edited by iaink; Jun 6th 2012 at 7:29 am.
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:26 am
#41
Banned
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,088
Re: Is this sexual assault?
This could be similarly argued if a woman did not take a pill....good luck proving it though!
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:31 am
#42
Banned
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,088
Re: Is this sexual assault?
Condoms certainly arent.
Vasectomy / tied tubes is... so is abstention if that floats your boat.
He was in the wrong to do what he did, but to class this alongside rape and other "real" sexual assaults just seems wrong, the courts really shouldnt be dealing with what is in effect a "marital" disagreement as a criminal case.
Vasectomy / tied tubes is... so is abstention if that floats your boat.
He was in the wrong to do what he did, but to class this alongside rape and other "real" sexual assaults just seems wrong, the courts really shouldnt be dealing with what is in effect a "marital" disagreement as a criminal case.
And it does meet the elements for a sexual assault....
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:37 am
#43
Thread Starter
slanderer of the innocent
Joined: Dec 2008
Posts: 6,695
From: Vancouver, BC
Re: Is this sexual assault?
She didnt say no, she said yes, but I dont want kids.
But if her consent was conditional on him using an intact condom, and he intentionally broke them, then there is a case to answer.
Were these two a couple, or was this just a one night stand? Im assuming there was a relationship, but maybe not...
But if her consent was conditional on him using an intact condom, and he intentionally broke them, then there is a case to answer.
Were these two a couple, or was this just a one night stand? Im assuming there was a relationship, but maybe not...
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:44 am
#44
Joined: Sep 2009
Posts: 4,680
Re: Is this sexual assault?
In the UK, this would be classed as assault and there have been convictions where people have been infected with STIs - they charge them with S20 Grevious Bodily Harm.
What a creep to do that sort of think - same as the women who do it - must all have a screw loose ! (excuse the pun
)
Dread - x
What a creep to do that sort of think - same as the women who do it - must all have a screw loose ! (excuse the pun
)Dread - x
Jun 6th 2012 | 7:46 am
#45
Banned
Joined: Jul 2011
Posts: 1,088
Re: Is this sexual assault?
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.
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.
